John Spratt

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas. (Mr. NEUGEBAUER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 207) recognizing the 60th anniversary of the United States Air Force as an independent military service.

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, in the interest of jointness, I have now the pleasure of recognizing and yielding 4 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sestak), who is a retired naval admiral.

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I have no requests at this time on this side. I therefore yield to the gentleman. If you need some of my time, I will gladly yield it.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the legislation, H. Con. Res. 207.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 306 (b) of S. Con. Res. 21, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2008, I hereby submit for printing in the Congressional Record revisions to the budget allocations and aggregates for the House Committee on Education and Labor for fiscal years 2007, 2008, and the period of 2008 through 2012. These revisions represent adjustments to the Committee on Education and Labor's allocations and aggregates for the purposes of sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, and in response to the conference report to accompany H.R. 2669, the College Cost Reduction and Access Act. Corresponding tables are attached. Under section 211 of S. Con. Res. 21, these adjustments to the budget allocations and aggregates apply while the conference report accompanying H.R. 2669 is under consideration and will take effect upon enactment of the measure. For purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, revised allocations made under section 211 of S. Con. Res. 21 are to be considered as allocations included in the budget resolution. DIRECT SPENDING LEGISLATION--AUTHORIZING COMMITTEE 302(a) ALLOCATIONS FOR RESOLUTION CHANGES [Fiscal years, in millions of dollars] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2007 2008 2008-2012 Total House Committee ----------------------------------------------------------- BA Outlays BA Outlays BA Outlays ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Current allocation:................................. Education and Labor............................. 13 4 -150 -145 -750 -742 Change in College Cost Reduction and Access Act (H.R. 2669):....................................... Education and Labor............................. -4,890 -4,890 -176 -842 5,754 4,888 Revised allocation:................................. Education and Labor............................. -4,877 -4,886 -326 -987 5,004 4,146 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the conference agreement on H.R. 2669. I am proud to say that this is a reconciliation bill which originated with the budget resolution for fiscal year 2008. This is also a happy occasion where good policy for education is also good for the budget's bottom line. This bill will reduce the budget deficit. That's right, it will reduce the budget deficit over 5 years by $750 million at the same time that it invests in human capital and makes colleges more affordable for millions of students. I am proud to see this outcome, proud to have gotten the ball rolling in the Budget Committee to start the process, and I commend the chairman who has taken this bill from January to September, passing it step by step through the House, through the Senate, conferencing it, in no small part due to the reconciliation status it enjoyed in the Senate, and I hope that the whole House will note the support that it has gotten. This is a solid, substantive bill for college students. I hope the conference report will pass handily in both Chambers and I hope the President will take note and sign this bill into law. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the conference agreement on H.R. 2669, the College Cost Reduction and Access Act. I am proud to say that this is a reconciliation bill, which originated with the budget resolution for fiscal 2008. This is also a happy occasion where good policy is good for the budget's bottom line. This bill will reduce the budget deficit at the same time that it invests in human capital and helps make college more affordable for millions of students. The conference agreement complies with our budget resolution for fiscal year 2008, which instructed the House Committee on Education and Labor to cut spending under its jurisdiction by $750 million by 2012. By passing this measure, the House maintains the tough pay-as-you-go rule and the rule barring reconciliation bills that increase the deficit, a rule the House instituted for the 110th Congress in January. These budget rules require Congress to make tough choices to meet priorities while restoring the budget to balance, and the House has insisted on enforcing these rules in every case. This reconciliation bill is a stark contrast from those enacted by Republican-controlled Congresses. Every Republican reconciliation directive since 1994 has resulted in reconciliation packages consisting primarily of huge tax cuts that increased the deficit. In contrast, this reconciliation bill is better than budget-neutral; over fiscal years 2007 through 2012, it results in budgetary savings of $752 million. In addition to making a net reduction in the deficit, this bill makes improvements in student loans and grants, paid for by cuts in subsidies to student loan lenders. It provides more than $20 billion in new resources to make college more affordable by lowering the cost of student loans or by increasing the grant available. For example, by 2012 the bill increases the maximum Pell grant to $5,400, a 33 percent increase over what the maximum grant was when the 110th Congress was sworn in. The bill also cuts by 50 percent the interest rate that students pay on subsidized student loans. To offset the cost of these student benefits, the bill reduces subsidies that the government pays to banks. These reductions are similar to those in H.R. 5, which passed the House in January by a bipartisan vote of 356-71, and to the subsidy cuts in the President's 2008 budget proposal. I commend the committee, and its able chairman, Mr. Miller, for moving this bill step by step from January to September, passing it in the House and conferencing it. I hope that this bill will pass handily in both bodies, and I hope that the President will take note, and sign this bill into law immediately.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I am transmitting a status report on the current levels of on-budget spending and revenues for fiscal years 2007 and 2008 and the five-year period of fiscal years 2008 through 2012. This report is necessary to facilitate the application of sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act. This status report is current through September 5, 2007. The term ``current level'' refers to the amounts of spending and revenues estimated for each fiscal year based on laws enacted or awaiting the President's signature. The first table in the report compares the current level of total budget authority, outlays, and revenues for the fiscal years 2007 and 2008, and the five-year period of fiscal years 2008 through 2012 with the aggregate levels set by S. Con. Res. 21, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2008. This, comparison is needed to enforce section 311(a) of the Budget Act, which creates a point of order against measures that would breach the budget resolution's aggregate levels. The table does not show budget authority and outlays for years after fiscal years 2007 and 2008 because appropriations for those years have not yet been considered. The second table compares the current levels of budget authority and outlays for spending by each authorizing committee with the section 302(a) allocations made under S. Con. Res. 21 for fiscal years 2007 and 2008 and fiscal years 2008 through 2012. This comparison is needed to enforce section 302(f) of the Budget Act, which creates a point of order against measures that would breach the section 302(a) allocation of new budget authority for the committee that reported the measure. It is also needed to implement section 311(c), which exempts committees that comply with their allocations from the point of order under section 311(a). The third table compares the current levels of discretionary appropriations for fiscal years 2007 and 2008 with the section 302(b) suballocations of discretionary budget authority and outlays among Appropriations subcommittees. The comparison is also needed to enforce section 302(f) of the Budget Act because the point of order under that section equally applies to measures that would breach the applicable section 302(b) suballocation. The fourth table gives the current level for fiscal years 2009 and 2010 of accounts identified for advance appropriations under Section 206 of S. Con. Res. 21. This list is needed to enforce the budget resolution, which prohibits advance appropriations that are: (i) not identified in the statement of managers or (ii) would cause the aggregate amount of such appropriations to exceed the level specified in the resolution.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, Under section 308(b)(1) of S. Con. Res. 21, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2008, I hereby submit for printing in the Congressional Record a revision to the budget allocations and aggregates for certain House committees for fiscal years 2007, 2008, and the period of 2008 through 2012. This revision represents an adjustment to certain House committee budget allocations and aggregates for the purposes of sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, and in response to the bills made in order by the Committee on Rules, H.R. 2776, the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2007 and H.R. 3221, the New Direction for Energy Independence, National Security, and Consumer Protection Act. Corresponding tables are attached. Under section 211 of S. Con. Res. 21, this adjustment to the budget allocations and aggregates applies while the measures are under consideration. The adjustments will take effect upon enactment of the measures. For purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, a revised allocation made under section 211 of S. Con. Res. 21 is to be considered as an allocation included in the resolution. DIRECT SPENDING LEGISLATION--AUTHORIZING COMMITTEE 302(a) ALLOCATIONS FOR RESOLUTION CHANGES [Fiscal Years, in millions of dollars] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2007 2008 2008-2012 Total

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin and I would like to gratefully acknowledge the expert assistance that the U.S. Congress has received from Paul Cullinan at the Congressional Budget Office. Paul is retiring from congressional service in August, and this institution will sorely miss him. Dr. Cullinan arrived at CBO in 1981, and has contributed to a vast range of policy analyses, budget projections, and legislative cost estimates over the past 26 years. But more important than the amount and variety of such work is the consistently high quality of that work and Paul's continual dedication to providing the Congress with thorough and timely analysis. For the past 13 years, Paul Cullinan has served as the Manager of CBO's Human Resources Cost Estimates Unit, a role in which he has excelled and one that has allowed CBO to provide critical support to the consideration of numerous and varied pieces of legislation including efforts to reauthorize and extend higher education programs and the Food Stamps program, potential changes to Social Security, proposals to reform U.S. immigration policies, and changes, both big and small, to a large host of income security programs. Moreover, Paul has been a key contributor and coordinator of CBO work on long-term budget projections, which we have come to increasingly consider as we move towards the pending retirement of the baby-boom generation. In addition to his superb analysis of legislative proposals, Paul has provided valued support to the House and Senate Budget Committees on a bipartisan and bicameral basis. In short, Paul Cullinan ranks among the top budget experts here on Capitol Hill, and we will miss his input, careful judgment, and dedication to providing the best budgetary information possible for congressional consideration.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, under sections 211, 301(b), 304(a), 305(b), 314(d), 320(a), and 320(c) of S. Con. Res. 21, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2008, I hereby submit for printing in the Congressional Record a revision to the budget allocations and aggregates for certain House committees for fiscal years 2007, 2008, and the period of 2008 through 2012. This revision represents an adjustment to certain House committee budget allocations and aggregates for the purposes of sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, and in response to the bill made in order by the Committee on Rules, H.R. 3162 (Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act of 2007). Corresponding tables are attached. Under section 211 of S. Con. Res. 21, this adjustment to the budget allocations and aggregates applies while the measure (H.R. 3162) is under consideration. The adjustments will take effect upon enactment of the measure (H.R. 3162). For purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, a revised allocation made under section 211 of S. Con. Res. 21 is to be considered as an allocation included in the resolution. DIRECT SPENDING LEGISLATION--AUTHORIZING COMMITTEE 302(a) ALLOCATIONS FOR RESOLUTION CHANGES [Fiscal years, in millions of dollars] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2007 2008 2008-2012 total House committee ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BA Outlays BA Outlays BA Outlays -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Current allocation: Energy and Commerce............... -1 -1 134 132 89 87 Ways and Means.................... 0 0 -38 -38 -98 -98 Change for Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act of 2007 (H.R. 3162): Energy and Commerce............... 0 0 2,872 2,872 51,798 51,798 Ways and Means.................... 0 0 2,939 2,939 -26,190 -26,190 Total............................. 0 0 5,811 5,811 25,608 25,608 Revised allocation: Energy and Commerce............... -1 -1 3,006 3,004 51,887 51,885 Ways and Means.................... 0 0 2,901 2,901 -26,288 -26,288 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, under sections 211 and 307(b) of S. Con. Res. 21, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2008, I hereby submit for printing in the Congressional Record a revision to the budget allocations and aggregates for certain House committees for fiscal years 2007, 2008, and the period of 2008 through 2012. This revision represents an adjustment to certain House committee budget allocations and aggregates for the purposes of sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, and in response to the bill H.R. 2419 (Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of 2007). Corresponding tables are attached. Under section 211 of S. Con. Res. 21, this adjustment to the budget allocations and aggregates applies while the measure (H.R. 2419) is under consideration. The adjustments will take effect upon enactment of the measure (H.R. 2419). For purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, a revised allocation made under section 211 of S. Con. Res. 21 is to be considered as an allocation included in the resolution. DIRECT SPENDING LEGISLATION--AUTHORIZING COMMITTEE 302(a) ALLOCATIONS FOR RESOLUTION CHANGES [Fiscal years, in millions of dollars] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2007 2008 2008-2012 Total

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 207(d) of S. Con. Res. 21, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2008, I hereby submit for printing in the Congressional Record revised 302 (a) allocations for the House Committee on Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008. Section 207 (d)(2) directs the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget to adjust the discretionary spending allocations for three program integrity initiatives: Continuing Disability Reviews and Supplemental Security Income Redeterminations, Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control, and Unemployment Improper Payment Reviews as provided in section 207 (d) (1)(A), (C) and (D) of S. Con. Res. 21, respectively. DISCRETIONARY APPROPRIATIONS: Appropriations Committee 302(a) Allocation [In millions of dollars] ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution. I will be frank to say that I think the time lines are too tight, the details are too sketchy; but I recognize this resolution for what it is. It is not a general order or master plan for the redeployment of our troops in Iraq. This is simply a way to frame the debate with the President over how we can most effectively reduce and redeploy the 170,000 troops now on duty in Iraq. We are, after all, in the 5th year of this war. So far, 3,611 Americans have given their lives, 27,000 have been wounded in action. We have spent $450 billion through May, and continue spending now at a rate of $10 billion a month. Had we the foresight 3 years ago, 4 years ago to see these costs, the War Powers Resolution would not have secured 100 votes in this House. Opponents of this resolution claim that we are encroaching on the powers of the President as the Commander in Chief. Those who think that should read the resolution and read it carefully. First of all, it does not call for an immediate withdrawal. It allows 4 months for the reduction in forces to begin. Second, it does not call for withdrawal at all. It calls for a reduction of the number of troops deployed or transition to a limited mission. Third, it spells out the limited missions. These include force protection, diplomatic protection, pursuit of terrorists, training of Iraqi forces. The resolution, far from interfering, defers to the President, allows the Pentagon to decide just what is the minimum force level for the mission it specifies, provided it justifies its decision. For the past 3 years, the President has assured us that we would stand down American troops as soon as Iraqi troops stood up. Well, that is essentially what this resolution does; 135 Iraqi battalions have been trained. Many may lack things like logistics to make them freestanding fighting units, but surely this is a capacity we can supply over the next 6 months or even longer through embedded advisers who will remain after April 2008. This resolution sends the Iraqi troops the message that we are not in their country, Iraq, indefinitely, and that the day is fast approaching when they must take responsibility for the security of their own country. For the past 2 years the President has told us that benchmarks or milestones have been laid down for the Iraqi government to accomplish. This week we received a progress report on those metrics showing few measurable gains. So here's our dilemma: Our presence in Iraq, with 170,000 troops, allows the Iraqi government an ability to operate, the freedom of action it would not otherwise enjoy absent our support. But the Iraqi government has exploited that security to avoid doing the very steps that are necessary to its becoming a true government of national reconciliation, which commands the allegiance of all Iraqis. Yesterday the Deputy Director for Analysis in the Office of National Intelligence told us, ``current political trends are moving the country in a negative direction.'' One way to make Iraqi leaders take the reins of their own government, establish their government, is to announce reduction of our forces in front-line combat troops and their transition to a limited mission and make it clear that our commitment to their country is not open-ended. Three or 4 months ago, we were told by the administration it was going to undertake a new strategy, a new plan for securing Iraq called a surge, concentrated primarily in Baghdad. We now have the early results from that. We were told we would know in 3 or 4 months. Three or 4 months have passed, and we've only seen casualties increase. There have been some successes, sure, and we're thankful for them. And I hope it succeeds. But we need a new strategy. We do not have one, and this calls for a rethinking of everything. And for these reasons I will vote for this resolution, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2669 (the College Cost Reduction Act of 2007), a bill that is good for students and good for the Federal budget. Our budget resolution for fiscal year 2008 included reconciliation instructions for the House Committee on Education and Labor to cut its spending by $750 million by 2012, and this bill more than fulfills that target. In fact, this reconciliation bill will reduce the Federal Government's budget deficit by $2.8 billion over the next 5 years while investing billions of dollars in making college more affordable for millions of students. One of the first actions of the 110th Congress was to institute a tough pay-as-you-go rule in the House that requires all changes to mandatory spending and revenues to be offset so that they do not lower the budget's bottom line. The rule was necessary to help restore fiscal balance, and it requires Congress to make tough choices about priorities. This bill adheres to the pay-as-you-go rule--with net savings of $2.8 billion over the 2007-2012 period and even greater savings over 2007-2017--while also providing needed improvements in student loans and grant aid. Like previous reconciliation bills, the College Cost Reduction Act includes some new resources that are more than offset by cuts elsewhere. All of the new resources in the bill will make college more affordable, either by lowering the cost of loans--up-front or through forgiveness after graduation--or by increasing the amount of grant aid available. But none of these resources will increase the deficit: the bill not only complies with our pay-as-you-go rule and the reconciliation directive but actually reduces the deficit by $2.8 billion over the next 5 years. To pay for these student benefits, the bill reduces the extra subsidies that the government pays to banks. These reductions are similar to those in H.R. 5, which passed the House in January by a bipartisan vote of 356-71, and to the subsidy cuts in the President's 2008 budget proposal. But the student loan business will continue to be an attractive one for banks, which are still guaranteed to receive 95 percent of unpaid principal on any defaulted loan and still receive a subsidy from the Federal Government on each loan they provide.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, under sections 211 and 320(c) of S. Con. Res. 21, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for fiscal year 2008, I hereby submit for printing in the Congressional Record a revision to the budget allocations and aggregates for the House Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Education and Labor for fiscal years 2007, 2008, and the period of 2008 through 2012. This revision represents an adjustment to the Committees' budget allocations and aggregates for the purposes of section 302 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, and in response to the bill S. 1701--to provide for the extension of transitional medical assistance, TMA, and the abstinence education program through the end of fiscal year 2007, and for other purposes. Corresponding tables are attached. Under section 211 of S. Con. Res. 21, this adjustment to the budget allocations and aggregates of the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Education and Labor applies while the measure--S. 1701--is under consideration. The adjustments will take effect upon enactment of the measure--S. 1701. For purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, a revised allocation made under section 211 of S. Con. Res. 21 is to be considered as an allocation included in the resolution. DIRECT SPENDING LEGISLATION--AUTHORIZING COMMITTEE 302(a) ALLOCATIONS FOR RESOLUTION CHANGES [Fiscal years, in millions of dollars] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2007 2008 2008-2012 Total House committee ----------------------------------------------------------------------- BA Outlays BA Outlays BA Outlays ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Current allocation: Education and Labor................. $0 $0 $-150 $-150 $-750 $-750 Energy and Commerce................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ways and Means...................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 Change in TMA extension bill (S. 1701): Education and Labor................. 13 4 0 5 0 8 Energy and Commerce................. -1 -1 134 132 89 87 Ways and Means...................... 0 0 -38 -38 -98 -98 Total........................... 12 3 96 99 -9 -3 Revised allocation: Education and Labor................. 13 4 -150 -145 -750 -742 Energy and Commerce................. -1 -1 134 132 89 87 Ways and Means...................... 0 0 -38 -38 -98 -98 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 207(d) of S. Con. Res. 21, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2008, I hereby submit the revised 302(a) allocations for the House Committee on Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008. Section 207(d)(2) directs the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget to adjust the discretionary spending allocations for an Internal Revenue Service tax compliance program integrity initiative as provided in section 207(d)(1)(B) of S. Con. Res. 21. DISCRETIONARY APPROPRIATIONS: APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE 302(a) ALLOCATION (In millions of dollars) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Budget authority Outlays ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fiscal Year 2007............................ 950,316 1,029,465 Fiscal Year 2008............................ 953,459 1,028,780 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Let me thank both the chairman and the ranking member for this gracious yielding of time but, in addition, for the excellent work they have done on this bill. As they know, there is a bone of contention in the bill where we have had a disagreement. It is called MOX fuel. I think it's a good idea. For some time we've had an understanding with the Russians that they and we would build MOX fuel disposition plants so that we could take weapons grade plutonium and convert it into reactor fuel, burn it and dispose of it so it would no longer be usable for weapons. This bill took the President's request of $333 million and basically cut it in half to 167. But when I sat down with the chairman, he pointed out to me that there were prior-year balances that would augment that amount of money and, all in all, there was a total of $698 million available which would be enough to move the project forward in the next fiscal year. Unfortunately, when we explored those unspent balances, we found that the numbers were a bit out of date, according to the Department of Energy, and that the available funds would add up to only about $326 million, which is about half of what is needed for the project next year. So I rise simply to say that in conference or somewhere along the way before this finally becomes law, we would like to reengage about the amount of money that is available for the MOX plant. I'm not offering an amendment today. I know it would be defeated. It would also be ingratitude for the work that the chairman and the ranking member have already committed to work with us on this project. But I do say, number one, I appreciate your efforts and, number two, we'll visit this number in conference with the conferees if at all possible. There are some other issues here, the H Canyon, there's $85 million taken out of it. It's the only plutonium processing line of its kind we have operative in the country today. That money may render it difficult to operate it through the rest of the year. And there is also a question of where the pit disassembly process will be located. I understand that has been resolved and will be resolved with an amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher). Let me thank the chairman and the ranking member for their assistance in this matter and say that we still have some work to do on the adequate amount of money for the MOX fuel plant before the bill is ready.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I am transmitting a status report on the current levels of on-budget spending and revenues for fiscal years 2007 and 2008 and for the 5-year period of fiscal years 2008 through 2012. This report is necessary to facilitate the application of sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act and sections 204, 206 and 207 of S. Con. Res. 21, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2008. The term ``current level'' refers to the amounts of spending and revenues estimated for each fiscal year based on laws enacted or awaiting the President's signature. The first table in the report compares the current levels of total budget authority, outlays, and revenues with the aggregate levels set by S. Con. Res. 21. This comparison is needed to enforce section 311(a) of the Budget Act, which creates a point of order against measures that would breach the budget resolution's aggregate levels. The second table compares the current levels of discretionary appropriations for fiscal years 2007 and 2008 with the ``section 302(b)'' suballocations of discretionary budget authority and outlays among Appropriations subcommittees. The comparison is needed to enforce section 302(f) of the Budget Act because the point of order under that section applies to measures that would breach the applicable section 302(b) suballocation. The third table compares the current levels of budget authority and outlays for each authorizing committee with the ``section 302(a)'' allocations made under S. Con. Res. 21 for fiscal years 2007 and 2008 and fiscal years 2008 through 2012. This comparison is needed to enforce section 302(f) of the Budget Act, which creates a point of order against measures that would breach the section 302(a) allocation of new budget authority for the committee that reported the measure. The fourth table gives the current level for fiscal years 2009 and 2010 for accounts identified for advance appropriations under section 206 of S. Con. Res. 21. This list is needed to enforce section 206 of the budget resolution, which creates a point of order against appropriation bills that contain advance appropriations that: (i) Are not identified in the statement of managers; or (ii) would cause the aggregate amount of such appropriations to exceed the level specified in the resolution.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, for years, Thomas A. Stallworth was a pillar of Presbyterian College in Clinton, SC, serving as chaplain, professor of religion, soccer coach, dean of students, dean of alumni affairs, and after retirement, as interim director of church relations. He died suddenly on May 14, 2007. I offer for the record the following tribute from John V. Griffith, president of Presbyterian College: Tom Stallworth: Our Man for All Seasons God's saints come in interesting sizes and shapes. They are agents of God's grace in the most unexpected of ways. So it is with Tom Stallworth. In the fall of 1951, Tom Stallworth was a freshman at PC from the south side of Atlanta. As an undergraduate he joined and loved the PC choir under the direction of Eduard Patte, was involved in student government, led the Student Christian Association, enjoyed athletics, belonged to Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity, was the leader of The Scottish Highlander Battalion of ROTC, and was enjoyed by his classmates for his sense of humor, love of life, and humble faith. After graduating from Columbia Theological Seminary and a short stint at the First Presbyterian Church of Rome, Georgia, Dr. Marshall Brown asked Tom to come to the College to teach for two years. Pete Hay was on leave. Tom retired 36 years later, although the way I look at it, Tom worked at or for PC for a total of 56 years. He has been PC's man for all seasons. In the 1973 yearbook, one of three dedicated to Tom, he wrote prophetic words, which I have come to see as autobiographical . . . ``There is an ingredient in and of this community which few miss. It's not obvious. Many take some time to see it. You may not even want to look for awhile. They do not leave the way they came. Look them up three, five, ten years from now. Won't we all be surprised? They will have a plus; it will show!'' Tom's plus showed. In him we saw much of what the College seeks to nurture in the hearts and minds of those who pass our way: a man for God, a man for God's people, and a man for

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, pursuant to section 207(f) of S. Con. Res. 21, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2008, I hereby submit for printing in the Congressional Record revised 302(a) allocations for the House Committee on Appropriations for fiscal years 2007 and 2008. I am also providing current law mandatory allocations for informational purposes only.

Mr. SPRATT

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, before yielding to the majority leader, let me set the record straight with respect to revenue flows. If you look in the Congressional Budget Office projections of revenues in the budget, you will see that for the period 2008 through 2012, cumulative revenues are projected to be $15.3 trillion. If you subtract 176 for that to account for the agreement we've made with the Senate, which will facilitate the adoption and extension of the middle income tax cuts adopted between 2001 and 2003, then our number for total revenues, according to CBO is $14.828 trillion. The President's budget, total revenues are $14.826 trillion. We are $14.828 trillion, the President is $14.826 trillion; $2 billion difference. This is the biggest tax increase in history? Give me a break. And how about the Republican's own revenue stream. You start from the same baseline. They have to use CBO numbers too. $15.3 trillion. Deduct from that $447 billion, which they have in tax cuts during that period of time, the baseline number for them becomes $14.556 trillion. That is a difference of $272 billion over 5 years, less than $50 billion a year over that period of time. This is absurd. This has gone on and on and on, as the speeches claim, and we will refute it every time it's raised today. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland, the distinguished majority leader.

Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green) for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request. (Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)