Paul Ryan

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to a senior Member of the Budget Committee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I will reserve.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. May I inquire how much time remains between the two sides.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California, a member of the Budget Committee (Mr. Campbell).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. At this time, Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the newest member of the Budget Committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California, the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee (Mr. Lewis).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. At this time, Madam Chairman, I would like to yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas, a member of the Budget Committee, Mr. Hensarling.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. At this time, Madam Chairman, I will yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), a member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 12\1/2\ minutes. Madam Chairman, in many ways I believe our two parties agree on many things. We both agree on the need to balance the budget. We agree on the need for solid, sustained economic growth that produces an abundance of good-paying American jobs. And we agree that the looming entitlement crisis is the greatest threat to our Nation's economic and budgetary future. But as this budget makes clear, there is a glaring disagreement on how best to achieve these goals, or as in the case of entitlements, even to address this challenge. Republicans believe that the best America is an America free from the burden of Big Government. We believe that the nucleus of our society, the engine of economic growth in this country, is the individual, the family, the entrepreneur, not the government. And we believe that the more the Federal Government expands demands and takes from these citizens, the less freedom they will have and the less opportunity to realize their own potential. Clearly, the Democrats have a much different philosophy. They believe that bigger government is better government, and they believe that the best way, the only way to meet our Nation's myriad challenges is with an ever larger Federal Government fueled by even higher spending, financed by ever higher taxes. With this budget, the Democrats have proven their commitment to this philosophy. And as it did last year, the first thing this budget does is tout a whole lot of new spending for, as we heard in last week's speeches and press conferences and as we heard today, for everyone and everything. But right next to this budget's much hyped new spending priorities and promises are somewhat less advertised big new tax hikes on American workers, families and small businesses, many of whom are already struggling to make ends meet. In recent months, we've seen a whole host of legitimate concerns in the economy. Growth and job creation are slowing, and many Americans are seeing their home values falling. At the same time their food, energy and health care bills are going up. The worst thing we could do to these families or the struggling economy is raise taxes. But if we pass this budget, that's exactly what we will be doing. Passing this budget means imposing on the economy and on our constituents the largest tax increase in American history. One of the most ironic things about the Democrats' tax increase is that it comes on the heels of this bipartisan economic stimulus plan. Just last month, Congress passed a stimulus package to give struggling families some of their tax dollars back and provide incentives for businesses to expand and create jobs. But before we could even get these checks out the door, the Democrats unveiled this budget that will take all that money back plus demand hundreds of billions more new higher taxes. Far from consistent tax policy, that's not even coherent tax policy. Is $600 really going to make a difference to somebody in Janesville, Wisconsin with a tax increase of nearly $3,000 per year looming on the horizon? Does a one-time check of $1,200 really make up for later raising taxes on that same family of four by $6,000 each and every year? This budget will raise marginal tax rates on all income taxpayers, including low-income individuals who are benefiting from the 10 percent bracket. This budget will slash the $1,000 per child tax credit in half. It will reinstate the marriage tax penalty. It will make it that much harder for families to pay their mortgages, pay their grocery bills and send their kids to college. Unlike the Democrats' rhetoric would have you believe, we are not just talking about hurting rich people. I know a whole lot of people back in Wisconsin who paid taxes, who are married and who have kids who do not consider themselves anything close to rich. But this budget's tax cuts will hit every single American taxpayer, whether or not they checked some imaginary ``rich'' box on their tax form. Now, again, my friends on the other side of the aisle insist this isn't their plan, that they're really not going to raise your taxes. They've got all of these groups from the left saying that's not happening. But yet they keep writing those tax hikes in their budget. Why? Because their numbers would never work. Their budget would never show balance. And without those massive tax hikes, this budget requires, includes, assumes, mandates a $683 billion tax increase over just 5 years. First, because it exhumes the complete expiration of the 2001 and 2003 tax laws. And because of their own PAYGO rule, just to continue those same laws which are already in place, they're required to offset those current provisions with an equal tax increase of $683 billion. So whatever way you cut it, you can't avoid it. It is a tax increase, a big one, the biggest we've ever seen. And second, because they're already committed, every one of those tax dollars, to pay for their new spending. Beyond admitting the burden these tax hikes will put on our constituents and the economy, this Congress has got to understand that we will never rid our government of deficits and debt by simply raising taxes. Our problem has never been that Americans aren't sending enough of their taxpayer dollars to Washington. Our problem has always been, and is clearly today, that Washington is spending too much money and far too quickly to be sustained. But for all of the Democrats' purported concern about the deficit, all they've chosen to do since they came into the majority is spend more and more money. This year's budget would certainly continue that trend. The Democrats' budget proposes to increase entitlement spending by untold amounts of the use of numerous reserve funds. At the same time, they want to increase nonsecurity discretionary spending by more than $22 billion over the President's request. But even while demanding billings and new spending, they fail to do anything to reduce the wasteful spending already included in these budgets. In fact, last year, the majority's appropriations bill included over 11,000 earmarks at a cost of nearly $15 billion to taxpayers. This year, the majority has already rejected Republican calls for an earmark moratorium or even earmark reform to reduce the wasteful, self- serving spending. In this regard, we can expect more of the same: another year and another choice by the majority of pork over paychecks. But for all of the additional spending, the worst thing that is not in this budget is not what it does, but the many things it fails to do. First, I think it's fair to note that if we apply the Democrats' own standards, this budget doesn't even achieve balance. That's because this budget suffers from the same shortcomings that the Democrats criticized the President's budget for doing just weeks ago. This budget doesn't pay for the AMT fix and it doesn't pay for the war, as the chairman so eloquently criticized the Bush budget just a couple weeks ago. As a result, this chart shows that this budget doesn't really balance in 2012; instead, it remains in the red for as far as the eye can see. Finally, for the second straight year, the majority budget fails to include even one meaningful reform to address our entitlement crisis. This means that even if this budget were to balance in 2012, it would be quickly driven right back into deficit by these programs' current path of growth. By ignoring this problem, this budget ignores every one of the witnesses we've called before the Budget Committee who have warned that our largest entitlement programs, particularly Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security, simply cannot be sustained as currently structured. These experts have told us unequivocally that if we fail to reform these programs, not only will they grow themselves right into extinction, they will impose a crushing burden on our debt, on our budget, and all but eliminate our Nation's ability to compete in the global marketplace. Our Nation's chief accountant, GAO Comptroller General Walker, recently testified that the long-term fiscal obligation of the U.S. Government is $53 trillion, or about $180,000 in unfunded liability for every man, woman, and child in the United States. It is $180,000 per person. You can buy really nice homes in Wisconsin for $180,000. And we know that this problem, once dismissed as somewhere off in the future, is already upon us. On February 12 of this year, last month, the first baby boomer, a retired teacher from Maryland, received her first Social Security check. And right on her heels are over 80 million other baby boomers who will qualify for both Social Security and Medicare right after her. And just last month, the Medicare trigger was set off sending a clear warning shot to Congress that we must act immediately to get this program on a sustainable path. In fact, by doing nothing, by ignoring this problem for another 5 years, the Democrats' budget will add another $14 trillion in unfunded liability for future generations. And this is just in the next 5 years. Over the long run, the problem will grow much worse than that. As this chart shows, by the year 2040, our three largest entitlement programs alone will consume 20 percent of our economy, equivalent to the cost of the entire Federal Government today. By this time, the overall size of government will consume 40 percent of our Nation's GDP, more than double the historic average of 18.3 percent. What that means in real life is my three children, who are 3, 4, and 6 years old, by the time they are exactly my age, they will have to pay twice the level of taxes we pay today just to keep today's Federal Government afloat for them at that time. Add no new programs and take none away, for my three kids, when they are my age, they will have to bear twice the burden we bear today just to pay the bills of the Federal Government before they can keep any money left in their own paychecks. The only choice we would leave them would be to pay the crippling tax burden or simply accept the fact that their Nation can no longer afford health care, education, or even defense or national security. I can't imagine any one of us who finds that kind of future acceptable, but this is exactly what this budget confines them to do. Everyone talks about this common entitlement as our greatest challenge, and rightfully so, but it is also our greatest opportunity. Today, with this budget, we have an opportunity to save our largest retirement and health safety net programs from financial ruin. We can make these programs better, stronger, more responsive, more resilient, more sustainable, and more in line with the way our economy works today. And if we act now, we have the opportunity to make these reforms in a rational, well-thought-out way. We don't have to wait for the crisis to hit. But regrettably, that's exactly what the Democratic majority would have us do. With this budget, they are simply accepting that we are going to continue to pile up massive amounts of debt for our children and we are going to force them to pay double what we do in taxes to keep these programs afloat in the future. In closing, let me say that I have come to know and respect many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. In particular, I think the gentleman from South Carolina is the definition of a true Southern gentlemen. He's a class-act man, and I don't have any doubt in my mind that every one of them on the other side of the aisle are just as well intentioned and just as concerned about our Nation's future as anyone is on this side of the aisle. Every one of us wants our Nation to remain strong, safe, prosperous, and free today and well into the future. Every one of us wants to pass on to the next generation a world that is even better than the one our parents gave us. By giving us these jobs, by sending us to Congress, that's exactly what our constituents entrusted us to do. With that great responsibility in mind, I will be opposing this budget that we are considering today. This budget misses an historic opportunity to put our Nation on a better path. Instead, they choose the path of Big Government, higher spending, higher taxes, higher debt. I can only hope that this Congress will choose to change its course before it's too late, because if we fail, we may be the first generation to sever that precious, fragile American legacy of leaving a better standard of living for future generations. With that, Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds only to say that this budget that's before us raises the national debt by $646 billion this year, the largest annual increase ever. And that's $14 trillion of unfunded debt to just two programs, Medicare and Social Security. With that, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina, the vice ranking member of the Budget Committee, Mr. Barrett.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, we are about to decide which path we want to take in America. We are about to decide what budget is right for Americans. Well, let's think about what Americans are facing today as we consider their budget for the next 5 years. What's happening in America today? Well, joblessness is up. The economy is in a downturn. It may be going into a recession. Prices are up. People are having a hard time to afford the cost of living. Gas prices are at an all-time high. Health care costs are at an all-time high and growing very fast. Home heating costs are very high. And it's a lot more expensive just to pay for food today because food prices are up. So the question is, as we debate the values that are underneath this budget, can the American people afford this Democratic budget? Now, my friends on the other side of the aisle are going to try to say all day today they're not raising taxes. We really aren't, believe us, trust us. Well, my friends, numbers don't lie. And this budget is a series of numbers. And the numbers they're bringing before this House in their budget resolution requires, assumes, banks, plans on the largest tax increase in American history. When we looked at the 1993 budget that passed last decade, even then Senator Patrick Moynihan, a Democrat, a very, very wise man, a statesman, adored by both sides, said at that time that that was the largest tax increase in history. That tax increase was $241 billion. Under the same logic, under the same math, under the same process that we have here today, the tax increase in this budget is $683 billion. But let's look at what kinds of taxes we're talking about. And this begs the question, can the American people afford this budget? This increases the marriage penalty in 2\1/2\ years. Can the American people afford that? It cuts the $1,000 child tax credit in half. It eliminates the marriage penalty tax relief and increases marginal tax rates. It eliminates capital gains and dividends relief, and it brings back the death tax. Let's take a look at what the numbers are. Income tax rates go up across the board to the top rate of almost 40 percent. Capital gains and dividends, which are the taxes on our pensions and our savings and our 401(k)s, go up across the board as high as 40 percent. The death tax comes back in to 55 percent. The marriage penalty comes and hits an average of $1,400 per couple. The child tax credit goes from $1,000 down to $500. And the lowest tax bracket goes from 10 percent up to 15 percent. Let me just give you some numbers of what this will mean to average Americans. Roughly 116 million taxpayers will see their taxes increase, on average, by $1,833. An estimated 84 million women would sustain, on average, a tax increase of $2,121. Approximately 48 million married couples would incur an average tax increase of over $3,000. Taxes would increase by an average of $2,323 for 43 million families with children. Some 12 million single women with children would see their taxes increase, on average, by $1,091. For 18 million elderly individuals, taxes would increase, on average, $2,181. And the tax bills for 27 million small business owners would rise, on average, by more than $4,000. More than 6 million taxpayers who previously owed no taxes at all would become subject to the individual income tax as a consequence of the tax increase in this budget. These aren't rich people. These are ordinary Americans working paycheck to paycheck trying to get by. The problem we have today is our paychecks aren't going as far as they did before because we have rising gas prices, high home heating costs, high health care costs. So the question is, can the American people afford this budget? I ask people watching this to send us your e-mail. Give us a call. Call your Member of Congress and tell us, is that what you want us to do? And the more important question is, should we balance the budget? Yes. Both Republicans and Democrats say we ought to balance the budget. Here's the difference: We believe we ought to balance the budget by controlling spending, not by raising taxes. And, unfortunately, what the Democrats choose to do is increase spending and taxes. So their budget will show, by the Congressional Budget Office in their numbers, they will achieve balance. The way they achieve balance is they spend an extra $280 billion over 5 years, but they increase taxes a whole lot more than that to get to a balanced budget. What's more important about this budget for our children and grandchildren is not the economic damage that would be done by this budget with these huge tax increases for every income taxpayer, for married people, for people with children, for small businesses, for farmers, for investors. What really is troubling about this budget is not as much as what is in this budget, the largest tax increase in history. What's really almost the most troubling about this budget is doing nothing, doing nothing to save money, doing nothing to reform our entitlement programs. We just heard my friend from Texas. I'm on two committees with the gentleman. He said a $3 trillion increase in debt over the last 5 years. This budget proposes, in just two programs, to increase the debt by $14 trillion. Let me go through that again. By doing nothing to rescue and save Social Security and Medicare, this budget proposes, by its own virtue, to increase the debt to those two programs by $14 trillion. We have an obligation to the next generation to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars. We have an obligation to the next generation to leave them with a better fiscal state. Our friends on the other side of the aisle have chosen to walk away from that responsibility. They have chosen to have more money to spend today, to raise taxes, and to make matters worse for the next generation. We think that's the wrong way to go. We don't think the American people at this time of economic downturn, at this time of high prices, we can afford a tax increase of all times. We don't think there ever should be a time where we increase taxes, because you know what, Mr. Speaker? Washington doesn't have a tax revenue problem; Washington has a spending problem. And our friends on the other side of the aisle are making it worse by not only increasing spending but even increasing taxes. That's the wrong recipe for this Congress. That's the wrong message to send our children and grandchildren. And that's the dead wrong thing to do at a time of high prices and economic downturn. I think we should vote this budget down and do so on behalf of our children and our grandchildren and the American taxpayer so we can give a chance to our economy to actually grow. You're not going to grow an economy by giving us the largest tax increase in American history. That's for certain. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Just one more friendly view. If you recall, this was a bipartisan bill when this passed when we were in the majority.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. If the gentleman would further yield, I would simply like to say that we in the minority are more than willing to work with the gentleman in the majority to include the smoothing in the public pension provision.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Will the gentleman yield for a minute?

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Mr. Chairman, I first want to start off by congratulating the chairman of the Budget Committee, a good man, a man I have a lot of respect for who has a hardworking staff and a diligent staff. I want to compliment them. These budget resolutions are not easy to write. He has a tough job because he has to defend this budget. This is a budget I wouldn't want to come to the floor to defend. I just have to bring one point to bear, and I do so respectfully. You cannot say that you are balancing the budget and not raising taxes. It is illogical and axiomatically impossible. Let me explain why. This red line is the baseline that the Democrats are using for their budget. It is what we also refer to as the CBO baseline. This green line is the baseline minus the tax increases. They are using the red line, not the green line. This means in order for them to achieve a balanced budget, what must happen, what is required to happen, what has to happen, all of these taxes have to be raised, specifically by $683 billion over the next 5 years. Now, my friend from New Jersey, another very conscientious, skillful Member, said that was a tax vote he regretted not taking. And the Senator from New York at that time, Senator Moynihan, said that was the largest tax increase in American history. That was $240 billion. This one is $683 billion. This is the largest tax increase in American history. The point is this: You cannot claim you are balancing the budget and not raising taxes because you are relying on these very tax increases to balance the budget. That is what this budget does. Now, no amount of reserve funds, no amount of senses of Congress, no amounts of ``we have delayed the decision on the tax cuts for now'' gets them out of this bind. They can't. It is impossible. You have to have it one way or the other. Either you are not balancing the budget or you are not raising these taxes because, Mr. Chairman, they are not saving any money. There is no savings in this budget. The piece of paper I have in my hand is more valuable than the amount of savings they have in this budget. This paper, may it cost 1, 2 pennies. That is more money than they are saving in this budget over the next 5 years. In fact, they are expanding spending. They are increasing discretionary spending by $280 billion. What is worse is they are going to add, in just two programs, an unfunded liability of $14 trillion, to just two programs, Medicare and Social Security. Let's look at the Medicare program. Today, the Medicare unfunded liability, according to David Walker, our GAO Comptroller General, is at $34 trillion. That is an average per household bill of $300,050. Every household in America right now, if we want to make Medicare whole for my children when they need it, 300 grand. Under this budget, because they do nothing, they are adding $11 trillion to that liability. That is $395,650, almost $400,000 for one household to cover Medicare so my children can maybe get it. That's for our kids. That is wrong. We have got to address these issues. Now, Mr. Chairman, surely, there's waste in government. Surely, there's efficiencies we can get. But this budget concludes that there is not. This budget is basically saying, Washington's not wasting any money. All of these earmarks, the 11,000 we passed last year, are perfect, they're justified; we should do 11,000 more. And there's no waste, fraud or abuse anywhere in the Federal Government. In fact, they're doing such a good job in Washington spending our tax dollars, let's give them $280 billion more to spend. And on top of it, given the fact that our entitlements are going bankrupt, given the fact that we have an unsustainable course, let's just add more to the debt; and we're going to raise taxes while we do it. But we won't tell people. We'll pass this kind of cute reserve fund, sense of the Congress that says we really don't want to raise those taxes, but we're balancing the budget. That means you're raising taxes if you're going to balance the budget. But let's look at the brass tacks. And this is what I want to ask the American people. Can you afford this budget? People are struggling right now. People are losing jobs. We just finished 52 consecutive months of positive job growth, very impressive growth. Finished, I said. The last couple of months they've been bad months. Also, prices; the cost of living is going up to America, the cost of health insurance, the cost of food, the cost of filling your gas tank when you take your kids to school, the cost of sending your kids to college. The cost of living is higher and higher, and people's pay checks are not getting as far along as they used to. And so what does this budget do? It raises their taxes. It says you're going to have to send, on average, three more grand per person to Washington because we don't think Washington has enough of your money. We think Washington's great. There's no waste, there's no inefficiency, no fraud. We, in fact, need more of your taxpayer dollars, you, American men and women of America. So I'd like to know, is that what America wants? Tell us. Call us, e- mail us. Call your Congressman. Because here's what this bill will do specifically. 116 million taxpayers will see their taxes on average go up $1,800; 84 million women will sustain, on average, a tax increase of $2,121; 48 million married couples will incur an average tax increase of over $3,000. Taxes will increase by an average of $2,323 for 43 million families with children. Some 12 million single women with children will see their taxes increase on average by $1,091. For 18 million elderly individuals taxes will increase by an average of $2,181. Tax bills for 27 million small business owners will rise on average by more than $4,000. And more than 6 million taxpayers who previously owed no taxes at all will become subject to the individual income tax as consequence of these tax increases. Mr. Chairman, we had an opportunity here. We had an opportunity to do something that I felt would be good and bipartisan. I've heard my colleagues on the other side talk about the need to do this. We had all these witnesses come to the Budget Committee, saying we've got to get our fiscal house in order, that we owe the next generation a debt-free Nation, that we owe them the mission of health and retirement being fulfilled, which means reforming our entitlement programs. This budget says for the next 5 years, let's not do any of it. Let's make sure that we're on the glide path so that our kids will pay literally twice what we pay today in taxes, just for our Federal Government today to be there for them when they're our age. This is a lost opportunity. Under this budget, the unfunded obligation that are Medicare and Social Security themselves go up 37 percent, $14 trillion. I'm upset at the debt that was racked up lately, but it pales in comparison to the debt that this budget proposes to rack up. So what we really ought to be doing, Mr. Chairman, is we ought to be fixing this budget process, having real budget discipline, real spending caps. We ought to be making reform decisions. And the last thing we ought to be doing in this time of high prices, a tough standard of living to maintain, in this time of economic downturn which quite possibly could come into recession, the last thing we ought to be doing is raising taxes. That is what this budget does. We will propose a different alternative tomorrow. We will propose a budget that balances the budget without raising taxes by controlling spending. And even in doing that, spending will still go up one year after the other. Instead of spending $15.8 trillion over the next 5 years, we're going to propose to spend $15.3 trillion. And by simply doing that, by simply exerting a little bit of discipline, we're going to make sure that we're not raising these taxes, and we're going to repeal the alternative minimum tax. One more thing, Mr. Chairman. This earmark problem is getting out of control. Earmarks are an abuse. Some are worthy, some are right, but a lot of them aren't. We've got to control this. We are proposing a real earmark moratorium. More importantly, we are saying let's take a timeout from earmarks and let's save that money. Our proposal tomorrow will not only have an earmark moratorium, it will save the money from an earmark moratorium. And if Congress just says no to earmarks for 1 year, you know what we can do? We can make permanent the child tax credit and the repeal of the marriage tax penalty. We can say, pass up your earmarks for a year in Congress and don't tax people for getting married. Pass up your earmarks for a year in Congress and don't cut the child tax credit in half. These are the choices we are being confronted with. These are the choices that we must make. These are the values that we believe. We believe we owe our children a growing economy, a future of a higher prosperity, of a higher standard of living, and one in which the promise of health and retirement security is actually sustainable, is actually made good upon. That's not what this budget does. There's no way you can split these hairs with the reserve funds, senses of Congress, flowery Washington rhetoric. This budget contains the largest tax increase in American history, not just on wealthy people, on all people. That's wrong. It's not right. We shouldn't do it because Washington doesn't have a tax revenue problem, Washington has a spending problem. Unfortunately, the Democrat budget makes it worse by spending even more money. There is waste in Washington. There is waste in earmarks. There are entitlements that are out of control. We should confront those, instead of just throwing more money at Washington, because you know where that money comes from? It comes from the hard working men and women of America. It comes from families, it comes from entrepreneurs, it comes from small businesses, it comes from the individual of this country. That's wrong. They should be able to keep more of their own money and we should be able to clean up government. I urge a ``no'' vote on this budget. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), a senior member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, let me inquire as to how much time is remaining for each side.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. McCotter), the chairman of the Republican Policy Committee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. If the gentleman would yield, it is also interesting that after that tax increase, from that tax bracket, the Federal Government actually brought in less money under those higher tax rates.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Reclaiming my time, the administration does earmarks in their budgets. That it is in the President's budget does not mean this is or is not an earmark.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Okay. So the chairman has decided that that's an incorrect opinion?

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. So the chairman does not believe this is not an earmark, even though it goes to just two tax beneficiaries?