Jason Altmire

Mr. ALTMIRE

Mr. ALTMIRE. I would.

Mr. ALTMIRE. Absolutely. And I thank the gentleman for that story. And I've had similar circumstances in my district where people wonder why we are cutting Alzheimer's funding, where they have a loved one who has struggled with that disease. I also want to talk about education and what this budget does for education. I think just about anyone should agree that's a national priority. Few things in the budget are more important than education. Well, what does this budget do? This budget freezes education funding, which results in cuts in real terms. And instead of investing in innovation in the classroom, the budget eliminates, eliminates, the $267 million program providing grants to States for classroom technology. It freezes the $179 million mathematics and science partnerships. At a time when we're struggling to compete in the global economy with countries like China and others that are investing heavily in science education, we are cutting it. At least the President is proposing cutting it in his budget. It freezes targeted improvement and achievement in math and science programs that do that. And instead of making college more affordable, the budget eliminates, completely eliminates, supplemental education opportunity grants; the Perkins loan program, one of the staples of student assistance for higher education in this country, eliminates; and the Leveraging Education Assistance Partnership program, the LEAP program, which many of my colleagues know is necessary to provide financial support specifically targeted to needy students who otherwise wouldn't have the opportunity to pursue a higher education. These are the programs that are being eliminated under this budget. Not frozen, not cut, but eliminated.

Mr. ALTMIRE. And the gentleman from Connecticut represents a district in some ways that is similar to my district. We both have a manufacturing base that has suffered in recent years as a result of the global economy and a variety of factors. And as the gentleman said, at the very time when we should be finding ways to help people that have suffered as a result of these job losses and a loss of manufacturing, find new job training sources, find educational opportunities for our kids so they can stay in our communities instead of having to leave town, a problem that we are struggling with, I think, probably in both of our districts, the President uses this budget as an opportunity to eliminate, not freeze, not cut, but eliminate vocational education. And he slashes the Safe and Drug-Free Schools program by 45 percent; afterschool programs by 26 percent; teacher quality State grants by $100 million, which helps incentivize high quality people to go into the teaching profession, people who have other options, who could become doctors or lawyers or chemists or any other profession. We want to incentivize the best and brightest in this country to go into teaching to educate our kids, and everyone knows the importance of what goes along with that. Well, the President proposes cutting the budget by $100 million for that program. And, similarly, the gentleman from Connecticut talked about the fact that middle-class workers are seeing their wages stagnate and American jobs have been lost, 17,000 lost jobs just last month. And at this time when we should be finding ways to stimulate the economy and create jobs, instead, the President's budget slashes $234 million for job training programs. Again, not to repeat myself, but it is worth pointing out, in an atmosphere of a budget that creates $407 billion in deficit spending, out of balance, and that slashes employment services more than $500 million in cuts for Americans looking for work. These are people who are motivated, who want to find jobs, who are looking for work, and he eliminates grants to States to provide employment services for job seekers and employers cutting one-stop career centers. These are all programs that my constituents benefit from that get heavily used in western Pennsylvania. We have had manufacturing losses, and we are trying to find ways to retrain those workers so they can move into other careers, educate themselves so they can stay in western Pennsylvania, and what are we doing? The President is proposing cutting these job training programs. It is just inexcusable.

Mr. ALTMIRE. That is exactly where I was going to go. I thank the gentleman for his comments.

Mr. ALTMIRE. And the gentleman knows there is another thing that our regions in the country share and that is that we have harsh winters. We have been known to have harsh winters. And another thing that gets cut in this budget inexcusably is home heating assistance. And with regard to energy generally, we have a time where we have all time record energy prices. Families across the country are struggling with finding a way to pay their bills directly related to the price of oil and gas. And at that time, you would think that the President would view that as a priority in his budget. But instead, it severely cuts assistance to seniors and to families with children in paying their home heating bills through the LIHEAP program, Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, very important in my area in western Pennsylvania. He cuts it by $570 million nationwide, $19 million of which comes from the State of Pennsylvania. And this is going to force States to reduce the number of households getting help through the LIHEAP program nationwide by 1.2 million people. These are low-income families with children. These are senior citizens that simply don't have the financial ability to pay their heating costs, and we are going to knock, with this budget, 1.2 million of them off the rolls.

Mr. ALTMIRE. I think this is exactly why it is important to have this discussion, to walk through these programs in the budget and talk about what exactly are we talking about when we talk about these draconian cuts that we are facing? And as I said earlier, I have people in my district that say, cut it, cut it, Federal spending, we need to cut it. And we do have an enormous deficit. We have an all time record debt, and we do need to find a way to reduce the Federal deficit. Nobody can disagree with that.

Mr. ALTMIRE. I appreciate that. The fact is the Democrats in this Congress have made the tough decisions. We submitted a budget last year, and I am sure we will do so again this year that achieves balance for the first time since the previous administration. Nobody can disagree that there is room for more cuts. There is room for more reductions. But what we want to do here tonight in this 30-Something Special Order is to talk about the programs that shouldn't be cut, the programs that are critically important to this country that the President has made a decision to reduce. We talked about Medicare. We talked about life-saving medical research. We talked about the Centers for Disease Control, infectious disease prevention. We talked about education. We talked about the LIHEAP program, home heating energy assistance, and unfortunately the list doesn't end there. It is incredible to think that at a time when we are facing a recession in this country driven by a lot of different factors, but nobody can dispute perhaps the number one driving factor over the past several months and maybe the past few years has been this subprime mortgage issue and home foreclosures and people struggling to afford their mortgages, finding a way to make that monthly payment. Despite the growing problems in the subprime mortgage crisis, inexplicably this budget that we are talking about tonight cuts loan counseling for those at risk of losing their homes. The name of the program is the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation. It cuts it by 87 percent, at a time when we are struggling as a Nation with a subprime crisis that the world has never seen before, or at least America has never seen before. At a time when the crisis is at its most acute point, we are going to cut by 87 percent the program that helps those most at risk, 2 million people in this country at risk of losing their homes. The people most at risk of losing their homes are facing an 87 percent cut. It is ludicrous.

Mr. ALTMIRE. That is right. The gentleman talked about the assumption in the budget being submitted. Because the gentleman wasn't here when I showed this, I want to show the gentleman, as he knows, what $3.1 trillion looks like. This is what it looks like. This is what the President dropped on your desk and mine on Monday. This is the budget we are talking about. So for our colleagues who are joining us late, this is the budget that we are discussing tonight. The assumption that was made in putting this budget together by the administration, by President Bush, was that Congress would act on the Alternative Minimum Tax, and, of course, we will. We are not going to allow that to lapse, which would result in an increase for 23 million people in the country, a tax increase, 70,000 in my district, I think the gentleman said 80,000 additional in his district. So, of course, we are going to deal with the AMT. It is tough. It is a difficult way to have to do policy, to do it year-to-year. It is probably not the best way. We made a tough decision in December, we will make another tough decision at the end of this year, and the President knows we are going are to have to do it and we are going to have to pay for it, because that is what we have to do. It is not included in the cost of this $3.1 trillion budget. I know we are running short on time, so I did want to just summarize a few of the other programs, saving one in particular for the end that near and dear to my heart, that are cut in this budget. Because, again, people say what are we talking about when you talk about all these cuts? We talked earlier about the subprime mortgage funding and so forth. How about highway funding? Is there anyone in the country that can disagree that we have a national crisis with infrastructure? We had the unfortunate situation last fall with the bridge collapse in Minnesota which highlighted a problem that many knew but really in a very tragic way shined the spotlight on the incredible need that exists in this country for infrastructure improvement, for bridge repair, for highway repair. We simply do not have anywhere near close to the amount of money necessary to fix the roads and bridges that need fixing right now, let alone all the new construction that needs to take place. The district that I represent, we are talking about funding for bridges and roads and docks and dams along the riverways. Well, with highway funding in particular, the President's budget unbelievably proposes to cut funding for highways by $800 million below the amount guaranteed by the previous transportation reauthorization bill that we did several years ago. Every $1 billion in new infrastructure investment creates 47,500 jobs in this country and a shortfall in highway revenue is projected in fiscal year 2009, which is what this budget covers. So we have a projected shortfall, yet the President still recommends a $800 million cut. And at a time when we lost jobs in January, who knows how many jobs we are going to lose in the months ahead as we face what may turn out to be a recession, we are talking about a problem that can create nearly 50,000 jobs for every $1 billion in new investment, and we are going to cut $800 million. It makes no sense. Homeland security, the gentleman from Connecticut talked about the importance of homeland security, which nobody can dispute, perhaps the number one issue facing the country today. Well, so what does the President's budget do? The calculation of his budget excludes $2.7 billion in border emergency funding from Congress, which was approved in fiscal year 2008. When this is taken into account, the President is only proposing to increase less than $100 million for fiscal year 2009 for homeland security needs for the entire agency. In addition, the budget slashes funding for State Homeland Security Grant programs, first responders, police, firefighters, EMTs, people right out there on the front lines in our communities, many of them volunteers. This President's budget cuts $750 million, 79 percent below the current year's funding level. For firefighter grants, $450 million, 60 percent below, just for firefighter grants, and 79 percent below for all first responders. It is incredible that this is the budget that was put before us. Who could possibly argue that that is a good policy decision, to cut funding for first responders by 79 percent?

Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman. I am going to talk about the most egregious, in my opinion, of all these cuts. And I know it is hard to believe having walked through them that there could be one in particular to point to. There is one that is particular to my constituents and to something that I support. We are going to turn it over momentarily to our freshman colleague, Mr. Yarmuth from Kentucky, who I am sure is going to talk more about some of these issues. As Members of Congress, we are all given the opportunity to testify before the Budget Committee and say here are our priorities. These are the one or two or three at the most things that we care about that we really want to see addressed in the budget. I was asked over the break that we had in between the first session and the second session during the holidays, somebody came up to me in a shopping center and recognized me and said, hey, you know, how has the first year been? What are your experiences? What are you most proud of? Without hesitating, for me, what I am most proud of that this Congress did last year was we had the highest funding increase for veterans health care in the 77 year history of the VA. We had to fight tooth and nail. We had to do it over multiple opportunities throughout the year. But in the end, the budget that we passed exceeded even the recommendations of the service organizations. The VFW, the American Legion, the Vietnam Veterans of America, Disabled American Veterans, those organizations every year present to Congress their recommended funding levels for what they feel that they are going to need. For the first time ever, this Congress exceeded that. So I am very proud of the work that we did as a Congress on veterans. And it was a bipartisan effort. It is something we can be proud to have worked together on. Well, what does this budget do for veterans, something that I have made my number one priority in this Congress. And I think we as Congress have a good record so far on veterans, and I want to keep that good record going, and I want to prevent the cuts that the President's budget talks about. It cuts veterans health care by $20 billion over 5 years. Let me repeat that. This budget cuts veterans health care by $20 billion over 5 years and cuts funding for constructing, renovating and rehabilitating medical care facilities in 2009, for which this budget is authorized. Now, for me, that is very parochial, because I have $200 million of VA health construction going on in Western Pennsylvania, a lot of which is in my district. Two different projects, $200 million. So the President is coming in here at a time when we have the opportunity in Western Pennsylvania to be the preeminent health care system in the entire VA, top notch facilities, he is going to cut the construction funding, and he is going to cut funding even more egregiously for veterans health care by $20 billion. I am sure the gentleman can agree, there is no group that should stand ahead of our Nation's veterans when it comes time to make funding decisions.

Mr. ALTMIRE. That is right. I thank the gentleman. We are going to wrap it up as our time has expired. I would only point out on that note that this is the sixth year in a row that this budget raises health care costs on 1.4 million veterans, imposing $5.2 billion in increased copayments on prescription drugs and new enrollment fees on veterans over 10 years. I wish I had more time to talk about that. At this time I am going to thank the Speaker for the opportunity to address the House this evening with my colleague Mr. Murphy from Connecticut.

Mr. ALTMIRE. I'm sure the gentleman from Connecticut would agree that it's ironic, given the fact that it was a week ago that we sat here together in this Chamber and listened to the President's State of the Union Address. And I liked some of what the President had to say on fiscal responsibility, challenging the Congress, challenging his administration to take the budget and make tough decisions and be fiscally responsible.

Mr. ALTMIRE. Madam Speaker, we're here this evening as part of the Speaker's 30-Something Working Group, and I'm going to be joined by some other members of that group who will be familiar faces to our colleagues who have participated in these Special Orders presentations. We're going to talk specifically tonight about the budget that the President dropped on our doorstep on Monday. Now, this was an exciting series of days for the American people. We, of course, had Super Bowl Sunday, one of the most exciting Super Bowls we've ever seen. We had Super Tuesday last night, very exciting for all the American people to watch the unfolding for the Presidential election for this year. And in the middle of that, we had Monday. And what happened on Monday? Most Americans say, well, not a whole lot happened, but in Congress a lot happened because the President put before us a $3.1-trillion budget. Now, the American people may say, well, that sounds like a lot of money, and it is a lot of money. But what does it look like? What does $3.1 trillion look like? Our colleagues may be interested to see that. This, Madam Speaker, is what $3.1 trillion looks like. This is what the President sent us, both electronically and in paper format. This is a very big document, the entire Federal budget as proposed by the administration for the coming fiscal year 2009. I'm going to talk a little bit about what's in this budget, but before I did that I wanted to take a little walk down memory lane for our colleagues. And many don't need to be reminded of this fact, but in the last 4 years of the previous administration we had four consecutive budget surpluses. And those surpluses, at the end of that administration and the beginning of the current administration, budget surpluses were forecast as far as the eye can see. And there was every reason to expect that the budget was going to be balanced throughout the next administration. The projection over 10 years by the Congressional Budget Office was $5.5 trillion of budget surplus over 10 years. That was the projection. Well, now we're 7 years, going on 8 years, into this new administration. This is the eighth and final budget that President Bush is going to send to this Congress. And what has been the outcome of this $5.5 trillion surplus? And we talked about the Presidential election, Madam Speaker, and I would remind my colleagues about the debate of the 2000 election. The number one issue that was discussed in that election was, what are we going to do with this surplus? We have an enormous budget surplus, $5.5 trillion, and all the ways that that money could be used. Are we going to pay down the debt? Are we going to shore up Social Security, put that money into the trust fund? How are we going to use this enormous surplus that's facing us over the next 10 years? That was the debate in the year 2000. Well, in this Presidential election year we're not having that debate anymore because, you see, Madam Speaker, that surplus is gone. That surplus was gone in the first year of this administration. Instead of $5.5 trillion of budget surplus over a 10-year period, we've had $3.5 trillion of deficit spending over the first 7 years of this administration. And I'm going to talk in some detail about what this fiscal year 2009 budget says, and it includes an enormous amount of deficit spending. What we have before us is a budget that for the eighth time in 8 years continues enormous deficit spending. But we can't lose sight of the fact that when this administration first came into office, that wasn't the projection. That wasn't the way it was supposed to be and that wasn't the way it had to be. But, unfortunately, decisions were made in a fiscally irresponsible manner, and now before us is a budget that is $407 billion over budget. We have a $407 billion deficit for one year, fiscal year 2009, the third highest single year budget deficit ever submitted to the Congress behind only the budget that was sent to us last year by this President, which was $410 billion, and the 2004 budget also submitted to this Congress by the President. So we have a record here of destroying projected surpluses and creating record deficits. $9.2 trillion of debt, Madam Speaker, faces this country before this $400 plus billion deficit that's been submitted to us. We can't continue to charge things to the credit card. The way the previous administration turned the all-time record deficits of the 1980s into all-time record surpluses in the 1990s was through pay-as- you-go budget scoring. And that's very simple: It's what we all do in our own home checkbooks. It's what every business in America is forced to do. You have to have money on one side of the ledger to spend it on the other. And if you want to increase spending or if you see a decrease in your revenue, you have to have an offset on the other side to balance it out. Well, those are the rules that this Congress operated under from 1991 through 2001. Unfortunately, this administration did away, and the Congress, in conjunction at that time in 2001 going into 2002, did away with pay-as- you-go budget scoring. And since that time, before this current session of Congress, every penny that was spent through the Federal Government was charged to the national credit card. We're going to let somebody else worry about it. We're going to transfer this funding to our children, our grandchildren, and our grandchildren's grandchildren. Well, unfortunately, the problem with using credit cards that way is the bill comes due, and the bill has come due, Madam Speaker. We're going to talk about the coming economic crisis that this country faces, the possibility, if not the certainty, of a recession, and the economic stimulus package that this Congress came together in a bipartisan way to put forward to help resolve that issue. We're going to save that discussion for a little bit later. But in the discussion over the budget, it can't be lost that in presenting a $407 billion deficit budget before this Congress, that this President has made incredibly deep cuts in some very important programs that mean a lot to a lot of people in this country. Veterans programs, veterans health care, slashed. Medicare cut by $556 billion over 10 years, a cut in Medicare at a time when you're exploding the deficit by $407 billion. And we're going to talk specifically about the misplaced priorities included in this budget. Before we go line by line and get into that level of detail, Madam Speaker, I do want to turn it over at this point to my 30-Something colleague, Mr. Murphy from Connecticut, who has joined us and is going to give us some detail on what he views this budget to be.

Mr. ALTMIRE

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, economists say the most important thing Congress can do to stimulate our struggling economy is to act quickly, and that is exactly what this House is going to do today. House leaders from both parties worked with the President to craft the bipartisan agreement that is before us. We came together, and by acting quickly, we are hoping that our actions spark our economy. The package is going to provide some relief to middle-income families who have been left behind in many ways over the last 7 years. This bill gives 117 million Americans a tax rebate so they can begin to breathe a little easier when paying their bills in the coming months. Equally important, this economic package also gives tax breaks to small businesses to help spur investment and job creation. Mr. Speaker, economists said we need to act fast, and that is what we did. Let's get to work and pass this economic stimulus package today.

Mr. ALTMIRE

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, just to tie this whole thing together, we have just celebrated the LSU Tigers' national championship and West Virginia's championship in the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl. As a Member from western Pennsylvania, I would like to take a brief moment and remind my colleagues of the role the University of Pittsburgh played in this whole scenario, because were it not for the improbable upset that the University of Pittsburgh was able to pull off on the last game of the regular season, we may have been doing these in a little bit different order than we were today. So I congratulate West Virginia and LSU. But I did want to put in that plug as well. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 938) commending the West Virginia University Mountaineer football team for exemplifying the pride, determination, and spirit of the Mountain State and overcoming adversity with skill, commitment, and teamwork to win the 2008 Tostitos Fiesta Bowl, as amended.

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. ALTMIRE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, I request 5 legislative days during which Members may insert material relevant to H. Res. 938 into the Record.

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, we have a colleague who represents Morgantown, West Virginia, with us, Mr. Mollohan, and I know there is no greater fan of the West Virginia Mountaineers than he. I am sure he is justifiably proud; so I will yield him such time as he may consume.

Mr. ALTMIRE

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, there is no greater fan of the LSU Tigers than Mr. Melancon from Louisiana, and I yield him such time as he may consume to speak about this championship for the LSU football team.

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the Louisiana State University Tigers football team on winning the 2007 Bowl Championship Series national championship game, and to congratulate the players, coaches, and LSU fans on a tremendous 2007 football season. On January 7, 2008, the LSU Tigers took on the Ohio State University Buckeyes in a newly reopened Louisiana Superdome in New Orleans. The 2007 BCS national championship game was a treat for fans all over the Nation, and a celebratory moment for New Orleans as the Superdome observed its return to hosting big events after the destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina. And it was quite a celebration as the Tigers defeated the Buckeyes 38-24. Ohio State got off to a 10-0 start, but LSU never backed down and went on to score 31 unanswered points. Led by game captains quarterback Matt Flynn, safety Craig Stelz, fullback Jacob Hester, punter Patrick Fisher and defensive tackle Glen Dorsey, the Tigers proved that they deserved to play in the championship game. This Tigers team played with extraordinary heart all season. In 2007, LSU beat seven nationally ranked teams, and their only two losses each came in triple overtime games. A very talented senior class created a sense of urgency throughout their leadership, and the rest of the team never stopped playing with heart throughout this record-setting season. Defensive tackle Glen Dorsey won four prestigious awards, including the Lombardi Trophy, and has been a model player off the field as well by encouraging young people to ``dream big'' this year. Quarterback Matt Flynn threw 21 touchdown passes this season and had a career high of four touchdown passes during the championship game. Finally, Jacob Hester rushed for 1,103 yards and scored 12 touchdowns during the 2007 season. This was truly a multi-talented team. I want to extend my congratulations to Coach Les Miles and the rest of the LSU coaching staff. The players and staff have come together to create a preeminent football program with a record two BCS titles in just the past 5 years. In his tenure as head coach at LSU, Miles has led his team to three bowl victories and an impressive 34-6 record. Congratulations are also in order for the dedicated State and university community. The avid Tiger fans have supported their team all season and helped to set a Superdome record of 79,651 people in attendance for the BCS championship game. In the words of former Governor Kathleen Blanco, the Tigers ``embodied Louisiana's fighting spirit.'' The entire State deserves to celebrate this title and begin to look forward to the 2008 season. Mr. Speaker, once again, I congratulate the Louisiana State University Tigers football team, and I urge my colleagues to pass this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. ALTMIRE. I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. ALTMIRE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, I request 5 legislative days during which Members may insert additional material relevant to H. Res. 933 into the Record.

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 933) commending the Louisiana State University Tigers football team for winning the 2007 Bowl Championship Series national championship game, as amended.

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.