[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 5500-5501]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   VOTE FOR THE MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Harris). Pursuant to the order of the 
House of January 20, 2004, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Madam Speaker, let me follow in the same footsteps of 
my colleague from Maryland.
  Last week, the House passed a budget, a very bitterly debated and 
very close decision on the final outcome as to which budget we should 
pass. A lot of speeches were made, a lot of promises were made, but one 
of the things that was not a part of the budget resolution last week 
was pay-as-you-go.
  Now, our friends on the other side of the Capitol, the other body, in 
passing their budget they suggested that pay-as-you-go would be a good 
policy; and they included everything. In my opinion, unless we have 
everything on the table, spending and revenue, pay-as-you-go will not 
work as well in 2004 as it did in the 1990s.
  There are those that believe there should be a difference. They are 
the same ones that have succeeded in passing three budgets now in the 
last 3 years that have given this country the largest fiscal deficits 
in the history of our country. They are the same ones that are arguing 
now that pay-as-you-go should only include spending, not revenue. But 
they are the ones also that should accept the responsibility for their 
ideas, having, as I said, given this country the largest amount of 
fiscal deficits in the history of our country.
  We borrowed $1 trillion in the last 2\1/2\ years. We are going to 
borrow another trillion dollars in the next year and a half. And yet 
they argue, and will argue this afternoon on the motion to recommit, 
that we should only include spending.
  Well, the pay-as-you-go resolution that I supported, and it was in 
the Blue Dog budget, was in the Democratic party alternative, was put 
everything on the table. If you want to spend more for any purpose, 
then you have to cut spending somewhere else. If you want to cut taxes, 
then you have got to cut spending somewhere to make room for them or 
raise taxes in some other area that will be more proficient, more 
efficient, and accomplish what needs to be done for the job creation in 
this country but also for getting our fiscal house in order.

[[Page 5501]]

  We are not going to wish deficits away. We can argue about this, and 
we did last week. We can argue about what trade policy we should have. 
But one thing we cannot argue about, and no one does argue about, is 
the baby boom generation reaching age 62 in 2008, 65 in 2011, 67 in 
2013. That is when the greatest economic pressure that this country has 
ever known is going to hit us, and that is why it is so important for 
this Congress and this administration to get real about fiscal 
responsibility.
  Philosophy alone will not cut it. To those that argue that cutting 
taxes was going to produce more revenue, it didn't. It did not. It came 
up over $100 billion short. Those of us that believe in pay-as-you-go 
say that when you advocate a policy, whether it be spending or revenue, 
and it does not do what you said it was going to do, then you should 
step up to the plate and pay for it. But, no, those who argue on the 
other side say we are not going to ask those fortunate to be alive 
today to pay for it, we are going to send the bill to our 
grandchildren. We are going to send the bill to them because they 
cannot vote in November.
  Pay-as-you-go is a pretty simple philosophy. Every family in the 
United States has to adopt pay-as-you-go. Most families do not have the 
luxury, in fact, they would not even think about one of the solutions 
to the family problems is to reduce mom's or dad's paycheck and yet 
reduce that paycheck and live within that means. One would not think 
about doing that, but that is what the leadership of this House is 
suggesting. That is what they did even though a very large, I think 
plurality, maybe majority on the other side of the aisle agrees with 
those of us that says pay-as-you-go is something that should be part of 
the budget resolution, and it should be implemented, and it should be 
implemented with everything on the table.
  That is what the motion to instruct conferees tomorrow will be about, 
and I would encourage my colleagues, both sides of the aisle, to vote 
for it and put some muscle into the speechifying on budgets in this 
body.

                          ____________________