Kendrick Meek

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is an amendment that will increase the amount of funding to the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General's office by $200 million. Mr. Chairman, this is so very, very important due to the fact that the Department of Homeland Security is the largest agency in the world right now, not only the Federal Government. It has 22 legacy agencies that had problems before the Department of Homeland Security was created. If it were not for the fact that they are in charge, this Department is in charge of protecting the homeland and making sure that all of the 9/11 Commission recommendations are implemented properly and also making sure that they protect our borders and our airways. The inspector general really needs the additional funding and staffing to be able to keep up with the growing Department of Homeland Security. The spending on contracts alone was $6.1 billion in 2004, and in 2005 it moved up to $10.9 billion. That is a 40 percent increase in 1 year. It is literally impossible for the Inspector General's office to keep up not only with the policing of the Department but to ensure that the mission's integrity is followed through on. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson).

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Not just mine.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would just yield for one second, not just the college students, but their parents. I want to tell my colleague, when I graduated from college, I went straight into the Highway Patrol Academy. Thank God I had a full scholarship to Florida A&M. But a number of students that go into college, they do not have a scholarship, okay? And they come out owing student loans. And do we know who pays those student loans when they come out? Mom and Dad or Grandmom, to make sure that they do not end up falling into bad debt and also falling into an area where they are going to start off on the wrong foot.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say before I comment to what the gentleman from Illinois just said, I want to commend him for coming to the floor, not only representing his great district but representing some great Americans that are doing what they can under the circumstances. I have a similar program in my district, Good Will Industries, providing uniforms for our men and women that are in uniform, sewing together jackets. They are handicapped, some physically handicapped, mentally handicapped, many; but they are trying, and we have got to give them an opportunity to play a role in working America. Another thing I want to also point out, and I know that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) is here, is that the gentleman from Illinois is talking about working Americans, not folks sitting at home talking about where's my check. These are individuals that wake up every day and want to wake up every day and go and be productive. That is what this is all about. That is what our democracy is about. It was a pleasure yielding to the gentleman. He is one of the most outstanding orators that we have in the Congress.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Ohio's (Mr. Ryan) point as it relates to pointing out the trade deficit is the fact that Americans, if we allow hypothetically, and I do mean hypothetically, in this Congress a privatization plan to go through this Congress the way the President and majority side would like to see it happen, then they are going to get a double whammy. They are getting a double whammy of not having high-paying jobs. And this is not just me talking. Folks can go to a number of third-party validators and even the White House itself said there will be drastic benefits cuts, benefits cuts to the tune of if someone is earning $37,000, they are going to get a 28 percent benefit cut than what they are experiencing right now. At $58,000, they are going to get a 42 percent benefit cut, and on and on and on. So there will be benefit cuts, and we have put that up front, and there will be a great gamble on the future of Social Security. So I am really pleased that the gentleman brought those charts because folks really need to understand, and this is from the U.S. Census Bureau. That is where he received that information.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I just want to make sure because we point out when there is inaccurate information out there. And some of our friends here in the Beltway, which is Washington, D.C. they have an imagination about what the truth is about. We talk a lot about what the truth really is. We talk a lot about the $350 billion so-called prescription drug plan that is supposed to help Americans, and now it is $724 billion, but we were told $350 billion when it first started. So the President is saying $5 trillion on a privatization plan. What is it going to be next year? Is it going to be $10 trillion?

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, that is the problem. This Social Security, it is not some small little program that a Member of Congress put in the budget and said this is our pet project. This is Social Security. This goes towards our generation for our children and grandchildren, and I hope to have them some day, grandchildren. I want them to have a better opportunity. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) came to the floor to talk about those individuals putting together clocks in his district, the Lighthouse Project. I yield to him, from the 30-something Working Group hour, to give him an opportunity, and he did not come here saying we need to create a program for people who do not want to work. We need to make sure that Americans, and he is talking about blind Americans, are able to continue to support themselves. Remember, Mr. Speaker, 33 million Americans are retired, receiving Social Security benefits now. Forty-eight percent of the 33 million would be living in poverty if it was not for Social Security. And they have a plan that comes up here to the Hill. And I would not call it a plan. I would say it is some sort of philosophy or theory that the White House and majority side have. And I would also like to say, Mr. Speaker, we know that we have friends over there, few in number, on the Republican side that are willing to stand up and say, I am not with you on this. And if you bring it to the floor, I am going to vote against it, rightfully so. Do we know why? Do we know why it is not on the floor tonight? Because I believe, just like the American people know and just like many Members of this House know, it is not because we are Democrats and we are right; we are Democrats and we are willing to stand up to say what is right for Social Security. This is not a political issue; this is an American issue. So when we start talking about what people are saying here on the floor as it relates to the majority side, we do know we were given that prescription drug number, $350 billion, it ended up being $724 billion and climbing, and still did not put forth a plan where we can combine buying power and take the price down for seniors.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. And change.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, let me just say this. We are both going to be in the Committee on Armed Services tomorrow late into the night marking up or creating the Committee on Armed Services for the United States of America authorization bill to protect the American public, to make sure our men and women that are in harm's way get what they need, to make sure that we do all of the things that we need to do to defend this country, adding $5 trillion to the debt and making decisions that should not be made. And I just want to say, at the end of the legislative business of every week, we have our whip, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) come to the floor with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), and they talk about the business of next week and what is going to happen. I hope when it comes down to Social Security that there is a bipartisan effort to not only make sure that we pay for what we do or have a plan to pay for what we do as it relates to borrowing the money that we are going to have to use to make sure that we make Social Security stronger and better, but there is no discussion about, well, next week we are going to talk about private accounts, because that is going to be a sad day in this Congress. I will also say this, that it is important for people to understand that on the Democratic side, and I mentioned the gentlewoman from California (Leader Pelosi) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), who is our chair, and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), who is our vice-chair, and other Members who are here with leadership roles and who have been here before the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) and I, before we even thought of a 30-something Working Group; that a bipartisan plan like the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) speaks of all the time, consists of Democrats and Republicans sitting down, sharing values on behalf of the American people, and putting forth a plan that will preserve Social Security for years to come. Social Security news flash, I say to the gentleman, because if we listen to what the White House is saying and all of the Federal jet fuel they are burning flying all around the country sharing with people what their side of what they believe the crystal ball may actually provide Social Security benefits to future generations, 47 years from now, 100 percent benefits as we see them now will still be in place. Forty-seven years from now, Social Security will be still be here. Do my colleagues know why? Because in 1983 this House, in a bipartisan way, Tip O'Neill, President of the United States Ronald Reagan, God bless his memory, voted off of this floor 243 to 102 to make sure that Social Security is there for future generations and that it provides benefits to the 48 million, those who are disabled, those who are living under survivor benefits, and those who are retired right now. It took leadership to do that. So it all comes down to, if some Members of power, and this would not even be a discussion if we were in the majority. It would not even be a discussion, because there will be a panel put together to come up to the Committee on Ways and Means and other committees of substance as it relates to this issue to come together with a bipartisan plan. And I guarantee my colleagues that private accounts would not even be an issue on the preservation of Social Security. We have always talked about making sure that the Social Security trust fund that has been a Democratic issue from two or three Presidential campaigns, about making sure that Social Security is here for future generations.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio. And to our e-mailer, we just want to say that all Democrats throughout this Congress will be calling into radio stations, be it country, rap, rock and roll, what have you, during drive time in the morning to talk about the importance of Social Security and young people. Mr. Speaker, it is always an honor to come to the floor and we thank not only the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Democratic leader, but the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) the Democratic whip, for allowing us to have this hour week after week. This is a strong part of our democracy, and we really appreciate representing the 30-somethings and above and under, that age, to give them a voice here on the floor.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Members of Congress.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. This is not the ``Tim Ryan Report.''

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Go ahead and read the e-mail you have.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, once again it is an honor to address this great House of Representatives. I want to thank not only the Democratic leader but the Democratic leadership for allowing me to be here on their behalf. Our 30-something Working Group, which the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) put together in the 108th Congress, our focus is to work on issues that are facing not only young Americans but Americans in general. I think it is very, very important for us to state not only here on the floor but to also say in our communities and the workplace that there is no greater service than making sure that your children and grandchildren have a better opportunity than what you have had. That is kind of the unwritten statement for the 30-something Working Group. We are benefactors of the generation that allowed us to have better opportunities than what they have had. I think that is what makes our country great. I commend those Members that live with that philosophy. But I think it is important in a time of judgment and a time that we all have to be leaders that we stand up, not only stand up, but inform the American people and future generations on what is going to happen good for them and in many cases what may not work out the way that is being portrayed here in the Congress or any issue that we are talking about here, that we are taking action on here in Washington, D.C. There are a lot of good things that families are doing for one another to make sure that future generations and their bloodline have a better opportunity than what they have had. There are families that are trying to save money with a college plan or savings plan for their children to receive education for their bloodline for the first time. Some families that only made it after a 4-year experience stopped at an associate's degree or a bachelor's of science degree, and want their children or a family member to be able to receive a master's degree or a doctor's degree. It is that individual in the middle of America that wants his or her son or daughter to be able to carry the family business further than they were ever capable to carry it. I know that it is in the fiber of our American Dream that is in our hearts and in our minds. So when we start talking about the issue of Social Security, we have to say that that is a paramount issue when we talk about values and commitment to our future generations, we talk about value and commitment to those beneficiaries that are receiving Social Security benefits right now. We have to think about those individuals that are disabled that are counting on this Congress to stand up on their behalf, those individuals that elect us to speak on their behalf. One thing about this body within the U.S. Congress, we cannot be appointed to the House. We cannot be appointed to this position. We have to be elected. The other body can be appointed. We have to be elected. Through the election process, there is a lot of commitment and sacrifice. A lot of Americans, someone woke up early one morning, 7 a.m., and showed up to their election polling place for some accountability. That is what we are here to do. When we start talking about Social Security, I think it is important that we come to this floor to let the American people know and the Members of this House of Representatives know that many of us within the Congress are very, very concerned about the privatization scheme that is being talked about and that is being portrayed as a plan for future generations, or the preservation of Social Security. We cannot believe everything we hear, especially when folks start saying, well, these are the facts and this is my plan and this is the way it is going to work. Right now, especially on the Democratic side, and I will say a few of my Republican colleagues understand that 48 million Americans are receiving Social Security right now, that 33 million of those Americans are already retired, 33 million that are counting on Social Security. Social Security is that security blanket, our end of the deal that we said we would hold, they paid into it, it is there for them and it will be there for them for the next 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 years at the same level that it is right now. Of course we want to strengthen Social Security. Also, it is important to understand that right now, today, $955 per month on average goes out every month to support families and support their unmet needs. This is not a giveaway. This is what they paid for. This is what they invested in. It is important that we do not gamble with those dollars. I think it is also important to understand that 48 percent of Social Security beneficiaries, if they did not have Social Security, they would be living in poverty today. So, Mr. Speaker, I cannot help but have trouble with the administration's plan and some Members on the Republican side's plan to privatize Social Security and to say and admit up front that benefits will be cut and that they would not only receive a benefit cut but even those who do not want to go in a private account will suffer. I cannot understand for the life of me how we can serve that up on a platter and say that we are trying to help future generations or present enrollees in Social Security right now. I cannot help but question $5 trillion. Until I got to the Congress, I had no meaning of what $5 trillion actually meant, $5 trillion, not of money that we have in our wallets but money that we are willing to borrow, $5 trillion. But better yet, this is supposed to help maintain Social Security. I am going to talk a little further about what we are doing as Democrats, but I would like to yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I think this is very, very important since we are talking about the future and we are talking about future generations, and we must talk about these numbers so future generations understand what their debt is. For someone that is looking for additional help on Pell grants, that is not going to happen in any significant number. It is going to make a difference to your overall debt situation or credit situation. When you also look at the issue of Social Security from the beginning, remember, remember, $5 trillion to help save you money over the next 20 years. That is a lot of money, okay? It is going to stop us from doing the things we need to do in taking the debt down. It was the Democratic Congress here that made the hard decision to take down the debt and put us into surpluses as far as the eye could see, and then the Republican Congress took over and took us down into debt. I think it is also important, and we always like to give the Members third-party validators, and I want you to write this Web site down: www.cbpp.org. That is the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Center For Budget and Policy Priorities. There is a lot of good information on that Web site. It gives not only Members but the American people good information on what someone may earn and how much of a benefit cut they are going to receive; not a benefit increase, but a benefit cut. And in this whole debate, there is no, there is no discussion about an increase. There is no discussion about some of the positive things that can happen outside of saying, this will be good for the trust fund in the future. I also want to say that, you know, that I have no real problem with what is going on in New York and the whole Wall Street experience. Okay? Do not think that I have a problem with it. But I do have a problem, which the only entity or institution, or even if Wall Street was a perfect person, to be the only group that would benefit from a privatization plan, some $940 billion guaranteed to Wall Street, not necessarily to the individuals that are enrolled in Social Security. And I thought while the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) was talking, as you know I have my papers, we get our briefings, and we call and we ask institutions that are studying this Social Security privatization scheme to give us information as we work on ways to push this Congress towards a bipartisan approach to Social Security without private accounts. That is something that we are doing here as Democrats. But I look, and I want to tell you, in your State there are a number of individuals, 315,000 survivor beneficiaries, 278,000 individuals that are receiving disability benefits. I think it is also important to understand, even in my State, in Florida, you have 450,679 that are receiving disability benefits and 408,543 that are receiving survivor benefits. Even in the State of Pennsylvania just north of us, survivor benefits, these are individuals that their children are now beneficiaries from the work that their parents did. They didn't have anything to leave them, but they had Social Security to leave them, to help be there for them, because they wanted to be there for them financially, but that was a part of our deal with Americans that we will make sure that not only will they be taken care of, that we will have security for them, but for their children. And in the State of Pennsylvania 353,000 survivor beneficiaries, and also you have 336,000 individuals that are on disability.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important not only that the Members, but the American people understand, Mr. Speaker, that when it comes down to health care we are going to be okay. The reason why we are going to be okay is because we are Members of Congress. Not because of our health plan, but because of our last name. And that is a crisis for real Americans, because my constituents they sit in the emergency room for hours. I walk into the emergency room, believe me, I can barely sit down before someone grabs my arm and says, Congressman, please let us check you out. All right. When I need to get prescription drugs, I can get prescription drugs. When I want to get a doctor's appointment, I can get a doctor's appointment. I do not have to wait 6 months to see an ophthalmologist or on optometrist, whoever it may be, to see them. I think what the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) said in the last 5 or 6 minutes meant so much in this entire hour of really talking about the issues, where the rubber meets the road. And the reality of this argument is that originally the administration was saying that it is a crisis. They kind of have backed off of that now, because the American people said you want to know what a crisis is? The crisis is that my son is sick and I cannot afford to take him, I am taking care of him through the drug store. I am buying off the shelf, which I think is a greater problem. I hope it is a cold. That is a crisis. A crisis is not saying, hey, listen you know something, I got to move this private account thing while we are in power so we can help make our buddies even more buddies to us. Because that is what I think the underlying issue here is. And so I just want to step in there, because you made an excellent point.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Give the e-mail address.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. We have about 10 minutes.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I look forward to that. Just not in the winter time, that is all I have to say, because I am from Florida. I do not know about all Chicago, holding on to the ropes and the wind blowing and everything. I love Chicago. I thank the gentleman from Illinois for standing up for those great Americans. Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) is here. And we are, I tell the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), the 30-something Working Group; so he can be 30-something, not under 30 or I think I would not be with this group. I would be with them in spirit. Mr. Speaker, I was just talking here for a moment about the whole issue of a bad privatization scheme and throwing the dice on the retirement of so many not only Americans that are presently receiving Social Security benefits, and I am not just talking about retirees. We are talking about disabled Americans. We are also talking about those individuals who are going to school and surviving on survivor benefits of Americans that have passed on. They paid into Social Security. They knew there were survivor benefits for their kids. And one can ask even those Americans and those of us in the Congress that were pension funds outside of this Congress and we know what happened to our pension fund. It went straight down. The gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) our ranking member on the Committee on Education and the Workforce, said just today that airline pilots who were receiving $12,000 a month in pension benefits, now it is down to $2,000 a month. That is a $10,000 difference in their retirement. So now we are going to do that with Social Security? Even for those individuals who do not enroll in the program, they are still going to get benefit cuts. They still receive benefits cuts. And, also, the dollars that are needed to support them in their time of need. So it is a great pleasure once again being with my good friend from Ohio and the fact that we come to this floor along with the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Davis), and others to share with Americans about what we are working on here in the Congress.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Whatever we want to call it. I will just say that this bipartisan number here, 163 Democrats for it in 1983, 80 Republicans for it in 1983, and Tip O'Neill, the Democratic Speaker of this House was sitting in the Speaker rostrum, Mr. Speaker. It took leadership, and that is what we need now. Folks ask, I say to the gentleman, what is the Democratic plan. Well, the Democratic plan is in the wallets of every American, the guarantee when they go through their wallet looking for lunch money for their children or looking for bus fare to catch the bus or, as we know, grabbing, unfortunately, for a credit card now versus cash to put gas in your tank, when they pass that Social Security card, what they know now is the fact that they will receive benefits for the next 47 years. That is the Democratic plan, and the Democratic plan is also making sure in a bipartisan way that we move forward, make sure that we preserve Social Security for future generations, and make sure that we do not hand debt to our future generations. Mr. Speaker, $5 trillion is an awful lot of money. Once again, on the armed services end, 44 percent of our debt is owned by foreign interests. If we want to talk about the future of this country, if we want to talk about security, if we want to talk about homeland security, if we want to talk about financial security, stability for this country and for the Republic, never before in the history of the Republic has the deficit been as high as it is right now. Now, I can tell my colleagues, our friends on the other side, and I say the leadership, because I know, some of my good friends do not want this.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. It is not a personal issue. And they know it is not a personal issue. They know that bad decisions have been made. They know that the deficit is as high as it has ever been, and climbing. We are so high up in debt right now, I mean, it is just bad. We cannot call these 1-800 numbers we see on the TV saying call us, we will help you with your debt. We cannot even take care of those issues right now, because it is so much and we are so high in debt. So I think it is important, as we remember 30-somethings and those young Americans who are graduating from college now, Mr. Speaker, they are leaving, on average, $20,000 in debt, $20,000 in debt, the average American that is graduating. Now we are going to put more on them? I think that is something that we should not do, and that is the reason why we come to the floor. That is the reason why we have third, fourth, fifth, and six-party validators for the reason that this privatization plan is nothing but a pure gamble for Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and others that are depending and looking for Social Security when they are in need.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important not only that the Members understand, but the American people also understand. I mean, the gentleman is the second most senior member on the Committee on Armed Services; and I think that the gentleman is in the right position on the Committee on the Budget, that this is Iraq, the early years. I mean, this is going to be a long-term commitment of the United States. We are there; we are going to be there for some time. The coalition is getting smaller. We need to make sure that we provide for these men and women and their families back here. So I just wanted to say that so that the Members understand that we have an overall responsibility, but some of the things that the gentleman is showing us here on this chart of the realities that are obviously coming in the future and, on top of that, the Social Security issue, is going to be a train wreck in the making, if not already there.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I thank the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz). I thought the gentlewoman and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Davis) shared some really good comments. I see that the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) has a board there that he wants to share with us, and I know the gentleman has some comments based on our comments.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, once again, it is an honor to come before this House of Representatives. I can tell you that this 30- Something Working Group, Mr. Speaker, that our Democratic leader, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), has designated this time every week for the 30-Something Working Group to come to the floor to not only speak to the Members but also have an opportunity to share good information in general with the American people, and that is why we are here, to represent them, Mr. Speaker. I want to say, in the last several weeks, we have been talking about the issue of Social Security. I can tell you that Social Security is not only at the forefront of the agenda in this Congress but also has been promoted throughout this Nation as being in a state of crisis, which it is not. So, tonight, the 30-Something Working Group, we have asked a member of our caucus to come, the ranking member of the Committee on the Budget, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), to come to talk to us a little bit about this double whammy that the American people will be going through because of the push of privatization of Social Security and the irresponsible spending by the majority side and also by the present administration. This whole debate is about helping future generations. This whole debate is about making sure that we keep our end of the deal to the American people. I can tell you, keeping our end of the deal to the American people is saying we are going to do what we said we are going to do from the beginning, Mr. Speaker, and it is important. But I believe when misinformation or inaccurate information is given to the American people and to some Members of this House, it jeopardizes our commitment to keeping our end of the deal. What I mean by ``our end of the deal,'' for those individuals that have paid into Social Security over the years, and they are looking forward to the security of Social Security being there for them at the benefit level to where it is now, I think it is very, very important that we do not let those Americans down. I want to make sure that not only the Members of this House but everyone understands that Social Security will be solvent for the next 47 to 50 years at the present benefit level of where it is right now. Forty-eight million Americans who need the survivor benefits, retirees or individuals eligible for Social Security at this point will receive 100 percent of the benefits they are receiving now. On average, they receive $955 of monthly benefits from Social Security. Thirty-three million Americans are retired that are in that 48 million, and a large number of those Americans would be living under the poverty line if it was not for Social Security. So when we start talking about privatization of Social Security, it is a very dangerous thing and something that we should not play around with at all. I am proud that Democrats on this side of the aisle, and I would even say some of my Republican friends, believe in strengthening Social Security without slashing benefits that Americans have earned and making sure that private accounts are not a part of the Social Security debate or reality, because there is strong evidence, not hearsay, strong evidence of major benefit cuts to Americans that are counting on Social Security. I think it is also important, Mr. Speaker, that the Members understand that, once we can get to the point that we stop insisting on private accounts, when it really does not add up for the individual that is receiving Social Security or that will receive Social Security, I think we can get on to not only a serious discussion but action in dealing with the question of Social Security. We should not increase the debt by some $5 trillion and gamble on the future of Social Security. I think the American people deserve better. I think the American people demand better, and I think the American people will continue to pay very close attention to what is being said and what is not being said in this discussion about Social Security. I do not believe that Members of this House or the other body will take a vote where they are going to make a career decision on a gamble on Social Security privatization. It is not at that point to where one has to gamble with the retirement of so many Americans. Social Security is there to make sure that it is a guarantee for men and women that have worked in this country. So, tonight, we are going to talk about the budget, the $26,000-plus that every American owes to the Federal debt, and tonight, we are going to, if I could use the word, cross-pollinate, Mr. Speaker, Social Security privatization philosophy and the reality of the ever-growing deficit, that it seems that this Congress is out of control of continuing to add on to the debt without any plan whatsoever, no real realistic plan, in making sure that we take down the debt for future generations. So I think that is very, very important. Now, some individuals will say, Well, what is the Democratic plan? Well, I would like to know what is the Republican plan? Some of my good friends in this Chamber are Republicans and want to know the Republican plan. I would say, the Republican leadership plan, because I do not want to generalize, because I feel there are Members in this Chamber that have a genuine argument and concern when they see statistics that are given by notable organizations and even by some of our Federal Government organizations that are saying that there going to be major benefit cuts if we go to privatization, to the point that where even individuals who do not enroll in private accounts are going to receive cuts. That is not fair. So that is the reason why we come to this floor, week after week, the 30-Something Working Group, along with others, to be able to talk about this issue. Now, tonight only are we going to have the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), who is always here, Mr. Speaker, and Ms. Wasserman Schultz, and we have one of our 30-Something Working Group members, the gentleman from the Great State of Alabama (Mr. Davis), who will come before this great House to be a part of this discussion, along with our ranking member on the Committee on the Budget, the Democratic ranking member of the Committee on the Budget and a part of the Democratic leadership team in dealing with the issue of the deficit and the budget and responsible spending and also making sure that we do the right thing. I would like to yield some time to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt). As you go to the well there, I want to just let you know how much I appreciate not only the hard work that you have been doing but the fact that you have joined us here, the 30-Something Working Group. I know you have been really given to not only the Democratic Caucus but informing the Congress on what we are doing and what we are not doing. I would like to say to the distinguished gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Davis), feel free to be part of this, also a member of the Committee on the Budget.