[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 8]
[House]
[Page 11569]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 STOP SPENDING ON WEAPONS AND WARFARE; START INVESTING IN THE AMERICAN 
                                 PEOPLE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Woolsey) for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, this week, the House is debating the 
Defense appropriations bill, which provides an excellent opportunity to 
point out something quite ironic about my colleagues in the majority 
because, Madam Speaker, for all of their talk about getting spending 
under control, that same rhetoric is surprisingly absent when we are 
talking about the Pentagon budget, which we are talking about this 
week.
  You see, they're eager to slash and burn when it comes to programs 
that invest and support middle class working families, but somehow, 
when it is time for sacrifice to be shared, the military industrial 
complex is nowhere to be found. While we have to fight for every penny 
of domestic spending, the Pentagon simply fills in its amount on a 
blank check, it appears. So I think we ought to have a dollar-for-
dollar match in spending cuts.
  I will be offering a series of amendments to the DOD appropriations 
bill that call for defense cuts in the exact amounts by which other 
important programs are being reduced.
  For example, the proposed Labor-HHS-Education spending bill 
eliminates the title X program. Title X, the family planning program 
that historically has been passed with bipartisan support, has provided 
contraceptive and preventive health services to low-income women for 
more than 40 years. The Republicans want the title X $294 million 
investment gone. So let's cut the defense budget by an identical $294 
million;
  The Ag appropriations bill provides $119 million less than the 
President requested for WIC--the Women, Infants, and Children's 
program--which provides badly needed nutrition assistance for poor 
pregnant women, new mothers, and children up to the age of 5. So, if we 
are going to shortchange a pillar of our safety net by $119 million, 
then I believe the Department of Defense can do without that same $119 
million.

                              {time}  1040

  Here's the big ticket item: the Republican budget. The budget that 
passed this body in March zeroed out all funding for the Social 
Services Block Grant, including $1.7 billion in cuts for next year. If 
my Republican friends believe that we can't afford $1.7 billion next 
year to provide daycare, housing, home health care, home meal delivery, 
and other social services, then I say we can also eliminate a 
corresponding $1.7 billion in defense spending.
  The fact is, Madam Speaker, defense cuts are not only fiscally 
responsible and morally defensible; they're widely popular. USA Today 
reported yesterday on a new survey that shows that two-thirds of those 
living in Republican congressional districts believe that the defense 
budget is too large.
  It is no secret that military spending is widely out of control. 
Let's remember that none of this takes into account the war in 
Afghanistan, which isn't funded through the appropriations process. On 
top of the bloated defense budget, American taxpayers are shelling out 
another $10 billion a month--not a year--for a decade-long war that is 
failing to advance our national security objective.
  It's time to reverse this course. It's time to bring our troops home 
from Afghanistan. It's time for the Pentagon to assume its share of the 
shared sacrifice. It's time to do the right and the sensible thing: 
stop spending on weapons and warfare and start investing in the 
American people.

                          ____________________