Paul Ryan

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Platts).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Hurt).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Lummis).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz), a member of the Budget Committee, control 30 minutes; the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett), the vice chair of the Budget Committee, control 30 minutes; and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan) control 30 minutes of debate.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. With respect to the remaining time, I will reserve the balance of my time and turn it over to the gentleman from Utah.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to say, I hope the gentleman joins us in supporting our plan, then, because our plan says let's get rid of all those tax loopholes. Let's make the tax code flatter and fairer. Let's get tax rates down for all Americans and for businesses so we can grow our economy.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds only to say that the only place where our budget mentions oil is when we say we want to drill for more of it in our country. We don't address the tax issue. In fact, what we call for is eliminating loopholes to lower tax rates. We save Medicare, and guarantee the program is there for people 55 and above--more importantly, contrary to the current law, which takes Medicare away from current seniors as they now know it. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the House Republican Conference chairman, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. At this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama, the chairman of the Financial Services Committee, Mr. Bachus.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 355, I call up the bill (H.R. 2560) to cut, cap, and balance the Federal budget, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Chair, I rise today to provide an explanation of my support for a waiver of the Cut-go point of order on the Manager's Amendment to H.R. 1249, the America Invents Act. No matter how well-crafted a budget enforcement tool may be it can never be immune from all unintended consequences. There are two reasons I support this waiver. First, the violation arises from an anomaly associated with converting this program from discretionary to mandatory. Second, the Manager's Amendment does not cause an increase in direct spending relative to current law. With respect to the first point, CB0 currently records PTO fee collections on an annual basis with the enactment of the relevant appropriations bill. As a result, CBO shows no deficit impact from PTO for fiscal years after FY 2011 if the funding and fee collections remain subject to the appropriations process--what we call ``discretionary spending.'' The reported bill would have provided permanent authority to the PTO to collect fees and spend the fee collections. We call spending that is provided through permanent law ``mandatory spending.'' CBO estimated this permanent authority for FY 2012-2021 would reduce mandatory spending by $712 million. The savings, however, are the result of CBO's estimate that the agency will not be able to spend the fees as quickly as they are collected, not from spending reduction. This should be obvious because the whole rationale of this bill was to ensure the expenditure of all PTO fee collections. If the reported bill was mandating that all PTO collections be spent, how can it produce budgetary savings? It doesn't. The only savings are paper savings, resulting from an accounting change and not an actual reduction in spending. The Cut-go rule was designed to prevent the total amount of mandatory spending in the Federal Budget from increasing by requiring a corresponding spending reduction for any proposal to increase direct spending, and not offset with an increase in revenue as was common practice under Pay-Go. Ironically, the Manager's Amendment would prevent a discretionary program from turning into mandatory spending, but because Cut-go is measured relative to the reported bill and not to the baseline, it triggers a Cut-go violation. Cut-go was not intended to favor mandatory spending over discretionary spending. With respect to the second point, the Manager's Amendment maintains the same basic fee and spending structure as the underlying legislation but keeps the program discretionary. CBO estimates the bill, with the Manager's Amendment, would decrease the deficit by $5 million over ten years, unrelated to the PTO classification. The Committee could have avoided a Cut-go point of order if it reported out a separate bill that reflected the Manager's Amendment. I do not take waiving budget points of order lightly, but in this case it is justified.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 301 of H. Con. Res. 34, the House-passed budget resolution for fiscal year 2012, I hereby submit revisions to the budget allocations set forth pursuant to the budget for fiscal year 2012. The revision is for new budget authority and outlays reported by the Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Defense, which are designated for the Global War on Terrorism. 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 allocations are to be considered as allocations included in the budget resolution, pursuant to section 301 of H. Con. Res. 34.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I understand why this might be confusing to my friends on the other side of the aisle. After all, they didn't bother to pass a budget last year. Our friends on the other side of the Rotunda in the Senate didn't bother to pass a budget this year. We have a budget crisis. We've got a $1.5 trillion deficit. We've got a debt that is getting out of our control. And what do you do when you have a problem like that? You pass a budget. The reason we're doing what we're doing today is because our partners on the other side of the Rotunda in the Senate didn't pass a budget. House Republicans did. We passed a budget. And we're acknowledging and living within that budget. If our friends on the other side of the aisle bothered to pass a budget, we wouldn't be in the situation where we are today. Now, let's discuss about what our budget does and what it does not do. Number one, because we have a debt crisis, we think we have a moral obligation to our constituents, our children, and our grandchildren to put our budget on a path to balance and to pay off our national debt. We also think we need to put our economy on a path to prosperity so we can get job creation. Let's, for a moment, talk about Medicare. Medicare as we know it is already gone. Our friends on the other side of the aisle, when they passed the Affordable Care Act, they stopped the Medicare status quo. Under the President's new health care law, that ends Medicare as we know it. It does two things: It raids Medicare, and it rations Medicare. It takes $500 billion from Medicare to spend on the President's new health care law. It doesn't take that money to extend its solvency. Just like people have complained for years we're raiding the Social Security trust fund and we should stop doing that, the President's health care law does that to Medicare now. The second thing it does, starting next year, the President will appoint 15 unelectable, unaccountable bureaucrats to put in charge of Medicare, to price control and to ration Medicare for current seniors. What's worse is the President and the Senate still have yet to put out a plan to save Medicare to prevent it from going bankrupt. We stop the raid of Medicare in our budget and make sure that half a trillion dollars stays in Medicare to advance its solvency.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I will not yield. Number two, we repeal the rationing board so that we don't put bureaucrats in charge of determining what kind of health care benefits seniors do or do not get; and, number 3, we save Medicare. The way in which we do this is this. We say that if you are on Medicare, if you are 10 years away from retiring at 55 and above, government already made a promise to you. We want government to keep that promise. So under our budget we keep that promise. We stop the raid, we repeal the rationing board. And for those of us who are 54 and below, who have a bankrupt system that we right now cannot count on, we reform it so that it works like the system Members of Congress and Federal employees have. It's a system that looks like Medicare Advantage or the drug benefit that works today, where seniors get a choice of plans offered to them by Medicare, guaranteed coverage options from which they can choose, and Medicare subsidizes that plan. It doesn't subsidize people as much if they are wealthy, and it subsidizes them a lot more if they are low income, if they are sick. This saves Medicare. This puts Medicare on a path to solvency and, more importantly, by saving it for future generations we can keep the promise to the current generation. We repeal the rationing board, we stop the raid, and we save the program. That's what our budget proposed to do, but with respect to this rule, we are talking about discretionary spending. We are talking about paying the bills this year for all those different government agencies. We simply think Congress should function the way the Founders envisioned it where we actually pass budgets, we actually scrutinize spending, and we actually finance government's functions and its agencies. We are not dunking our responsibility; we are passing our budgets. Because we are deeming those numbers in this year's bill, it is simply because of the fact that nobody else around here seems to be bothered with passing budgets. The President hasn't put out a plan to fix the problem and the Senate has, for a second year in a row, failed to even pass a budget. We are leading, we are saving Medicare, we are getting the debt under control, and we are working to create jobs in this economy and we are governing by actually paying the bills and passing our appropriation bills. Revisions to the Allocations of the Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Resolution Related to Legislation Reported by the Committee on Appropriations Mr. Speaker, pursuant to sections 301 of H. Con. Res. 34, the House-passed budget resolution for fiscal year 2012, I hereby submit for printing in the Congressional Record revisions to the budget allocations set forth pursuant to the budget for fiscal year 2012. The revision is for new budget authority and outlays reported by the Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Homeland Security, which are designated for the Global War on Terrorism. 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 allocations are to be considered as allocations included in the budget resolution, pursuant to section 301 of H. Con. Res. 34. Paul Ryan, Chairman, House Budget Committee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Angela Z. McCollough, an employee of the Congressional Budget Office who is retiring next month after nearly 40 years of exemplary public service. In August of 1975, after spending three years at the Environmental Protection Agency, Angie started her career at the Congressional Budget Office--just a few months after CBO was founded. From 1975 until 2008, she served as the secretary and administrative assistant to the Assistant Director of the Natural Resources and Commerce Division (since renamed the Microeconomic Studies Division). In October of 2008, Angie was promoted to Executive Assistant to the CBO Director. Angie has been an invaluable member of the CBO team and over the years has exemplified the very best qualities of public service upon which the Congress and the Nation so heavily depend. Angie received two CBO Director's Awards--in 1984 and again in 2003. She has also received several STAR awards for her work in the Microeconomic Studies Division and the Office of the CBO Director. Angie was honored in 2001 for her role in recreating CBO's timekeeping and payroll system and for ensuring that CBO's employees were paid during that difficult period in the Fall of 2001 when the Ford House Office Building was closed for the anthrax investigation in the weeks following the tragic events of 9/11. Angie is one of the longest serving employees in the history of the Congressional Budget Office. Her tenure at CBO spans the agency's lifetime. She has served under all 8 CBO Directors. And throughout her time at CBO Angie has set the standard for dedicated public servants throughout the Federal Government. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor today to acknowledge Angie's time at CBO, to thank her on behalf of the Congress and the Nation for her years of dedicated service, and to wish her all the best in what we hope and trust will be many years of a well- deserved and fruitful retirement.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the House Republican Conference, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself the remainder of my time. First of all, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank our staffs, the Democratic staff and the Republican staff, for all of their hard work in getting us to this moment. I want to ask my colleagues a question. I want to ask the American people a question. I remember one of the worst moments I had in Congress was the financial crisis of 2008. It seems like it was yesterday. We had the Treasury Secretary and we had the Federal Reserve chairman coming here talking about crisis and talking about bank collapses. And what came out of that was really ugly legislation that we passed on a bipartisan basis but no one enjoyed. That crisis caught us by surprise. It was unpredictable. We didn't see it coming. Let me ask you this. What if your President and your Member of Congress saw it coming? What if they knew why it was happening, when it was going to happen, and more importantly, they knew what to do to stop it and they had time to stop it, but they didn't? Because of politics? What would you think of that person? Mr. Chairman, that is where we are right now. This is the most predictable economic crisis we've ever had in the history of this country. Yet we have a President who is unwilling to lead. We have too many politicians worried about the next election and not worried about the next generation. Every politician in this town knows we have a debt crisis. They know that we are in danger. We cannot avoid this choice. To govern is to choose. We are making a choice even if we don't act. And that's the wrong choice. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. Will we be remembered as the Congress that did nothing as the Nation sped toward a preventable debt crisis and irreversible decline? Or will we instead be remembered as a Congress that did the hard work of preventing that crisis, the one that chose this Path to Prosperity? This Path to Prosperity charts a different course. It gets us off this wrong track. It achieves four objectives: Number one, grow the economy and get people back to work. Number two, fulfill the mission of health and retirement security. We don't want to ration Medicare. We don't want to see Medicare go bankrupt. We want to save Medicare. Number three, repair the social safety net. Get it ready for the 21st century. We don't want a welfare system that encourages people to stay on welfare. We want them to get back on their feet and into flourishing, self-sufficient lives. So let's reform welfare for people who need it, and let's end corporate welfare for people who don't need it. Number four, let's do the work of lifting this crushing burden of debt from our children. This is what we achieve. We have a choice of two futures, but we have to make the right choice. We must not leave this Nation in decline. We must not be the first generation of this country to leave the next generation worse off. Decline is antithetical to the American idea. America is a Nation conceived in liberty, dedicated to equality and defined by limitless opportunity. Equal opportunity, upward mobility, prosperity; this is what America is all about. In all the chapters of human history, there has never been anything quite like America. This budget keeps America exceptional. It preserves its promise for the next generation. Colleagues, this is our defining moment. We must choose this Path to Prosperity. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the distinguished majority whip.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished majority leader, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the Speaker of the House, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. McCotter).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Chairman, let's talk about Medicare for a moment. It's not as if we don't have a problem. We know Medicare is going broke in 9 years. We want to make sure that the people who have retired and who are 10 years away from retiring can bank on the promises that have been made for them. But to keep that promise, we have to reform it and save it for the next generation. So that's why we have a plan that says for people 54 and below, you too will have a plan of guaranteed Medicare coverage from guaranteed Medicare plans that you get to choose from. Choice and competition works. A prescription drug benefit, a bunch of plans that compete against each other for the seniors' business, came in 41 percent below cost projections. Why? Because it's not a government-run program. It's not a bunch of bureaucrats. What is the President proposing? What are the Democrats proposing? Here's what they have proposed for current seniors. The President just gave us a glimpse of it 2 days ago. He wants to take this board of 15 people he appoints on this rationing board, and they make the decisions. They price-control Medicare. They ration Medicare, $480 billion, almost $10,000 per senior on current seniors. We are saying, don't do this to seniors, get rid of the rationing board and don't delegate Medicare decision-making to 15 people appointed by the President with no congressional oversight. Let the 40 million seniors in Medicare be in charge of their Medicare program. More importantly, we save Medicare, prevent its bankruptcy. What does the other side do? They sit by and watch the program go bankrupt. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to a member of the Budget Committee, the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lankford).

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

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Budget Committee, Mr. Garrett of New Jersey.