Paul Ryan

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Black), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee and the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, apparently, a strong budget means we need to borrow more from the Chinese to fund our government. With that, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished Wisconsinite, Mr. Duffy, who does know the difference between real cheese and Cheez Whiz.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, when we call for ``revenue neutral tax reform,'' that means tax reform that keeps raising the same amount of revenue we raise today, do it through a better Tax Code so we are not picking winners and losers, so we can grow the economy and create jobs. With that, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Bucshon).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself an extra 30 seconds. What we are saying is, keep the award where it is, the maximum award, and fully funded for the decade. That is slashing it? That is as opposed to the President who is saying let's grow it and then have some cliff and show no way or means of paying for it. The President and his budget is making a promise in Pell grants that he shows no way of keeping. We think we should make a promise and keep it; that is why we fully fund the current award at Pell. And, oh, by the way, we also are cognizant of the fact that a lot of studies show us we are raising tuition. We are contributing to tuition inflation. And we need to get to the bottom of that before we keeping throwing more money at a system that is raising tuition. Mr. Chair, with that, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Wenstrup).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair, just in order to balance the time, I think we will let the gentleman from Maryland yield to another speaker so we can catch up.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, yesterday, I was Dracula; now I am conducting a parade of horribles and firing heat-seeking missiles at the American people. I am interested to see what comes next. With that, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlelady from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentlewoman an additional minute.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself 30 seconds to say, boy, I wonder what tax bill they are talking about, because it is not the one that is within the Republican budget. The Ways and Means Committee writes tax laws. We put out the outlines of tax reform that say there is a trillion dollars a year of tax expenditures, of loopholes that can be closed to give us a fairer, simpler Tax Code, that lowers taxes for everybody, all families and businesses, not whatever it is they are saying.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes. Well, here we are, Mr. Chairman, resuming the debate we left off yesterday. Let me try and give a summary of what this is all about. This is all about getting our fiscal house in order. This is all about prioritizing hardworking taxpayer dollars. This is all about doing in our generation what we need to do to make sure that the next generation has a secure future and a debt-free future. So that is why we are bringing a budget to the floor, that is why we are making those difficult decisions, and that is why we are advocating for these important reforms. In much of the 20th century, a lot of programs were created, and a lot of laudable goals were established. But now in the 21st century, I think we have learned a thing or two about how we can better accomplish and achieve some of these goals such as health and retirement security, because the way these programs were designed nearly a generation ago, they are now going into bankruptcy in this generation. If we allow that to happen, then we will pull out from underneath those who depend on these programs for their health and retirement security, we will renege on that social contract. More to the point, we are going to do damage to our economy if we keep this deficit and debt going on its current course. We asked the Congressional Budget Office to take a look at the kind of deficit and debt reduction that we are proposing and tell us over the long period, over the course of this budget, what does that do for America and for our economy? And they tell us that getting your economic and fiscal house in order, reducing the deficit and balancing the budget so that you can begin paying off the debt is good for economic growth. In fact, it will increase economic output by 1.8 percentage points. That is actually a lot. What does that mean to every person in America? About $1,100 in more take-home pay and in higher income because we did our jobs here. But, more importantly, what it means for the next generation is, instead of sending our bills to them to work hard, to pay their taxes to pay off our bills and then they have to start working for themselves, we are going to give them a better future. Because we know right now--the CBO tells us as much--they are going to inherit a diminished future. That is point number one. Point number two is that we have got to stop spending money we don't have. We will hear all of these arguments about the draconian cuts and the slashing and all of this. These are the same arguments we have heard time and again. And when those arguments have prevailed, they have brought us to where we are today: extraordinarily high deficits, deficits going back to $1 trillion by the end of this budget period, and a debt that is about to take off. If we don't get this under control, then we will not have the kind of economy that the people of this country deserve. We don't want Washington to stand in the way of people's success. We want Washington to play its rightful supporting role so that people can become successful. We believe in a system of natural rights and equality of opportunity so people can make the most of their lives. We don't believe in a system where government thinks that they must take this commanding role within the middle of people's lives that ends up bankrupting this country, diminishing the future, and lowering economic growth and prosperity. There is a big difference in approaches. We want to tackle these challenges. What I also want to say is that we have an important obligation to secure this country and protect our national defense. America, like it or not, is the superpower nation in the world and a duty that falls upon us to take that responsibility seriously. With that responsibility also comes the ability to chart our own course in the world, to help preserve the peace, and to help pave the way for prosperity so that we can have economic opportunity and so that we can advance our views and our values and the protection of individual and human rights and democracy. These things are good for America. A strong America and a strong military helps make for a peaceful America and a prosperous America. So we need to take the needed reforms to make sure that these critical retirement programs are there, not only intact for people in and near retirement, but there for those of us who are younger when we hope to retire. We need to get our spending under control so we can balance our budget and pay off our debt. We need to enact pro-growth economic reform like tax reform and economic development to create jobs today.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Wow, that is a doozy, I have got to tell you. That is a doozy if that kind of people get elected. Look, we just think we should balance the budget, have government live within its means, and pay off our debt. If those kinds of people get elected, great. With that, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), our distinguished majority whip.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself an additional 15 seconds. At the end of the day, instead of growing government spending at 5.2 percent, which is the trend, we are proposing to grow it at 3.5 percent over the next 10 years. Hardly draconian. With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I believe the gentleman is supposed to make his remarks to the chairman.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 96.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I am here to rise in support of H. Con. Res. 96, for the fiscal year 2015. This is the fourth year we have done this--this being bringing a budget to the floor to balance the budget and pay down the national debt. This is exactly what our economy needs today. We ask the Congressional Budget Office to look at this kind of deficit reduction. What would it do? Well, it is very clear that it would promote economic growth. In 2024, economic output would be 1.8 percent higher than it otherwise would be. What does that mean? That means by getting our fiscal house in order, by balancing our budget, paying off our debt, and reducing the deficit, take-home pay for Americans will be $1,100 higher than it otherwise would be if we don't do something like this. That is just part of our budget. We also call for more job creation, economic growth policies like tax reform, and energy development. All of these things would help get our economy back on track. I also understand that there is a lot of confusion about what is going on in our budget. I would like to spend a few moments sort of clarifying and clearing up some of that confusion. First, our budget does repeal ObamaCare. Let me say it again. Our budget does repeal ObamaCare because we think it is going to do great damage to our economy, to our budget, to health care. We don't keep the tax hikes in ObamaCare. Instead, we propose revenue neutral comprehensive tax reform. Our critics like to claim we are keeping it. What we are saying is let's scrap this Tax Code in favor of a better Tax Code, including replacing ObamaCare taxes with pro-growth tax reform to create jobs, increase take-home pay, and get this economy growing. Second, we end the raid on Medicare. The dirty little secret that the other side won't want to talk about is the fact that they turned Medicare into a piggy bank for ObamaCare. They raided $716 billion from Medicare to pay for ObamaCare. We say that those savings from Medicare need to stay with Medicare to make it more solvent, and if some of those savings from Medicare are doing damage to the Medicare provider network, like reducing access to things like Medicare Advantage, then we have a mechanism in here to make sure that we can fix that, just like we did for the SGR, otherwise known as the ``doc fix.'' We think we need to save and strengthen this program, not only so that it is there intact for those in the near retirement, but for future generations who are facing a bankrupt program if we don't do something to reform it. Second, we don't slash the safety net. If anything, we strengthen the safety net. This administration has made all sorts of promises that it has no way of keeping, or it has made all sorts of promises and it is not telling us in any way how they are going to keep these promises. It has promised major expansions in programs like Medicaid and Pell grants. How they plan to pay for it, we have no idea. We refuse to be complicit with the demise of these programs. We spend $3.5 trillion over the next 10 years on Medicaid. Under our budget, program spending will continue to rise by population plus inflation. We grow the program each and every year after fiscal year 2016 onward. We simply slow the growth rate by giving Governors and State legislators more flexibility to customize these programs to meet the unique needs of their populations instead of cramming down their throats some one-size-fits-all Washington-knows-best approach, which has been failing the Medicare population in our health care provider network. This budget spends $600 billion over the next 10 years on food stamps. It is a program that has quadrupled since 2002. We propose to give Governors more flexibility so that they can customize this program to meet the needs of their populations, but not until 2019, until CBO says the economy will have recovered by then. CBO says that the Pell grant is going bankrupt. It is going to face a fiscal shortfall in 2016 and every year thereafter. So instead of making all these Pell promises that the government has no way of keeping, the budget maintains the current Pell award, $5,730, throughout each of the next 10 years and funds it. Our budget all told cuts $5.1 trillion in spending over the next 10 years. We do this by cutting waste, by cutting abuse, by stopping the age-old Washington practice of spending money we just don't have, and by making much needed reforms to government programs. Our critics call this draconian. Look at it this way. On the current path, we are set to spend $48 trillion of hardworking taxpayer dollars or borrow it from the next generation--$48 trillion over the next 10 years. Under this path, we will spend $43 trillion. By contrast, under the current path, Federal Government spending is slated to rise by 5.2 percent on average for the next decade. Under this budget, it will rise by 3.5 percent over the next decade. Hardly draconian. Mr. Chairman, there is nothing compassionate about making promises that the government cannot keep. When that bill comes due, it is going to hurt the vulnerable, the first and the worst, and the voiceless. This is why we need to get spending under control. Let me show you what we are proposing in a nutshell. The red shows you our national debt. Our national debt is on course to hit catastrophic levels. Our national debt is going to hit these catastrophic levels which guarantee that the next generation of Americans inherit a bleak future, a lower standard of living, a burden of debt that they cannot have a high standard of living with. We in our generation have to make tough choices. We have got to face up to this issue. What we are saying here with this budget is, the sooner we get on top of our fiscal problems, the better off everybody is going to be. We are saying, if we get ahead of these problems now, we can phase in reforms, such as Medicare reforms that don't even affect people in or near retirement. The sooner we tackle these fiscal problems, the better off everybody is going to be, the faster the economy grows, and the more we can guarantee that the next generation inherits a debt-free future. We have never given the next generation a diminished future in this country before. That is the great legacy of this Nation, work hard and make tough choices, so that the next generation can be better off. We know, without a shadow of a doubt, that that is not going to be the case. According to the Congressional Budget Office, we know that, in a couple of years, the debt starts taking back off, and we are back to $1 trillion deficits. Our tax revenues are at an alltime high this year. The problem is that spending is outpacing that. The sooner we can get our fiscal house in order, the sooner we can create jobs and get economic growth. The sooner we can bring solvency to our safety net, to our social contract, the more that people can depend on these programs, and the sooner we can bring these reforms to get our spending in line with our revenues, the faster we can pay off this debt. Just like a family, a government that lives beyond its means today necessarily has to live below its means tomorrow. We want to make right by the next generation. We want to grow this economy. We want to create jobs and increase take-home pay, and we want to get people to work. That is what this budget is designed to do, and that is why I am proud to bring this balanced budget to the floor. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to say: you can't have it both ways. That is interesting. You can raid Medicare by $716 billion to pay for ObamaCare and then count that money as if it is going back to Medicare, counting the same dollar twice. That is not our word. That is the word of the Congressional Budget Office and of the actuaries, themselves, at Medicare, which is what the other side did with ObamaCare. Look, apparently, the only way to revive and protect the American Dream is to bring our debt from $17 trillion to $24 trillion and, on the way there, raise taxes on hardworking Americans another $1.8 trillion, and if you are not for that, you are against the American Dream. With that, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair, at this time, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I do not have any further speakers at the moment.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to say, wow, that sounds horrible. Good thing it is not true. Only in Washington is a slower increase in spending awful, blood-curdling, cut- throating, terrible, and draconian cuts. If we are going to get our fiscal house in order, what we are saying in this budget is, instead of increasing spending 5.2 percent a year on average, let's do it by 3.5 percent a year on average--hardly draconian. And by the way, maybe people closer to the problems, like our States, might have a better idea on how to help people in their communities. Those are the principles we are talking about here. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam), the chief deputy whip.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. I think there is this view that the pie of life is fixed, that society is static--the economy, a fixed pie--and that we here in Washington should decide how to redistribute the slices of the pie. We reject that whole, entire premise. Life is dynamic. The economy is dynamic. We want to grow the pie for everybody. You don't grow the pie--grow opportunity or grow the economy--if you drive this country to a debt crisis, if you continue spending way beyond your means, if you spend money we don't have that is taken from the next generation. This President has already raised taxes $1.7 trillion. The top effective tax rate on successful small businesses is almost 45 percent. The tax rate on big businesses, like corporations, is 35 percent.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Montana (Mr. Daines).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds just to say there are different visions. We don't think we should take more money from hardworking taxpayers to spend it in Washington and then borrow more from our children. We think we should balance the budget and pay off the debt. We are going to see a lot of budgets coming to the floor here offered by the other side, which is great. It is their right. I am glad they are offering alternatives. Mr. Van Hollen's Democratic budget will have a $1.8 trillion tax increase, just like the President's new $1.8 trillion tax increase. The Progressive Caucus budget, they have the candle here: a $6.6 trillion tax increase they are encouraging.