[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 7435-7439]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Francis Rooney of Florida). Under the 
Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2017, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of 
the minority leader.
  Mr. POCAN. Mr. Speaker, I am here on behalf of the Progressive 
Caucus, which is the largest values-based caucus within the Democratic 
Party--74 members strong--who are helping to lead the legislative arm 
of the resistance in this country.


[[Page 7436]]

  We, every year, put forth a Progressive Caucus budget, which is 
really a statement of the values of the Progressive Caucus and the 
values of the American people. This year, this week, we released our 
budget. But before I talk about it, let me just take a step back.
  One of the things that people have asked us to do, asked so many of 
our Progressive Caucus members in this Congress to do, is to really 
fight and to lead the resistance here in Washington, D.C. And we are 
fighting many of the bad ideas that get proposed, from the idea of 
having a wall on the Mexican border to the terrible tax plan that is 
going to cost tens of millions of people access to health care, to a 
tax plan that is going to lower rates for the wealthiest in the country 
and leave the working class and those aspiring to be in the working 
class without any benefits.
  The cuts that the Trump administration has proposed in their budget, 
there is just so many bad things, day after day, sometimes hour after 
hour, in Washington, D.C., that happens. And it is the Congressional 
Progressive Caucus that is largely leading many of those fights, saying 
no to the bad ideas. But it is not enough to just say no. We also have 
to have a positive, progressive alternative so that the American people 
can see there is a true alternative.
  You don't have to just go by the policies of this administration. You 
don't have to go down the path that really leaves so many people out so 
that the top 1 or 2 percent can continue to benefit. And that is 
exactly what the Congressional Progressive Caucus is doing.
  So when we put forth a Congressional Progressive Caucus budget, it is 
a comprehensive budget that lays out the values of the American people 
from everything from education, to infrastructure, to health care, to 
our Nation's security. It is a document that we use throughout the year 
to put forth positive, progressive ideas to show that there is an 
alternative. You don't have to follow the ideas that have come forth 
from the Republican majority in this House and the President.
  Let me just start by talking about the Republican budget, the budget 
that Donald Trump has proposed in his skinny budget he released a while 
ago. He will be producing a more in-depth budget, but he laid out the 
fundamental foundation of what his budget is going to look like. That 
budget is a budget that has no additional revenue. It has $54 billion 
of additional spending for the military, and because it has no 
additional revenue, it has cuts to almost every other program that we 
see, and these are deep cuts--20, 30 percent cuts--to all sorts of 
agencies.
  So let me share a little bit about what that budget looks like, and 
then I will offer the contrast of what the Congressional Progressive 
Caucus has put forward and why it means so much to have that budget in 
place.
  First of all, that $54 billion increase means you are going to have 
to have a lot of cuts to a lot of other areas in the budget, and let me 
just point a few of those out. One that means a lot to my district, and 
I represent the people of south central Wisconsin, but it means a lot 
to everyone across the country, is funding for the National Institutes 
of Health, NIH.
  That is the area where that funding goes to researchers across the 
country who are finding cures for diseases so that we can live longer, 
and better, and have healthier lives, and it is essential funding. That 
is so important that, in the last Congress, one of the few things we 
got done in a bipartisan way is, we did additional funding for the 
National Institutes of Health.
  Just today, in the Omnibus bill to get us through funding through 
September 30 of this year, we upped funding in a bipartisan way for the 
National Institutes of Health, because we, in a bipartisan way, value 
the work they do. In President Trump's budget, there is a $6 billion 
cut--almost 20 percent of that budget--that would happen, threatening 
all sorts of research across the country.
  For the Department of Education, there is a 13 percent cut, but that 
is not just a 13 percent cut. That cut would be even deeper if you 
didn't count the hundreds of millions of dollars put into taxpayer 
funds going into private schools. It would be more like an 18 or 19 
percent cut, but it is huge cuts.
  Just in higher education alone, Pell grants--something that I was 
fortunate enough to have--I grew up in a lower middle class family, and 
I was fortunate enough to get loans, and work through college, and get 
some Pell grants to help me so I could attend college. There is a $4 
billion cut just in that line item. So clearly, there is not the 
attention to education from the K-12 level or higher education in that 
budget.
  Programs like Head Start and others are devastated in the pre-K 
level. So there are a lot of problems with President Trump's budget for 
education. When you get to transportation, there is a 13 percent cut--
$2.4 billion--everything from Amtrak, to dollars going to other rail 
programs and transit programs, investment programs that help people in 
rural areas, TIGER grants for highway projects, and more.
  In energy, we see the nonnuclear weapon portion of the energy budget, 
a cut by 18 percent below the current level, and that contains programs 
like LIHEAP that helps provide assistance to low-income seniors in 
winter. Now, maybe a low-income senior in winter in Arizona isn't 
experiencing the same thing they are in Wisconsin, or Michigan, or 
Pennsylvania, or New York, or a lot of our States, but it gets cold. 
And sometimes those heating bills can really sock a senior who is on a 
limited income. That money is just vital to them being able to live in 
their homes.
  It completely cuts the Community Development Block Grant program. 
That is things like housing programs, Meals on Wheels. I had the good 
fortune of going around my district and delivering Meals on Wheels 
about a year ago to constituents one day.
  It is not just that you are providing a nourishing meal to seniors 
who often can't get out of their homes, who this is the only place they 
may get that nourishing meal, but it is also a check-in to make sure 
that they are all right. Some are still living by themselves, and often 
you don't know if you don't have that visit to be able to check in. It 
would cut programs like that completely from getting any Federal funds.
  At the Environmental Protection Agency, environmental programs, 50 
programs would be eliminated, and 31.4 percent of their budget would be 
gutted for all sorts of things that protect our clean air and clean 
water--programs like the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative or the 
Chesapeake Bay Watershed Initiative. So many areas would be cut through 
that funding, and that just doesn't make any sense.
  This is a time that we have the Flint, Michigans of the world, and we 
are finding that more and more communities with aging infrastructure of 
their waterways are having lead in their water and other contaminants. 
This is not the time to be cutting a program that watches out for this 
by 31 percent; and on, and on.
  There are so many cuts that affect real people. So while maybe it is 
good for the defense contractors to get $54 billion because, trust me, 
that money is not going to be shared with the people who actually 
protect our country.
  I was talking to another Member of Congress recently whose son is in 
the military making $22,000 a year. I can guarantee you that $54 
billion is not going to be targeted to truly improve what that person 
is doing, what they are getting paid as they fight for our country to 
protect our country, but it is going to go to a bunch of new weapons 
systems and other things that allow the money that, again, is going to 
go to that top 1 and 2 percent in this Nation.
  So let me offer what that contrasts. Instead of putting 54 billion 
new dollars into defense and cutting all of those programs I talked 
about by huge amounts--20, 30 percent, our State Department, 28 
percent, go down the list, huge cuts--we actually invest in this 
country, and we invest in multiple levels.
  The People's Budget: A Roadmap for the Resistance--that is what we 
call it--does a whole lot of different things. 

[[Page 7437]]

Let me just highlight 
some of what we put forward this week, along with 60 organizations, 
major organizations that are endorsing the efforts that we put forward.
  First of all, we have a $2 trillion investment in our Nation's 
infrastructure; $2 trillion that is going into programs to modernize 
our roads and bridges; modernize our water and sewer systems, our ports 
and waterways; investing in our transit systems; investing in our K-12 
school reconstruction; investing in high-speed broadband infrastructure 
that we need so desperately in our rural parts of the country; 
investing in the VA hospitals and extended-care facilities; and 
investing in the actual workers who are going to do these projects.
  This alone is a $2 trillion investment, and, throughout this budget, 
it is estimated, by the Economic Policy Institute, would create 2.4 
million new jobs in this country, good family supporting wages, while 
we are reinvesting in our Nation's bridges, and roads, and schools, and 
broadband, and other infrastructure. That is a key part of what we have 
put out there, and it is what is needed in this country.
  We have to invest in our country, and this budget does just that. We 
also look at taxes in a very different way, and we rewrite the rules in 
a system that often seems rigged against the middle class and those 
aspiring to be in the middle class.
  We close loopholes for big corporations that send jobs overseas. We 
stop CEOs from receiving millions in tax-free bonuses, and we tackle 
income and equality by having fair tax rates--fair for those who are 
working, and sharing a little more for those who are the wealthiest in 
this country. We level the playing field for the working families 
across this country.
  In this budget, we also have a new initiative to invest $1 trillion 
into childcare, childcare for everyone who needs it, pre-K education in 
this country. There is no question, we know more people are working 
more and working more jobs, but you can't if you don't have someone to 
watch your children when you are doing that.
  Having this in place will allow us to make sure that those crucial 
years in education that really develop you for often the rest of your 
educational experience--K-12 and higher education--we have a plan to 
truly invest in every single person so that no one is paying more than 
10 percent of their income for childcare.
  It is not just that. We are funding K-12 schools. We are funding that 
infrastructure for our schools. We are making sure that people who live 
in rural areas have broadband so they can do the homework that you do 
in a modern America.
  At the higher education level, we have several innovative ideas 
offered in our budget, from refinancing of student loans to the lowest 
current available rate so that you are not paying some of these high 
6.6 percent interest rates that don't even make sense in today's 
economy, to providing for debt-free college; to make sure that if you 
actually work and you want to do a workstudy job, you should be able to 
leave a 4-year public institution debt free, and leave with a degree, 
compared to the $30,000 plus on average that people are leaving with 
now. We also tackle some of the ideas about free tuition in public 
institutions. So we have got some real ideas from pre-K, to K-12, to 
higher education.
  We also make sure that we are addressing the costs of prescription 
drugs because that is one of the drivers as we have this debate around 
health care.
  One of the reasons we have seen the spikes we have had is because, 
quite honestly, a lot of prescription drug companies have charged 
prices that are quite unreasonable, by any reasonable person's 
standards. There is no reason why the same drug you pay for in Canada 
or Ireland is substantially cheaper than it is in the United States.
  We have measures to make sure that we can reduce the price of 
prescription drugs here in this country and that people don't have to 
make a decision between paying for their medicine or their groceries.
  We also are looking at health care in another way. First of all, the 
Affordable Care Act, as I think now many people across this country 
understand and now support the concept--while they may not have 
supported ObamaCare, they love the Affordable Care Act. Same thing, 
folks.
  What we are finding is, there are things we need to do to improve it. 
And while we look at some of those, one of those is allowing States to 
look at going to a single-payer system, and we provide the pathway to 
do that, to reduce costs and increase coverage so that even more people 
can have that.
  We also expand access to mental health care--this is Mental Health 
Awareness Month in this country, and we are making sure we are doing 
that--and treatment for opioid addiction.
  We also have a humane and comprehensive immigration reform proposal. 
We are not talking about building walls at a time we should be talking 
about building bridges. Instead, we are having sensible plans that 
provide for full implementation of the Deferred Action for Childhood 
Arrivals program, the DACA program.
  We preserve funding for sanctuary cities, and we prohibit any funding 
whatsoever to go to President Trump's wall.

                              {time}  1800

  Those are just a few of the things that we have in this budget. When 
you contrast those deep cuts to programs that help middle class 
families and those aspiring to be in the middle class across the 
country, when you contrast it with the proactive positive alternatives 
we have in this budget, I think people will see that there truly is a 
significant difference and why we don't have to settle for something 
that is out there that is not going to take care of the working 
families in this country.
  You know, a lot of people across the country talk to our Members of 
Congress. We see these huge attendances right now at townhalls, and 
every Member should be out having those townhalls. And what we are 
hearing from people is that they are not happy with the proposals 
offered by the Trump administration and by the Republicans in Congress, 
the healthcare proposal that they put forward that we could be voting 
on as early as tomorrow--the second attempt at this.
  I will tell you, I have learned something very interesting. When 
someone doesn't want to put their name on something, in this place 
especially, it is usually not very good. I have found people really 
like to put their name on things in this town.
  It's funny that the Trump administration was calling their healthcare 
bill RyanCare, Congress is calling it TrumpCare, people back home call 
it I Don't Care.
  In the end, what we are finding is this is a bill that is going to 
cut access to 24 million people, give tax breaks of $600 billion-plus 
to the wealthiest in this country, the top 1 and 2 percent, to 
insurance companies, to Big Pharma, and other big entities. That is 
often what it seems like it is really about.
  It is going to increase fivefold. People will be paying five times as 
much--older Americans--for their health care, and it cuts Medicaid to 
so many people who need it in this country.
  Don't forget, Medicaid is not just for people who are poor and trying 
to get health care and trying to get work; it is also people with 
disabilities, it is seniors in nursing homes.
  It is, quite honestly, incomprehensible that the Republicans think it 
is all right to cut those programs. That is their tax plan. But here is 
the best part: they are making it now even worse. The words we are 
hearing and that they are bragging about are amendments to make it so 
that, State by State, they can turn down things like coverage for 
preexisting conditions and turn down other essential health benefits, 
things like prescription drug care, maternal care, emergency room 
visits.
  That is what health care is all about. If you gut everything out of 
health care, all you have is a shell of what you can call health care 
but doesn't actually provide any of the benefits.
  They are doing this to bring in the Tea Party, the most conservative 
element of their caucus that fundamentally doesn't believe in the 
functioning 


[[Page 7438]]

of government. They are going to basically do that, make 
sure government doesn't have any say in what health care is. You will 
have no guarantees.
  I guarantee with what they are doing--this is according to the 
official nonpartisan estimates by the CBO, the Congressional Budget 
Office, not our estimates--at least 24 million people will lose care 
under the old proposal. Take the new proposal, and if you start adding 
the States being able to make those decisions, more and more people 
will lose access to their health care.
  We will see what happens, whether or not they can get this done. I 
think they are having a difficult time. When we had a little 
conversation on the floor about it today, we noticed they didn't quite 
have answers about when the bill will come up. We will see what does 
happen with that.
  But when you contrast that sort of a healthcare proposal with the 
fundamentals that we have in the Progressive Caucus budget, you see a 
stark difference. We take and expand upon the progress of the 
Affordable Care Act that has allowed tens of millions of people to have 
access.
  When you look at the proposals that we put forward, there was an 
Economic Policy Institute article and a Washington Post article today 
that I will include in the Record.

             [From Economic Policy Institute, May 2, 2017]

  The People's Budget, Not Trump's Budget, Will Help Working Americans

                            (By Mark Pocan)

       After President Trump's first 100 days in office, it's 
     clear that his promises to help the working class were little 
     more than a campaign ploy. His dismantling of Obama-era 
     regulations like the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces rule and 
     deregulation of the financial industry reveal what he really 
     cares about--lining the pockets of America's ultra-rich.
       Nothing demonstrates his disdain for working people more 
     than his budget proposal. In it, he cuts 31 percent of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s budget, which ensures 
     people across the country have clean air and water, and 21 
     percent from Department of Labor programs that provide job 
     training to seniors and disadvantaged youth. Instead of 
     helping working people, Trump's budget imposes a hiring 
     freeze on crucial federal agencies and calls for many more 
     staff to be laid off from public sector jobs--the largest 
     reduction in the federal workforce since World War II.
       The FY 2018 People's Budget: A Roadmap for the Resistance 
     by the Congressional Progressive Caucus stands in stark 
     contrast to Trump's budget. The People's Budget is a plan to 
     actually help working Americans who have felt left behind by 
     an economy rigged against them. Our budget is a roadmap for 
     the resistance, investing in the progressive priorities and 
     kitchen table issues that matter to real people: 
     infrastructure to create jobs and ensure public safety; 
     education to help our kids reach their full potential; and 
     sustainable energy to protect our precious environment. 
     Progressives in Congress fully want to make investments in 
     our future generations and protect programs that improve the 
     lives of people every day. We believe our budget should 
     strengthen Social Security and Medicare and invest in job 
     growth through infrastructure, education, and research and 
     development, while responsibly reducing our deficits and 
     cutting wasteful spending and redundant programs where they 
     exist.
       As a business owner from Wisconsin and a long-time union 
     member, I understand what it means to take the economic high 
     road. It means ensuring that working people get a fair shake 
     at economic opportunities, that the wealthy pay their fair 
     share of taxes, and that we all do better, when we all do 
     better. I urge President Trump and Republicans in Congress to 
     seriously consider the proposals in the People's Budget so 
     that we can create a fairer economy.
                                  ____


                       [From the Washington Post]

          This New Budget Points the Way Forward for Democrats

                           (By James Downie)

       Out of power in Washington and around the country, 
     Democrats are struggling with how to move forward as a party. 
     Already the jockeying for the 2020 nomination has begun. What 
     policies the party chooses to champion will be essential to 
     how long or short the path will be to recovery. On Tuesday, 
     the Congressional Progressive Caucus--led by Reps. Raul M. 
     Grijalva (D-Ariz.) and Keith Ellison (D-Minn.)--released its 
     annual ``People's Budget'' for 2018. The CPC has produced a 
     budget for years, but with the party at a crossroads, this 
     edition may be the most important ever. Democrats should 
     recognize its ideas as an inspiration for the party going 
     forward.
       The People's Budget starts by acknowledging a problem that 
     most leaders acknowledge but few have addressed: the 
     country's crumbling infrastructure. It provides $2 trillion 
     over 10 years to repair bridges and tunnels, revitalize mass 
     transit, replace contaminated water systems, rebuild public 
     schools and more. Furthermore, weak wage growth and other 
     indicators demonstrate that the economy remains short of 
     where it was before the Great Recession, and infrastructure 
     investment can provide badly needed jobs that will help 
     propel the economy to new heights. The Economic Policy 
     Institute projects that the People's Budget would add 2.4 
     million jobs and increase GDP by 2 percent in the near term.
       The CPC's plan also addresses other crucial domestic 
     issues. While Republicans struggle to reconcile repealing 
     Obamacare with keeping health care affordable, the CPC puts 
     forward actual ideas to bring the cost of health care down: 
     The People's Budget introduces a public option--which would 
     lower premiums--and ends the ridiculous prohibition on 
     Medicare negotiating drug prices. The document also 
     recognizes the dangers of climate change, puffing a price on 
     carbon and eliminating tax breaks for the fossil fuel 
     industry. And it funds universal pre-kindergarten and 
     strengthens antitrust enforcement, fighting back against the 
     oligopolies in health care, cable and other industries that 
     are hurting Americans' pocketbooks.
       Finally, the People's Budget invests in communities that 
     need critical help. It ends funding cuts to programs such as 
     Head Start and needs-based nutrition programs--cuts which 
     disproportionately hurt women and people of color. It invests 
     millions to help veterans find housing, jobs and health care. 
     And it commits money toward fighting homelessness and funding 
     affordable housing.
       With all this spending, people may wonder what happens to 
     the national debt, but the People's Budget reduces the debt 
     as a percentage of GDP. In addition to the savings and the 
     carbon pricing mentioned above, the budget raises trillions 
     while making the tax system more fair. In addition to closing 
     numerous loopholes for businesses and high earners, there are 
     three major changes: restoring Clinton-era tax rates for 
     income above $250,000 and higher rates for income over $1 
     million, going after companies that defer tax by sending 
     income overseas, and reintroducing a financial transaction 
     tax (which the United States had from 1914 to 1966). All 
     told, these three reforms raise nearly $5 trillion over l0 
     years.
       The People's Budget has no chance of becoming law in a GOP-
     controlled government. But this budget is a marker for 
     Democrats aspiring to lead the party forward. The party is 
     increasingly seen as out of touch, even by its own 
     supporters. The People's Budget by contrast is built around 
     sound policies that are also politically popular. It reflects 
     Americans' long-standing desires for fixing the country's 
     infrastructure, strengthening entitlements, lowering the cost 
     of health care and making the wealthiest pay their fair 
     share. These ideas, if adopted, could be the foundation of a 
     rebuilt and resurgent party, and by embracing the goals of 
     the People's Budget, Democrats can reorient toward the 
     future.

  Mr. POCAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to read a little bit from The 
Washington Post.
  ``This new budget points the way forward for Democrats.''
  And what this specifically is addressing is the Progressive Caucus 
budget. It is looking at it and saying:
  ``Democrats should recognize its ideas as an inspiration for the 
party going forward.
  ``The People's Budget starts by acknowledging a problem that most 
leaders acknowledge but few have addressed: the country's crumbling 
infrastructure. It provides $2 trillion over 10 years to repair bridges 
and tunnels, revitalize mass transit, replace contaminated water 
systems, rebuild public schools and more.''
  And that is what we talked about. Those are the very provisions that 
we put forward in that $2 trillion investment in our infrastructure.
  Mr. Speaker, I will go back to reading this.
  ``The Economic Policy Institute projects that the People's Budget 
would add 2.4 million jobs and increase GDP by 2 percent in the near 
term.''
  That is 2.4 million people with a good family-supporting job while we 
are rebuilding our Nation's infrastructure and increasing our Nation's 
gross domestic product.
  What does that mean?
  I have been a small-business owner for 29 years. It is the rising 
tide that lifts all boats. The more people that have money in their 
pockets that can spend it, puts money right back into the economy.
  If we make sure that more people are working and more people have a 
family-supporting wage that they can buy a sofa, they can take their 
family out 


[[Page 7439]]

to dinner or to a movie, that creates more economic 
activity, and that creates even more jobs. That is exactly what we need 
in this country.
  That is, again, the Economic Policy Institute projecting what our 
budget would do.
  Mr. Speaker, let me go back to the document.
  ``While Republicans struggle to reconcile repealing ObamaCare with 
keeping health care affordable, the CPC puts forward actual ideas to 
bring the cost of health care down: The People's Budget introduces a 
public option--which would lower premiums--and ends the ridiculous 
prohibition on Medicare negotiating drug prices.''
  Can you believe that?
  We don't use our purchasing power right now to negotiate for cheaper 
prices for prescription drugs. There is a reason why we pay sometimes 8 
more, 20 times more, than other countries for the exact same drug. It 
is because we are not allowed to use that purchasing power in a way 
that will help create that economic savings.
  Mr. Speaker, I will go back to the document.
  ``The document also recognizes the dangers of climate change, putting 
a price on carbon and eliminating tax breaks for the fossil fuel 
industry.''
  Think about it. We still subsidize gas and oil, which is one of the 
most profitable businesses on the planet, and we are subsidizing them 
with tax subsidies. We get rid of those tax subsidies.
  Mr. Speaker, I will go back to the document.
  ``And it funds universal pre-kindergarten and strengthens antitrust 
enforcement, fighting back against the oligopolies in health care, 
cable and other industries that are hurting Americans' pocketbooks.''
  These are the things that we have in our Progressive Caucus budget to 
make sure that real families, as you are sitting at your kitchen table 
trying to decide if you can afford to pay your mortgage, send your kids 
to college, take a family vacation this year, maybe have that one 
luxury of a camper or a snowmobile, only if you live up north, or a 
boat. Those are the things that I grew up with. I grew up in Kenosha, 
Wisconsin, like I said, in a lower middle class family. That was the 
existence of most everyone I knew. We are trying to make sure that that 
can be the existence again for every single person.
  While wages have been largely flat, the economy has come back. We 
have just recently had a little bit of a bump in the last year or so of 
the Obama Presidency. We need to do more for those families.
  Mr. Speaker, let me go back to this document.
  ``With all this spending, people may wonder what happens to the 
national debt. But the People's Budget reduces the debt as a percentage 
of GDP. In addition to the savings and the carbon pricing mentioned 
above, the budget raises trillions while making the tax system more 
fair.''
  This budget actually reduces overall debt by $4 trillion between now 
and 2027. You don't see that out of almost any other budget proposed. 
Yet our budget, while investing in America and investing in Americans, 
we also help to turn back that crushing debt that this country has so 
often had and that we need to address.
  Mr. Speaker, let me just finish with reading a little more of this 
document.
  ``The People's Budget, by contrast, is built around sound policies 
that are also politically popular. It reflects Americans' longstanding 
desires for fixing the country's infrastructure, strengthening 
entitlements, lowering the cost of health care, and making the 
wealthiest pay their fair share. These ideas, if adopted, could be the 
foundation of a rebuilt and resurgent party, and by embracing the goals 
of the People's Budget, the Democrats can reorient toward the future.''
  Now, that is, again, an opinion out of The Washington Post today 
about the budget we released yesterday.
  I encourage people to go to the Progressive Caucus website to learn 
more about this budget, to look at the work that the Economic Policy 
Institute has done in working the numbers of this budget, and see what 
the contrast can be.
  You don't have to settle for second or third best. We don't just have 
to make sure the top 1 and 2 percent have even more, and we hope that 
some of that trickles down on the other 98 percent of us.
  Instead, we can have a budget that invests in infrastructure and 
creates good jobs, that invests in our public education system from 
pre-K to higher education. We can have a budget that expands our 
healthcare opportunities so that even more people can have affordable 
health care and helps lower the cost of prescription drugs.
  We can have a budget that does these things, and we have put that 
forward in the People's Budget, which is the product of the Progressive 
Caucus here in Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time to be on the floor of Congress to 
present this on behalf, again, of the 74 Members of the Progressive 
Caucus, the largest value-based caucus within the Democratic Party. We 
are proud to present this budget. This should be coming to the floor as 
we debate all budgets in the coming months. But we are proud to put 
ours out first. Let's set the standard. Let's see how we can see what 
the Republicans in this House will put forward, and we will see what 
details the President puts forward.
  I can guarantee no one will have more in place for the middle class 
in this country and those aspiring to be in the middle class than the 
People's Budget that is put forward by the Congressional Progressive 
Caucus.

                          ____________________