Paul Ryan

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 5652, the Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind everybody for a minute as to how we got here. Why are we doing this? What's going on? When the President was requesting an increase in the debt limit last year, he wanted a blank check. Just increase the debt limit. Borrowing unchecked. Then when that wasn't going to happen, he asked for a big tax increase. That didn't occur. What occurred out of that was the Budget Control Act. You've got to cut at least a dollar's worth of spending for every dollar of debt- limit increase that occurs. So Congress passed the Budget Control Act with no tax increases, spending cuts. Half of it, approximately, were the caps on discretionary spending netting about $1 trillion in savings--$917 billion, to be specific. The other half, the $1.2 trillion, was the Select Committee--people call this the supercommittee. That committee failed to produce a result. As a result of that, a sequester occurs. And the sequester, according to people on a bipartisan basis, is not good government. The sequester, according to the Secretary of Defense, the President himself, would hollow out our military when it kicks in on January 2 next year. The sequester will take nondefense discretionary spending down 8 percent and defense down 10 percent. We believe the purpose of the sequester was to replace the fact that Congress isn't governing. Well, let's have Congress govern. That's why we're doing this. What we're doing is we're bringing a bill to the floor to cut 405 percent of the spending cuts that are in the sequester in the first year. A net deficit reduction of $242.8 billion to set aside the sequester under discretionary for 1 year of $78 billion, we think that's a good tradeoff. More to the point, we need to get in the habit of doing reconciliation because 61 percent of the Federal budget is off limits, it's autopilot, it's not touched. Congress doesn't deal with it. So we should look at this part of our government that is not being dealt with. The last time we used reconciliation for its intended purpose--to cut spending, to reduce deficits--was 2005. So rather than just having annual discretionary spending bouts and debates, we should look at the other parts of government that are on autopilot. Take a look at what we're doing. We basically are doing five things. We're stopping the abuse by ensuring individuals are actually eligible for the taxpayer benefits they receive--novel idea, I know. We're eliminating government slush funds to stop bailouts. We're controlling runaway, unchecked spending. We're putting restraints on government spending by bureaucracies. And we're getting rid of duplicative spending. I can go through each program, and we will do this in this debate, but what we're simply saying is people should actually be eligible for the benefits that they receive, whether it's a tax credit, whether it's a SNAP benefit, whatever it is. When we take a look at why we're cutting spending, we are doing this with the guise of the fact that we have a spending-driven debt crisis on the horizon. If taxes go back to where they've been for the last 40 years, which is what they are projected to do, there's no way you can fix this problem by raising taxes. We have a spending-driven debt crisis, and the debt crisis is one in which we have a tidal wave of debt coming to this country just like Europe is experiencing. If we don't get our spending under control and we don't get our deficit under control, the people who need government the most--the poor, the elderly--they're the ones who get hurt the first and the worst. We need to get spending and, therefore, deficits under control to prevent a debt crisis. That's what this does. It's a downpayment. Instead of saving hundreds of billions of dollars like this bill does, we need to get into the practice of actually saving trillions of dollars, which is what our budget does, in order to prevent a debt crisis from ruining the American Dream for Americans. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself 1 minute to say, Mr. Speaker, that the gentleman's substitute raises taxes $85 billion and raises spending $55 billion on the net to achieve simply $30 billion in deficit reduction. This bill achieves $243 billion in deficit reduction without raising taxes. The ratio of tax increases to spending cuts gross 3 to 1. That's what they think balance is. Let's look at food stamps. Food stamps went up 270 percent over the last decade. If this passes, it will have gone up 260 percent. Let's talk about Medicaid and SCHIP. This program has gone up 50 percent over the last 10 years. It's projected to grow 125 percent over the next 10 years. If this passes, it will grow 123 percent over the next 10 years. If we can't have a civil debate about how to slow the growth of spending around here then we'll never get this under control. Medicaid alone made $15.8 billion in overpayments in 2011 alone. If we can't deal with this waste, if we can't deal with this overspending, we can't fix this problem. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes of my time to Mr. Hensarling of the Financial Services Committee, and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to yield time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Medicaid is projected to grow at 125 percent over the next decade; under this bill, it will grow 123 percent. Food stamps grew 270 percent; under this bill, they would have grown 260 percent. Only in Washington is this considered draconian cuts. Slowing the growth of spending is not cutting; it's slowing the growth of spending. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks), a member of the Judiciary Committee, and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to yield time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds simply to say that the Social Services Block Grant, according to the Government Accountability Office, is a textbook example of overlap and duplication of Federal programs. It's one of 69 programs to fund early education; it's one of 200 programs serving Americans with disabilities; and it's one of 49 programs providing education and training services. The program demands no accountability for results and provides no means to measure the impact of the programs. Mr. Speaker, we've got to end duplication and waste in government. We're saying also, on the tax side, close loopholes for tax reform, not to fuel more spending. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to yield time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 648, I call up the bill (H.R. 5652) to provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 201 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2013, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

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

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. An additional 30 seconds. I've got three other committees that are coming.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I continue to reserve.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. First off, Mr. Speaker, let me thank those six committees that contributed to making this possible. Over 60 percent of the Federal budget is in a category of spending we call mandatory spending. It's a budget term of art that means that part of spending is on autopilot. Congress does not address or oversee or set the levels of that spending in any given year. Congress does address what we call discretionary spending. That's government agency budgets--about 39 percent of the budget every single year. The last time Congress actually looked at this 60 percent of spending on autopilot for savings was 2005. It's important that we make sure that we're scrutinizing how we're spending hard-earned taxpayer dollars, and it's a shame that we haven't revisited this category of spending since 2005. We're doing that here. Now, the President, the Secretary of Defense, the Speaker of the House, the minority leader of the House, they've all said that this sequester is a mistake; it's bad, it's going to hurt. Not only does it hollow out defense, according to the Defense Secretary, but it also creates an 8 percent across-the-board cut to domestic discretionary spending, like the National Institutes of Health. We think we should prevent that. On a bipartisan basis, we think we should prevent that. That's what we're doing. This is the only plan that says, Prevent that from happening, and here's how you pay for it. Here's our plan to stop that from happening, this event that everybody says should be stopped. Now, when we take a look at what this package does, I think we want to look at, is our government working the way it ought to be? In particular, we're hearing lots of comments about how this hurts people, how this hurts the poor. Let's take a look at our poverty- fighting efforts. And should we measure our poverty-fighting efforts based on inputs or based on outcomes? Should we measure our poverty- fighting efforts based on how much money we're spending and how many programs we're creating? Or should we think about how many people are we getting out of poverty? Here's the problem: These efforts aren't working. One out of six Americans today are in poverty. We have the highest poverty rates we've had in a generation. These programs aren't working. Let's fix them. Let's pass reforms that instead decrease the poverty rate, which is happening these days, and get people back into lives of self- sufficiency. Let's go back to the American idea of an opportunity society with a safety net that doesn't keep people in poverty but gets people out of poverty into lives of self-sufficiency. And we're not going to be able to achieve that if we don't grow our economy. We're not going to be able to achieve that if we don't have more opportunities in society so that people who are on the bottom rung of the economic ladder can't climb up and out. We shouldn't be defining success as how many people we have on these benefit programs. We should be defining success as to how many people we are graduating from these benefit programs into lives of self- sufficiency, into jobs. That's the American idea. So when you take a look at whether these programs are working well or not, we need to reform them. We haven't touched these programs for decades. Food stamps, we've gone from 17 million people to 45 million people in a decade, a 270 percent spending increase--$1.8 billion in overpayments last year alone. We're just saying you need to qualify for the benefit to get the benefit. Medicaid. If we think this is such a success, then why are half the doctors filling out surveys saying they're not going to take any new Medicaid patients. If this program is working so well, then why was $15.8 billion in overpayments made just last year? Does this devastate Medicaid? Instead of increasing Medicaid by 125 percent over the next decade, this proposal increases it by 123 percent over the next decade--hardly draconian. What we're saying is we need to make these programs work to achieve their intended results. Give States more flexibility to customize their benefits to meet the needs of the people in their States. That's what these Medicaid reforms are all about. When we hear the other side talk about no spending cuts but more tax increases, that's going to slow down job creation. We're the first ones who came to this floor saying, ``Close these tax loopholes, but close these tax loopholes to create economic growth by reforming the Tax Code.'' Treat people fairly in the Tax Code so that a company or a person who makes the same amount of money pays the same level of tax. You do that by getting rid of tax shelters and tax loopholes, not to raise spending, but to lower tax rates so American businesses can survive, can thrive, and create jobs. Upward mobility. Economic opportunity. That's what we're trying to achieve here. Mr. Speaker, we should not be talking to each other in this society as if we're stuck in some class, as if this person's middle class, that person's lower class, and that person's upper class. Our ancestors left those class-based societies to form this country, which should not be a class-based society. It should be a society of upward mobility, where we can make the most of our lives, based on our own God-given talent and our own effort. We should not be speaking to people as if they're stuck in their current station in life and the government is here to help them cope with it. We need to get ourselves out of this debt crisis because, if we have a debt crisis, if we keep on this path where we're borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend, we're going to have a debt crisis. Europe is in a debt crisis. And what happens when you're in a debt crisis? Immediate austerity, cutting benefits to seniors, cutting benefits to people in the safety net, raising taxes. That slows down the economy, especially for the youth. Look what we're doing right now. Half of our Nation's college graduates are either unemployed or underemployed--half. It's not working. We need to change these policies. We need to grow the economy. And if we have a debt crisis because of this spending, then the people who need government the most, they're the ones who get hurt the first and the worst. We're leading. The President, no plan to fix this. The Senate, no budget since 2009. And our friends on the other side of the aisle, tax increases, spending increases, no spending cuts. Mr. Speaker, this is a small step in the right direction. It's something Congress should do every day. I urge passage of this bill.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I object.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman for bringing this to our attention. We just received the legislation about 3 or 4 minutes ago, and there are a couple of observations I want to make. Number one, I think this is an intriguing policy with respect to denying pensions to the Members who become lobbyists. I think the gentleman should introduce legislation and send it to committee, like the legislation should be passed, and we should give it proper review instead of springing it at the last minute. The second point I would make is on an area where we completely agree, which is that Members of Congress should bear an even higher burden than we're asking of other Federal employees. This bill does that. The underlying bill does that. The underlying bill says: In addition to Federal employees going from paying .8 percent to their pensions, they go to 5.8 percent from their paychecks to contribute to their pensions so that they pay half of their pension benefits as is required through most private sector arrangements. Members of Congress will pay 9.8 percent to their pensions under this bill. This bill has an 8.5 percent pay cut to Members of Congress, and it only has a 5 percent pay cut to all other Federal employees. So we are already incorporating the idea, which we agree with. Members of Congress, in order to exercise moral authority, are the ones who should take the biggest pay cuts and have the biggest pension contributions relative to anybody else. That's why we have it in this bill already. While I understand the gentleman's interest--I appreciate it--it is something that we are already accommodating in this bill. As a result, I would urge a ``no'' vote. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney), a member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to a distinguished gentleman on the Budget Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lankford).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I would say, Mr. Speaker, this is not a tax cut bill, this is a spending cut bill. With that, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Agriculture Committee, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas).

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

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to sections 404 of H. Con. Res 34, the House-passed budget resolution for fiscal year 2012, deemed to be in force by H. Res. 287, and 503 of H. Con. Res. 112, the House-passed budget resolution for fiscal year 2013, deemed to be in force by H. Res. 614, I hereby submit for printing in the Congressional Record revisions to the budget allocations and aggregates set forth pursuant to the budget for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 as set forth under the provisions of those resolutions. The revision is designated for the Small Business Tax Cut Act of 2012 H.R. 9. A corresponding table is attached. This revision represents an adjustment pursuant to sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended (Budget Act). For the purposes of the Budget Act, these revised aggregates and allocations are to be considered as aggregates and allocations included in the budget resolutions, pursuant to sections 101 of H. Con. Res. 34 and section 101 of H. Con. Res. 112.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Chair, as an avid outdoorsman and member of the bipartisan Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus, I am grateful for the opportunity to voice my support for H.R. 4089, the Sportsmen's Heritage Act. This legislation clarifies federal policies for the management of sporting activities on public lands and protects opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting. I commend the House Committee on Natural Resources for their commitment to preserving the legacy of conservation and upholding Second Amendment rights, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this important legislation.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I would like to yield 1 minute to the distinguished majority leader of the House, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, let me just start off by thanking all of the staff and the minority and their staff for the hard work. I want to congratulate Mr. Van Hollen for bringing his substitute to the floor. The minority does not need to do that, and I think that it is good for the process and the system that they do that. In particular, I want to thank our Budget Committee staff: Alex Stoddard, Andy Morton, Austin Smythe, Charlotte Ivancic, Conor Sweeney, Courtney Reinhard, David Logan, Dennis Teti, Dick Magee, Eric Davis, Gerrit Lansing, Jane Lee, Jenna Spealman, Jim Herz, Jon Burks, Jon Romito, Jose Guillen, Justin Bogie, Marsha Douglas, Matt Hoffmann, Nicole Foltz, Paul Restuccia, Stephanie Parks, Steve Spruiell, Ted McCann, Tim Flynn, and Vanessa Day. I also want to thank our personal office staff and the people who are over there at the Ford Building that not everybody sees but who work for the Congressional Budget Office. I had the privilege to meet with them last December while they were busy putting the payroll tax numbers together. This year, the President's budget came late. Easter came early. Everyone was crunched. We worked them overtime, very hard. Now, we don't always like the estimates they necessarily give us, but I want to thank them for their dedication and their professionalism in making this process work. With that, I will reserve the balance of my time. Paul Ryan Personal Office Staff Allison Steil, Andy Speth, Chad Herbert, Danyell Tremmel, Joyce Meyer, Kevin Seifert, Megan Wagner, Nathan Schacht, Sarah Peer, Smythe Anderson, Susie Liston, Teresa Mora, Tricia Stoneking, Lauren Schroeder, Casey Higgins, Aubrey Yanzito, Rick Jacobson. CBO Staff Adam Talaber, Adam Wilson, Adebayo Adedeji, Alan van der Hilst, Alexandra L. Minicozzi, Allison Percy, Amber G. Marcellino, Amy E. Petz, Andrea K. Noda, Andrew Stocking, Ann Futrell, Anna E. Cook, Annette W. Kalicki, Athiphat Muthitacharoen, Aurora K. Swanson, Avi Lerner, Barbara Edwards, Barry Blom, Benjamin R. Page, Bernard C. Kempinski. Brianne B. Hutchinson, Bruce G. Arnold, Carla Tighe Murray, Caryn Rotheim, Chad M. Chirico, Chad Shirley, Charles Pineles-Mark, Charles Whalen, Chayim Rosito, Christi Hawley Anthony, Christian K. Howlett, Christina Vu, Christine M. Bogusz, Christopher Murphy, Christopher Williams, Christopher Zogby, Courtney Griffith, Cynthia R. Cleveland, Damien Moore, DaMischa Phillip. Daniel Frisk, Daniel S. Hoople, Darren Young, Dave Hull, David A. Brauer, David Arthur, David Austin, David B. Newman, David C. Gaffney, David D. Jackson, David E. Mosher, David Rafferty, David Torregrosa, David Weiner, Dawn Sauter Regan, Deborah A. Kalcevic, Deborah Kilroe, Deborah Lucas, Denise Jordan-Williams, Doug Elmendorf, Dwayne Wright. Ed Harris, Edward (Sandy) Davis, Edward C. Blau, Elias Leight, Elizabeth Bass, Elizabeth Cove Delisle, Ellen C. Werble, Emily Holcombe, Eric J. Labs, Ernestine McNeil, Ernestine McNeil, Esther Steinbock, Felix Reichling, Frances M. Lussier, Francesca Castelli, Frank J. Sammartino, Frank S. Russek, Gregory Acs, Gregory H. Hitz, Heidi Golding, Holly Harvey, Jamease Miles. James A. Langley, James Baumgardner, James Johnson, Janet F. Airis, Janet Holtzblatt, Janice M. Johnson, Jared Brewster, Jason Wheelock, Jean P. Hearne, Jeanine Rees, Jeff LaFave, Jeffrey Kling, Jeffrey M. Holland, Jennifer C. Gravelle, Jennifer Smith, Jessica Deegan, Jessica S. Banthin, Jimmy Jin, J'nell L. Blanco, Joanna (Jodi) Capps. Joe Miller, John H. Skeen III, Jonathan A. Huntley, Jonathan A. Schwabish, Jonathan P. Morancy, Joseph Evans Jr., Joseph Kile, Joshua Shakin, Joyce M. Manchester, Juan M. Contreras, Juann H. Hung, Judith Cromwell, Julia M. Christensen, Julia Mitchell, Julie H. Topoleski, Julie Somers, Justin Humphrey, Justin R. Falk. Kalyani Parthasarathy, Kate Kelly, Kathleen FitzGerald, Kathleen Gramp, Kent R. Christensen, Kevin Perese, Kim J. Kowalewski, Kim P. Cawley, Kirstin B. Nelson, Kurt Seibert, Lara E. Robillard, Larry Ozanne, Leah C. Mazade, Leigh S. Angres, Leo K. Lex, Linda Bilheimer, Linda Schimmel, Lisa Ramirez-Branum, Loretta Lettner, Lori B. Housman, Lyle Nelson. Majid Moghaddam, Marika Santoro, Marin A. Randall, Marion C. Curry, Mark Booth, Mark E. Sanford, Mark J. Lasky, Mark P. Hadley, Mark T. Grabowicz, Martin von Gnechten, Mary M. Froehlich, Matthew Goldberg, Matthew Pickford, Matthew Schmit, Maureen Costantino, Megan E. Carroll, Melinda B. Buntin, Melissa Merrell, Michael Bennett, Michael Levine, Michael S. Simpson, Mitchell A. Remy, Molly W. Dahl, Monte Ruffin. Nabeel A. Alsalam, Nancy A. Fahey, Natalie J. Tawil, Nathan T. Musick, Noah P. Meyerson, Noelia J. Duchovny, Paige Piper/ Bach, Pamela Greene, Patrice L. Gordon, Patrice L. Watson, Paul Burnham, Paul Jacobs, Paul Masi, Paula D. Brown, Perry C. Beider, Peter H. Fontaine, Philip C. Webre, Priscila Hammett. R. Derek Trunkey, Rae Wiseman, Raymond J. Hall, Rebecca Rockey, Rebecca V. Yip, Robert A. Sunshine, Robert G. Shackleton Jr., Robert McClelland, Robert W. Arnold, Robert W. Stewart, Rod Goodwin, Romain Parsad, Ron Gecan, Ronald L. Moore, Ryan G. Miller. Sam Papenfuss, Santiago Vallinas, Sarah Ammar, Sarah Anders, Sarah Jennings, Sarah Puro, Shane Beaulieu, Shannon Mok, Sharon Broderick, Sharon Corbin-Jallow, Sheila Campbell, Sheila M. Dacey, Sherry Snyder, Simone Thomas, Stephanie Burns, Stephanie Cameron, Stephanie M. Ruiz, Stephen P. Rentner, Steven A. Weinberg, Stuart A. Hagen, Sunita C. D'Monte, Susan Willie, Susanne S. Mehlman. T.J. McGrath, Tamara Hayford, Terry M. Dinan, Theresa A. Gullo, Thomas B. Bradley, Tiara P. MizeIle, Valentina Michelangeli, Vi Nguyen, Virginia Myers, Wendy Edelberg, Wendy Kiska, William J. Carrington, William Ma, William Randolph.