Paul Tonko

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Thank you. Representative Garamendi, we have about 4 minutes remaining in our one-half hour here of dialogue.

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Representative Garamendi. I appreciate you and Representative Cicilline joining in this important half-hour of discussion. But I can clearly state that no one that I talked to in this House, no Representative, was hearing advocacy to end Medicare during our campaigns last year. I didn't hear one individual tell me that--senior, non-senior. I didn't hear anyone ask me to give more profits, more handouts, to big oil companies. I didn't hear one person say, Protect the corporate loopholes for corporations out there. I didn't hear anyone say, Hand more tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires. I did hear, Make my budget work at home. I need the basics. I did hear, I can't survive with the situation as it is. I did hear, We need jobs. I did hear, Start growing our economy. Stop shrinking the middle class. Well, evidently this majority was not listening. There was anger-- undeniable anger, understandable anger--that existed out there. But this is not this quantification that they were looking for. They did not want to see this as a result, as an outcome. I think we need to continue to fight this effort to end Medicare, and we're going to continue that fight. With that, I thank the gentlemen for joining me in this half hour. I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. TONKO. Representative Garamendi, if you will, that Medicaid cut also will impact the Nation's seniors because when they're in institutional settings we know about 66 percent of the expenditure is for our seniors. Again, we understand the compassion that is required. We know the American spirit to respond to those who have served society so well. And in their golden years they need the assistance. But every attempt that is being made here, we have tried every which way to inform the public of the attack on Medicare, the attack on Social Security, to privatize Social Security. This is about giving Big Oil, big insurance companies, big banks more business. This is like cashing in on being good to some people here. That is not how this government should be guided. It should be guided on the principles of providing the basic core needs in a way that's most effective, most efficient. We have even attempted--the House was addressing the Republican version of the budget. I introduced an amendment on the Budget Committee where I serve and presented it before the Budget Committee, and it went down by party vote to stop the attack on Medicare, to end Medicare. There was an absolute amendment that said, Let's pull out ending Medicare from your budget plan. It was denied. Then, I traveled to the Rules Committee and attempted once more before the bill came to the House, Let's stop the effort to end Medicare. It was denied at the Rules Committee again with the Republican majority at the Rules Committee. So now we're visiting this situation. And the budget was approved in this House with this raid on the middle class and the attack on the values of the middle class, of working families. It is really disturbing that the most comfortable continue to get that effort made their way. And especially when history speaks--and speaks so abundantly well to us. It should resonate. When we put people to work with FDR's programs back years ago, decades ago, the result was 8.5 million people put to work and public projects built that still serve us well today. JFK investing in global technology to win the space race. Those are examples of things that worked. LBJ promoting a Medicare program. Now we're repeating this driving the car into the ditch scenario. Reaganomics and its trickle-down didn't work. The Bush II Presidency and its cuts to the millionaire, billionaire companies didn't work. Why would we revisit that as we crawl out of the most painful recession and propose ending Medicare--ending Medicare--denying dignity to our Nation's seniors and avoiding the fundamental responsibility of good government, efficient government, which is what I think the voters asked for in November, not this sort of pain. Representative Cicilline.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. I thank the gentleman for his leadership on this issue and for yielding me time. Let there be no doubt, Americans are worried about the price of gasoline; and its recent spike has, once again, put us on notice. Yet this bill that relieves regulation provides the wrong tools. Americans know we can do better. We cannot afford to mindlessly give billions of dollars to Big Oil companies while they make record profits. In the short term, we must ensure that speculators and Wall Street quit playing games with the price of oil. Finally, we must provide motorists with fueling options at the pump. It is unconscionable that we would give $4 billion of taxpayer money to Big Oil companies this year alone while they're on track to make nearly $100 billion in profits in 2011. With prices this high, does Big Oil really need even more money? Taxpayers know they don't, and taxpayers are hit twice with taxes on gasoline--once at the pump and once on tax day. This must end. We can help consumers at the pump by going after Wall Street speculators who drive up the cost of oil. We can increase mileage standards, and it's entirely reasonable that they could reach 60 miles per gallon by the year 2025. Also, we can invest in fueling options so that consumers can choose the lowest alternative. High gas prices are painful. They are painful to American families; they are painful to seniors living on fixed incomes; and they are painful to small businesses; and the Big Oil subsidies that accompany them are painful for our Nation's economy as it recovers from the Bush recession. Let's end these Big Oil giveaways to some of the most profitable companies in the world, and let's provide drivers with alternatives--fueling options, better vehicles--and create the clean- energy jobs of the future.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor William ``Bill'' Schultz. Bill is an educator who has dedicated over three decades, specifically 34 years, to teaching in Maine, New Hampshire, and New York. Upon retirement, he has dedicated his energies and talents to other retirees. Bill was a leader in the labor movement and served two terms as president of the Niskayuna Teachers Association in my congressional district. Serving 8 years as president of Retiree Council 12 of the New York State United Teachers Association, Bill was influential in organizing the council. Bill's leadership, dedication, compassion, and knowledge have had a profound influence on the lives of the students he has taught, the retirees for which he has advocated, and the friends he has made along the way. In 1921, John Cotton Dana said, ``Who dares to teach must never cease to learn.'' It is in this spirit that Bill will be honored later this month. I commend and congratulate him on all his efforts and hope his service and dedication can stand as a model and inspiration for countless others. After all, our future and our children's future are only as good as those who teach them.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. I thank my colleague for yielding. Madam Speaker, in the last week I have twice offered an amendment to protect health care for seniors, veterans, and active duty military and military families. And to my great disappointment, the Republican majority has twice blocked this effort, first in committee, where Republicans voted unanimously on a party line vote to end Medicare, and again yesterday, when the Republican leadership refused to allow this amendment to be heard, debated, and voted on in this Chamber. I have twice asked my Republican colleagues to honor the Constitution. They must allow the democratically elected representatives of the American people to have an honest up or down vote on whether or not we support privatizing Medicare, a trend that could lead to similar privatized plans for the health coverage provided to our troops and veterans. For if they honestly believe that seniors will receive quality care at a more affordable price to the taxpayer, what's to stop them from going after TRICARE and the VA? My amendment will protect health care provided to seniors and the disabled from being privatized or being subject to arbitrary spending caps. It would extend the same protection to health coverage for active duty military and their families, as well as veterans. This amendment would protect Medicare, TRICARE, and VA health care from being eliminated and replaced with voucher or premium support programs. The Road to Ruin budget ends Medicare. This is a program that 46 million seniors and disabled individuals rely on for their health care. Rather than guaranteed benefits, seniors and the disabled will be left with a voucher, or so-called premium support, that by design cannot and will not keep up with rising health care costs. The private market views seniors as a risky and expensive investment. So too the disabled. So too military servicemembers and veterans who have unique health needs earned through their sacrifice in service to America. The question before us today is not whether to reduce the deficit, but how. We have balanced the budget before without ending Medicare. We can do it again without the painful consequences that the Republican plan would initiate, where our seniors would pay 68 cents of every dollar of insurance required as compared to Congress paying 28 cents on every dollar. Forty-six million people rely on Medicare today. Even more will depend on it in the future. Those many millions deserve a vote. That vote has been denied to them by the Republican leadership of the House.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. I thank my distinguished colleague for yielding. Mr. Chairman, as indicated in the chart to my right, the Republican Road to Ruin budget ends Medicare and other investments to pay for tax breaks to millionaires and some of the most profitable corporations in the world. Forty-six million Americans rely on Medicare for their health care today. Under the Road to Ruin plan to end Medicare, seniors and the disabled will lose their guaranteed health benefits. They will be left with a voucher. By design, the voucher cannot and will not keep up with rising health care costs. The private market views seniors and the disabled as a risky and expensive investment. That's why Medicare was created in the first place. As a result, when the Road to Ruin health plan takes effect--and as this chart again to my right reveals--seniors will see their health costs double. By conservative estimates, seniors will pay more than $12,000 in out-of-pocket expenses for the same coverage Medicare provides today. Facing dramatically higher health costs with less help, our seniors will be forced into life-and-death decisions--do I buy groceries or do I buy prescriptions? Do I pay rent or do I pay medical bills? Never fear, my Republican colleagues say to seniors, you will get the same care as a Member of Congress. Well, as a Member of Congress, I know that congressional health plans cost about $9,000 this year. Seniors will be getting a ration of $8,000 10 years from now for health care that will cost over $20,000. With all due respect, I must say that the Republican talking point that seniors will get the same coverage as a Member of Congress is not just political hyperbole, it is a lie. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that seniors will pay 68 percent of their health costs under the Republican plan. Members of Congress only pay 28 percent of their premiums. Seniors will pay more than double the share that Members of Congress pay and more than double the amount that they pay today under Medicare. We have balanced a budget before without ending Medicare. We can do it again. I ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Road to Ruin plan that would end Medicare.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Representative Garamendi. And I compliment Representative Welch for what I believe is a balanced approach to how to solve the deficit situation, the debt situation, and certainly how do we move forward with a sound budget that can invest in America at a time when other nations are investing in a clean-energy, innovation economy. We don't have the luxury to just hone in on deficit, or budget carving here that solely relies on impacts through domestic program cuts on our middle class families, our working families and the poor. What we have seen here is trillions' worth of cuts to domestic programs, impacting the ability to pay utility bills, impacting the ability to perhaps send your adult child off to college, to dream the American Dream, to own a home and to have an affordable home budget. All of these items are at risk here. We're putting people most vulnerable at risk. We have seen almost a flat curve for the growth in household income across America, just a slight bump upward, while we've seen an exponential rise in corporate executive salaries, in millionaire and billionaire wealth. That's where the growth has been. The recovery here has seen that happening with a downward spiral, a downward mobile quality to the comeback of our efforts here in this country. So it is important for us to make certain that there is a balance here, that we're calling upon all tools in the toolkit to make it all happen. And this chart absolutely tells a story. Over the last 40 years, middle class wages have stagnated while millionaires and billionaires have trumped all by 256 percent. Now, this tells a story. When people are talking about not wanting to visit a fairness in tax policy here, when we have seen the anger in America expressed via the many, many households that the great multitudes of people in this country are portrayed in the middle class, they are the population that have expressed anger, and rightfully so, that anger has got to be addressed through fairness in tax policy, through an across-the-board impact of solution here that will enable us to do what's fair and do what's correct. I watch the savings that they talk about here with the Republican plan. The Republicans will talk about the huge amounts of savings that they produce all through cuts on the domestic programs, again impacting working families, the poor and the middle class. Well, those aren't savings because in order to be savings, they might be in a locked box or assumed to go after relieving the deficit. But instead, they take these trillions in like amounts and provide tax cuts for millionaires, billionaires and corporations and still continue to hand out mindlessly the subsidies to big oil companies. This is what is so most egregious about this budget. Instead of working towards a balance that looks at revenues, that looks at the domestic programs that require investment, no, they are going pell-mell into an all-out attack on the middle class. That's wrong. And also in the outcome as they slide programs, assistance and investments to middle class America, as they slide it over to the millionaire, billionaire, corporate and big oil companies crowd, that community, what happens in the interim? With this Republican plan for a budget, we grow debt by $8 trillion. So where have we gained here? This sounds like a repeat of the pre- recession years where we were not acknowledging fairness in revenues, where we were allowing for a falling apart of the system. At the same time we took the watchdog out of the equation on the financial sector on Wall Street. We allowed for working families' portfolios of investments to go to ruination where we lost $2.8 trillion in accumulated wealth on 401(k)s and various other investment materials. And this is what happened: we destroyed the economy, and now we're going to repeat history, history of the worst kind. Let's pick up on the history of the best kind. Let's pick up on investing in jobs as we did in the FDR years where we came out of tough economic times and people knew the dignity of work and we saw projects built across America, not the trickle-down theory that didn't work during the Reagan administration and the trickle-down theory that didn't work during the second Bush Presidency. It just didn't happen. And my question is, I can't help but rhetorically ask, why would we revisit that kind of scenario again knowing that we're just crawling out of the recession and we're growing private sector jobs to the tune of $2 million in just over a year? Why would we disrupt that progress? I ask, why would we disrupt that? Representative Garamendi, I think it is great that we're bringing this information to the forefront here and allowing it to be exchanged with the people that we serve day in and day out who have expressed, rightfully, the anger about the onus, the burden and the unnecessary pain that has been placed upon households of modest annual income means.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Madam Speaker, tomorrow marks the 100-day celebration for congressional Republicans taking control of the House. How will we celebrate? Well, not by focusing on jobs or the economy or growing the middle class, but, rather, with the road to ruin budget that will end Medicare while extending tax breaks for Big Oil. The road to ruin Republican budget proposal will end Medicare. It will end a program that 46 million seniors and disabled individuals depend on for their health care. Rather than the Path to Prosperity, as its been designated, this budget is more like the road to riches, a road paved in gold with lavish handouts for special interests paid for and built with dollars from senior citizens who will see their hard- earned benefits rationed. We must stop this road to ruin budget lest it lead to a cliff of catastrophe for our Nation's seniors.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Absolutely.

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Representative Yarmuth and Representative Garamendi. Thank you both for your input. Now, Representative Bass of California talked about the Medicare transformation that would really hurt people across this great country, and it seems as though you would expect everyone that serves here to be an avid fan of history, that we would want to be taught by the history that has built this great Nation. We heard earlier from Representative Yarmuth about the repeats of the tax cuts that were recent history. We saw it during the second Bush Presidency. We saw it during the Reagan era where we did this trickle- down theory: if we reduce the burden at the top, it will trickle down and everyone will have jobs galore. Well, you look at the history, and those two scenarios just did not work. They did not work. And as students of history, all of us as Representatives, we should absorb that lesson, and we should know that a repeat of that kind is only going to wreak damage on the American economy and, more importantly, on the American families, the middle class. What did work, what lesson in history stands very strong and tall is that during the FDR Presidency when this country was hurting from one of the worst economic struggles it had to face, they came up with a program that invested in job creation, invested in the American worker, invested in American families. We created infrastructure; we built across America the needs of this great Nation. And today, some of those institutional efforts are still serving our needs. They stand as a monument of government responding in a way that embraced compassion, that came forward with an intelligence that enabled us to grow out of those economically difficult times. And we were benefited by that sort of leadership. What we need today is an investment in job creation. Think of it. As we enter into a global race on clean energy and innovation, other nations are bulking up and we are defunding with this budget. We are defunding R&D, research and development for science and tech jobs. How can we expect to win a race, a global race, when we're tying our hands behind our backs and are not allowing us to go forward? But to Medicare, the history learned there, and Representative Garamendi pointed it out, pre-1965 people were being cherry-picked, they were being led along without appropriate health care coverage, without insurance because they were perhaps dealing with a preexisting condition, they were a complex case, they were ignored, they were totally just abandoned by an insurance opportunity. Because of that, our Nation, with compassion again, the history it wrote through those LBJ years was to establish a Medicare program. Look what happens. This chart will tell us when we get rid of Medicare, when this Republican plan, if it had its way, ends Medicare, we are going to see this very impact coming upon our seniors. We will go back to the pre-1965 years. Look at this. This is the current Medicare program, where benefits for our seniors enable them to avoid oftentimes the out-of-pocket expenses. It is forecasted by independent groups out there, not by partisan thinking here in the House, but independent bodies are suggesting that it will double in the early years in terms of what is expected of our seniors digging deeper into their pockets. And by the year 2030, it's forecasted triple what they are paying today. This is another way to provide savings for the sole purpose of investing those savings in millionaire, billionaire tax cuts, in oil company handouts, in corporation relief. This is the effort here. It is a reverse Robin Hood. It is going after the middle class, which is the strength of America. Give that middle class its purchasing power. Give our middle class seniors their Medicare program. Let them have dignity. Let there be a quality of life. Let there be the opportunity for work, for employment, and let the masses enjoy the benefits of those sorts of programs. That's what we're talking about here. History repeated. Bad history repeated. Good history ignored. And our seniors will suffer from this Medicare program. This end to the Medicare program will bring about suffering for them because of greed and because of the road to ruin that has been established by this so-called path to prosperity. Representative Yarmuth, I believe that we need to do better than this. We should not fail our seniors, our disabled, and as Representative Garamendi said, future generations of seniors, an onslaught of baby boomers that will be impacted by all of this activity.

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Representative Yarmuth. I believe we don't have much time left in this hour of discussion. But let me just indicate that this entire House experienced an election last November. Everyone was up for election. And I would dare say in talking to many, many colleagues about the message that resonated back at home it was about jobs, jobs, jobs. It was about the economy. That was the driving dynamic I believe at the voting booth. And look at our track record here for the first 3\1/2\ months for the 112th session of Congress. Not one bit of legislation that would produce jobs was brought to the floor. However, that budget, as you just pointed out in your Slash-onomics bar graph, might take as many as 975,000 jobs off the picture for American workers, after we've spent just over a year creating over 2 million private sector jobs. Now that's in contrast with 8.2 million lost under the Bush recession. So we've got a long way to go. But why would you reverse progress with a budget that, with Slash- onomics, reduces nearly--well, we'll even take some of the lower estimates of 400,000; why would you want to do that at a time when we are recovering from that very difficult economic time? I think it's so important for us to inform the constituents out there and tell middle class America this is a tipping point in our history. This is whether we fix an economy, create a situation where we come forth and produce products not yet on the commercial scene. A leading nation can do that when it embraces its intellectual capacity. You build products not yet discovered and engineered. That is making it in America. That's what we can do if we invest in our workforce and invest in our education. But we're denying all those investments with this budget, just like this Medicare chart which, as you indicate, will have seniors receiving 32 cents on every health care dollar they require, and they're going to have to fend for the rest. So we're asking middle class America to pay more, everything but 32 cents on the dollar for their health care as seniors qualifying for Medicare, and then we're going to take and destroy this economy and snuff out the dreams and the opportunities for America's middle class. We were told in November, America start growing the economy, stop draining and reducing the middle class. You are reducing, you're snuffing out that middle class. And that was the message. And also on taxes I believe America is waking up to what has happened here with some of these scenarios. They understand it is not about who's cutting taxes but whose taxes are you cutting? Whose taxes will you cut? There's a big difference. And when you do this mindless handout to profit-rich oil companies, historically profit rich, sitting on about a trillion dollars worth of profit, and mindlessly for nearly a century we have handed out these benefits to oil companies. It's wrong. We can do better. This plan is the Road to Ruin.

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Representative Yarmuth, and thank you for leading us in this discussion. It is rather interesting to hear you, with your introductory comments, speak of the approach to one side of the ledger. What has been advertised out there, what has been messaged, is that what we have are these cuts that translate into savings: we're going to save at the expense of the middle class. We're going to cut programs for seniors, for veterans, for children, for working families, for small businesses. That will produce savings--this propensity for tens of billions of dollars' worth of cuts, for $100 billion worth of cuts, and an insatiable thirst for cutting domestic programs that really provide the dignity factor for many families as well as provide for job creation and retention. We saw what happened when we invested in job creation, which was to gain over 2 million private sector jobs in just over the last year. So we know that those investments oftentimes will lead to lucrative dividends. They will relate to programs that are required for our working families, for our middle class Americans across this great country. Also, they provide for an opportunity for job creation, which produces the sort of mix--that down payment, the priming of the pump, if you will--that makes it all happen. So, Representative Yarmuth, you are correct in talking about this as a one-sided approach. Yet what troubles me is that there is this messaging effort under way that would try and convince the American public that it's producing savings. But where do those savings go? There are trillions of dollars of cuts to the middle class in this Republican plan. Those trillions of dollars of cuts that they deem as savings are then that fuel that provides the resources to cut the trillions of dollars' worth of millionaire/billionaire tax cuts to provide for the continuation of services that contractors will provide, which have been deemed wasteful or at times fraudulent, with the Pentagon. They will continue to protect those investments. They will allow for additional relief for corporations. So it's sliding dollars out of the pockets of the middle class and investing them, the spending that they do, as they accrue those savings. The new spending that they do is tax cut delivery for those in the upper echelon. To me, it sounds very much like the pre-recession situation under the Bush administration which led us to this deep and very painful and long-term recession. Their plan has been dubbed by themselves, by their own Members, as the Path to Prosperity. I would suggest that it's a road to ruin for the middle class and that it's a road to riches that paves the streets with golden opportunities for those who are the most comfortable in society, for those deemed on top of the perch. This is a very interesting scenario that is being placed before this body, before all of Congress for that matter. We need to put it under the microscope, and we need to message to America what is happening. You take from the poor and the middle class. You slide it over to the most comfortable--to corporations and millionaires, billionaires, oil company handouts, mindless handouts. That's how they pay for those, by sliding that cash down that slippery slope and investing it in tax cuts, spending it on tax cuts for those, as you indicated, who just didn't get quite enough under the Bush tax cuts. In a while, too, I want to go toward the Medicare situation. They want to end Medicare with this budget. I want to talk about that after we hear from some of our other colleagues. This is an interesting scenario--a road to ruin, a road to riches. It's a complete separation, a dichotomy, of special needs out there, coming at the expense of middle class America. It's a raid on our middle class. It's paving the road to riches for the very fortunate, and it's creating the road to ruin for America's middle class. Without a strong middle class, without enhancing the purchasing power of our middle class, we have a weakened America. That is easy enough to prove through history. So thank you again, Representative Yarmuth, for bringing us together on a very important discussion here in the House of Representatives as we continue to fight for the middle class that has been impacted severely and would take even more hits if this budget were allowed to pass through.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, the Republican road-to-ruin budget, if enacted, will end Medicare. It will end the program that 46 million seniors and disabled individuals depend upon for their health care. This gross injustice is made immeasurably more egregious and offensive by the fact that this is being done not to balance the budget, but to expand and permanently guarantee even bigger tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires and to give new tax breaks to some of the world's most profitable companies. Rather than the path to prosperity, this budget is more like the road-to-riches, a road paved in gold with lavish handouts for special interests, paid for and built with dollars from senior citizens who will see their hard-earned benefits rationed more and more with every passing year. I have heard a lot of talk in the last few months about the need to make tough choices in this budget. Well, the average senior on Medicare earns just over $19,000 a year. About one-quarter of Medicare beneficiaries suffer from a cognitive or mental impairment, and many have at least one or more chronic medical conditions. I ask my Republican colleagues, what exactly is it about stripping these Americans bare of their health and economic security that qualifies as tough? There is nothing tough about stealing from the poor, the weak and the frail to give to the rich. Our seniors, on the other hand, know all about tough choices. Do I buy groceries or do I buy prescriptions? Do I pay rent or do I pay medical bills? It hurts, but how much will it cost? These are tough choices. These are life-and-death choices. With the passage of Medicare in 1965, we entered into a covenant with every American citizen. This budget breaks that promise and brings us back to square one. The Republican voucher plan ends Medicare. Instead, seniors will be on their own, with a measly voucher and forced to buy insurance in the private market, where all decisions will be profit- driven. More profits for insurance companies on the backs of seniors-- sounds like a Republican plan to me. This new voucher program amounts to a ration card, and the value of the voucher is not linked to increases in health care costs in the private market. Yet the costs of private health insurance have risen over 5,000 percent since the creation of Medicare--5,000 percent. The analysis of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that in less than 20 years, the vouchers under the Republican road-to-ruin budget would pay just 32 cents on every dollar that a senior spends on health care. Now, the Republicans have repeatedly stated that their budget gives seniors the same coverage as Members of Congress. Well, as a Member of Congress myself, I know that our health plans pay for about 72 cents on every dollar of our health coverage, not 32 cents on the dollar. According to CBO, the voucher program will provide a ration of $8,000 to seniors every year to purchase their health care from private insurance companies. Yet the private insurance premium charged by Blue Cross in 2010 for a Member of Congress was well over $9,000. Does anyone honestly believe that sick senior citizens and people with permanent disabilities will be able to find coverage from private insurance for $8,000 when they are now charging over $9,000 to Members of Congress? According to The Wall Street Journal, the average cost of health care for seniors over 65 in 2009 was $11,743. If an insurance company were to take on $11,743 of risk for $8,000, they would be out of business in short order. But Republicans don't believe their insurance company buddies will actually offer coverage for $8,000 or even for $11,743 just to break even. They know that seniors will have to go into their pockets for thousands of dollars as this plan hands Medicare over to the private insurance companies to make even more profits. In fact, CBO found that seniors will have to pay more than twice as much out of pocket as they do today. This budget takes trillions from seniors and rations their care, and where does it shift the savings? Well, if you guessed permanent tax cuts for millionaires and a new tax break for corporations making billions, you guessed right. After more than a year of hurling lies and demagoguery about death panels and rationing care, Republicans on the panel before us have demanded that we restrict seniors to a health care ration card and ensure that those who cannot afford coverage on their own will be left to suffer or die. Well, therein is the real death penalty they once talked about. They pay lip service to Americans' responsibility to share the burden and instead steal from those who cannot afford an expensive lobbyist and give to millionaires and billionaires and companies that can afford much, much more. I'm not speaking of playing politics. America knows that our budget is a statement of priorities and values, not purely dollars and cents. America's families set priorities with their own budget each and every day. And I respectfully and honestly disagree with the values and priorities that the Republicans have established in their road-to-ruin budget. Let's not end Medicare.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Representative Yarmuth. I will do this quickly because I know time is ticking away. We all mentioned the concern about Medicare and how they're going to privatize it. Well, here it is, the end to Medicare. This is the buyer beware chart. This shows the Republican proposal in 2022 dollars and the Medicare model in 2022 dollars. And the voucher simply isn't going to cover much. They're suggesting 32 percent. So that leaves a $12,500 price tag to be assumed by--you guessed it--the senior. Dig into your pocket. Under the current Medicare model, it leaves you with a $6,150 price tag. So it's going to more than double the commitment from the senior citizen. This is the ``buyer beware'' chart. The happy shopping spree isn't so happy. Representative Yarmuth, I just wanted to point that out. The bar graph shows it plain and simple: buyer beware. This is an attack on middle class America. It's an attack on the system that has worked well for so many decades, and certainly it is a priority that is not ours. It is theirs. We are for the working families of this country, and we will continue to fight that fight.

Mr. TONKO. I thank you, Representative Yarmuth, and thank you for leading the next 30 minutes of discussion here which I think are very critical to the lives of Americans, the American public and American working families across our Nation. It is an honor to serve with you on our Budget Committee as we spent countless hours yesterday dealing with a saga of a budget for 2012. Just as we're trying to avoid a shutdown of America's government this very hour, they are also pushing through in a rather rushed format a 2012 fiscal plan that takes the pain and suffering of the 2011 plan and expands it exponentially. They grow it drastically, the pain for 2012. As you indicated, these are choices that we have before us. I believe firmly that our budgets, whatever level--Federal, State, local--are a reflection of our values, our principles, our priorities. That's where we are now, whether we are trying to avoid a shutdown for the 2011 fiscal year which is looming over us, or whether we are putting together the 2012 fiscal plan. It is about priorities and values and principles that we hold near and dear. It is also a statement on an economic agenda. I have before me here this chart that speaks about the 1.8 million jobs that have been added since last year, since 2010; 1.8 million private sector jobs. You can see the precipitous drop that came with the red ink of the close of the Bush recession. And then early in 2009, we began to recover. We stopped the bleeding of the recession, and it has been a slow but steady and upward and forward climb as we have introduced new jobs into the private sector arena that allows us to now work away at those 8.2 million jobs that were lost during the Bush recession. Why we would want to stop that progress is beyond me; but those are the cuts that will be made here in the 2011 scenario, by which we are attempting to avoid a shutdown, and the 2012 budget where there are cuts to R&D and to science and technology. I served as president and CEO of NYSERDA, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, prior to coming here a couple of years ago. I saw firsthand what science and tech means in terms of job growth and expanding the opportunities. And so these cuts that are part of the 2011 plan and the 2012 budget that we're dealing with in double-dose fashion will mean tremendous pain for our middle class families. We need to commit to a jobs agenda. The people told Democrats and Republicans alike in campaign season it's about jobs, jobs, jobs, and the economy. It's not about growing another pricetag, draining our economy with the cost of a shutdown. We need to avoid that shutdown. One of the concerns yesterday when we were meeting on the 2012 budget format was--my concern, your concern, our concern as Democrats on that Budget Committee--to avoid the end of Medicare. This plan, introduced by our Republicans on the Budget Committee, is called the ``roadmap.'' And I said it's a road to ruin for our middle class, for our working families. They want to end Medicare, a system that has worked for over 40 years for 46 million Americans. And what does it do? It shifts risk from government over to the senior citizen. It asks the senior citizen to dig deep into the pocket, and then every year dig deeper. They are already suggesting that the beneficiaries' costs will more than double by the year 2022 and then more than triple by the year 2030. Is this what we're about? Are these our values? Are these our principles? Are these our priorities? I would say boldly, no, they are not. They are not. And senior citizens are already getting wind of this idea, and they are supporting our efforts to stop the end to Medicare, which is part of the format that they have introduced, part of the legislation they have introduced for their budget for 2012. We failed in that attempt. You and I supported it--Gwen Moore has joined us I see. We all supported that push to end their desire to end Medicare. We failed with it, and that will be coming to a vote before the full House I think next week. So these are the things that people need to be alerted to. These are the issues that are going to be tough for middle class America to assume for the poor, the working poor, for the masses out there. And when we see the concentration of wealth and all the benefits and all the focus being in just the upper echelon, we understand what their choices are. Their choices are different than ours--they're with Big Oil, they're with big banks, they're with special interests, they're with millionaires, billionaires. They're with handouts to the oil companies that are sitting on record profits of over $1 trillion. We're there with the middle class families, the working families, making certain that we create jobs, retain jobs, and keep this pattern of activity going. Thank you, Representative Yarmuth, for bringing us together for what I think is an urgent, urgent dialogue that needs to reach every household in America.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 242, had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. You know, the dignity that was addressed, the respect factor of ``I am a man,'' that rhetoric that speaks to the working individual, that speaks to humanity, the man, the woman, the child, the dignity of the individual, the respect shown, was all that was embraced in that message, that struck all of America, touched all Americans. I am of the age that I remember that tragic day. It came so clustered. In a short 5 years, we lost three great leaders to bullets. It is just really a tragic outcome that you can't help but find yourself questioning what if their march continued, how different would America be? I find it so interesting that his last major appearance and effort was for workers, fighting for workers, for the dignity of work and the dignity of workers. The assault on workers' rights that he was addressing we see today in the news. We see it in Wisconsin. We see it in Michigan. We see it in Ohio. And it is like the same battles are here to be fought and won. So the spirit of Martin encourages, I think, builds our determination and our resilience to make a difference. The efforts that America needs to associate with the overall cause and concern for job creation and job retention is so vitally important. Many would choose to have us believe that it is a high rate of firings that is occurring out there, but it is really a low rate of hirings, which is a different sort of saga. We need to invest now in worker opportunities, in training, retraining, in education, and in job creation. I am a firm believer, and I know many are, that unemployment is driving our deficit and that if we invest in jobs, if we invest in the worker, we will see a corresponding benefit on the flip side of a reduced deficit for this Nation. I think the stats tell it all. The bottom 50 percent of income earners in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the Nation's wealth. That is a startling fact. And we need to make certain that there is more justice that is produced out there. As I said earlier, I really do believe that the purchasing power that we can enhance for America's working families, for our middle class, for the mainstream worker out there is an empowerment for all of us. Someone needs to purchase the products that those perched on the top may produce by their ownership. But the worker to build that product and the worker to buy that product is an important key, perhaps the most important ingredient in the equation. When we look at the fact that some five people are lined up for every job opportunity in this country, and when we look at the fact that workers' rights are under assault today in many areas across this country, there is a great amount of unfinished business. And on this anniversary commemoration of a great leader's death, it is important for us to recommit our energies and our spirit to speaking to the needs of America's workers. Nothing could honor Dr. Martin Luther King's legacy and the man more vibrantly than speaking to job creation, job retention, workers' rights and prevention of what we are seeing where there is an assault on those rights across this country. Thank you, Representative Edwards, for bringing this solemn opportunity together on this floor where so many issues were addressed in favorable measure, that were driven by the courage and the boldness and the noble vision of Dr. Martin Luther King and other great leaders, like JFK and RFK, who traveled that same era in history.

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Representative Edwards, for bringing us together this evening on what I think is a very timely discussion. You know, it seems as though 43-year-old history resonates profoundly today. The same battles for which Martin Luther King had fought, the eloquence with which he raised America's consciousness is needed today, not only in the halls of government but across America, to understand that there is an attack, I believe, on workers. There is a diminution of the impact of our middle class, our working families in this country, when we look at the fact that the top 10 percent of Americans now own or earn around 50 percent of our national income. We look at stats from 1950 that has the executive salaries somewhere in a 30-to-1 ratio compared to the American worker. By the year 2000, that had changed drastically to some 300-to-1 to 500-to-1. So it's obvious that the gap between those who are drawing large paychecks and the workers, the masses that make things work, that have the need to have purchasing power so as to enable our economy to function and function well, have been threatened. They have been at risk. And I think the whole moral fabric that Martin Luther King embraced, the entire mission to raise America's people as one by providing for the dignity of the American workers, was a tremendously strong statement in defense of all people, not just people of color, people of every demographic, people of every racial persuasion that could provide for a stronger America. It was that vision that he had and he shared it so eloquently, and his climb to the mountaintop was bringing all of America's children and people along. He knew that the empowerment of the individual meant the empowerment of the society. As we weave the strands of diversity into the fabric of America, our mosaic growing stronger and brighter and more vibrant enables us to be a Nation that really, truly is unique if we could just empower the American worker. I see the raid now on this middle class in these Chambers, in the congressional Chambers, both the House and the Senate being so focused on a dismantling of the power of the working families, of the true middle class of our society. That is a wrong move. That is one that will devastate our economy and one that is not utilizing, embracing the intellectual capacity of this great Nation. Cuts to our children through Head Start or in classroom experience is the worst cut of any because it's our future that we are playing with. We are not allowing for the dignity, again, of which Martin Luther King spoke, to be felt in the classroom; and that magic of learning is dulled, is dulled, by these painful cuts. So we have got to respond, respond with compassion and with our eyes wide open knowing that that message of 43 years ago and that powerful statement made about the dignity of labor, the evening before he was brought down, still speaks to every one of us, or at least ought to, so that we can provide for the sorts of policy and the resource advocacy, the distribution of income across this country in a way that really empowers the individual and families. That, I think, is the mission that is still there for each and every one of us. So many of us were inspired by the words of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Robert F. Kennedy. It drew people to the public arena. They wanted to be involved; they saw government as a noble mission. And that tarnished atmosphere that's prevailing today has allowed for misrepresentation of facts or denial of data that really should guide our process here, as Martin often called for fairness, for equitable treatment, for justice. Those are the factors that drive the dignity. So it is a challenge to us, but I think we are up for that challenge, and I remain optimistic. If we just provide the boost to our Nation's working families, to our middle class, then we are all empowered. I think that tide would lift all boats. So, thank you, Representative Edwards, for bringing us together on a very important discussion.

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Representative Edwards. I would have to say that I truly believe that, if Dr. King were in our presence today, he would remind us that a budget is a series of priorities. What we place high, what we place most precious in that budget, we would see as a document that speaks to a family. Just like a household will balance its needs, its concerns with its ability to pay and put together the balancing, so too does the family of America require that sort of tender balancing. He would remind us, whether they are employed, critically unemployed or marginally underemployed, whatever the situation might be, that today America's middle class families are living paycheck to paycheck. That's becoming more and more the scenario. He would have suggested, look, we need to take that concern for mortgages, that concern for college tuition, that concern for just pay, that concern for utility bills, that concern for food costs and energy costs, and we need to invest in the American working families. Contrast that with what the other scenario might look like: handouts to oil companies, corporate loopholes that are not shut, tax breaks for the most comfortable in society. That is the contrast he would challenge us to face head on and to understand it's about social and economic justice. It's about bringing more balance, more fairness into the equation. As a clergyman, he embraced the faith and brought it into the community; he brought it into America; he challenged us to respond in compassionate measure. We have it within our means to do this in a fair and just way, and that's why we are at a tipping point in this Nation's history where we need to look at revitalizing the middle class. I represent many modest annual income households. They have told me their fear is about maintaining their homes; their fear is about educating their children; their fear is about tomorrow having the opportunity. I'm optimistic that we can do it because we have the skills here within the Congress to make it happen and to make it work in a progressive fashion. Do we have the will? That would be the challenge. That would be the challenge from Dr. King this very evening: Do we have the will to move forward in a progressive fashion? So thank you, Representative Edwards, for bringing us together tonight in tribute to a giant of an individual, an icon in our midst.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, well, here we go again. We're 1 week away from a government shutdown. I, for one, wish we could focus on creating jobs and growing the economy. But, instead, the majority can't even agree on how to keep the doors open. In fact, unwilling to compromise and unable to break free of the clutches of the tea party, they have tried a stunt that is beyond belief. It's altogether fitting that we are debating this absurd measure today on April Fool's Day. Why? Because after reading the Constitution on the floor of this body just weeks ago, they are ignoring our founding document, mocking its principles, and attempting to circumvent 222 years of history. What do they want to do? Say that any bill, any bill that passes this House is good enough. No need for the Senate or President. It should just become law, like magic. This country was founded on checks and balances and limited government. Instead of desperate attempts to ram through job-destroying legislation to appease the extreme wing of their party, perhaps the majority in this House could try negotiating in good faith with the Senate and our President to keep the lights on. After all, that's the least the American public expects of their elected officials.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. I thank the gentleman. This Republican April Fool's resolution on the House floor today seems to look for a waiver of all points of order against consideration of the bill, which includes the waiver of section 425 of the Congressional Budget Act, which causes a violation, we believe, of section 426(a). I am not sure if the rules of the House are declared null and void on any April Fool's Day, but I have a feeling that we are about to see that happen today on the floor. Apparently, the new Republican leadership and their majority believe that they can take control of the parliamentary system. Unfortunately for them, we still have a bicameral legislature, including a United States Senate and a Constitution that requires the President of the United States to sign legislation. So the rules seem to be changing every day around here. I thought we were going to see bills 72 hours in advance. The bills would have to be paid for under the Republican cut-go measure, and all bills--again, all bills would have to meet a constitutional test before the floor considers it. In the last 2 weeks, we have violated every one of these principles. There are likely some unfunded mandates in this measure. I raise a point of order because this is the only way that we have to debate this bill and we are being denied the ability to actually offer the amendments that we would like to, to illuminate what is actually in this legislation and how this is a break again from the hallmark and tradition of this great House, which is to allow open debate on appropriations bills. So, in conclusion, we simply cannot trash the rules of the House like we are doing here today and, ironically, on April Fool's Day.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Madam Speaker, wake-up calls; are we listening? Yes, there are wake-up calls. Can we hear them? This majority in the House has not heeded a wake-up call. They have ignored the investments that we need in the clean energy economy to grow jobs. What are those wake-up calls? Well, there is, first, the hard-earned American energy consumer dollars, $400 billion plus, that go to unfriendly nations that will take those dollars and invest in fighting the American troops while they supply us fossil-based fuels. Then there is the oil spill in the gulf that reeked damage on our ecosystem and wrecked the regional economy. Then there was the sticker shock at the pump, at the gas pump, that is driving down the American economy. And no one is listening. Now maybe we will pay attention to the sad announcement today. Last year, we dropped to number three in clean energy investment after China and Germany. When will we wake up? I say today, as the President talks to us about energy security in our economy, that we need to reduce oil imports and innovate into a clean energy future. We need to heed that clarion call. It is a wake-up call that's necessary. The America I know and love is number one. It should never be three on the list of clean energy investment.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, I simply cannot believe we are focusing on this right now. At a time when millions are out of work, people are looking for jobs, and trying to get back on their feet, why is this body focused on NPR, of all things? Is this really the best we can do? For a minute, let's put aside the fact that national public radio is a part of our tradition as a country and provides quality programming to millions of listeners in urban, suburban and rural America. Let's put aside for a minute that funding for NPR is but a drop in the bucket compared to the giveaways and budget busting tax breaks Republicans support for Big Oil companies. Here we are, eleven weeks into a new Congress--still putting politics over policy. Make no mistake about it, cuts to NPR will not solve our budget crisis and it will not create jobs. Mr. Speaker, we can and we must do better. This body should be focusing on jobs. Plain and simple. Instead we are focused on defunding NPR. I urge a no vote.

Mr. TONKO

Mr. TONKO. Representative Garamendi, I would add to that public safety. We even dismantle the efforts to forecast tsunamis. We just saw the devastation in Japan with this horrific earthquake. We take away the opportunity for science to work for us, to address our own public safety. How long can we be here?