Tim Ryan

Mr. RYAN of Ohio

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I know the gentleman is passionate about this. I think your performance on our committee has been a passionate performance, and I think it is important for the young people who are watching it or the C-SPAN viewers who are watching this to understand at how much of a disadvantage the next generation is going to be because of the acts of today, the amount of credibility that we lost in the world, the amount of negotiating power that we have lost in the world; and I am going to give a couple of examples and tie this into something that we were talking about before a few weeks ago. We were talking a lot about China stealing our manufacturing in the United States of America, how we are losing the manufacturing base in this country, and the majority of these jobs and companies are moving to China, exploiting the labor and human rights and everything else. How does that tie into this? Because of the political capital that we have been expending on Iraq, we cannot deal with a greater threat, which is North Korea, which has increased their nuclear arsenal by 400 percent in the last 3 years. So because we are so bogged down in the Middle East right now, we have to ask China to deal with North Korea for us, and therefore, we cannot play tough with China on manufacturing. So this has helped us not to be able to deal with the erosion of the manufacturing base. It is the same with the oil prices. OPEC is now saying they are going to turn the spigots on. We are not sure. We will believe it when we see it, but we have to ask Saudi Arabia to help us with our problems in the Middle East and Iraq, and we cannot talk tough with Saudi Arabia for the gasoline prices. So we have put ourselves at a weak bargaining position with China, weak bargaining position with the Saudis to deal with the oil crisis and the gas crisis in this country. I want the American people who work two jobs and deal with their grandparents and their parents and people are sick and they are sending their kids to school, who do not have time to digest all of this, and I want them to understand that we have made bad political moves, and we hire Presidents and hire Members of Congress to put us in good political positions. I heard many Members on the other side talk about Thomas Jefferson. Well, we bought the Louisiana territory. That was a good political position. It put the country in a good position. NASA put the country in a good position. For us to just sit here and watch our country be put in a weak position, a weak bargaining position, a weak negotiating position, all in the process of pulling out the credit card and dropping $200 billion in the Middle East, which now we have to stay and win, no one's arguing that, we have to support our troops, and I know we both voted for the Defense authorization bill. So this is not pacifist. We do not want any war ever, and we are going to support the Defense spending in this country, the Defense appropriations. We both have voted for that. All we are saying is bad decisions have been made and they have been made because we have been taking advice from a con man who has conned everybody for the last 25 or 30 years in the world, who was found guilty of 30-some counts in Jordan, fraud, embezzlement, has been running around the Middle East and running around Europe over the past years. Everyone knew the reputation of this man; and he just told this administration what they wanted to hear, and they bought it hook, line and sinker; and now we are stuck.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. We will pay for the bus fare.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I find it very interesting that the other side has taken this opportunity to talk about the Medicare prescription drug bill. Two provisions the Democrats wanted to get in: one, reimport the prescriptions from Canada, drop the price in the United States of America and allow a free market competition; and, two, ask the Secretary of HHS to buy in bulk on behalf of the Medicare recipients, again dropping the prices. But the increased amounts of campaign contributions to this body has led to both of those provisions being absent. The thing that Democrats are most offended about is not the cost. It is about the deceit. We were told $400 billion this program would cost. Actuaries were told not to release the real figures to Congress, and the real figures ended up being $140 billion more. That is the shame, and that is the sham.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for yielding me time, and I also thank the gentlewoman from the Buckeye State for her comments as well. I am rising here, Mr. Speaker, to urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question. As the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) said, there are several amendments here that we wanted to get in to this that were not allowed. One of the amendments obviously offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) was to extend unemployment benefits. We have thousands of workers in the State of Ohio who have exhausted their unemployment benefits and need help. These are people who are locked out, these are people who are unemployed, these are people who cannot afford to go back to a job that pays $6 an hour. We hear a lot about job creation, but the jobs that we are losing are $20 an hour with health care benefits. The jobs we are gaining are $6 an hour at Wal- Mart. One of the amendments, the Ryan amendment, would request an authorization of such sums as necessary from 2004 to 2009 for on-the- job training opportunities for medical and safety occupations, police, firefighters, rescue personnel, paramedics, medical personnel. This money would go to the Governors. The Governors would be able to use 75 percent of it in a formula based on population, based on the need as well, with 20 percent of the money being discretionary, to go for first responders. This would be an economic stimulus for local communities in many places like the State of Ohio that could use this economic stimulus. Many of the cities, municipalities, townships, and counties would be able to take this money, use it for training and be able to hire more and, therefore, provide a direct economic stimulus. There is also another debate I think that is going on here, and I think it is a debate that the American people need to hear and need to participate in. Basically, after 9/11 there were two philosophies. One we are exercising now with the war in Iraq, over $200 billion being spent over there. But there was another philosophy that did not get much hearing. There is also another idea that we had here, and that was take some of those billions of dollars that we have been spending in Iraq and invest that to batten down the hatches in the United States of America. More money for first responders, police, fire, Border Patrol; more money into the intelligence community; hire people who speak Farsi that can infiltrate some of these camps. I think it becomes a choice between hiring police, fire and military personnel in Iraq, or hiring police, fire and medical personnel here in the United States of America. I think this would have been an opportunity for us to provide a direct economic stimulus and change course a little bit by investing here and protecting the civil defense, the homeland security. I think that would have been a better way to go.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon). This is truly a bipartisan effort, and I appreciate all of the help we have received. This is a county in my district which has been low on resources, as many counties have been, not only in the State of Ohio but across the country. There has been a reduction in money from the State level to the local county level, and this is an opportunity for the Federal Government to step in and help a community that needs our assistance. I would like to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) who has been very helpful, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), and the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the ranking member. I would also like to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) and Governor Bob Taft and the Director of the Department of Job and Family Services, Tom Hayes, who has been extremely patient through this process, as well as the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), and the local county commissioners in Portage County, Commissioners Smiles, Keiper and Frederick, and the State Senator, Kim Zurz, and the State Representative, Kathleen Chandler. This was truly a bipartisan effort, an effort to help a local community that needs help. As the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) said, about 88 percent is being picked up, and that will assist the local community. With that, I would like to again thank the gentleman for his help. I appreciate the Chair of the committee as well and all of the staff who have been tremendous. The staff of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) and the staff of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) and the staff of the committee has been great, and I thank them for all their help. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I would like to state for the record that my vote yesterday on the amendment to H.R. 4200 offered by Susan Davis of California was intended to be a ``no'' vote. I oppose this amendment.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Many Democrats lost their job over it because they made the sacrifice.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from Florida is absolutely right, and he is as articulate as anyone is around here. A couple of issues that I want to talk about. And we are going to wrap up here in a few minutes. The hour is getting late, but I think it is important to just say that what we want this Congress to do, what we want this President to do is to take a strong leadership role in creating a new economy for the young people of this country. And I come from an old steel town, very strong during the industrial age; and what I hear from the retirees, I hear from people who have been working in a lot of these mills over the years and are coming close to retirement, is, What are our kids going to do? And when we look back at how we succeeded during the industrial age, the GI bill, the investments in infrastructure, the investments in the interstate highway systems, and I think needs to be duplicated, not in the same, but look at the space program, the national priority to educate people. It was not just about going to the Moon, which was a great national priority; it was about getting people, young people and the country engaged in math and science and engineering and physics because that administration understood that that would spin off into the economy, and those engineers who were getting educated were not just working in the space program. They were working in a lot of other industries. So I think it is important for us to do that. That is one. And, two, I have heard the President say the economy is turning around. I cannot help, as we are wrapping it up here in the final couple of minutes, but to just acknowledge the fact that just a few miles outside of my district in Canton, Ohio, Timken, which was a staple in Canton and Massillon, some of the greatest high school football in the country, the Timken Company is going to close up shop, 1,300 jobs in this community. Howard Fineman just wrote a great article about Timken and its potential effect on the election, but 1,300 jobs in Ohio were bleeding. And the President and others want to say that the economy is turning around, and I cannot help but say, where? Where? Maybe if they have a little bit of stock, and the stock market is not even doing all that well. And gas prices are going up. I mean, where is it getting better? It is not. It is getting progressively worse. We have the financial albatross around our neck with the current war, and we are having a number of problems. So these are some things where we have to make education a national priority for us.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I will read a couple here and start wrapping things up here. Alan T, a senior at Oklahoma State University, sent us an e- mail. ``I am spending over $300 a semester for textbooks that have been used four or five times already by previous students. My best friend was unable to be the first in his family to graduate from a major university due to the fact that he was unable to pay for textbooks, parking permits and other student fees that are burdening students more and more,'' also probably a few parking tickets, if I remember college well. Those are also a cost that students must endure. ``I can either pay my bursar, or I can pay my rent. Next year, I won't buy my textbooks, so I can pay both.'' The fact that we have people making this decision, it sounds eerily similar to the decision that a lot of our senior citizens have to make between food and prescription drugs. Joseph Oliver from North Dakota, a 20-year-old chemical engineering student: ``Full disclosure, I do want to tell you that I am historically, even though I am only 20, a conservative voting citizen. The investigation into textbooks,'' for those of you at home, we have a bill that is going to investigate the high cost of textbooks, also provide a $1,000 tax credit for you to be able to deduct that, or credit that, for your textbooks, up to $1,000 a year, or your parents up to $1,000 a year. ``The investigation into textbooks is long past due. I spent nearly $600 for three classes of books, then was unable to sell any of them back because the new editions were released.'' If anything gets you more upset in college, than you would drop hundreds of dollars for a textbook, and then you would go back at the end of the semester to get hopefully 10 or 20 bucks back, and they say, ``We are not buying these back any more.'' I mean, that was ridiculous.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. He goes on to say, ``That was the biggest unseen cost of college.'' He also goes on to talk about the variable interest rate for student loans. ``I have a fixed rate of nearly 3.4 percent right now. If that were to change, the light at the end of the tunnel would get a little less bright. I work 18 hour days in the summer to afford the opportunity of continuing school. I get upset every year, because I get penalized for working hard, among other factors, when it comes to receiving financial aid.'' I am going to wrap up here and just, again it is an honor to be here with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) to talk about these issues. I think it is important, if you are there, please send us your e-mail to us, find the rockthevote about voter suppression. But continue to send us these, because it is important for us to know exactly what your issues are. I do want to take this opportunity, since we are not going to be here next week and this is my first term in Congress, to wish my mother a happy birthday. She is 60-years-old, so I wanted to wish her a happy birthday. Also my cousin, Phil Guerra who is also turning 60 this year. I wanted to take this as an opportunity to wish them a happy birthday before we take off for our Memorial Day break. And just to say again, we got to keep plugging away. We got a long road here. But you establish what you stand for, you take it to these young students, these young kids, and I think you have an opportunity to change the way the country is run, and I think that is a great opportunity that we have here.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Over the break, maybe we can get away from here and open up and let the creative juices roll, and we can come up with something.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) makes some great points. I believe this is a good opportunity for us to try to communicate some of these points. To continue on a point that the gentleman was making, the gentleman was talking about the devolution of taxes and going from the Feds cut their taxes and they push it off onto the States. And the States, in many instances, cut their taxes too and have reduced revenue, and they are passing it on to the county. And we see the local school boards, we see the university raise its tuition prices, we see mental health levies, transportation levies, disability levies, and senior citizen levies for senior programs, parks; we see levies for just about everything. We have the devolution down until it gets to the local level, and the reason why we have a Federal Government to pass money along is because a lot of those areas are poor. They do not have the money to treat people with mental health problems in their county. They do not have the money. We need the Federal Government and the States to come in and help those poor communities. A lot of the school districts, and this is something that is going on in Ohio, some of the school districts, they do not have the local tax base to be able to fund an adequate education for their kids. So you need the State to be involved or you need the Federal Government to be involved in order to help them. That is one stream that comes down, and it is pushing down on the poor citizens in our communities all across the country regardless of the State. Then, as you reduce the Federal revenues and, as you said, you borrow the money, you reduce the Federal revenues; but then you have to figure out what you are going to give back because the revenues are not there to give back. It is not like we are returning surplus money to the millionaires, it is not like when Clinton left office, and we had billions of dollars to give back. There is no surplus to give back, and we keep giving back. So where do we get the money? We pull out the credit card. We borrow the money to give it to the top 1 percent. So we are cutting services on this end. We are pushing the burden down to the local level, and then we are borrowing money to give to rich people; and then in this other area here, we are pushing the burden off on the next generation. It is a tax shift off onto your kids, to your grandkids some day, my kids and my grandkids. So we are going to have a higher rate of taxes for your grandkids because of this indulgence, this binge that we have been on, the binge that this administration has been on; and we are pushing it down to these kids at the same time that the baby boomers are moving into our systems, our Medicare system and our Social Security system. What are we thinking? This makes no sense to do what we are doing. It is mind-boggling. I was on the floor a couple of hours ago with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and the other gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland) and we were talking about veterans. When you listen to this, if you are home just listening this, Law and Order is over, now you are turning on C- SPAN, watching us, you think those are two partisans down there talking, and a few hours ago there were three, just trying to score political points, just blatant politics. But then you look at the facts and you look at what is going on with our country and the lack of investment in people, the lack of investment in all of the programs that we have believed in for years, you begin to recognize it is an issue of priorities. It is an issue of we would rather give these tax cuts because we think in the long run it will help us win an election as opposed to what is best for the country.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I think when you ask and we talk about what do you do, and I think there is ample evidence for criticism of what has been happening, not only in this chamber but the leadership throughout our government, the lack of leadership, I guess I should say, throughout our government, and the variety of issues that have not been touched upon here tonight and a lot more that we have, but what are we going to do? What should we do? What is the answer? It is one thing I think to criticize and critique, but what is the answer? I think part of the answer is all we have to do is look back throughout the history of this country from its inception, and many people like to say, well, the government is not worth anything, the government cannot initiate anything. If you look at all of the major advancements that have been made in the country from the post office, to land grant colleges, to the railroads, to the interstate highway, Medicare, Medicaid, civil rights, Social Security, the GI Bill, the Pell grants, Federal housing, all of these initiatives have, in one way or another, moved the country forward. Who was it that moved the country forward? It was always the government who was leading the way to move the country forward. The research on the Internet was government investment. The research for diseases now at NIH, government investment, and now I just heard Secretary Abraham, Secretary of Energy, he wants $50 million for a new super high-tech fast supercomputer to give our country a competitive advantage. Who is the Secretary of Energy? Who does it belong to? Where does the money come from? It comes from here. It comes from the government. The government always has had a role to play. It will continue to have a role to play, and I think the philosophy that people are trying to push down the American people's throats now of here is your 300 bucks, while tuition and fees has increased by 28 percent under this current administration; tuition and fees at 4-year public institutions increased by 35 percent; tuition and fee increases at public 2-year institutions increased by 60 percent; tuition and fees increased in 49 of the 50 States in 2003. You and I come here at eleven o'clock at night. Our wives are watching and hopefully trying to engage some young people. But why do it? Because we need to establish a program in this country that will move the country forward. Now, after 9-11, we had opportunities for energy efficiency, or another GI bill, or you could have asked the American people to ride to work on bikes and they would have gone out and done it because they were committed to moving the country forward and committed to doing whatever it takes. And yet look at the inaction, look at the one solution for every problem. This is a one-trick pony. Tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts. And they are not going to the people in my district. Fifty percent of the people in my district in Youngstown, Ohio; in Niles, Ohio; in Warren, Ohio; and in Akron, Ohio, 50 percent of the people got a tax cut, but 50 percent did not.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Absolutely. I think an amazing number here, and I know viewers cannot see these at home, but these are official statistics. Household debt in January 2001 was $6.6 trillion. Household debt today, $8.8 trillion; $2.2 trillion more of household debt. And that is the issue that we keep talking about because the debt tax, the tax per household from this reckless binge that we have been on over the past 3 years is ultimately going to cost your kids and your grandkids enormous amounts of money to pay for that debt.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I drive back and forth from Ohio to Washington, and it is just, to try to get it on the turnpike or in a big city like Washington, shameful.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I am not sure we want to talk about it because it is painful.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. To do it right and to create long-term and probably really what we have, and I think young people sense this when I talk to them because they have grown up in the culture of where we are talking about stocks and politics, and they are a little more sophisticated than even we were just a few years ago, but a lot of those young people recognize that the decisions that are made in this body and the political decisions that are made are made for short-term political advantage, not long-term prosperity for the country. I think you have seen it over the past few years that the decisions that are made about how can we win the next election, and I am from the school of thought that if you do right when you are in power, when you do right by leading, that the electorate will take care of itself and the people will vote for candidates who support issues that make the country better, make the country stronger, economically, politically and whatever. But I think it is important for us to realize that the kind of atmosphere that we are creating here, the lack of investment in education, the lack of investment in K through 12, the lack of investment for our college kids is coming home to roost, and we are not creating any kind of new jobs. We are losing jobs. But what is the next industry? If you are not investing in the young people, you are not going to be able to create the next industry. I am going to share one statistic with you and then I am going to kick it back over to the quarterback here tonight. Some of the major technology hubs over the past few years, Silicon Valley, famous; Seattle, booming; Austin, Texas, everything was great. Those areas now have a higher unemployment rate than the Nation at large, and I think when we are talking here tonight about what is the future prospects of the young people who are hopefully out there tonight watching this, if not studying and going to school and trying to make themselves better, what are the future prospects, and think when you hear statistics like that where great areas of concentration of high-tech wealth and job creation have higher unemployment rates than the Nation at large, I think that there is a lot of things that need to be done, and I think the answer to that is investment into education. So I am hoping that through raising the awareness for the young people here that we have an opportunity to hopefully engage these young people like the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) wants to do, reach out to these students and 20 somethings and 30 somethings and engage them in the process and let them know that they have a right to stand up and they have a right to be involved in this process.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. They have been asked to make no sacrifice at all, and these gentlemen were talking before we got up here, about an hour ago, and they said, quote, and I wrote it down, ``Republicans will not raise taxes.'' And I think there were two words left out of that. Republicans will not raise taxes, well, maybe three words, on the rich.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, if people were just watching this and just tuned in and they hear us talk about some of these issues, I mean we go back to our districts every week and we talk to people who are not engaged in the day-to-day debates that we have here. You would think we are making this up, because it goes on and on and on and on, and you would think that the Democrats are just playing partisan politics. But if you just clearly look at the facts, you will find that we are not making this up, and you may come to understand as you listen to a lot of the special orders, you listen to the 1-minute speeches, you listen to the debate on the House floor, why some of us are so outraged at what is happening here. With the veterans' issues that we are talking about and closing down of the facility in Brecksville, Ohio, which many of the veterans in my district go to for service; and they are moving it into downtown Cleveland into Wade Park. We are asked to support this move because the administration has told us that there will be no decline in the service, there will be more services. There will be more services; it will be better for everybody. I hate to be the guy to spoil the party, but this administration does not have a very good track record on keeping their promises, and whether you go to Iraq, whether you go to their economic policy, the domestic policy, No Child Left Behind, promises to veterans, promises for Pell Grants, whatever it has been, they have not lived up to the promises they have made. So why should the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), the Congressman down in Mississippi, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Doyle), why should we take this administration at their word that they are going to take care of our veterans? Because they have not; they have not with our soldiers, they have not with our Reservists. And so we are here tonight, I think in part, to hold their feet to the fire and to question the kind of leadership that they are getting. One or two points that I just want to make: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs has said that the budget that is coming out of this, that the budget, not that the President recommended, is $1.5 billion short, billion with a ``B'', short of what is needed. The veterans organizations have said that the President's request is $3 billion short of what they need. Now, is the veterans organization too high and the Democrats too high? I do not think so, but at the very least, the administration should at least follow the lead of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, who says $1.5 billion more to meet the needs. For this administration to continue its shortsighted approach, along with all of its domestic policies, this one is what kills me, and especially because the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) has spent so much in the health care field in understanding the needs for investment. There is a $50 million cut in the award-winning VA medical prosthetic research and development program. Now, here is an award-winning program that is developing prosthetics for amputees, the best around; and we have soldiers in Iraq right now that are losing arms and legs as we speak, and we are cutting funding for the research and development of better prosthetics. It continues, it continues, it continues; and it is just the shortsightedness that this administration has. To do it for young kids, to do it for the poor, to do it for the uninsured is shameful, but to do it to the veterans who have given us this system that we have here today, I think it is especially shameful. I am glad to join you here tonight to continue this conversation.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield on that point, because this is an important point to make.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Everyone who in some way receives some kind of public assistance, whether it is the veterans, or No Child Left Behind, or people going to school, everyone, Medicare, all the social programs that we have been asked to make some kind of sacrifice. The only people who have not been asked to make any sacrifice at all are the wealthiest people in our society.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I think it is appropriate for us to talk about what the Democrats' plan is and what we would do. I think it is important not just to criticize, although there is plenty of room for criticism in this administration. The Democratic budget that we want for veterans would increase the tax for those who make more than a million dollars a year, not all of it. As the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) said, they get $123,000 back from the Bush tax plan. We would say they would only get $100,000 back. They would have to give around $20,000 of their tax cut back. Part of that money we would use, $2 billion of it, to restore the full survivor benefits to families of military retirees. $2.5 billion we would put in veterans health care. We would improve military housing for 50,000 military families. So if anyone is at home asking, what is the Democratic plan, this is our plan: $2.5 billion for health care, 50,000 families for military housing, $2 billion to restore full survivor benefits. And our legislation, if we were controlling this Chamber, the other Chamber and possibly the White House, would permanently permit Reservists to buy military health care through the TRICARE program. Many of the Reservists, almost 2,000 of them, and I hear often about the health care issues, our plan would allow them to buy permanently into the TRICARE program. We would give them pay raises, things the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) talked about, the combat pay, et cetera; our future veterans would be taken care of. So the Democrats have a plan. Let the millionaire keep $100,000, we are going to take a few thousand away and invest it into our veterans and into the research and development for our amputees that will be coming back, so they have the best possible health care that the United States of America, the wealthiest superpower ever in the history of world, can at the very least take care of its veterans.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I would be happy to yield.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Well, I just wanted to say that that is a letter sent from the head of the Department of Defense, the Republican- controlled administration sent to this Congress saying that if you pass a benefit for the veterans, we will veto the bill. It is that clear. It is black and white.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Absolutely.