Adam Putnam

Mr. PUTNAM

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, it is a great day in this House and a great day for our Nation and an honor to kick off the debate about the fiscal blueprint, that our conference of the House and the Senate has come together to set forth the priorities for our Nation. House Resolution 248 is a closed rule that provides for consideration of the conference report on House Concurrent Resolution 95, establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2006 and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2007 through 2010. As a member of both the Committee on Rules and the Committee on the Budget, I am pleased to bring this resolution to the floor for its consideration. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget. The rule waives all points of order against the conference report and against its consideration. It provides that the conference report shall be considered as read. Importantly, section 2 of the resolution is a valuable addition to the rules and process of the House. I appreciate the work that a number of Members in the House have put into this effort. Specifically, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence), and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) particularly have fought for budget process reform and, with the leadership of the gentleman from California (Chairman Dreier) and the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Nussle), have included it. Congress in this resolution makes a strong commitment to enforcing fiscal responsibility with the addition of a separate order for the 109th Congress. The resolution creates a point of order in the Committee of the Whole against a motion to rise and report a general appropriations bill if that legislation, as amended, is in breach of its 302(b) budget allocation. Any Member of either side of the aisle, on the Committee on the Budget or not, on the Committee on Rules or not, may raise this point of order. A breach in allocation will be determined by the Chair, based on estimates provided by the Committee on the Budget as is currently prescribed in the Budget Act. If the Chair sustains the point of order, the Chair would put the question to the Committee, and there would then follow 10 minutes of debate on the question, equally divided. At the conclusion of the debate, the Chair would put the question to the whole Committee. If the motion to rise and report were defeated, then no further amendment shall be in order except one proper amendment equally divided and debated and multiple pro forma amendments, if offered by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, for the purpose of debate. This point of order is only applicable once for a given bill and does not apply to a motion offered under clause 2(d) of rule XXI. The congressional budget is the ultimate enforcement tool, allowing Congress to clearly identify its priorities, to lay out that fiscal blueprint and vision for the coming fiscal year. It lays out the plan for how America's tax dollars will be spent. It allows us at a time of war to ensure that our Nation's soldiers, Guardsmen, Reservists, sailors, Marines, Coast Guardsmen are equipped and trained and supported, prioritizing guarantees that our economy continues to expand, providing jobs and opportunities for more Americans to achieve their piece of the American Dream each and every day. It is a tool that allows us to make certain that our government acts in a fiscally responsible manner to ensure opportunities and safety for future generations of Americans. This added point of order gives one more enforcement mechanism to ensure that Congress spends responsibly and follows the priorities set forth in the congressional budget. Just as small businesses and large businesses, families and individuals sit down on a regular basis and review their budget and, despite the pressure, have to stick to it, so should Congress. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a member of the Committee on the Budget that this year reported out a historic blueprint that sets in motion a path to cutting the deficit both in dollars and as a percentage of our gross domestic product, a percentage of our economy. This budget wisely targets both discretionary and mandatory spending in an effort to do that and in establishing priorities. The Committee on the Budget calls for a reduction in total nondefense, non-homeland security discretionary spending. That has not been done since President Reagan was in the White House. And for the first time since 1997, the budget includes reconciliation instructions to authorizing committees calling for a reduction in the rate of growth in mandatory programs. Mandatory spending is the guaranteed spending, the entitlement spending, if you will, that grows each and every year, largely without congressional reform or review. Today it consumes 55 percent of the budget, and if it continues unchecked, it will reach nearly two-thirds of the entire Federal budget by 2015. It is unacceptable that more than half of the government's spending today is largely on automatic pilot. This is neither sound policy nor sustainable fiscal policy, and Congress is on its way to losing control over spending priorities as entitlements squeeze the budget more and more. These reconciliation instructions embodied in this conference report are the vital step to begin the process of getting mandatory spending back to growth at a sustainable rate and continuing to lead us on that path toward cutting the deficit in half in 5 years. I am hopeful that while the authorizing committees are reviewing their programs, they would also conclude that a number of these mandatory programs would be better suited as discretionary, and therefore subject to continued oversight by the Congress. I am proud of the work the Committee on the Budget has done this year. I thank the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) for his tremendous, steadfast, fair, balanced and honorable leadership of that committee and for driving us forward with a fiscal discipline that brings us to this point of consideration of the conference report on the budget. I urge Members to support the rule and the underlying conference report. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. (Mr. PUTNAM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield the remaining time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), my distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to my colleague on the Committee on the Budget, the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley).

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 248 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would remind the gentleman that the Social Security bonds are still backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. And unlike the other side of the aisle, this side of the aisle is concerned not just about Social Security for today's seniors, who are perfectly cared for if you are 50 and older, but for tomorrow's seniors as well, those students who are graduating from college today who will retire 15 years after the system has gone bust if action is not taken. One side has plans, competing plans even, a variety of plans. The other side is in denial. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished member of the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Lewis).

Mr. PUTNAM

Mr. PUTNAM. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is entitled to his opinion, and we are here to deliberate it on the floor, a criticism that he has leveled against us. We are deliberating it under the same-day rule. He will be able to make that same charge to me and my party when we debate the rule, and he will be able to, along with the others who have managed to find their facts and figures about all the terrible, awful, horrible, no good things this budget will do that they have expressed on the floor of this House, they will be back to deliberate it when we take up the conference report. There are very wide differences of opinion between these two parties. The budget is the vision, the blueprint, the spending priorities of this government for the fiscal year. Not one of your party voted for it in committee, not one of your party voted for it on the House floor, and I would dare say not one of you will vote for the conference report. I cannot speak to that, but if I were a betting man, I think it would be a pretty safe bet. It is a reflection of the difference in philosophy about where we ought to be going as a government, and we are judged by the American people on that philosophy in this body every 2 years. The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) made reference to a vision of a new New Deal. I am fairly confident there will not be a new New Deal in this budget conference report because that is a difference in philosophy. We have put together in negotiations with the Senate a spending and budget package that gets our arms around mandatory spending, around discretionary spending, that looks for savings through the reconciliation process and attempts through economic growth and development to put in place an economy that allows everyone to succeed and find their piece of the American dream. Apparently you all disagree, and that is your right, and we have hours of this floor debate to go through these disagreements.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentleman in his 30 minutes of debate has made the point that he is opposed to us facilitating consideration of this bill today so that Members can get home, and he has respectfully made his point. We have made ours.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, as the gentleman knows, the Senate is taking a respite next week, apparently from their labors of legislative productivity, whereas the House will be in session. Our goal, knowing that April 15 was when we would have liked to have had this budget done, our goal is to facilitate getting this process along and pass the budget conference report out of this body so that the Senate may consider it before they go out for a week, because, as the gentleman knows, we are moving into the appropriations season and it is important that the American people and the Congress have a budget blueprint in place. This is an important process that we have in place. It is important, as a Committee on the Budget member, to me and to the entire House that we have in place a working budget, something that the government has not had every year, but I believe it is important that we should. I think it is important that we reconcile our differences with the Senate and move this along so that the House and Senate can take it up.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, as the gentleman knows, I voted for the same-day rule in the Committee on Rules, and, as I said earlier, it is to facilitate Members getting back to their district, like the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and the other Members who have expressed an interest in being back to talk about the issues going on before this Congress, whatever those issues may be, and whatever the individual Members' opinion of the outcome of those votes may also be.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, their reliance on the press reports is much more favorable to their side than it would be for ours and a much more reliable source of information than it would be in our case.

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

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PUTNAM. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I appreciate the sincerity of the gentlewoman from Texas. I would just point out that this is a tool that we are using to enable us to expedite the consideration of the budget conference report so that she can be with her constituents tomorrow to tell them all of her disagreements with our plans to reform Social Security.

Mr. PUTNAM. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just marvel that in this deep dark process that we are engaged in enough light has been cast to find all of the flaws in the budget. So on the one hand, there are tremendous problems with the budget that will be presented in the budget; and on the other hand, we do not know what is in the budget because there has been inadequate time. I submit that the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) was right when he said that this is a big deal, it is an important issue. Having a blueprint, having a budget resolution for the Congress is hugely important so that we may avoid the omnibus at the end of the year, which also is open to the criticism that it is difficult to find everything that is in it when we have to pass and manage the government in that way. And the budget resolution lays forth a blueprint that enables the Committee on Appropriations to do their work and enables the American people to know what the priorities of their government are for that fiscal year.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, by the direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 242 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the ranking member of the Committee on Rules, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes of debate only. (Mr. PUTNAM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 242 is a same-day rule. It waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII requiring a two-thirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from the Committee on Rules. H. Res. 242 allows the House to consider the rule and conference report accompanying H. Con. Res. 95, establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2006, revising appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2005, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2007 through 2010 or establishing a separate order relating to budget enforcement. Mr. Speaker, it is imperative we pass this same-day rule so that we may consider the congressional budget resolution today. Once the House completes consideration and passes the budget, we can send the budget resolution to the Senate. The Senate will then be in a position to consider, and hopefully pass, the budget resolution on Friday, before they recess next week. I am pleased and excited at the prospect of the passage of this budget. For the first time since 1997, the budget includes reconciliation instructions to authorizing committees, calling for the reduced rate of growth of mandatory programs. Mandatory spending is the guaranteed spending that grows every year, mostly without reform or review. It currently consumes 55 percent of our budget; and if it continues unchecked, it will reach 61 percent of the total Federal budget by 2015. More than half of the government's spending today is essentially on automatic pilot. This is neither sound nor sustainable fiscal policy. Congress is on its way to losing control over the spending priorities that the people send us here to debate and review and vote on as entitlements squeeze the budget more and more. Reconciliation instructions are the critical step to beginning the process of getting mandatory spending back to a sustainable rate of growth. These savings are an excellent precedent. My hope is that reconciliation instructions become a standard practice in this time of deficits. With budget deficits, it is imperative to get a handle on all spending, both discretionary and mandatory. This budget is an inauguration of true fiscal discipline in a period of restrained spending. I want to commend the Committee on the Budget and its staff for their hard work through the night to get this budget resolution finished so that we may consider it today in preparation for the recess that the Senate intends to take next week. The House will be back to work next week. The House Committee on Rules will be meeting later today to provide a rule for the consideration of the budget resolution. I am pleased that this same-day rule will help facilitate the timely deliberation of our budget. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this same-day rule so that we can move forward to the rule and eventually on to the conference report on the budget today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I certainly respect the views of the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on the Budget, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), who has worked very hard on the blueprint for the Federal Government. He enjoys an exceptional working relationship on the House Committee on the Budget. I think it has worked as well as that committee can possibly work under the gentleman's leadership and the chairmanship of the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle). I would just say, as a conferee he is probably privy to more information about the status of the blueprint than I am, having been in the meeting and having been one of the three House conferees. Representing a third of our entire representation on that body, he certainly has had access to the information about the differences between the House views on the budget and the Senate views on the budget, and he has articulated them well.

Mr. PUTNAM

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.