Jim Nussle

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Texas is correct. We have been debating this all day, and he is exactly right, but you just do not get it because you equate taxes with spending. You equate when the government does not take in taxes, somehow that is spending, and the reason you do that is because you believe that decisions should start here in Washington rather than at the small businesses and the farms and the kitchen tables of America. Those are the people who pay taxes. We are not going to raise taxes. We have decided that. Seven times this year we have had this vote, and so we want to get to that vote, but let me just remind us of a couple of things. Today was a good debate because any day you discuss controlling spending is a good day. Any day you discuss that is a good day. What is not quite good about today is that we are probably not going to pass anything, and that is because they do not want to control spending. I know that was tough, but before we start pointing fingers at each other, all I was going to say is that we are all in this together. We can blame processes, we can blame appropriators, we can blame Democrats and we can blame Republicans. We can blame Presidents. Oh, sure, we can blame the other body. We can blame all sorts of things for what we do every day when we cast our votes in committee or on the floor to have spending continue out of control, and we can devise all sorts of very interesting processes to try and rein us in and to convince our constituents that if all we did was to pass a new law or pass a new process, somehow all of it would be fixed. This is about us. This is not about one particular committee or another. Now, I understand why the appropriators today, with all due respect, came to the floor just a little bit paranoid about this process. Even paranoids have enemies. I understand, but rightfully so, they are concerned that we have spent way too much time only looking at discretionary spending, and that is why in final analysis what this bill does is it manages the mandatory spending process with a pay-as- you-go requirement, and it manages the discretionary process by setting caps for only 2 years at the budget that we have all voted for. We have a budget. We should stick to that budget. If we stick to that budget, we will control spending, and as a result already, if we stick to that budget, we are going to protect the country, make sure that our homeland is secure, make sure we can win the global war on terrorism, make sure our economy can continue to grow like it has for the last 6 months, which has been the fastest in over 20 years, and continue to create jobs. The payoff is even better than that. If we stick to this plan, we will already see, I predict within this next month a reduction in the prediction for the deficit for this year alone by $100 billion. That my friends is controlling spending, and that is a good day's work, even if this does not quite make it to the finish line. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 4613, the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005. This piece of legislation is the most significant component of our wartime budget for America. It is the third bill we are considering pursuant to the 302(b) allocations adopted by the Appropriations Committee. I am pleased to report that it is consistent with the levels established in the conference report to S. Con. Res. 95, the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2005, which the House adopted as its fiscal blueprint on May 19th. The budget resolution set aside $420.8 billion in discretionary budget authority for the national defense function in 2005. In addition, the budget resolution set aside $50 billion for overseas contingency operations. As members recall, the administration's initial budget submission did not provide funding for Iraq and Afghanistan; but in consultation with the membership we decided that providing a mid- range estimate for those operations was the only way to construct a meaningful budget blueprint. H.R. 4613 funds the bulk of the national defense commitment. The rest is funded in the military construction bill and the energy and water bill. H.R. 4613 provides $390.9 billion in new discretionary budget authority towards funding the President's February 3rd defense budget request. It also contains $25 billion requested by the President as a fiscal year 2005 Iraq war supplemental, the repeal of $1.8 billion in rescission authority provided to the President in last year's omnibus appropriations bill, $685 million in additional funds for the State Department, and $95 million for international disaster relief and migration assistance. The bill provides that if this spending occurs in fiscal year 2004 it will be designated as an emergency and will not count against the budget limits; if it occurs in 2005 it will be counted against the $50 billion contingency for war-related operations provided for in the budget resolution. Excluding the overseas reserve portion, the bill's funding shows a 6.6-percent increase from the previous year, and it builds on a 5-year average annual growth rate of 7.2 percent for defense appropriations. The base amount is equal to the 302(b) allocation to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. Accordingly, the bill complies with section 302(f) of the Budget Act, which prohibits consideration of bills in excess of an appropriations subcommittee's 302(b) allocation of budget authority and outlays established in the budget resolution. This bill represents the House's support for the nearly 160,000 U.S. troops performing courageous duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill also contains the largest research and development funding ever, and the largest procurement funding since 1990. H.R. 4613 does have one aspect that is a potential cause for concern: the bill reduces funding for operations and maintenance in by $1.8 billion from the President's February request. While there is a widespread belief that any potential operations and maintenance shortfall can simply be made up for in a future supplemental, I would raise a caution that Congress ought not to make it a regular practice to budget by supplemental for predictable events. With that reservation, I express my support for H.R. 4613.

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak on the appropriations process for fiscal year 2005 and the Homeland Security appropriations bill in particular. The actual appropriations process commenced on May 19, when the House agreed to a budget resolution that established an overall limit on appropriations for fiscal year 2005 of $821.9 billion, excluding emergencies. This limit was developed in the context of a freeze on non-defense, non-homeland security discretionary spending. The Interior and Homeland Security bills we are considering this week mark the first steps in establishing our priorities in discretionary spending programs within the overall limit established by the budget resolution. The budget resolution provided a total allocation for discretionary appropriations of $32.0 billion for Homeland Security in fiscal year 2005, demonstrating the high priority that the House is placing on this vital area. This amount includes $2.5 billion in advance appropriations that were previously enacted for Project BioShield. While there has been much discussion about the other body not achieving an agreement on the budget for the coming year, this House has done its job in adopting the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for fiscal year 2005, and deeming it to be in effect in the House by a separate vote. Now the appropriations process has begun pursuant to that framework. Today we consider the second of these appropriations bills, H.R. 4567, the Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2005. This is only the second time this chamber has considered a separate appropriation bill for the Department of Homeland Security, which consolidates 22 Federal agencies and its 180,000 employees. The discretionary spending levels in this important measure are consistent with the limits in the budget resolution for fiscal year 2005. The bill provides $32.0 billion in appropriations, an increase of $2.8 billion or 9.4 percent above the previous year's level. Fiscal year 2005 Homeland appropriations in H.R. 4567 are equal to their 302(b) allocation, and the bill is also consistent with the budget resolution. H.R. 4567 does not contain any emergency-designed BA, which is exempt from budget limits. It rescinds $33 million in previously-appropriated BA. By increasing Homeland Security funding $1.1 billion above the President's fiscal year 2005 request, this bill demonstrates the House's strong commitment to win the war against terrorism. Consistent with the Budget Resolution, the bill provides resources in areas like Local First Responder funding, Border and Transportation Security, and Science and Technology. This bill will enhance the Nation's ability to secure our borders, protect lives and property, and disrupt terrorist financing. I am pleased the Appropriations Committee was able to meet a critical need in the fiscally responsible manner outlined in the budget resolution. As we enter the appropriations season, I wish Chairman Young and our colleagues on the Appropriations Committee the best as they strive to meet the needs of the American people within the framework established by the budget resolution.

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak on H.R. 4568, the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2005. H.R. 4568 provides $20.0 billion in budget authority and $20.2 billion in outlays--an increase of $78 million in BA and $629 million in outlays from fiscal year 2004. As Chairman of the House Budget Committee, I am pleased to report that the bill is generally consistent with the Conference Report on the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for fiscal year 2005 (H. Con. Res. 95) which recently passed the full House but has yet to pass the Senate. The bill comes in at its 302(b) allocation for fiscal year 2005 and therefore complies with section 302(f) of the budget resolution, which limits appropriations measures to the allocation of the reporting subcommittee. A very important component of this bill is the funding for suppression of wildfires. In addition to fully funding wildland fire suppression activities at their ten-year average, H.R. 4568 provides an additional $500 million for fire suppression within the Forest Service and the Department of Interior in both fiscal years 2004 and 2005. I am authorized by the budget resolution to increase the allocation of the Appropriations Committee to accommodate this additional spending because the bill fully funds the wildfire suppression accounts. However, the appropriations for fiscal year 2004 does exceed the allocation in that year because of a slight breach in its allocation resulting from legislation enacted late last session. H.R. 4568 contains no rescissions but does include an advance appropriation of $36 million for payments under the Elk Hills School lands fund settlement agreement. The advance appropriation is included in the list of anticipated advance appropriations under section 401 of the Budget Resolution. Let me conclude by commending Chairman Taylor and Ranking Member Dicks for a job well done in prioritizing the programs within their jurisdiction and coming to the floor with a bill that complies with this year's budget resolution.

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I submit for printing in the Congressional Record revisions to the 302(a) allocations to the Appropriations Committee and budgetary aggregates established by the budget resolution. These revisions increase the amount of new budget authority available to the House Appropriations Committee to reflect both technical changes and additional funds for wildland fire suppression provided by the Interior appropriations bill reported to the House today. My authority to make these adjustments is derived from sections 312 and 313 of S. Con. Res. 95, as made applicable to the House of Representatives by H. Res. 649 (108th Congress). Section 313 of the conference report to accompany S. Con. Res. 95 provides for an increase in budget authority and outlays to the House Appropriations Committee upon reporting of the first bill by that committee. This increase, which totals $7,158,000,000 in new budget authority and $14,516,000,000 in outlays, is necessary both to increase the discretionary levels from the discretionary limits that are binding in the Senate (by virtue of Section 504 of the fiscal year budget resolution) to the levels envisioned by the conference agreement, and to achieve comparability in the budgetary treatment of Project Bioshield between the President's budget request and the conference agreement. I am hereby increasing the allocation and budgetary aggregates by these amounts. Section 312 of S. Con. Res. 95 provides for a supplemental increase in budget authority and outlays to the House Appropriations Committee if additional funds are provided in 2004 or 2005 for wildland fire suppression. The adjustment is available for fiscal year 2005 if regular appropriations provided by the reported bill are at least 10- year average of obligations for such activities. Because this requirement has been met, I am increasing the 302(a) allocation of budget authority to the Appropriations Committee by $500,000,000 in both 2004 and 2005 to reflect the additional amounts provided in the Interior appropriations bill. Outlays flowing from this budget authority total $330,000,000 in 2004 and $420,000,000 in 2005. After the adjustments specified in these two sections, the 302(a) allocation to the House Committee on Appropriations becomes $786,065,000,000 in budget authority and $861,672,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2004 and $821,919,000,000 in budget authority and $905,748,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2005. The corresponding budgetary aggregates become $1,881,055,000,000 in budget authority and $1,903,832,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2004 and $2,012,726,000,000 in budget authority and $2,010,964,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2005.

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor President Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan once said, ``We in government should learn to look at our country with the eyes of an entrepreneur, seeing possibilities where others see only problems.'' It is that spirit that brought me and many others into the public service profession. I am proud to have cast my first presidential vote for Ronald Reagan in 1980. Fortunately for this country and the world, a majority of my fellow citizens agreed. Ronald Reagan served as a beacon of hope and inspiration. His vision of a stronger, optimistic America inspired me to action. In 1980 I was a young student at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa and I jumped right into grassroots politics on my campus. I was selected to attend the Republican National Convention that summer and was one of the youngest delegates there. Iowans are proud of our connection to President Reagan. WOC, a Davenport radio station in my district, gave Ronald Reagan his first job out of college and he lived in Iowa for several years. Ronald Reagan made the future something to charge toward rather than fear. His philosophy was based on a brilliant truth: He knew without a doubt that having faith in Americans would create the best America. The Reagan Revolution is still the foundation for my core beliefs: The American people make better decisions about their daily life than the government can for them. Keeping America secure is job one. Peace is best achieved when you negotiate from a position of strength. I keep a plaque on my desk with a quote from Ronald Reagan. It reads ``There's no limit to what a man can do or where he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit.'' Today, I join my colleagues, thousands of Iowans and millions of Americans in giving credit to Ronald Reagan for renewing our nation and for changing the world forever with his leadership and ideals. Thank you, Mr. President for reminding us why we should be proud to be Americans and for making us feel safe when nothing in the world seemed safe. Above all, thank you for your humor, optimism and for believing the best in us. We will never forget you.

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I was detained and was not able to cast my vote on Rollcall #195, passage of H. Con. Res. 424, Honoring past and current members of the Armed Forces of the United States and encouraging Americans to wear red poppies on Memorial Day. Had I been present I would have voted ``aye''.

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 649, I call up the conference report on the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 95) setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2005 and including the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2006 through 2009.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on S. Con. Res. 95.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first I would like to thank members of the Committee on the Budget on both sides of the aisle that have worked throughout the process this year. I wish to thank my ranking member and friend, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt). We will embark today on a vigorous debate. I have a feeling that we will differ quite a lot on the policy and the issues before us faced in the budget, but we do so in a cheerful manner, one that is with full respect; and I have enormous respect for my very able friend and colleague, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt). I also want to thank our staff. Rich Meade and the entire Committee on the Budget staff, they have worked very, very diligently on the majority side; and Tom Kahn and the minority staff have also done that. They prepare Members, not only on the committee but throughout our conferences and caucuses, so we are prepared for this debate today and throughout the year, and they deserve our support as we move forward and our appreciation. As we started crafting the budget this year, there was certainly really no lack of naysayers who said that getting a budget passed this year would probably be next to impossible. There were way too many challenges, people said, facing our country, too many conflicting interests, too much pressure because of the upcoming elections. All of those things are certainly true. It is true we are dealing with a number of other challenging issues, such as the ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the war against terrorism in general on a global basis. But we will prevail as a Nation. Regardless of the debate that we have today on budgets and taxes and pay-as-you-go and the national debt, we will prevail as a Nation, because it is not about budgets in the end. It is not about taxes in the end. It is about an American spirit that will not die, because we believe in freedom, and that is freedom that is given to us as a little seed planted in our hearts when we are born and something that blossoms throughout our lives. We want to share that with the world, and we believe that by sharing it with the world, we will have a safer place in which to live. I am also happy to report that we have prevailed, despite a myriad of critics who said it could not be done, that we would not even get a conference report agreement between the House and the Senate. We were able to do that. So today in the House we will complete the first step of what are some of our most fundamental duties. I am extremely proud of this budget and what it stands for. I would like to particularly thank our leadership, our Speaker, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert); our majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay); our deputy whip, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor); and our whip, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt); as well as the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce). All of the leadership team worked hard, standing our ground for the budget principles that we knew must be done. And what was that must-do list for this year's budget? Clearly, this budget had to provide for the defense and homeland security of our Nation. That is job one. There is no excuse not to complete the most important job that this country requires of a Nation in order for it to be free, and that is the defense of our country. Second, this budget had to continue to support a program of economic growth for our country, as well as continue our commitment to a host of critical domestic programs, such as veterans benefits, education, health care, and prescription drugs for seniors. And we had to do all of this while reining in our spending and working to reduce the deficits we incurred while responding to extraordinary circumstances over the past few years. Getting a consensus on what was exactly right or correct was not easy. It has been very difficult. Every single person has their own idea of what a perfect budget would look like. This is not a perfect budget, and I dare say my friends on the other side will remind me of that time and time again today; but it is what is doable at a time of extreme circumstances in our Nation's history. I have heard people say at time of war we ought to do this; at time of economic challenge we ought to do that; we ought to fund priorities. All of those are true. But we have never faced all of them at the exact same time: to have a downturn in the economy, be faced with two wars, a global response to terrorism, the most unbelievable tragic event of terrorism facing our Nation. All of this happening at the exact same time is something that has never happened to our Nation. So these are extraordinary circumstances and we will respond. Let me tell you the guiding principles of this budget of how we are going to respond. First is strength. We are free as a Nation as long as we are able to defend our freedom at home and abroad. And so the first principle is strength. Second is growth. We must continue to grow. Our policies are helping to boost the economy. We do not want to grow government. We want to grow the earning capacity of people. We want to grow the ability to create jobs. We want to grow the entrepreneurial spirit in our country. That is what we want to grow. And we have already seen, the last 6 months have been the fastest growth in 20 years as a result of the policies put forward by our President and by this Congress. And we believe that must continue. Business investment is up. Unemployment is falling, and it is lower now than it was on average for the 1970s, the 1980s or the 1990s. And most important, we are seeing jobs being created. More Americans are working today than at any time in American history; 1.1 million jobs have been created over the last 8 months alone. So to remain the most prosperous superpower, our economy must be able to continue to grow. Finally, opportunity. Strength, growth and, finally, opportunity. America's continued greatness comes from the unlimited opportunities that our American freedom provides. We are all for that. And we must continue to encourage those opportunities for a better life for every American citizen. Government certainly has a role in that. Those were the guiding principles of our budget that we passed here in the House, and they remain the guiding principles as we work through this conference agreement. I also want to talk to you about a few principles with regard to this budget that were included in the final conference agreement. First, there will be no tax increase. And let me be clear: If you vote ``yes'' on this budget, you are saying we do not need a tax increase. We do not want an automatic tax increase to happen, and we do not believe that this is a time for Americans to dig deeper in their pockets in order to deal with challenges we should be facing here in Washington. Tax increases should not be the solution. And so if you vote ``no'' on this budget, be aware you are voting to automatically allow tax increases to occur this year. That is what this budget will do. It will prevent an automatic tax increase. So by voting against it, an automatic tax increase will occur. Second, on spending, our constituents have told us time and time again that we have got to rein in spending. We have got to control the waste, fraud and abuse in Washington. And certainly that is often in the eye of the beholder; but we believe that it is time to go through our departments, through our categories and look at ways to rein in spending. We cannot begin to address reducing the budget deficit without holding the current rate of spending growth. This is what our spending growth has looked like in the past few years, a lot of growth. Most of that from necessary demands, but we cannot sustain that spending growth. So we have looked for ways to control spending throughout the budget. This budget calls for holding the line on nondefense, nonhomeland security discretionary spending. For the first time, this Congress, certainly in my tenure here and I daresay in the tenure of all Members of this body, this will be the first opportunity for you to vote to freeze or hold the line on nonsecurity spending in Congress. Let us talk about the war. The President did not, when he submitted his budget back in February, contemplate the true cost of war because they were unknown at that time. Our budget has taken that into account. We know, without question, that there will be costs for the ongoing war and that this budget will have an effect as a result. Do we know the exact amount? No. That is not known right now to the Congress, to the Defense Department, to the President. We can speculate, and we have put into this budget a placeholder that says $50 billion, based on the estimate that we have for this year, is an appropriate figure to begin planning for the 2005 costs of the war. And thank goodness we did that, because right after we passed our budget, we found out that at least $25 billion will be necessary to fund the ongoing conflict during 2005. So it is not with precision that we know this amount, but it is something we need to plan for in this, and this budget accomplishes that. This budget does all of this, if we follow it, to get us back to balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility. We have to start somewhere. There will be people who come to the floor today who say, you know, this is only a 1-year budget. Well, yeah, that is what we always pass. Last year we passed a budget; it had a lot of years on it, but we only followed it for a year. Then we renegotiated it this year. We will to the same next year and the year after. In fact, every year I have been here we have gone year to year to year with regard to taxes, spending, rules, appropriations, all of the different issues that face us today. And so we are coming forward to present to you today a 1-year budget. It complies with the Budget Act. You will see 5 years' worth of projections for the amounts of money, but this is a 1-year budget. And we believe if we can get this right and if we can hold the House and the other body and the President to this plan, it puts us on a path to not only controlling the deficit, but getting us back to a balanced budget. This budget is the first step in accomplishing that but it only works if we stick to it. This is our next major challenge, I daresay, to begin to get past all of the excuses of the last few years, although they are appropriate, certainly important rationale for how we have gotten here. But we need to move forward. This allows us to do that today. So we need to vote ``yes'' in order to move this plan forward. But let me be clear: If you vote no, as I said before, you vote for an automatic tax increase, you vote to cut veterans' spending because we increased veterans' spending here over the President's amount by $1.2 billion; you are not supporting the troops to the tune of $50 billion contemplating the war costs. Sure, you can say we will vote for the appropriations bill, but this plans for it in a budget. And I also suggest, you are not doing what you need to do to plan for defense and homeland security of our Nation. This puts us on a track to fiscal responsibility. It meet our needs and the strengths of our country and growth for the economy and opportunity for the future. And I ask my colleagues to support the conference report. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me just respond quickly and say, and I forgot this part, we are reducing the budget deficit by $100 billion. So I understand there is concern out there. We are taking $100 billion off the top as a result of this budget because we are planning our work and we are sticking to our plan, and it is a good plan.

Mr. NUSSLE. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. NUSSLE. It is my understanding. The gentleman is correct.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry), a very valued member of the committees.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, could I inquire how much time is remaining on both sides.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, we will reserve our time and let the other side catch up a little bit.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds, and then I will let them continue. But I want people to listen. Listen. We have got half the speakers on that side saying, worry about the deficit and debt, and the other half coming like the gentleman from Minnesota saying we are not spending enough, we are not spending enough, we are not spending enough. So is it the deficit or is it spending? My goodness, my colleagues need to get their message straight.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to respond to the gentleman that that is why our budget reduces the deficit next year, $100 billion alone, and that is without raising taxes. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), a very valued member of the committee.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite).

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer) for the purpose of a colloquy between myself and the gentleman from Texas, and ask the gentleman to summarize.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, that provision is still in the budget. We worked to preserve that. I appreciate the gentleman's leadership on that. The provision in the Senate-passed budget resolution concerning the farm payment limitation is not included in the conference version. I thank the gentleman for his leadership and his continued efforts in this regard. The gentleman is correct and I appreciate his leadership on this issue and work to ensure that we keep the promises of the Farm Bill. The provision in the Senate passed budget resolution concerning farm payment limitations is not included in this conference version. Any major changes to farm payment limits or any other agricultural policies should be addressed by the Agriculture Committee which has jurisdiction over these issues. While the House passed budget resolution, H. Con. Res. 393, included $371 million over five years in reconciliation instructions for the Agriculture Committee, these instructions, which were never intended to reduce critical farm commodity support programs, are not included in the conference agreement.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), a very valued Member and the vice chairman of the committee.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. It is often asked at a time, is America better off than it was 4 years ago? Is it better off at all? Well, it is. Homeland security. Since 2000, we have greatly strengthened our homeland security, in part because of the budgets that we have passed to make sure that our homeland is protected through strength. We have created the Department of Homeland Security and more than doubled the funding for homeland security since September 11. With the improved resources, we have increased presence in key ports, the Bio Watch program now on many large U.S. cities, and over 500,000 first responders have been trained. America's homeland security is better off. Defense. Over the past 3 years, we have made great strides in correcting the defense deficit done in the early 1990s, including increasing the Department of Defense's annual budget by over $110 billion to prosecute the global war on terrorism, greatly improving the military quality of life. Our defense is better off than it was 4 years ago, and it is better off under this budget. Our economy. The economy is growing now in 2004, the best in 20 years, not on the verge of a recession the way it was when President Clinton left office. Real gross domestic product growth is at its highest pace in 20 years. Payroll employment is growing strongly now. We have had 1.1 million jobs added to this economy just since last August. Manufacturing jobs are increasing, the unemployment rate is falling, and housing markets are the strongest in 20 years. The economy is much better off than it was 4 years ago and it will be better if we continue the policies of this budget. Our budget is the blueprint that allows these policies to continue, and we will all be better off if we adopt that budget here today. We need to adopt it to provide the strength of this country, the growth for our economy, and the opportunity for our future. And we can do it without a tax increase and reduce the deficit by over $100 billion next year alone. That is what this budget accomplishes. The other side offers nothing but fear and trying to talk down the economy and trying to scare people about our future. That is not an agenda. Fear and anger is not an agenda. The agenda we need to adopt today is a positive one of strength, growth, and opportunity for our future; and we can do it if we adopt this conference report on the budget. I ask for the adoption of the conference report.