Mike Simpson

Mr. SIMPSON

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. SIMPSON. Will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. SIMPSON. Madam Chairman, I move that the committee do now rise.

Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to the gentlewoman from Wyoming.

Mr. SIMPSON. Yes, I agree with the gentlewoman. The burden should be on the authorizers, and they should do their job, and they should reauthorize the program. I still haven't seen the reauthorization for the Land and Water Conservation Fund. That was last year. I still haven't seen it. I haven't seen the reauthorizations for any of the programs. The whole State Department is unauthorized. Where is the reauthorization? What do you want us to do? We would eliminate about two-thirds of the Federal Government. Now, some people might like that. But we would eliminate about two-thirds of the Federal Government if we just said we are not going to fund any of the Federal programs. So, I mean, it is a debate that goes on. I agree with Congressman McClintock. We have to find a way around this. We have to find a way to address the reauthorization issue without screwing up the whole appropriation process. I think we can do that if reasonable people sit down and try to find a way around this. I actually think that every committee chairman ought to sit down with leadership at the start of a session and say: This is my 5-year plan, and these are all of the programs that are unauthorized under my jurisdiction. This is my 5-year plan to get them reauthorized. They ought to follow through on that work plan. Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve my point of order. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, let me respond and tell the story again. We have already gone through this once tonight about authorizations. I don't think we should fund any program that isn't authorized. I don't think we should flat-fund it. I don't think we should fund it. But that is, unfortunately, what the Appropriations Committee ends up doing because the authorizing committees aren't doing their dang job. They are not getting out and reauthorizing the programs. One year--and I will tell the story again. I will tell it again and again, I suspect, as we go through all of this--when I was chairman of the Interior Committee, because the Endangered Species Act at that time had not been reauthorized for 23 years, 23 years, I took all funding for listing of endangered species and designation of critical habitat out of the bill, zero funded it. We brought the bill to the floor. The biggest supporter of my bill and opponent to the amendment to put funding in it for those purposes was the chairman of the Resources Committee. It is the Resources Committee's responsibility to reauthorize the Endangered Species Act. But he supported my amendment. And after all of that, guess what? They still haven't reauthorized the Endangered Species Act.

Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. First, let me assure the gentleman that I understand his concerns and appreciate his passion for protecting his constituents. I agree with him that, if the floodway is required to be operated in a major flood event, the levee should be restored as soon as possible after the flood event. In fact, the committee report on this bill makes that very point. Unfortunately, the amendment and the impacts of it are not clear. It is possible that the amendment would actually increase flood risks for other communities within the Mississippi River and tributaries project area. Without understanding the effects of the amendment, I must oppose it.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I commend the gentlewoman for her consistency. She always has these amendments to cut 1 percent across the board out of the appropriations bills, and I appreciate her consistent work to protect the taxpayer dollars, but this is an approach that, frankly, I can't support. While the President may have proposed a budget that exceeds this bill, the increases were paid for with proposals and gimmicks that would never be enacted. This bill makes the tough choices within an allocation that adheres to current law. You may not agree with current law, but it is the current law, and that is what we had to go with. Since there wasn't a budget resolution passed, what we ended up with is current law; and that is the allocation that we have, and that is what we stayed within. I don't think the Appropriations Committee gets enough credit over the last several years for the work we have been doing in reducing Federal spending. If you look at the total Federal budget and the amount of discretionary spending and mandatory spending, at one time it was about two-thirds discretionary spending and one-third mandatory spending 30 or 40 years ago. Then, about 5 years ago, it was one-third discretionary spending and two-thirds mandatory spending. That is Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security entitlements. Since we have taken control the last 5 years, that one-third of the budget that is discretionary spending is about 28 percent now. As it continues to go down in relationship to the entire budget, we cut discretionary spending more and more. We have made difficult tradeoffs that had to be made in this bill to balance it with our needs. We prioritize funding for critical infrastructure and for our national defense. These tradeoffs were carefully weighed for their respective impacts and are responsible. Yet the gentlewoman's amendment imposes an across-the-board cut on every one of these programs, even the national defense programs, which are vitally important. This makes no distinction between where we need to be spending to invest in our infrastructure, promote jobs, and meet our national security needs, like meeting the Ohio-class submarine dates so that we can get the Ohio-class submarine done, so that we can do the refurbishment of our nuclear stockpile, so that we can do the other things that are important on the national defense side of this budget. It makes no distinction between those and where we need to limit spending to meet our deficit reduction goals. Therefore, I must oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' The amendment imposes additional duties. I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I just want to state that I don't want people who may be listening to this, other Members who may be listening to this, to get the impression that we are putting money in here for the Loan Guarantee Program. There is no money in the underlying bill for the ATVM additional new loans. The only money in there is to administer the existing loans. I understand what the gentleman is saying. I agree with the gentleman. I just don't want Members to think that we are putting money into the program when we are not. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.