John Spratt

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Chair, how much time remains on this side?

Mr. SPRATT. I yield myself 30 additional seconds. Americans without health care or health coverage dropped from 15.3 percent to 13.7 percent in the Clinton years, then went back up to 15.3 in the Bush years. These facts speak louder than anything I can say. The difference between us is profound. If you want to know whom you can believe, trust, and put your faith in with respect to economic planning, just remember what we did in the 1990s, and what we can do in the period we have now with the President we have and the program we're trying to devise. Vote for the base resolution--the House Democratic resolution. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SPRATT. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of our Foreign Affairs Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman).

Mr. SPRATT. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. SPRATT. We have the right to close, I believe. We have one more speaker, and we will close with that speaker.

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Chair, I yield the balance of our time to our distinguished majority leader, Mr. Hoyer.

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Chair, this has been a compressed period for producing a budget. An enormous amount of work has gone into the effort that is manifest on the floor here for the last couple of days. It never would have come to this fruition without their superior assistance. I want to recognize Tom Kahn, our staff director, my longstanding legislative aid and staff director, Sarah Abernathy, Ellen Balis, Arthur Burris, Linda Bywaters, Adam Carasso, Marsha Douglas, Stephen Elmore, Chuck Fant, Jason Freihage, Christen Green, Jose Guillen, Jennifer Hanson-Kilbride, Sheila McDowell, Dick Magee, Diana Meredith, Gail Millar, Morna Miller, Kimberly Overbeek, Scott Russell, Marcus Stephens, Naomi Stern, Lisa Venus, Greg Waring and Andrea Weathers; as well as Adam Brunelle and Andrew Fieldhouse. I also want to recognize the indispensable work done for both of us by Bob Weinhagen of the Office of Legislative Counsel and the staff of the Congressional Budget Office. This is a testament to what staff means to us and the kind of work they pull together in a short period of time. They make us look good. We couldn't do without them. They deserve our praises.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 85.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute first to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews) for a rejoinder, and then I will go to Mr. Scott.

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Chair, President Bush has left President Obama a hard hand to play. The economy is receding, the budget is in deficit by $1.752 trillion, according to OMB, and the end is nowhere in sight. President Obama has responded with a budget that meets the challenge head on. The Budget Committee's resolution before us tonight reflects his policies and his proposals. The President has recognized that we have not one but two deficits. The first is an economy running at 6 percent to 7 percent below its full capacity. To move our economy closer to its capacity, the President has signed into law a package of stimulus measures totaling $787 billion. Here is what the Congressional Budget Office says in its analysis issued 2 weeks ago about the stimulus package, and I am quoting, ``The adoption of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and very aggressive actions by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury will help end this recession this fall.'' Let's hope they are right. In light of this prognosis, it is hard to believe, but our colleagues from across the aisle use their budget to call for terminating, ending, the Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The President next turned to the budget. He has sent us a budget to cut the deficit by two-thirds, two-thirds by 2013, from $1,752,000,000 from this year to $533 billion in 2013. Now, it is all but impossible to balance a budget when the economy is in recession, and, for that matter, it is ill-advised. To end, or at least to mitigate this recession, our economy is need of more demand for goods and more demand for services, and any demand we generate to make the economy run better will make the deficit run larger at least for now. But here is the stark reality: The deficit that President Bush left behind constitutes a massive 12.3 percent of our gross domestic product. At least two-thirds of that stems from tax and spending policies undertaken by the Bush administration. Anyone, almost anyone, would agree that this is an unsustainable deficit, defensible only in deep intractable recessions. President Obama clearly believes that, because he has responded with a budget that pares the deficit down to 3 percent of GDP in 2013. His budget cuts the deficit to $533 billion in 4 years. The budget embodied in our resolution before us tonight uses CBO projections instead of OMB, and reduces the deficit to $586 billion in 2013. That is 3.6 percent of GDP or, roughly, the real rate of growth for that year. Our budget is not so committed to deficit reduction that it overrides or overlooks other needs. In fact, it takes on topics that previous budgets have found too tough to tackle, like health care for the millions of Americans who lack insurance. On top of that, it slows down defense spending with an increase of 4 percent, and makes a moderate adjustment to nondefense discretionary spending, lifting it a bit above this year. Notwithstanding deficits, the President's budget launches some bold initiatives to make our economy more productive and our people more competitive: First, in education through Pell Grants in particular; next, in health care for the millions who are uninsured; and, finally, on alternative energy to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and the depletion of our environment. This resolution upholds those priorities. Now, some will single out instances where additional revenue is raised, for example, by allowing certain concessions for upper-bracket taxpayers to expire at the end of 2010, which is the date they were set to expire. But the bigger picture will show that this budget leaves in place the middle-income tax cuts adopted in 2001 and 2003, the 10 percent bracket, the child tax credit, and the marriage penalty relief. It indexes the alternative minimum tax to keep it from coming down on middle-income taxpayers, for whom it was never intended. It also extends estate tax exemptions at the 2009 level, $3.5 million per decedent, and indexes the exemptions for future years. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have complained about the President's tax and spending policies; but let me read from CBO's own nonpartisan analysis of the President's budget, which is basically before us tonight. I am quoting: Proposed changes in tax policy would reduce revenues by an estimated $1.7 trillion over the next 10 years. Reduced revenues, by an estimated $1.7 trillion over the next 10 years. That is CBO talking. The President's major initiatives, those in health care, energy, education, the environment, are all implemented by way of reserve funds. And I would stress that these funds are deficit neutral. They are yet to be funded, and will only become operative to the extent they are funded and will only be enacted if they are deficit neutral. The resolution before us sounds all of these themes and, with a few exception, supports the principles that underlie the President's own budget. This is just the beginning; however, it is a bold beginning for the 2010 budget. Our resolution is laid out in the form of a 5-year budget using CBO's scoring and CBO's projections of the economy. OMB has run its budget out over 10 years and our Republican colleagues have done the same, but a 5-year budget is not at all unusual; in fact, it is the customary timeframe for budgeting. In recent years, four deficit reduction acts have been enacted, and all implemented budgets of less than 10 years. Graham-Rudman-Hollings, the Bush Budget Summit, the Clinton Budget in 1993, and the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 all were 5-year budgets. The farther out you run forecasts, the more tenuous they become. It is speculative just to predict what the economy is going to do 10 months from now much less 10 years from now. Five-year forecasts are, therefore, more realistic, more reliable; and, if the projected results don't pan out, they are more amenable to adjustment. All projections rest on assumptions about the future, and the assumptions can have a profound effect on the bottom line. To show you how uncertain assumptions can be and projections can become, look at CBO's recent experience. Just since last January, CBO's estimate of the deficit is off by $436 billion, since January. Look at the long run, because small differences compound over time into big differences. Over 10 years, the difference between OMB's estimate of tax revenues received and CBO's is $2.8 trillion. That is a huge difference that has a huge impact on the bottom line of these competing forecasts. Fortunately, the congressional budget process is an annual process. Since we revisit the budget every year, we can take steps to correct its course, which we will surely do with deficits of this gravity looming over us. For our part, I can tell you that we are mindful of the second 5 years. As we approach 2015 and 2016, we will be making corrections to see that the deficit stays on a downward trajectory. We believe that these midcourse corrections can best be made when our economy has emerged from the recession and we have a much better and clearer view of an economy that bounces back. Right now, our economy is mired in the worst recession since the 1930s. It stands in marked contrast to the fiscal situation that the Bush administration faced 8 years ago. Instead of inheriting a surplus of $5.6 trillion as did President Bush, President Obama has inherited a deficit, a deficit of $1.7 trillion to $1.8 trillion. At least $1.3 trillion is attributable to the spending and taxing policies of the Bush administration. In effect, President Bush told us we could have it all, guns, butter, and tax cuts, too, and never mind the deficits. Well, 8 years and $5 trillion later, the country is confronted with the worst deficits in our peacetime history. These are not cyclical deficits so much as they are structural deficits. They were built into the structure of the budget over the last 8 years, and they will overhang our budget for years to come as we try to wind them down. This situation cannot be reversed in a year, but we offer today a budget resolution that puts us on the right path. It will have to be renewed, it will have to be complemented, it will have to be adjusted many times before the economy and the budget are right again, but today we can start that process by voting for this resolution. I ask the Chair if she could tell me how much time was consumed.

Mr. SPRATT. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Chair, before yielding 11 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania, I yield 1 minute to Mr. Andrews, the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. SPRATT. I yield 11 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz).

Mr. SPRATT. I would inquire of the gentleman from Wisconsin if he wishes to have further speakers at this point or if we should go ahead.

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Chairman, I will yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) for a rejoinder.

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida, from the Blue Dogs, Mr. Boyd.

Mr. SPRATT. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Chair, I yield 12 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. SPRATT. I yield 1 minute for rejoinder to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

Mr. SPRATT. I yield 9 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra).

Mr. SPRATT. I will yield the gentleman 30 seconds of my time if he'll explain his arithmetic and show us the taxes he's talking about in the text of the resolution. Because they're not there. This has been asserted again and again as a mantra. It doesn't exist.

Mr. SPRATT. It comes from CBO. Don't take it from me. From the analysis of the President's budget: Proposed changes in tax policy would reduce revenues by an estimated $1.7 trillion, with 6.1 percent over the next 10 years. CBO.

Mr. SPRATT. I reclaim the time. I'm glad to yield you some time, but it needs some sort of limit to it.

Mr. SPRATT. I still don't know what the arithmetic is and I don't know where the taxes are, except the tax cuts, as you know, expire on December 3, 2010.

Mr. SPRATT. The President's budget will allow them to expire, except he then proposes to have the capital gains rate be 20 percent instead of 15 percent, which is less than it's traditionally been. And same thing for dividends--20 instead of 15 percent. We don't dictate that in this resolution. We leave matters of that kind--specific policy choices--up to the Ways and Means Committee. I'm going to reclaim my time so we can go forward.