THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Contents Display
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H. CON. RES. 353, CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE
BUDGET, FISCAL YEAR 2003 -- (Extensions of Remarks - April 09, 2002)
[Page: E443] GPO's PDF
---
SPEECH OF
HON. JAMES R. LANGEVIN
OF RHODE ISLAND
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, March 20, 2002
The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union had under
consideration the bill (H. Con. Res. 353) establishing the congressional budget
for the United States Government for fiscal year 2003 and setting forth
appropriate budget levels for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007:
- Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to this
budget resolution, which undermines our long-term fiscal health and spends a
huge portion of the Social Security and Medicare surpluses.
- I stand united with the President and my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle in our commitment to defeat terrorism and to do what is necessary to
preserve national security both at home and abroad. However, despite the many
new security and economic challenges confronting us, our homeland protection
efforts and fiscal policies should not shortchange Social Security and other
national priorities. We can win the war against terrorism without raiding the
Social Security and Medicare
Trust Funds and without increasing the national debt.
- Earlier this year, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) confirmed that in
less than a year the 10-year projected surplus declined by $4 trillion. While
portions of this decline are a result of the war and the economic downturn,
the depletion of the surplus to date was largely caused by last year's massive
and fiscally irresponsible tax cut package. The additional billions in tax
cuts proposed in this year's budget would only worsen our current situation
and lead us further down the path of mounting deficits and escalating public
debt. To pay for the additional tax cuts, this budget would raid more than
$1.5 trillion from the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds over the next ten
years to cover deficits in the rest of the federal budget. We need a wartime
freeze on tax cuts to avoid deficit spending.
- When I was elected to Congress, I promised my constituents that I would
protect the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds. And I was not
alone. Over one hundred of my colleagues have co-sponsored legislation to
prevent Congress from spending the Social Security and Medicare surpluses, and the House of
Representatives has voted four times in the past three years to establish
lockboxes for these funds.
- The Administration and the Republican Leadership made the very same pledge
to not touch these vital trust funds. This budget breaks that promise. It is
time to honor our commitments by acknowledging our current situation and
working together to craft budget that is fair and fiscally responsible.
[Page: E444] GPO's PDF
- Moreover, this resolution uses overly optimistic Administration budget
estimates rather than the usual non-partisan estimates from the Congressional
Budget Office. Furthermore, it assumes unacceptable cuts in key domestic
priorities such as education, housing, health care, job training and
environmental protection, even though Congress will likely restore the needed
funding. While this resolution provides $350 billion in additional Medicare spending, it would place a
Medicare prescription drug benefit in competition with Medicare ``modernization,'' as well as
provider givebacks that the Republican Leadership has estimated will costs as
much as $174 billion. The projections also leave out an assessment of the lost
revenue from extending expiring tax credits and modifying the individual
minimum tax that will impact 39 million middle-income taxpayers over the next
10 years. And these five-year projections fail to disclose the cost of making
last year's tax cuts permanent, as the Administration's budget proposes. Over
the customary ten-year budgetary window, extending the tax cuts cost $400
billion. A more realistic set of assumptions would show that the 10-year
budget surplus has already vanished.
- The disappearance of the 10-year surplus compels us to consider not just a
one-year but also a long-term budget plan. The American people have the right
to know how the Congress proposes to restore fiscal discipline while enacting
additional tax cuts, boosting spending for the military and meeting
commitments to a growing number of retirees. The Administration and Congress
should devise budgetary rules that make tax cuts and spending contingent on
the realization of specified targets for the budget surplus and the federal
debt. Unfortunately, this budget fails on all those counts.
- I am also deeply concerned about the draconian cuts to the Small Business
Administration. The budget proposes cutting funding for the 7(a) loan program
in half. Last year, this loan program provided over $94 million in assistance
to Rhode Island's small business community. Additionally, the Administration
proposed cutting funding for employment and training programs by $685 million.
With more than 1.4 million workers laid off over the last year, we need this
funding now more than ever. The budget would also slash the Low-Income Home
Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) by #$300 million. This program is crucial
for all New England states and particularly for our seniors, who might
otherwise be forced to choose food over heat. Finally, the budget would cut
$417 million from Public Housing Capital Fund, which helps provide 1.2 million
families nationwide--40 percent of whom are elderly or disabled--with
affordable housing. Housing needs are especially acute in Rhode Island, where
38 percent of renter households pay more than 30 percent of their income for
rent.