[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 9236-9243]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   THE ECONOMIC SITUATION WE NOW FACE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 2009, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Akin) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. AKIN. Mr. Speaker, I come here this evening to the floor to talk 
about a subject that is arresting the attention of Americans 
everywhere. It arrests their attention because it very much involves 
their futures, their future hopes, and the hopes of their children and 
grandchildren: that is, the economics and the economic situation that 
we now face.
  Over the past, we have, over the past 6 and 7 years, heard repeatedly 
in our media the tremendous cost, particularly of the war in Iraq. We 
were told every day not only of people that were dying there but also 
of how it's just draining and siphoning money from the American 
economy.
  And so, we come today in a curious situation. If you were to add all 
of the money that was spent in Iraq in the war there, add it all up for 
6 years, and then take the money that was spent in the war in 
Afghanistan, add it up for 7 years, and you put those two sums of money 
together, you would come up with less money than this U.S. Congress 
spent in the first 5 weeks that we were in session when we passed the 
supposedly stimulus bill.
  That, perhaps, casts a certain amount of light and helps to put in 
perspective what $840 billion in taxes that we actually don't have, but 
$840 billion dollars in spending that we approved here on this House 
floor.

                              {time}  1845

  What has happened since that time is we have spent other money, and 
there have been other large chunks of change, and I think it gets a 
little bit confusing in people's minds exactly how much is the Congress 
spending.
  And so I have here immediately to my left a chart that talks a little 
bit about some of the money that we have spent in the past, and we do 
this on the eve of the fact that we have the new budget coming up which 
will be discussed and debated tomorrow. That budget is a whopper of a 
budget, but first, let's put it into context.
  First of all, in the fall of last year, as Wall Street was becoming 
weaker and as there were demands for money to bail out Wall Street, the 
Congress approved $700 billion for the Wall Street bailout. The first 
$350 billion were spent last year, with an additional $350 billion this 
year.
  Theoretically, this money was supposedly offered with transparency, 
so we could know what it was going to be used for and how we were 
getting something good from it. However, in spite of the fact that we 
spent the first $350 billion, we saw the stock market sliding and 
sliding. Then we spent the second $350 billion, and people continued to 
ask whether this money was really an effective tool.
  As we asked many questions, even last fall on this subject, what we 
found was that particularly some people that worked on the savings and 
loan crisis some more than 10 years ago said that there was a way to 
help deal with our financial crisis, and particularly the toxic 
mortgage and bad loans that had been made, there was a way to deal with 
that without spending a lot of money. In fact, during the savings and 
loan crisis, we did not spend any of this kind of money, even though 
the situation was not dissimilar. That involved things like mark-to-
market and other accounting kinds of principles that could have been 
followed rather than going into the American taxpayers' pocket for $700 
billion.
  Well, this year we spent $350 billion of that. Moving forward to this 
economic stimulus--I call it the porkulus bill--we spent another $787 
billion. Let's put that into perspective. In an area that I work, which 
is on the sea force committee, sea power committee, and one of the big 
ticket items that we deal with are aircraft carriers. People that know 
something about the Navy know that aircraft carriers are expensive, and 
we protect them by putting other ships around them. We only have 11 of 
them currently in service, and they average about $3 billion 
historically. That's what we paid for them.
  And so if you were to divide the $3 billion into this $787 billion, 
what you'd find out is that you have got, you know, over 200 aircraft 
carriers. Picture 200 aircraft carriers tied end-to-end. That's a whole 
lot of money that we're spending that we don't have. Or if you want to 
put it another way, just the interest and the debt service on this 
money that we don't have that we're spending would be enough to buy 
nine new aircraft carriers every single year.
  And what is there in this economic stimulus package that's so 
important? Well, as it turns out, it isn't even the good old Keynesian, 
the good old FDR, ``government spend its way out of trouble'' kind of 
package. It doesn't have those kinds of things in it. You'd think it 
would have in there hard manufacturing kinds of jobs, building ships,

[[Page 9237]]

pouring concrete to make hydroelectric plants or nuclear power plants. 
You would think it might have a lot of money for roads, something for 
small businesses to get them going. It turns out it's not. It turns out 
what it is, it's a whole lot of spending on items that are just 
budgetary items of the Federal Government. It's just a whole lot of 
spending on social programs.
  It does include some money to protect an endangered mouse in Speaker 
Pelosi's district. It contains things about education for HIV. It has 
some money for ACORN and things like that. These are regular old social 
government programs, but nothing that's really stimulative 
particularly.
  And so this tremendous amount of money added to the debt is something 
that has very much captured people's attention, but we haven't stopped 
there unfortunately. We have seen no sign in the economy or in the 
stock market that this money is doing any particular good. In fact, all 
of the evidence economically would suggest that it won't. In fact, when 
you take a good look at the people that came up with this whole idea of 
stimulating the economy by government spending money, it doesn't even 
make much common sense.
  Think about your average American family. Hey, we've got hard trouble 
with the budget this year, what are we going to do? Oh, let's go buy a 
brand new car and spend a whole lot of money. Nobody's that dumb in our 
country except for the Federal Government, and of course, we want to 
spend a lot of money. There isn't any economic justification. In fact, 
Henry Morgenthau, who was the Secretary of the Treasury under FDR, 
after they did this lovely theory of spending tons and tons of money--
and this is all through the 1930s and 1939--Secretary Morgenthau comes 
before the House Ways and Means Committee. He said, We have tried 
spending a whole lot of money and it doesn't work. He's pretty 
straightforward. It doesn't work. Our unemployment is as bad as it's 
ever been, and we have a tremendous amount of debt to boot.
  So, so much for little Lord Keynes' theory. It was tried by the 
Japanese back in the 1990s, and the Japanese economy was sick because 
they just kept spending more and more government money, and it didn't 
help their economy at all.
  So, so much for the theory of a whole lot of government spending is 
going to make the economy go well. Actually, considering the number of 
trillion dollars in debt, if the government spending was what made 
things went well, why we would all be millionaires ourselves if that 
theory worked. Of course, it doesn't work, and this of course, does not 
work.
  Then we have the appropriations for 2009 which was another $410 
billion, and you start putting this together, and it starts to add up 
to real money. And now we have the new budget that has been proposed, a 
$3.6 trillion budget, and that includes some different, interesting 
items.
  One that I think is of significance, the President promised us while 
he was in this very Chamber, he promised us that if you were making 
under $250,000 you didn't need to worry about taxes because he wasn't 
going to raise your taxes any. I thought, I'm glad because I don't make 
$250,000 a year, so I don't need to worry about tax increases.
  Well, you better hang on to your wallet in Washington, D.C., because 
what is this cap-and-tax? This is a tax on electricity and heating 
fuel, propane, natural gas, things like that. And what's that going to 
mean? Well, some economists took a look at what that was going to cost, 
and this is a very credible organization. I believe it was MIT. I 
forget which university it was. Their estimate was $3,100 for every 
household in America. So, so much for the $250,000. Sure, we're going 
to tax those guys that own small businesses, but we're going to tax 
every household in America on an average of $3,100 every year.
  I see a good friend of mine from Indiana, a very respected statesman 
on this floor, and I would yield to my good friend, Congressman Burton.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Well, I really appreciate you saying that, and 
I just hope everybody in my district in Indiana heard you say that 
because I want to make sure they appreciate me. So thank you very much 
for saying those nice things.
  The thing that I wanted to mention is you're absolutely right. The 
amount of money that this is going to cost the average homeowner is 
just unbelievable, and it's going to be a tax increase that's going to 
be borne by every single person in this country.
  But in addition to that, the inflationary pressure that's going to be 
created by all this printing of all this money is unbelievable. They're 
talking about something like over the next decade 7, 8, 9 trillion 
dollars in spending, and that's going to result in a tremendous amount 
of printing presses being run over at the Treasury Department. And when 
that money gets into circulation, it's going to cause a tremendous 
amount of pressure as far as inflation is concerned.
  As a matter of fact, I know my colleague knows this, but just in the 
last couple of weeks we found out that the money supply in this country 
has been almost tripled in the last couple of years. And because of 
that, we already have a built-in inflationary pressure that will be 
taking place I think in the next couple of years. So I think there's 
going to be a spike in inflation.
  But I'd just like to add one more thing.
  Mr. AKIN. If I could reclaim my time, you talk pretty fancy words 
about how this is going to create all this inflation and stuff. I want 
to just see if that connects to what I'm saying.
  Back in my district, the poor people are investing in lead, and the 
more well-to-do people are investing in gold. The poor one, it's the 
lead shells for different types of rifles, pistols and shotguns; the 
other one is gold coins. Maybe they're thinking along the same lines as 
you are, with inflation, you have got to do something to protect 
yourself, and the government is just running the printing presses.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. If the gentleman will yield, there's no 
question that the inflationary pressure is very real, and the taxation 
that people are going to face is very real, and it's not something that 
we're just making up for political purposes. It's going to happen, and 
it's going to happen very quickly on the tax issue, and the inflation 
issue is going to come in just the next couple of years, in my opinion.
  But one of the things I wanted to mention--and I appreciate my 
colleague taking this time--and that is, that there's a book out called 
``The Forgotten Man,'' and it's a book that I hope everybody who's 
interested in what happened during the Great Depression and how that 
correlates to what's happening today, if they're interested in that, 
they really ought to read it because there's tremendous parallels 
between what happened between 1929 and 1941 with what's going on here 
today. And that depression that we went through in this country lasted 
for over 10 years, and that's something that we don't want to see 
happen in the United States.
  Mr. AKIN. Reclaiming my time, I have heard great things about that 
book. My own father read it, and he just said it's something you can 
read on an airplane. It's fascinating.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Well, I do read it on the airplane.
  Mr. AKIN. Fascinating. So I appreciate you mentioning it. ``The 
Forgotten Man''?
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Yeah, but the thing about it that's important 
is we're making the same basic mistakes we've made in the past during 
the 1920s and the 1930s that led to the Great Depression and caused a 
tremendous amount of unemployment and heartache for the people of this 
country.
  And the thing that really bothers me is that we went through a very 
large recession back in the late 1970s. When Ronald Reagan, your hero 
and my hero, came into office in 1980, he immediately moved to cut 
taxes across the board, and because of that, even though that economic 
problem we faced back then was worse than it is now, we came out of 
that and had the longest period of economic growth that we've had in my 
memory, and that's

[[Page 9238]]

because he cut taxes. He didn't raise spending like this. He cut taxes 
so people and businesses had disposable income that they could use to 
invest and buy things. That's what we need to be doing today.
  Mr. AKIN. Just reclaiming my time, what you're talking about, Ronald 
Reagan, a lot of times people say that Republicans, well, all we do is 
say ``no,'' we don't have any answers. But the fact of the matter is 
that this idea that Keynes had and Morgenthau had about the government 
spending lots of money to fix the economy, it doesn't work, it's never 
worked. So we vote ``no'' on what doesn't work.
  But what does work? Well, what you're saying is, one, you want the 
government to spend less money, but the other thing is certain types of 
tax cuts, not every tax cut, but certain types, particularly the tax 
cuts that put liquidity into the pocket of those small businessmen--
that's 70 percent of the jobs in this country are created by these 
entrepreneurs, these investors, the small businessmen that get their 
things going. So that's what Ronald Reagan did, and boy, did it work. 
He wasn't the only one that did it. JFK did it, didn't he?
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. That's right. He did it, and Reagan did it. 
Reagan cut taxes for business, as well as for individuals, and today, 
if we cut the capital gains tax in half or cut it out all together for 
maybe a year and if we cut the income tax out for just two or three 
months, that would cost a great deal less than we're spending, and I 
have no doubt that it would stimulate a real rapid growth in the 
economy of this country.
  So I'd just like to say to my colleague and my other colleague that 
just showed up on the floor, I want to thank you both for taking this 
Special Order. The American people really ought to appreciate what 
you're doing by explaining what in the Dickens is going on around this 
place, and I'm very happy that you're doing that.
  Mr. AKIN. Just reclaiming my time for a minute, let me ask you: on 
this chart this is the historic budget in balance. Everything below 
this line, we spent more money than we had. Anything above the line, we 
spent less than we had. Every single bar is a year going back to the 
1980s and 1990s. You come across here. Does it strike you as being a 
little bit odd that in 2009 we have this tremendous level of spending? 
Does that look like a good sign to you? You know something about 
economics. I yield.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. There's just no question in my mind that the 
tremendous amount of spending that we're doing right now is going to be 
very bad, not only for us but for the future generations. The kids and 
the grandkids that we're going to be having are going to be bearing the 
burden of higher taxes and inflation, and it's not necessary if we did 
the right thing today by cutting taxes across the board.
  And I see both my colleagues are here, and I really appreciate. And 
I'd just like to say one more thing before I yield the floor to my 
colleague, and that is, everybody ought to take a hard look at what 
happened in the Great Depression and what happened in the 1970s and the 
1980s with Ronald Reagan. And you will see a real contrast between 
trying to spend our way out of a problem instead of cutting taxes and 
let the American people spend the money the way they want to spend it 
and the way business wants to spend it. Because if the American people 
have more money to spend and if business has more money to invest, then 
they're going to start doing the things that will stimulate economic 
growth and make the economy work; whereas, government trying to control 
everything and trying to spend our way out of these problems we're 
facing, it only leads to disaster.
  It did in the 1920s. It did in the 1970s, and they will do it again 
right now if we don't get real and start cutting taxes instead of 
increasing spending across the board.

                              {time}  1900

  With that, let me yield to my colleague, and I really appreciate you 
taking the time tonight to do this.
  Mr. AKIN. I sure appreciate my colleague from Indiana and his wisdom. 
He's been in the Chamber for some number of years, keeps an eye on 
these things, and Congressman Burton is a great leader down here.
  Mr. Speaker, Congressman Scalise is somebody who hasn't been here as 
long but is readily and rapidly earning the respect of his colleagues 
on the floor, particularly for the fact that he is paying immediate 
attention to the number one top priority, which is what's going on 
fiscally.
  Mr. Speaker, I'm going to yield the remaining time for this hour and 
would hope that Congressman Scalise could then pick that up.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from 
Louisiana will control the balance of the time.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SCALISE. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank my friend from Missouri 
for participating in helping lead this hour-long debate on the issue 
that is right now most important facing our country, and that is not 
only how to get out of this economic crisis that we're in, but how to 
sustain and get our country back on footing in terms of budget policy.
  In many ways, we've got problems in our financial systems, but we've 
got big problems here in Washington as it relates to spending and 
borrowing and taxing.
  This week, we're going to be voting on the President's budget. His 
budget resolution is on the floor later this week. It's a budget that 
causes us great concern because of its record levels of spending, 
record levels of borrowing, and record levels of taxing not only small 
businesses but every family in this country that uses energy on the 
energy cap-and-trade plan that just got filed yesterday--the 
President's cap-and-trade policy that adds a $646 billion tax increase 
which will fall on the backs of every American family.
  So when we talk about all of these policies, let's look graphically 
at just what this means in terms of spending as it's relating to the 
past decades in our current national debt.
  Right now, if you look at the trend over the last few years, the 
budget deficit was actually going down. It was still too high. For 
those of us who do not support deficit spending, it was still too high, 
but at least it was trending down towards getting back to a balanced 
budget.
  Unfortunately, the first budget that President Obama filed increases 
deficit spending--actually, record levels. Next year would be a $1.9 
trillion national deficit added to a record level of debt.
  When we talk about the level of debt--and I think you're seeing 
across the country this budget has got a lot of people concerned, not 
only for what it does in the first year of spending, but this comes on 
top of the stimulus bill, that massive spending bill, over $800 billion 
of deficit spending that the President signed in his first few weeks in 
office. But then this budget thrown on top of that, when we look at 
what this means to future generations, this is where the real concern 
comes in.
  This is a chart that actually shows since the history of our country 
since 1789, when George Washington took the oath of office, through the 
period of time that George W. Bush left the White House in January of 
this year. This country accumulated $10 trillion of national debt.
  Now it's a level that I'm not comfortable with and many people are 
not comfortable with. But when you compare that with President Obama's 
budget, he mushrooms the national debt from $10 trillion, which is the 
national debt he inherited, to $23 trillion, when his budget that is 
going to be voted on late this week is taking effect.
  Now, obviously you see graphically why so many of us oppose this 
record level of spending and borrowing. The fact that one President in 
just one budget resolution can double the national debt to do what it 
took 43 other Presidents to do in 220 years of our country's history, 
this President will double that number, to go from $100 trillion in 
national debt that all 43 previous President's accumulated, to going up 
to $23 trillion when President

[[Page 9239]]

Obama's budget is fully implemented--if it's fully implemented.
  That's what brings us here tonight--the fact that this budget 
resolution has not passed yet. It's a proposal. It's a proposal by the 
President that I don't support, that many of us don't support, and I'm 
not sure that a majority of us don't support it, because we will have a 
vote and there is a chance that this budget will pass. That's why we're 
trying to lay out these facts.
  These are facts. These haven't been disputed. These are verified by 
the Office of Management and Budget, the Congressional Budget Office. 
Everybody that's looked at this has confirmed that the President's 
budget will more than double the national debt. Yet, we are presented 
with this vote later this week.
  Those of us on the Republican side have presented an alternative 
budget. In fact, we've laid out a plan to get us back to surpluses; a 
plan that pays down, goes down on deficits--brings our deficits back 
down to where we're only spending as much money as we're taking in.
  Just like American families across the country during these tough 
economic times--they are cutting back, they are making do with what 
they have--this Congress should do the same. This President should do 
the same. The Republican budget that we have laid out now will do just 
that.
  It doesn't add new taxes. In fact, it cuts taxes so that small 
businesses can go out and hire more people. But then it responsibly 
spends to a level where we will finally have a balanced budget, 
something that is critical--for our country to spend within our means.
  So my friend from Missouri I know has been talking about this same 
thing. I want to yield back to him some time so that he can further 
expound on it.
  Mr. AKIN. I appreciate the gentleman yielding. There are a couple of 
things. In spite of how deadly serious this is and the tremendous 
impact it's having in terms of lost jobs and just hammering people's 
pensions and people struggling with their payments, one of the things 
that is so odd about what we do in the government sector is we pass 
these laws and they have unintended consequences.
  I'm just thinking about, Here we go again. We're just about to pass 
another silly law. And I'm thinking about how are my people in the 
great State of Missouri going to react.
  We've got this cap-and-tax tax increase that you're talking about. 
That tax increase is going to be not on people over $250,000, but what 
this is going to be is a tax increase on the use of energy--of 
electricity, natural gas, propane, or whatever you're heating your 
house with.
  So just think about it a minute. This has been estimated to be $3,100 
per family in America per year. That is a pretty big tax increase. That 
is like my entire property taxes on the house that I have now.
  So I'm picturing, Congressman, if you think about it a little bit, 
and all of a sudden your energy is going up at such a tremendous rate 
and you're having to pay $3,000 more in taxes, what in the world are 
you going to do?
  Well, people in my State are going to get that steel chain saw out, 
they're going to be cutting up firewood, they're going to get 
themselves a wood-burning stove, and they're going to start burning 
firewood instead of natural gas. What's the effect of that going to be? 
Well, not as complete and clean a combustion.
  So we're going to put more CO2 and other types of gasses 
in the air by passing this bill and it's going to have the exact 
opposite effect of what it's supposed to do.
  It's like when some brilliant genius put this MTBE in our gasoline to 
make the air cleaner and people figured out that it was ruining the 
water and the water table because it was washing out of gasoline that 
was spilled and poisoning the water. So we do something that is 
supposed to be making the environment better--and we make it worse.
  Here we go. We're going to tax everybody's use of home energy. And 
what's going to happen? They're just going to get wood-burning stoves. 
It's going to smell nice like a barbecue going on all the time. But 
this is just another really bad idea, particularly in these hard times, 
to be laying one more heavy tax burden.
  Now we heard a lot about President Bush spending too much money. As a 
Republican, I voted against some of those proposals. But let's do a 
comparison here of exactly where we are because you talk about 
trillions and billions of dollars, it makes my head spin. But I can do 
a simple comparison.
  Here the average annual deficit under President Bush is $300 billion, 
and what is being proposed by the current President is $600 billion. I 
can understand the difference. There's twice as much spending going on 
here as there was under Bush.
  Here's the highest deficit. George W. Bush, when the Democrats ran 
the House, that was when there was the most spending going through--
$459 billion. Under President Obama, he's looking at $1.2 trillion. 
That's two times more deficit spending.
  Increase in the national debt. Under all of the years of President 
Bush, $2.5 trillion. Well, that's not good. Again, President Obama has 
got him beat two to one.
  So I think it's helpful to try and put numbers in perspective. What 
we are talking about is unprecedented spending--and guess what the 
result of that is going to be? You guessed it. Something that none of 
us like. Jobs lost. That's what's happening.
  When you start spending too much money, taxing too much, borrowing 
too much, you start to lose jobs. Small businesses shrink down. The guy 
that made $250,000, now he's getting taxed and not putting that money 
back in his business.
  It's making all Americans across our country hurt. This is something 
we can talk about numbers. But we're also talking about people, 
Congressman.
  I appreciate your yielding some time here because this isn't the way 
we should be going. What we should be doing is tightening the belt in 
government like everybody else is tightening their belt.
  Understand that this is not government money, this is hard-earned 
dollars not of ours, not of our children. It's our grandchildren's 
hard-earned dollars that are being spent. We just can't allow this to 
go on.
  I'm going to stand here, I know you're going to stand here, and we're 
going to fight until every American understands what is at stake. I 
believe when America wakes up to what's happening here, they're going 
to say: No more spending, no more taxes. Back off, Washington, D.C., 
and let us do what we have always done so well and that is let America 
free enterprise and the American Dream pull us out of this mess.
  I yield back.
  Mr. SCALISE. Reclaiming my time, I want to thank my colleague and 
friend from Missouri for laying out not only the stark realities but 
the optimistic tone that this is not something that has happened yet. 
This is an issue that the American people are recognizing when they see 
the concerns that they have, which are the same concerns that we have, 
that the President's budget spend too much, taxes too much, and borrows 
from our children and grandchildren--money that we don't have.
  So why is this bad? Because the numbers that you showed, the numbers 
that we show right here on this chart, the fact that President Obama is 
doubling the national debt, something that took over 220 years and 43 
Presidents to accumulate. He is more than doubling that with his record 
level of spending.
  What's interesting is right now, just today, they started a summit in 
Europe. The President went to Europe today and he is going to be 
meeting with other world leaders in Europe.
  Just last week, European leaders--now we're seeing American people 
all across the country speaking out against this record level of 
spending, recognizing the problems and dangers that it's going to pose 
not only to them in terms of higher interest rates, lost jobs, 
inflation, but also in terms of what we will be leaving to our children 
and grandchildren. All of this debt that would be saddled on the backs 
of future generations.
  So Europe is actually taking notice. In fact, the Czech prime 
minister and

[[Page 9240]]

the current European Union President, Mirek Topolanek, said last week 
that ``the biggest success of last week's EU summit was its refusal to 
copy the U.S. example. We need to read the history books and the 
lessons of history. And the biggest success of the EU is the refusal to 
go this way.''
  You had the head of the European Union telling the President that 
he's spending too much money and that he's concerned about President 
Obama's spending. It's almost like when Otis, the town drunk, tells you 
he's concerned about your drinking problem.
  I think you need to take notice when leaders in Europe are telling 
the United States that this President is spending too much money. I 
think that's very riveting. In fact, it's a major concern that a lot of 
us have.
  That's why those of us on the Republican side and we invite our 
Democrats to join us in a bipartisan way to join with our budget 
resolution, not a budget that spends too much, borrows too much, and 
taxes too much, but a budget that actually balances the Federal budget, 
that does not raise taxes that will actually create jobs.
  We filed this bill in a bipartisan way. We're reaching out to our 
Democratic colleagues to reject the path of doubling the national debt. 
So, hopefully, they'll join with us.
  Somebody that is joining with us is my friend from Ohio, Mr. Jordan, 
who's on the Budget Committee and has been participating in some of 
these discussions and helping draft this alternative plan. So I yield 
time.

                              {time}  1915

  Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. I thank the gentleman from Louisiana and our 
colleague from Missouri for this Special Order hour, and appreciate the 
chance to be with you.
  You know, you hear ``tax and spend'' politicians. I would argue it is 
actually the opposite, it is spend and tax. Spending always drives the 
equation. Spending requires the increase in taxes. Spending requires 
the increase in borrowing. Spending is what hurts the future of our 
kids and our grandkids. And I know this has been pointed out because I 
see the chart that the gentleman from Louisiana has displayed.
  This budget, the Obama Democratic budget in the next 6 years adds 
more to the national debt than it took the previous 43 Presidents to 
accumulate. So, from George to George, from Washington to Bush, we 
didn't pile up as much debt as this administration is going to do in 
the next 6 years. And I would argue this: When you pile up that much 
debt, when you borrow and spend and spend and borrow and spend and tax 
that much, it is actually an attack on freedom.
  When you tax that much, it is obviously an attack on the freedom of 
taxpayers today, because we no longer have as much money, as much 
purchasing power, as much of our income to use on the goals and dreams 
and those objectives that we have as individuals and families. But 
probably more importantly, when you spend and tax and spend and borrow 
as much as this budget does, it is an attack on the future freedom, the 
freedom of future generations of Americans.
  And I read this in Budget Committee last week, Congressman, and it I 
think captures what is at stake here and why this is actually a moral 
question, in my mind. About 2 weeks ago in our district, Andrew and 
Emily Beck from Carey, Ohio gave birth to their first child, their son, 
Olen, nine pounds, three ounces, 19\1/2\ inches long, named after his 
grandfather. Little does Baby Olen know, but he already owes more than 
$30,000 in debt; and, if this majority's budget is passed, that debt 
will go to $70,000 by the time he is able to write his name. I mean, 
Baby Olen already with that kind of debt, and in just a few years it 
will reach $70,000 that every single person in this country is going to 
owe when you think about the amount of spending, the amount of taxing, 
the amount of borrowing that takes place in the majority's budget.
  Americans get it. I know the gentleman from Louisiana, my friend and 
colleague, was talking about the optimism that we heard from our friend 
from Missouri as well. Americans get it. It is why you are seeing all 
across the country these taxpayer tea parties, where people are showing 
up and expressing their outrage at this kind of spending, this kind of 
behavior from their government, their Congress.
  In fact, we had just 3 weeks ago in Ohio, on the first nice spring 
Sunday afternoon in Cincinnati, Ohio, we had over 4,000 people show up 
in Cincinnati to say: Enough is enough. Stop the craziness, stop the 
insanity, stop this ridiculous level of spending. Exercise a little 
discipline, exercise a little fiscal restraint. Make those tough 
decisions that we sent you to Washington to make.
  And it is always easy, I think I related this story another time on 
the floor. I had a coach in high school who talked about discipline 
every single day in practice. He talked about it in the classroom, he 
taught chemistry and physics, he would talk about it in the wrestling 
room, he talked about it every day: Self-discipline is the key. You 
have got to have self-discipline. He would talk about it all the time. 
And he had a great definition. I got sick of hearing him talk about it, 
as many teenagers would, but I am glad he did. He had a great 
definition. He said: Discipline is doing what you don't want do when 
you don't want to do it. Basically, that meant doing things his way 
when you would rather do them your own way. It meant doing things the 
right way when you would rather do them the convenient way.
  And that is what we need around here. The easiest thing in the world 
for politicians to do is to get ahold of the taxpayer wallet and spend 
the money. The tough thing to do is usually the right thing to do, and 
that is to say, you know what, we are going to have to prioritize. We 
can't spend and spend and spend. We are going to have to slow down this 
spending, quit borrowing, quit mortgaging the future of Baby Olen and 
other kids around this country and say we are going to do the right 
thing, which is get spending under control.
  That is why this budget is wrong. That is why we will have an 
alternative that will have some fiscal restraint, will lower taxes on 
the American families that are already overtaxed, and do those things 
that we think will help improve the future economic situation of this 
country.
  With that, I yield back to my colleague. And I appreciate, again, his 
hard work on this Special Order hour and this hard work in the 
Congress, along with our colleague from Missouri.
  Mr. SCALISE. I want to thank my friend from Ohio. And when he talks 
about the hard work and doing the hard work, doing the right thing even 
when the easy way out might be more appealing, he has got a little bit 
of humility but he did that hard work and was a two-time national 
champion wrestler. So, somebody who has been wrestling with the budget. 
But he has got some good experience, and he speaks I think some very 
poignant words.
  And when my friend from Ohio talked about those tea parties that are 
going on, when we talk about tea parties nowadays, it is not a couple 
people sitting around in sun dresses drinking hot tea; it is something 
that hearkens back to the days of our Revolution, the founding of our 
country when the Boston Tea Party was that symbol, that tipping point 
that many people had where they said enough is enough. And then they 
revolted against taxation.
  What we are seeing today in the country is a similar revolt against 
the spending, not just the taxing, but the spending and the borrowing, 
where thousands of people--and these are events that are organized not 
by community organizers, not by government institutions. It is just 
regular citizens on their own, in many cases without much media 
attention, that are saying: We want to speak out against this spending. 
And thousands of people show up at these rallies.
  In fact, on April 15, on tax day, which for many of us is not our 
most pleasant day we look forward to, but on that

[[Page 9241]]

day we have got two of those tea parties in my district, in Covington, 
Louisiana, and in Metairie, Louisiana, because citizen activists said 
we want to speak out against this spending that is being proposed in 
Washington, D.C.
  And I think the real sign of encouragement that they have is that 
since much of this hasn't happened, some of it has happened but much of 
this debt hasn't been added yet to the rolls; and before it does, they 
want to speak out so that we here in these halls in Congress hear those 
voices.
  And we are hearing them here, and we are proposing an alternative. It 
is not just a matter of being opposed to something that we think is 
bad; we proposed an alternative and a balanced budget, a budget 
resolution that, unlike the President's, brings us down a road to 
increased national debt, doubling of the national debt, higher taxes. 
We actually have a budget that has no taxes, that actually cuts taxes 
for small businesses to create good middle-class jobs at a time when we 
need to be creating jobs, and actually gets spending under control, 
brings us to a balanced budget. That is something that we should all 
support, Democrats and Republicans.
  And this is what the two proposals look like right here. President 
Obama's budget is in red, and you can see the graph continuing to go up 
in record spending and debt that is going to be increasing. And then 
you can see the Republican Budget, actually getting the spending under 
control and bringing it back down, bringing us to a balanced budget.
  With that, I yield back to my friend from Missouri (Mr. Akin).
  Mr. AKIN. I appreciate the gentleman yielding. It has been such a 
beautiful day here, we have got the cherry blossoms in full bloom in 
Washington, D.C., and yet we are talking about a very, very serious and 
very difficult problem with a government that is really out of control 
in spending. And I appreciate the gentleman from Ohio, Congressman 
Jordan, talking about the discipline. We don't have the discipline.
  But, you know, part of it is that we have forgotten some of the 
lessons that the founders that came to this country understood. And I 
have thought back a little bit, how is it that we got off track? And if 
you will allow me to just wax a little bit philosophical.
  This country was put together, and unlike any other country in the 
world America is a Nation that was founded on a creed. There are many 
things that are distinctive about America. We have the oldest 
Constitution. We have won a number of wars and ceded no territory. We 
have named no emperors, crowned no kings. And what we did was we taxed 
ourselves to rebuild.
  America is a very unique place, and there are many reasons why 
Americans could be proud of this country. But America also is a Nation 
that has, if you will, a political or religious creed, and that is 
stated in our own Declaration of Independence, why we went to war. And 
the sentence says: We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men 
are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. And it 
goes on to say: Among these is life, liberty, and the pursuit of 
happiness. Earlier versions of Jefferson's documents were life, 
liberty, and property.
  And then it goes on to say: Governments are instituted among men, 
deriving their just powers essentially to do, what? To protect life, 
liberty, property; life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.
  So if you take a look at that formula, what it is saying in simple 
terms is, there is a God. God grants all human beings certain basic 
rights, and the job of the government is to protect those rights now.
  Now, fast forward from 1776 to 1944, to the inaugural address by FDR. 
He said, well, that first Bill of Rights--which wasn't a Bill of 
Rights; it was a Declaration of Independence, life, liberty, pursuit of 
happiness--was okay for a while. But it wouldn't be any good if 
Americans are hungry or if an American needs a coat, or if some 
American is not secure. So we propose a second Bill of Rights, and that 
is that the government should give you jobs and education and health 
care and things like that.
  You note the clever twist here. The first rights are things that 
naturally occur to all people under God, the right to free speech, the 
right not to be killed, the right to own some property. These other 
kinds of things we are talking about now have a strange, strange 
parallel.
  We laughed some years ago in my past when we watched the Berlin Wall 
fall down and we said, we knew those commies or the USSR, that system 
would never work, communism, socialism. It won't work. Why was that? 
Well, because the government is going to give you your health care, the 
government is going to give you your food and your housing, the 
government is going to provide a job, the government is going to 
provide an education. And don't talk about God, because if you talk 
about God then you know you have natural rights from God, not rights 
that come from a government.
  So what we are doing in America with this kind of budget? What we are 
doing in America is the government is going to give you health care, 
the government is going to give you a job, the government is going to 
give you food and a place to live. The government is going to give you 
an education. How are we so different from the system we just watched 
fail?
  That is why the Europeans are laughing in their beers, looking at us 
and saying, has America been smoking those funny cigarettes or what? 
What are we doing? And I think that is the question we are trying to 
raise.
  I don't mean to be too philosophical, but where did we got off track? 
We got off track on the road to socialism, to the idea that the 
government is going to be all things to all people. And it does a lousy 
job of doing that.
  What we should be doing, quite simply, is protecting life and 
protecting people's basic liberties. And what are we talking about 
doing? We are talking about saying we are going to have a bureaucrat in 
D.C. to monitor what you put on your radio program. We are going to 
call that The Fairness Doctrine.
  We are going to take away your right to be able to vote without being 
compelled or feeling pressure, because we are going to get rid of the 
secret ballot election when it comes to joining a union or not.
  We are talking about taking away people's freedom to own a piece of 
property because some local government wants to take it and turn it 
into a strip mall so you don't have any private property rights.
  I mean, what is going on? How come we are giving up freedom? I don't 
think we are on the right track.
  I appreciate the gentleman with this hour, and I just felt like it 
was important to get back to what is basic in America, which is limited 
government that provides and protects our life, our liberty, and our 
property, instead of doing this institutionalized theft.
  Mr. SCALISE. Again, I thank my friend from Missouri. And when you 
talk about the Founding Fathers and that great document, the U.S. 
Constitution, which I would argue is the second most important document 
ever written, next to the Bible. And when the Founding Fathers really 
talked about and articulated the foundation of our country when they 
were forming it, they really did believe in those things, and they 
sacrificed tremendously for that liberty, for that freedom, to create 
what has been the greatest experiment in democracy in the history of 
the world. And we still are that great democracy. And the reason we are 
here tonight is because we want to preserve that democracy, not just 
for ourselves, but for our children and for our grandchildren.
  Every generation in this country has a fine tradition of passing on a 
better Nation than the one that they inherited. And many of us feel 
that if we go down this road, we would be in jeopardy of leaving a 
worse Nation behind. And so it is well worth fighting for those 
principles that our Founding Fathers talked about are critically 
important. It is why we were elected. It is why we took the oath of 
office here in this Chamber in January, to uphold the principles that 
that document articulates.

[[Page 9242]]



                              {time}  1930

  And when you look at this budget, when you look at the contrast, go 
back to World War II, and you will see this massive spike in public 
debt held as a percentage of GDP. And of course we were fighting a 
world war. We won World War II. And it was expensive. And as soon as 
World War II was over, we came out of it, and we got back to a regular 
level of spending. Then you see this massive spike, this red spike, 
which is representative of President Obama's budget contrasted by this 
green line, which is the Republican alternative.
  This bill, this is an alternative budget resolution that we filed. 
Too often we hear, and some of our friends on the other side like to 
reinvent history and they say, ``the Republicans have no alternatives. 
They are just against the President's budget.'' I guess they don't know 
how to read this document. We have copies right here on the House 
floor, and we are distributing to them to anybody who wants to see it. 
In fact, it is on the Internet. You can go and look it up on the 
Internet and read the details of what we propose. And that is a budget 
that is balanced. That is an interesting concept here in Washington, 
D.C. these days. But it is a budget that we actually balance.
  We don't raise taxes. In fact, we cut taxes for middle-class families 
and for small businesses to create jobs, to get our economy back on 
track, and so we can get control again on this runaway spending that so 
many people are speaking out about.
  One of the other points that this budget does that concerns many of 
us is it borrows from Social Security. So what do these policies, what 
does ``deficit spending'' really mean? Well, first of all, last week 
when the Treasury Department went out to sell debt--on occasion, a few 
times a week, the Treasury Department actually goes out and sells debt. 
And last week they had a hiccup. There was a problem because some 
people weren't buying the debt at the levels they were expecting. And 
you saw the stock market tank that day. Unfortunately these days, we 
see a lot of tanks in the stock market as reactions to some of the 
things happening here where you have the Federal Government, literally 
the government trying to tell private companies like GM whom to hire as 
their corporate CEO. These are not healthy signs for our country. But 
that debt had a cost.
  Another cost to that borrowing and deficit spending is that in just 
the first 4 years, in President Obama's first term, he will actually 
raid the Social Security trust fund of $910 billion taken away from 
Social Security. That is a cost of this deficit spending. That is why 
so many of us are speaking up against this deficit spending, because 
senior citizens out there who are on fixed incomes expect that 
obligation to be met by the Federal Government. Young people that are 
working today are paying in, paying those Social Security taxes. Some 
may be cynical and think they are not going to get anything for it. But 
it is an obligation that is made to them because they pay taxes into 
that system for that system to be there for them. And how is that 
system going to be there for them if this President in just 4 years 
raids the Social Security trust fund of $910 billion? These are real 
consequences to this runaway spending.
  So as we talk about these things, I'm going to yield back to my 
friend from Ohio to share his thoughts.
  Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
  Mr. Speaker I wanted to talk about the point we were on earlier, the 
greatness of this country and the freedom that we have enjoyed for over 
two centuries. My friend from Louisiana made the point about one of the 
things that makes us special, that makes us the greatest nation in 
history, is this idea that parents make sacrifices for their kids so 
they can have life a little better than they did. And then that 
generation in turn, when they become parents, does the same thing for 
the next. And it has been that continuation that has led to the amazing 
standard of living we enjoy in this country and prosperity and wealth 
over the years. It is a fascinating principle that parents make the 
sacrifices to help their next generation. Unfortunately, what you see 
in this budget is exactly the opposite. We are taxing and spending and 
borrowing and mortgaging the future of our children and our 
grandchildren in exactly the wrong direction that we need to proceed.
  Our colleague from Missouri talked about the loss of freedom. And if 
you think about this budget, I want to just talk about four things. 
There is an attack on liberty. There's an assault on freedom, as our 
friend from Missouri pointed out. The tax increases contained in this 
budget, when you tax people more and take more of their money, you are 
taking away their ability to go after their goals and dreams, to pursue 
those objectives and those initiatives that have meaning and 
significance to them and to their kids and their family and their small 
business. When you increase spending at this rate, we talked about this 
before, when you have this kind of spending and this kind of debt piled 
up, you limit the liberty and freedom of future generations of 
Americans. And when you impose in this budget, which is in the 
document, this tax on energy that we have called the cap and trade or 
cap and tax, this cap-and-trade concept which places a tax on all the 
energy in our economy, when you do that, you limit the freedom of the 
entrepreneur and the small business owner out there to get the energy 
he or she needs to grow their business and help our economy improve. It 
is a direct attack on freedom for small businesses owners.
  Probably the one that gets Americans the most is this idea that in 
this budget we are going to create this national health board which is 
going to be in the business of determining what kind of health care you 
and your family get. Instead of you and your doctor and your family 
sitting down and figuring out what kind of health care treatment you're 
going to get, we are going to have this national board. Money is set 
aside in this budget to pursue this advancement of nationalized health 
care. I think, just what we need, the Federal Government determining 
how we get our health care. That is a direct attack on freedom for 
families across this country.
  One of the things I know about Americans for sure, it is just part of 
who we are as a people, we hate being told what to do. We hate this 
concept. Our colleague from Missouri was talking about the folks who 
settled this place. They came here because they wanted to practice 
their faith in the way they felt was most appropriate. They didn't like 
the idea they were told what they were going to be taxed and what they 
were going to do and didn't have representation. Americans hate being 
told what to do. My friend from Louisiana may have heard the old line, 
for most Americans when they are traveling down the highway and they 
see the sign that says ``55,'' for most Americans that is not the 
limit. That is the challenge. That is just the way we are. It is part 
of being an American. And this budget tells so many Americans, ``we are 
going to take away your freedom. We are going to tell you how things 
are going to be. We are going to take more of your money. We are going 
to mortgage your kids' future. We are going to impose a cap and trade 
on this economy which is going to hurt the ability of our economy to 
recover and make it tougher for business owners to get the energy they 
need to grow their business and improve and create jobs. And we are 
going to tell you and your family what kind of health care treatment 
you're going to get.''
  Americans aren't going to stand for it. Again, we keep coming back to 
this. But consistent with the American tradition, it is great to see 
families and Americans and taxpayers all over this country, and they 
are all going to do it again on April 15 at these taxpayer tea parties, 
they are going to stand up and say ``do you know what? We are not going 
to take it.'' Just like we have done for over 200 years, we are going 
to tell our elected officials, we are going to tell the government, we 
are going to tell the Congress that we don't want our liberties 
attacked, and we want things done right. And it is great to see that 
again.

[[Page 9243]]

  I appreciate the leadership of our colleague and friend from 
Louisiana and our friend and colleague from Missouri for making these 
points and letting me join them this evening. I yield back to our 
friend from Louisiana.
  Mr. SCALISE. I thank my friend from Ohio for joining us tonight. And 
the things he said are so true, that great entrepreneurial spirit that 
makes this the greatest country in the world where people literally 
envision the American Dream, where industrialists like Henry Ford 
revolutionized the auto industry and the manufacturing industry with 
the assembly line and changed the way Americans can get around and can 
see the country, people like Bill Gates who dropped out of college to 
pursue a dream and change the way all of us communicate, literally, our 
day-to-day lives. That entrepreneurial spirit is still out there. But 
people don't want it taken away by government literally coming in and 
trying to control all of these areas of our life with this cap-and-
trade energy tax which would put a $600 billion tax on the production 
of energy in the United States, which would equate, by most estimates, 
to more than $3,000 per American family in higher energy costs.
  That is part of this budget that we are talking about that spends too 
much, taxes too much and borrows too much. It is why we are opposing 
it. It is why we are proposing an alternative budget, a budget that 
actually balances the Federal budget, that cuts taxes and that gets 
Americans back to work. We actually have this online. It is at gop.gov. 
We put it out there so that people can go see the details and compare 
it to what President Obama has proposed, which is a doubling of the 
national debt.
  We have just a few minutes left. I want to have a final word shared 
with us by my friend from Missouri.
  Mr. AKIN. Well, I thank you very much. And I appreciate your calling 
attention to the fact that we are on the wrong track financially here. 
It is true that doing the wrong thing financially impacts our freedom 
in America. And particularly it impacts something that is precious to 
every red-blooded American, and that is the American Dream. If you 
think back in the beginning of our country there were all these crazy 
people that came to America, starting with a group called the Pilgrims. 
They came to this land, and they had the idea of building an entirely 
new civilization on a different set of principles. And after they had 
been here about a month, half of them died. And the captain of the 
Mayflower comes to them and says, ``Things haven't gone too well. Maybe 
it is time for you to go back to jolly old England with me.'' So he 
gives the commands. The boatswain squares the yardarms, the anchor 
cable is wound up from Plymouth Harbor, at first large and then small, 
that Mayflower sails out and beyond sight. And here on the shore, with 
the wind blowing across the pine trees, is a little group of 50-plus 
people that had a dream of a new country based on new principles.
  It has been that way all the way along. There have been these crazy 
people that came to America with some crazy idea, and then it became 
maybe a vague possibility. And then they wrote something down, and 
eventually it became actually reality. And it happened so often that we 
gave it the name the ``American Dream.'' But it happened because there 
was a rarified environment of freedom in America where people could 
succeed. But they could also fail. They understood that there was a 
discipline that the gentleman from Ohio was talking about. Congressman 
Jordan understands discipline. There is a discipline. If you want to 
have freedom, you also have to have responsibility. And that is part of 
the American Dream. And that is being stomped out by this budget.
  We won't take it. And I appreciate your taking the leadership and 
scheduling this hour and particularly your leadership financially here 
on this floor, Congressman. Thank you.
  Mr. SCALISE. Thank you, again. I appreciate my friend from Missouri 
joining us in this hour debating and talking about what is at stake 
with this budget, the President's budget, that will be voted on here in 
this House Chamber later this week. The fact that one President with 
one budget, one 10-year budget proposal, can double the national debt 
what it took 43 Presidents in over 220 years in our country's history 
to rack up $10 trillion in debt, this President, one President with one 
budget proposal will more than double that. That is what is at stake 
here. That is why we are joining in this debate. That is why American 
people all across the country are going to these rallies, these tea 
parties, to speak up.
  We all understand that there is a role government must play. But it 
has to be a limited role. It has to be a role that is based in fiscal 
responsibility, not just for us, but for future generations, for our 
children and grandchildren who want the same things, who want a better 
life. And that is why people come to this great country.
  Again, when we talk about what is happening in Europe right now, the 
President is over there, it is very ironic that the Czech leader, the 
head of the European Union last week was lashing out, lashing out at 
the President on his spending proposal, expressing concern. And it must 
say a lot when leaders in Europe are concerned about the spending that 
is going on here.
  But it is not just leaders in Europe. It is people all across this 
country. And some people have talked about the fiscal irresponsibility 
of Congresses past, both Republicans and Democrats, those of us who 
weren't there back then, those of us who didn't vote for those budgets. 
A lot of us came up here to fix those problems because we don't think 
it is responsible to spend money we don't have.
  That is why I am the cosponsor of a balanced budget amendment to our 
Constitution so that we can force fiscal discipline in a place where 
unfortunately it doesn't exist right now. But it is not too late 
because this budget resolution hasn't passed yet. The vote will occur 
on this House floor later this week. And everybody will have to take a 
position. I know I will be voting against that budget because of what 
it does, not only to our generation, to our freedoms, but to future 
generations. And that is why I'm supporting the alternative, which is a 
budget that is balanced, a budget that actually cuts taxes to help get 
our economy back on track. These are proven principles. These are 
things that have not been tried and failed before. The only thing that 
we know that has been tried and failed in the past is massive spending. 
And you can go back to the Great Depression in the 1940s when the 
Federal Government spent and spent and spent. And even the Treasury 
Secretary under FDR said the spending didn't work, 8 years of spending, 
and there was higher unemployment.
  Ultimately, we can fix this problem. But it starts with this vote on 
this budget resolution that we are trying to defeat later this week.
  I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

                          ____________________