Jim Nussle

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Brown), a member of the Committee on the Budget.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the very distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller), a distinguished member of the committee.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, we have, as I understand it, 2 minutes remaining on our side; and we will close with that, I would just inform the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt).

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I write this tribute to commend Ashley Collopy for her exemplary service to her community. Ashley took the initiative to become involved in a local community service project that will strengthen the community and provide a better societal environment for all Iowan's. It is exciting for me to see a young Iowan tap their endless potential and give something of great quality back to the community and state. While Ashley no doubt found this work very rewarding, I am sure that those in her community are also very grateful for her commitment. I am very proud of Ashley's commitment to a better Iowa. Ashley is an outstanding young American, and is a person that other young people should look to as an example for what it means to be a leader. Ashley is a leader in her community and I have every confidence that she has the potential to be a leader in America's march to the future.

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, maybe I can expedite this. Maybe it is my upbringing or whatever it is, but I have a difficult time having my friends from the Committee on Rules trying to sweep under the rug or cover for mistakes that I am responsible for. I am the chairman of the Committee on the Budget. This is a conference report that at least from the House perspective I am responsible to file and file correctly. That was not done. That is my responsibility. Two pages were missing. I am not exactly sure I can tell you precisely how those two pages were missing. The fact is they were missing when they were filed. Upon discovery of that mistake, a decision had to be made how to proceed. We had a couple of choices. One is to continue this. Now it is 2 o'clock. Right or wrong, I do not think probably it is the best way to proceed to just continue this. What we thought we would do is to, now that of course you have a copy of the budget, with the two pages, you have got now until Tuesday, I think, to take a look at this. Certainly that will be a new opportunity that both sides would probably enjoy. And then we will have an opportunity in the light of day to have a good debate and discussion on that budget and pass it. But as far as all of the discussion about whose responsibility it is and the joking and everything else, the buck stops here. It was my responsibility to do it. You can blame everything from computers to staff, it does not matter, it was my responsibility, and I am the person. First of all I would apologize to the Members. I can give you all sorts of great rationalizations and excuses, but it is my responsibility. I apologize to the body for that. I would like and my recommendation is that we take the opportunity that has been given to us to read it carefully and then debate it carefully on Tuesday and to move forward.

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

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Rule XI, Clause 2 of the Rules of the House of Representatives, I respectfully submit the rules of the Committee on the Budget for the 107th Congress for publication in the Congressional Record. General Applicability Rule 1--Applicability of House Rules Except as otherwise specified herein, the Rules of the House are the rules of the committee so far as applicable, except that a motion to recess from day to day is a motion of high privilege. Meetings Rule 2--Regular meetings (a) The regular meeting day of the committee shall be the second Wednesday of each month at 11 a.m., while the House is in session. (b) The chairman is authorized to dispense with a regular meeting when the chairman determines there is no business to be considered by the committee. The chairman shall give notice in writing or by facsimile to that effect to each member of the committee as far in advance of the regular meeting day as the circumstances permit. (c) Regular meetings shall be canceled when they conflict with meetings of either party's caucus or conference. Rule 3--Additional and special meetings (a) The chairman may call and convene additional meetings of the committee as the chairman considers necessary, or special meetings at the request of a majority of the members of the committee in accordance with House Rule XI, clause 2(c). (b) In the absence of exceptional circumstances, the chairman shall provide notice in writing or by facsimile of additional meetings to the office of each member at least 24 hours in advance while Congress is in session, and at least 3 days in advance when Congress is not in session. Rule 4--Open business meetings (a) Each meeting for the transaction of committee business, including the markup of measures, shall be open to the public except when the committee, in open session and with a quorum present, determines by recall vote that all or part of the remainder of the meeting on that day shall be closed to the public in accordance with House Rule XI, clause 2(g)(1). (b) No person other than members of the committee and such congressional staff and departmental representatives as the committee may authorize shall be present at any business or markup session which has been closed to the public. Rule 5--Quorums A majority of the committee shall constitute a quorum. No business shall be transacted and no measure or recommendation shall be reported unless a quorum is actually present. Rule 6--Recognition Any member, when recognized by the chairman, may address the committee on any bill, motion, or other matter under consideration before the committee. The time of such member shall be limited to 5 minutes until all members present have been afforded an opportunity to comment. Rule 7--Consideration of business Measures or matters may be placed before the committee, for its consideration, by the chairman or by a majority vote of the members of the committee, a quorum being present. Rule 8--Availability of legislation No bill or joint or concurrent resolution shall be considered by the committee unless copies of the measure have been made available to all committee members at least 4 hours prior to the time at which such measure is to be considered. For concurrent resolutions on the budget, this requirement shall be satisfied by making available copies of the complete chairman's mark (or such material as will provide the basis for committee consideration). the provisions of this rule may be suspended by the concurrence of the chairman and ranking minority member. Rule 9--Procedure for consideration of budget resolution (a) It shall be the policy of the committee that the starting point for any deliberations on a concurrent resolution on the budget should be the estimated or actual levels for the fiscal year preceding the budget year. (b) In developing a concurrent resolution on the budget, the committee shall first proceed, unless otherwise determined by the committee, to consider budget aggregates, functional categories, and other appropriate matters on a tentative basis, with the document before the committee open to amendment; subsequent amendments may be offered to aggregates, functional categories, or other appropriate matters which have already been amended in their entirety. (c) Following adoption of the aggregates, functional categories, and other matters, the text of a concurrent resolution on the budget incorporating such aggregates, functional categories, and other appropriate matters shall be considered for amendment and a final vote. Rule 10--Rollcall votes A rollcall of the members may be had upon the request of at least one-fifth of those present. In the apparent absence of a quorum, a rollcall may be had on the request of any member. Hearings Rule 11--Announcement of hearings The chairman shall make public announcement of the date, place, and subject matter of any committee hearing at least 1 week before the hearing, beginning with the day in which the announcement is made and ending the day preceding the scheduled hearing unless the chairman, with the concurrence of the ranking minority member, or the committee by majority vote with a quorum present for the transaction of business, determines there is good cause to begin the hearing sooner, in which case the chairman shall make the announcement at the earliest possible date. Rule 12--Open hearings (a) Each hearing conducted by the committee or any of its task forces shall be open to the public except when the committee or task force, in open session and with a quorum present, determines by rollcall vote that all or part of the remainder of that hearing on that day shall be closed to the public because disclosure of testimony, evidence, or other matters to be considered would endanger the national security, or would compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or would tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person, or would violate any law or rule of the House of Representatives. The committee or task forces may by the same procedure vote to close one subsequent day of hearing. (b) For the purposes of House Rule XI, clause 2(g)(2), the task forces of the committee are considered to be subcommittees. Rule 13--Quorums For the purpose of hearing testimony, not less than two members of the committee shall constitute a quorum. Rule 14--Time for questioning witnesses (a) Committee members shall have an amount of time not to exceed 5 minutes to interrogate each witness until such time as each member who so desires has had an opportunity to interrogate such witness. (b) After all members have had an opportunity to ask questions, the round shall begin again under the 5-minute rule. (c) In questioning witnesses under the 5-minute rule, the chairman and the ranking minority member may be recognized first, after which members may be recognized in the order of their arrival at the hearing. Among the members present at the time the hearing is called to order, seniority shall be recognized. In recognizing members to question witnesses, the chairman may take into consideration the ratio of majority members to minority members and the number of majority and minority members present and shall apportion the recognition for questioning in such a manner as not to disadvantage the members of the majority. Rule 15--Subpoenas and oaths (a) In accordance with House Rule XI, clause 2(m) subpoenas authorized by a majority of the committee may be issued over the signature of the chairman or of any member of the committee designated by him, and may be served by any person designated by the chairman or such member. (b) The chairman, or any member of the committee designated by the chairman, may administer oaths to witnesses. Rule 16--Witnesses' statements (a) So far as practicable, any prepared statement to be presented by a witness shall be submitted to the committee at least 24 hours in advance of presentation, and shall be distributed to all members of the committee in advance of presentation. (b) To the greatest extent possible, each witness appearing in a nongovernmental capacity shall include with the written statement of proposed testimony a curriculum vitae and a disclosure of the amount and source (by agency and program) of any Federal grant (or subgrant thereof) or contract (or subcontract thereof) received during the current fiscal year or either of the 2 preceding fiscal years. Prints and Publications Rule 17--Committee prints All committee prints and other materials prepared for public distribution shall be approved by the committee prior to any distribution, unless such print or other material shows clearly on its face that it has not been approved by the committee. Rule 18--Committee publications on the Internet To the maximum extent feasible, the committee shall make its publications available in electronic form. Staff Rule 19--Committee staff (a) Subject to approval by the committee, and to the provisions of the following paragraphs, the professional and clerical staff of the committee shall be appointed, and may be removed, by the chairman. (b) Committee staff shall not be assigned any duties other than those pertaining to committee business, and shall be selected without regard to race, creed, sex, or age, and solely on the basis of fitness to perform the duties of their respective positions. (c) All committee staff shall be entitled to equitable treatment, including comparable salaries, facilities, access to official committee records, leave, and hours of work. (d) Notwithstanding paragraphs a, b, and c, staff shall be employed in compliance with House rules, the Employment and Accountability Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, and any other applicable Federal statutes. Rule 20--Staff supervision (a) Staff shall be under the general supervision and direction of the chairman, who shall establish and assign their duties and responsibilities, delegate such authority as he deems appropriate, fix and adjust staff salaries (in accordance with House Rule X, clause 9(c)) and job title, and, at his discretion, arrange for their specialized training. (b) Staff assigned to the minority shall be under the general supervision and direction of the minority member of the committee, who may delegate such authority, as they deem appropriate. Records Rule 21--preparation and maintenance of committee records (a) An accurate stenographic record shall be made of all hearings and business meetings. (b) The proceedings of the committee shall be recorded in a journal, which shall among other things, include a record of the votes on any question on which a record vote is demanded. (c) Members of the committee shall correct and return transcripts of hearings as soon as practicable after receipt thereof, except that any changes shall be limited to technical, grammatical, and typographical corrections. (d) Any witness may examine the transcript of his own testimony and make grammatical, technical, and typographical corrections. (e) The chairman may order the printing of a hearing record without the corrections of any member or witness if he determines that such member or witness has been afforded a reasonable time for correction, and that further delay would seriously impede the committee's responsibility for meeting its deadlines under the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. (f) Transcripts of hearings and meetings may be printed if the chairman decides it is appropriate, or if a majority of the members so request. Rule 22--access to committee records (a)(1) The chairman shall promulgate regulations to provide for public inspection of rollcall votes and to provide access by members to committee records (in accordance with House Rule XI, clause 2(e)). (2) Access to classified testimony and information shall be limited to Members of Congress and to House Budget Committee staff and stenographic reporters who have appropriate security clearance. (3) Notice of the receipt of such information shall be sent to the committee members. Such information shall be kept in the committee safe, and shall be available to members in the committee office. (b) The records of the committee at the National Archives and Records Administration shall be made available for public use in accordance with Rule VII of the Rules of the House of Representatives. The chairman shall notify the ranking minority member of any decision, pursuant to clause 3(b)(3) or clause 4(b) of the rule, to withhold a record otherwise available, and the matter shall be presented to the committee for a determination on the written request of any member of the committee. Oversight Rule 23--General oversight (a) The committee shall review and study, on a continuing basis, the application, administration, execution, and effectiveness of those laws, or parts of laws, the subject of which is within its jurisdiction. (b) The committee is authorized at any time to conduct such investigations and studies as it may consider necessary or appropriate in the exercise of its responsibilities under clause (1)(e) of rule X of the Rules of the House, and, subject to the adoption of expense resolutions as required by clause 6 of rule X, to incur expenses (including travel expenses) in connection therewith. (c) Not later than February 15 of the first session of a Congress, the committee shall meet in open session, with a quorum present, to adopt its oversight plans for that Congress for submission to the Committee on House Administration and the Committee on Government Reform in accordance with the provisions of clause (2)(d) of House Rule

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 83) establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2002, revising the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2001, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2011, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes to close our portion of the debate. Let me just reiterate that certainly we have tried and we will continue to try and reform our education system. Part of that reform requires us to consider new funding. Part of that reform requires us to consider that we are not paying the bills that have been promised under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Part of that is to recognize that, as people continue a lifetime of learning, that we have to find new ways to pay for higher education; that we recognize that reading programs in this country need additional assistance. But in part, that is the reason why our budget lays out for education those many different priorities we believe so succinctly and with so much of a priority. I think it is wrong to assume that because we have over the course of our appropriations passed some advanced appropriations that all of a sudden now that that should not be included as a priority for this year's budget or beyond. We have increased budgets for education in the past. We will do so in the future. This year's is 11 percent. We are proud of that. If there are ways that we can help improve that in the future with reform, we will consider that. As far as reform and modernization of Medicare, we believe based on the 407 to 2 vote earlier this year that the House of Representatives is clearly on record that not one penny of Social Security or Medicare ought to be used for anything else except Social Security or Medicare. Finally we have done that. I do not want to recall history, but the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), my good friend, knows that this is a very brief history involved in any side coming forth with a budget that does not touch the trust funds and the surpluses for Medicare and Social Security. Finally, in a bipartisan way, this year, we were able to say do not touch it, only use it for its intended purpose. But this is its intended purpose. If one cannot use Medicare Trust Fund dollars for Medicare, for modernization of Medicare, for improving Medicare and providing Medicare recipients more Medicare, what is one going to use the money for? I mean, I do not quite understand that. This desire to run to the floor and to say every penny you use from the Medicare Trust Fund automatically takes a penny away from its solvency in the future is just not factually correct. Modernization is intended for and we will pass modernization that needs to extend the life of Medicare. I just say the following: If one cannot use Medicare Trust Fund dollars for Medicare, if one cannot use Medicare surpluses for Medicare, what can one use it for? We believe we have finally arrived at a bipartisan principle on that issue. We believe that is embodied in this budget that has already passed the House. I believe it would be a grave mistake to change that tact now and to instruct our conferees, albeit it is not binding, I realize that, and maybe we should not make a controversy out of it, but I believe it is a mistake for us to bind our conferees or instruct our conferees by suggesting to them that now, all of a sudden, we are going to reverse that 407 to 2 vote and say that one cannot use Medicare now for anything, one cannot use it for prescription drugs, one cannot use it for modernization. I believe that would be a mistake. Therefore, I urge Members not to adopt the motion to instruct offered by the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt). Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would just again refer the gentleman to the first paragraph. It is kind of hard for me to disagree with the first paragraph. It says: ``To increase the funding in the House Resolution to provide'' not so much money for IDEA, not so much money for reading, not so much money for Pell grants, as has been argued on the floor here today, but just ``maximum feasible.'' We are all for that. My goodness, we go out and swing a dead cat and we could probably hit everybody who would be for maximum feasible everything in the budget. That is not what a budget is all about. A budget is putting numbers in here. We put a number in here. I think our number is very responsible when looked at in the context of all of the numbers that are in the budget. So to come in here and say we want to instruct the conferees, here is a very specific instruction: get in there and do something really good for education. Okay, we will do that. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Sununu), the vice-chairman of the Committee on the Budget.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to read the motion to instruct to the gentleman from California when he is referring to numbers in the motion to instruct: ``To increase the funding for education in the House resolution to provide for maximum feasible funding.'' Now, the gentleman from California is a Member of the House who stands behind no one when it comes to his advocacy of education and education funding and for our students. He is a friend, he is someone who has always tried to responsibly put forward reforms and proposals on education. But to suggest that this motion to instruct somehow provides more money than what the House resolution provided is just simply not the case. Let me review with the gentleman from California and others what is in the budget that has been passed that we are defending here today. The House-passed budget accommodates not only the President's ``no child left behind'' education reform, which links dollars to accountability. Simply throwing more money at the programs will not make them better. The gentleman from California even testified to that fact before me and the Committee on the Budget. It increases elementary and secondary education funding by 10 percent. It triples funding for reading programs. It improves by increasing IDEA by $1.25 billion to ensure that every child, particularly children with special needs, have access to the best possible education. It increases education savings accounts from $500 to $5,000 and makes them available not only for their original intent, but expands them to K through 12 education. It provides a full tax exemption to students using qualified prepaid tuition for college, and it provides $60 million to help older children in foster care transition to adulthood, including providing vouchers to cover tuition and vocational training costs. Now, the gentleman says that we do not really have, if we take this out and we move this over and we minus this off the top, it is not really an 11 percent increase. One cannot do that. It is an 11 percent increase in this budget. One cannot say, if we do not include this, we do not include that; it is all part of the budget, it is all in here, that it is somehow some other percentage. It is an 11 percent increase. We believe that is a responsible increase. Are there more ways that we can improve education in this country? You bet. Is throwing money at it the only answer? No. That is why we need to move through this budget as quickly as possible, give these instructions to the committee, give these resources to the committees so that they can begin to reform our education programs in this country and begin to make sure that no child is left behind. Just simply to come in here and say, it is not enough money without the reforms, it is not enough money without proposals, it is not enough money just because somebody says it is not enough money does not mean it is not enough money. Mr. Speaker, 11 percent over and above the huge increases we have provided for education has not necessarily solved the education concerns of America, and just providing a rhetorical response on the floor as a motion to instruct conferees, saying the maximum feasible funding, is not a way to do it either. We believe this is a responsible budget, it is responsible in the context of overall reform of education. It will help us to ensure that no child is left behind. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition and yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first of all, it is good to have the opportunity to discuss some of the budget issues with the gentleman from South Carolina. I would have thought over the last couple of weeks some issues would have resolved themselves, but we find ourselves debating some of the same issues that we were debating prior to the Easter recess. It is good to engage in these discussions again. Mr. Speaker, I would say that the gentleman's motion to instruct conferees to some extent is asking for the second bite of the apple. What could not be won on the floor as an alternative is being requested as a motion to instruct. I have to reluctantly oppose the instruction. Most are noncontroversial. Certainly motions to conferees are nonbinding on the conferees themselves. It gives an opportunity for Members to make a few points that they would like to make, and I certainly respect that opportunity; but let us go through the motion to instruct conferees. First, to increase the funding for education in the House resolution to provide for maximum feasible funding. I do not think that there is much controversy there. If Members of Congress had the opportunity to hold meetings such as I did, for example I held a youth summit in Dubuque, Iowa, to talk about education and met with special educators, people involved in special education, people involved in college education and higher education, early childhood education, reading, teacher training, administrators, principals, they all tell us anything we can do to improve education in this country is something that we should go back to Washington and get working on. Certainly one of the areas where we can help in education is to increase funding. That is why we made those increases, 11 percent; and we will hold to those. We will cheerfully continue to support those major increases in funding for education. Mr. Speaker, certainly people say we can do more. I might add in that chorus. While we added $1.25 billion in special education in this resolution, I personally, as well as professionally, know we should do more; but this fits within a balanced budget and a balanced approach towards making sure that our kids have the best education possible. Number two says to provide that the cost of coverage for prescription drugs under Medicare not be taken from the surplus in Medicare. What we are saying is even though we collect taxes to provide for a Medicare benefit, you cannot use those tax dollars to either modernize Medicare or provide a prescription drug benefit. I do not think I understand. We ask the American people for their hard-earned money to pay for a Medicare benefit; and then we say even though there are some obvious reforms, we cannot use the surplus to reform Medicare or modernize Medicare or provide a prescription drug benefit, we have to find money elsewhere, which is a little bit suspicious because we know our friends on the other side do not support tax relief, and it is probably a juxtaposition of tax relief versus Medicare benefits when all of us know that we can provide those benefits from the surplus in Medicare as well as possibly adding additional funds as necessary. It does not all have to come from the HI Trust Fund. We have made that very clear within our budget. We certainly do believe and we all voted on that as I believe one of the first resolutions of this year that we were going to lock away that money for Medicare and allow it for modernization and for adding the prescription drug benefits. So number two flies in the face of what the House has already done. On three, it says to increase the funding provided for Medicare prescription drug benefit to the amount set by the Senate. I am not going to presuppose or prenegotiate this item today, but I think that is probably something that is at least a reasonable request. I think we had that debate on the floor here. While the President's proposal was 153, it probably is going to be scored slightly more than that; and, therefore, we may have to make an adjustment there. So number three is not that controversial. Number four says to insist that the on-budget surplus set forth in the resolution for any fiscal year not be less than the surplus of the HI Trust Fund for that fiscal year. I think again this goes back to number two. What this is basically saying is that we are presupposing that you cannot use the trust fund that we collect the taxes from for Medicare in order to modernize or provide a prescription drug benefit for Medicare. Mr. Speaker, two and four are really the controversy. One and three, I think, are easily supported or at least certainly not controversial on both sides. Mr. Speaker, I would oppose the instruction for those two reasons. We should be able to, as we have already voted almost unanimously in this House in a bipartisan way, be able to provide the surplus from Medicare to provide a prescription drug benefit as well as to modernize Medicare. Those funds should be available. Since they are paid for Medicare, they should be allowed to modernize Medicare and improve Medicare and provide a prescription drug benefit for Medicare. Therefore, I believe it would not be a good idea for us to instruct our conferees just now appointed to hold that kind of position as we begin our negotiations with the Senate. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time to me, and for her leadership on this measure. The arguments are very interesting, particularly when we hear them in context. I have tried to document the arguments that our friends on the other side have made about our budget and about our taxes. It really puts it in perspective for me, because what we have come forward with today is a tax bill that fits. It fits within our tax priorities, but it also fits within the overall priorities of our budget, which is an important thing for us to consider here today. Their bill does not fit within that budget. It does not meet those commitments. But this is not a new argument for our friends on the other side. They have been making arguments about our budget and about our tax relief for Americans for quite a few years. Let me just highlight a few of them, because I think they are interesting. First, they said we cannot have tax relief for Americans because we do not have a balanced budget. My colleagues said we cannot do both. We did both. We balanced the budget. We provided a tax relief. Now my colleagues say, or then my colleagues said, we cannot do it unless we put Social Security in a lock box. So we put Social Security in a lock box. Then my colleagues said we cannot do it unless we put Medicare in a lock box. So we put Medicare in a lock box. We balanced the budget and put Social Security in a lock box. Then my colleagues said we cannot do it unless we fund some very important priorities. So we funded priorities, such as education, the environment, health care, health research, a number of very important priorities, plus added defense and agriculture to them. They said we still cannot have tax relief, because it is the wrong process. It is too fast. So we slowed things down, passed a budget; and still my colleagues said it is the wrong time, because now the tax bill is actually too big. Okay. Then we have proven that this tax bill fits within the budget that we just passed, that the Senate is working on. Now, believe it or not, all of those arguments have been refuted, and now they come to the floor with a bill that they say is not big enough. They say our tax bill is not big enough, that it is not fast enough. First, they said it was too slow; now it is too fast. Now it is too big; now it is too small. When are my colleagues going to understand you have run out of excuses? We are able to balance the budget, fund our priorities, provide the needed tax relief for our American families and small businesses and farms, do it in a responsible way that fits within the budget that we just voted on and passed, and do it at the same time we pay down our national debt and fund all of the priorities of our government. I think it is important for us to remember these arguments in context. H.R. 8 is a good bill that fits within the budget, and it deserves our support.

Mr. NUSSLE

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam), a member of the Committee on the Budget.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds and say I am very happy to yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner), but I would appreciate the same courtesy allowed to me. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw), my friend and member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

Mr. NUSSLE. I certainly would be willing to do that.

Mr. NUSSLE. I asked the gentleman to yield. The gentleman did not yield.

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to answer the question of the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner). The Progressive Caucus say they spend more on veterans. Well, that is interesting. I appreciate that the Progressive Caucus may spend more, but evidently it is spent in the wrong places, because it is the Republican budget that has been applauded and endorsed by the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, the American Legion, the AMVETS, the Disabled Veterans of America, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, and the VFW. So I guess the gentleman can make his claims, but the veterans are on the side of the budget that we have here as the base bill today.

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

Mr. NUSSLE. It is a commitment of that $1.25 billion, yes, number one, but, more importantly, as the gentleman knows, the House should work, under the circumstances will, to increase that as much as possible to meet its commitment to special education.

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

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is correct, number one. Number two, we anticipate that the Committee on Appropriations will provide and other committees will provide the continued flexibility so that States and local school districts can meet the challenges of IDEA. While the gentleman gave me some of the credit for that, and I appreciate that because it is a labor of love for me, there has been no one in this Congress who has held the banner any higher than the gentleman from New Hampshire. I want to show Members what the gentleman has accomplished. This is the gentleman's work, I say to the gentleman from New Hampshire, since he has been here in Congress, these kinds of increases for special education. We are going to build on this average annual increase of 23 percent for special education. While we celebrate that in this speech here today, we are not where we want to be yet. It is a labor of love for us. It is a labor of intellectual honesty, as well, of unfunded mandates. We are going to keep that fight going, but we have accomplished quite a bit in this budget. I appreciate the gentleman's leadership.

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

Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass).