Jim Jordan

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Then I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. I thank the chairman. The amendment before you would reduce the appropriations in the bill by $3.2 billion, as was just read by the Clerk. Even though the majority party will call this a ``cut in spending,'' this is not a cut. This is simply returning the level of spending in this appropriations bill to last year's level. It is level funding, spending the same dollar amount we spent last year. Again, as I have articulated on this floor several times in the appropriations process on other pieces of legislation, it is exactly what all kinds of families across this country have to do. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the work of the committee. I don't bring this amendment because I don't appreciate the work that the committee does; I bring it because our country and our government do face a real financial challenge in the future. If we don't begin to get a handle on the spending that this Congress does and that our government does, we are going to have real problems. The best way to begin to start that, when you think about the challenges and problems that loom in front of us, with entitlements, with Social Security, with Medicaid, with Medicare, the way to start that process, to get a handle on the fiscal crisis that is looming, is to start right here and say, you know what? It is probably not too much to ask for the Congress and for the Government of the United States to spend the same amount that they spent last year. That is why I bring this amendment forward. I would also point out this: Inevitably, when you continue to increase spending and increase spending and increase spending, it always leads to greater taxes. People talk all the time about tax-and- spend politicians. In truth it is just the opposite. It is spend and tax. Spending drives the equation, and that is why we have to focus on spending if we don't want to raise taxes on the American people, which we surely don't want to do. Yet the other party is talking about doing exactly that. All you have to do is look at recent press clippings where they talked about raising the tobacco tax to deal with the SCHIP program. They have talked about raising taxes on the top marginal bracket to begin to address the AMT. Both are bad ideas for families, bad ideas for our economy, and not the direction we want to proceed. Again, I bring this amendment forward because I think it is something that we have to begin to focus on as we look at the financial situation that is just around the corner for this country. All kinds of families, all kinds of taxpayers, all kinds of business owners have to live on last year's spending. It is not too much to ask our government to do the same. It is not to much to ask that our government do exactly what families all across this country have to do. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I was returning from an official delegation trip to Iraq yesterday, and was therefore absent from the Floor during the four rollcall votes that took place on Monday night. Had I been present, I would have voted in favor of H.R. 404 (the Federal Customer Service Enhancement Act), H. Res. 553 (Mourning the Passing of Lady Bird Johnson), and H. Res. 519 (Honoring the Life and Accomplishments of Tom Lea). I would have voted against ordering the previous question on H. Res. 558 (the rule providing for consideration of H.R. 3074).

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. I would be happy to yield. I asked you a question.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I would just ask the gentleman, my friend from Ohio, how does increasing spending 4.6 percent over last year's bill, how does that help address the $3 trillion debt problem that I admit, I wasn't here, I admit that's a real problem.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Reclaiming my time, I would argue that every dollar we let the American taxpayer keep gets earned and returned to the economy, and that's what ultimately allows us to deal with the $3 trillion in debt. That's why we are offering the amendment that we bring forward.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. I think our time is done.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, before yielding to my friend and gentleman from Arizona, let me just respond to one thing real quickly. The chairman of the Appropriations Committee talked earlier about all the new spending, and the other side has a definition for success for them is more spending. Our side actually believes the definition of success should be success. And I always look at education. I came from the general assembly in Ohio, and one of the things you focus on so much in the general assembly budget process is primary and secondary education. And if you look at what's happened, and this is for every State, but I can just give you the numbers on Ohio. We have 612 public schools in Ohio. In 1977 we had 2 million K-12 kids. Today we have 1.8 million. So we've had 200,000 less kids in K-12 public school, 612 districts in our State. Over that 30 years, 200,000 less kids. Dollars spent per pupil, dollars spent per aggregate, dollars spent for facilities, dollars spent any way you want to define dollars spent adjusted for inflation is a tremendous increase. So you have got 200,000 less kids. So you've got the graph going this way. The economists have always got these graphs. Graph coming down on number of students, graph going up adjusted for inflation, and what are the results? It's a straight line. So you spent a boatload more money on 200,000 less kids to get the exact same result. So more money may mean more learning in some places, but to make the blanket statement more money means more education, more money means more learning is simply not true, and the facts are on our side. So we define success as actually being success, not giving more money and hoping that good things are going to happen, and if they don't, you know what we're going to do, give them more money next time. We don't define it that way. We say if kids are really learning, that should be success, not the fact that we've given them more money. Mr. Chairman, with that, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Yes, sometimes facts are a strange thing. The Federal Government does not have a revenue problem. Revenues increased by 14.5 percent in 2005, 11.6 percent in 2006, and are projected to grow an additional $167 billion, or 7 percent this year, because we let the American family keep more of their money, spend it on the things they want to spend it, instead of saying to them, you know what, we are going to increase spending 4.6 percent in this bill and $20 some billion in this appropriation process that we have done.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. It has too worked. The deficits are coming down right now because of the tax cuts that were put in place earlier this decade. We have seen that happen right now.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Could I inquire, Mr. Chairman, how much time we have on our side?

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the Republican leader, friend and gentleman from Ohio, for 1 minute.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, one of the previous speakers from the majority party talked about how this legislation in front of us has reduced the number of earmarks. I believe his quote was there are 41 programs that have been eliminated from last year's appropriation bill. Nevertheless, this bill increases spending $10.8 billion more than the President requested, 7.7 percent more than the President requested. It is $7 billion, or a 4.6 percent, increase over last year's appropriation. So my amendment is real straightforward. It says we are not going to go back to the President, we are not going to cut it, using the term ``cut'' to the President's requested level, we are going to go back to last year's funding level, a level funding amendment, a hold-the-line amendment, whatever you want to call it. It is certainly not a cut, although that has typically been the argument made by the other side of the aisle. This is the sixth amendment I have offered in the appropriations process. Each one has been the same, to hold the line on spending. I don't do it to be a pain in the rear to the committee or to the ranking member. I appreciate the work of the committee and our ranking member and those involved on this committee in bringing this bill forward. I do it because we have a spending problem. We have a spending problem in this Congress and in this government, and there is going to come a day when we are going to have to deal with it. There is no better time to start than now, and no better place to start than to say let's just hold the line because here is what happens every single time government continues to spend and spend and spend. It inevitably leads to higher taxes, higher taxes that hurt our economy, higher taxes that hurt our standing in the international marketplace. But most importantly, higher taxes that hurt families out there trying to do the things for their kids and their grandkids so they can experience the American dream. If you don't believe me that spending is going to lead to higher taxes, all you have to do is look at yesterday's Roll Call where there is a story. In fact, we just had the distinguished chairman from the Ways and Means Committee down here defending an earmark in his district, but he is talked about and the article talks about the tobacco tax that they are looking to put on the American people to fund increased spending. The old line, it's tax and spend, tax and spend politicians; it's actually the opposite, it's spend and tax, spend and tax. Spending drives the equation, and that is why we need to begin to get a handle on spending. That's what this amendment does. In the course of offering these amendments over the last several weeks, we have consistently heard two arguments from the majority party. The first is the old devastating cut argument, that somehow if we just spend what we spent last year, that will somehow be terrible and the sky will fall and the world will end and everything will go to chaos. I find that hard to believe in light of the fact that countless number of American families have to do that all the time, live on last year's budget. But somehow, government never seems to be able to do that. The other line that we have heard, and I find this one somewhat amazing, but the line is how dare Republicans talk about holding the line on spending because you increased spending over the last several years as well. I am fascinated by that argument because the argument, when you boil it down, is this: Because Republicans spent too much, we are going to spend more. So I fail to see the logic in those two arguments. What I do understand is this, Mr. Chairman. Government spends too much. Families know how to budget. We should be able to do the same thing. Families don't just get an automatic 4.6 percent increase in their budget. We should look to hold the line on spending. That is what this amendment does. It will help set us on the path of fiscal discipline so we can begin to deal with the big problems that I referenced earlier that are going to be out there with entitlement spending, and begin to get a handle on our budget so that our economy can continue to grow and prosper. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished ranking member from New York.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. I have put my notes away. I understand. Madam Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia for his work and the chairman for yielding time and the ranking member as well. Look, this amendment is real simple. It recognizes a fundamental fact: Parents make better decisions than government does. And even though a few parents in some situations make poor decisions about the well-being of their children, in the vast majority of cases they make infinitely better decisions than the government, bureaucrats and politicians ever make. That is why this is good public policy and why I support the amendment.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I was absent from the House floor during today's rollcall vote on ordering the previous question on the rule, H. Res. 533, for H.R. 2956. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. No, not at all, Mr. Ryan. The amendment would spend exactly what we spent last year.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, let me just reiterate what the previous speaker said. Look, we heard the term ``devastating cut.'' As the gentleman from Texas indicated, we want to level-fund. We don't want to give a $550 million increase to the IRS. We want to level-fund the IRS and other agencies contained in this bill. It is not too much to ask government to do the same thing that taxpayers and families do all the time. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), a leader on fiscal discipline.

Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam), the Republican Conference Chair.