The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“HIGHEST DEBT IN HISTORY” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Energy was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H6819-H6826 on June 20, 2007.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
HIGHEST DEBT IN HISTORY
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Altmire). Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, it's an honor to be on the House floor. And I must say that free speech is a beautiful thing in the United States of America. Our friends on the other side can pretty much say anything they want in this wonderful Chamber in this country, with absolutely no ramifications or connection to the truth at all. And I want to just share with the American people and I want to share with other Members of Congress, Mr. Speaker, and my good friend here from Connecticut, some facts that have been absent over the last hour and really over the last couple of days.
I think it is important to just go back and piece the history together. Over the past 6 years there has been a Republican House, a Republican Senate, and a Republican White House. The gentlemen on the other side, fine men from fine families who have been speaking here, have completely forgotten about the last 6 years. They think that they ran up a high bar tab and that it can be fixed rather easily. The fact of the matter is they ran up, the Republican House, Republican Senate, Republican White House, $3 trillion in debt, $3 trillion over the last 6 years.
They just got out of office in January, and here it is June, and they're acting like this is ancient history. Three trillion dollars. They had the debt limit raised five or six times, which means they had to pass legislation out of here that would allow the Department of Treasury to borrow more money. And then 5 months after they're out of office, they come here, Mr. Speaker, and they talk like they've had nothing to do with this.
Now, we saw our friend from Texas earlier hold up the Blue Dog Coalition debt limit sign, over $8 trillion, almost to $9 trillion in debt and act like they had nothing to do with it. But the American people recognized in November and asked for a change in government, and they got it.
Let me clear up another fact that has been misrepresented here today and yesterday and over the past couple of weeks. This is their quote,
``The Democrats are somehow going to raise taxes. It is the largest tax increase in the history of the United States of America.'' Not accurate. Not true. I ask the American people, and as I speak and it is written into the Congressional Record, we need to ask all Americans to keep their tax forms from this year and hold on to them and match them to next year's tax forms. There will be no increase in taxes from the Democrats. None. And take the statements that have been said here, take your tax forms. Don't believe me. Don't believe Mr. Murphy or Mr. Meek or any of our other 30-
something friends who are going to come here, keep your own forms.
Now the bottom line is this; we know how to govern. Our friends on the other side have had their chance. They got the keys to the car in 2000 when President Bush won and they controlled all levers of government and failed miserably; $3 trillion in debt, a foreign policy that's a complete disaster, a FEMA organization agency that can't even respond to natural disasters in the United States of America. They can't even get the American citizens their passports. So save the lectures for somebody who wants to listen to them, because quite frankly, we don't, and the American people do not want to listen to them. That's the bottom line. When you can get the American people their passports on time, then come talk to us about worrying about environment and creating jobs and the economy and foreign policy. Enough is enough.
My friends, Mr. Speaker, on the other side are putting all of their trust in Mr. Bush, our President, because he says he's going to veto all our bills. Well, let's just look at what the Republican Congress did. President Bush, Mr. Speaker, said that he's going to veto all our bills if they come in one dollar above what his submission was to the Congress. Let's look at what happened in 2005.
This is the defense bill in 2005. The Congress spent, Republican Congress, $45 billion more than President Bush requested. President Bush signed the bill on December 30, 2005. Transportation appropriations bill, Republican Congress spent $7.2 billion more than President Bush requested. President Bush signed the bill on November 30, 2005. Labor, Health and Education. Republican Congress spent $5 billion more than President Bush. President Bush signed that bill into law on December 30th. On and on and on. And I can go through agriculture, military, I will submit this for the record so that all of America can go and check this out. Three trillion dollars in debt. Some of the highest deficits in the history of our country were run up by the Republican House, Republican Senate, Republican White House.
Here we go. Exploding national debt under the Bush, now Mr. Nussle, who is joining the team, projected 10-year budget surplus of $5.6 trillion turned into a projected 10-year deficit of $3 trillion. The surpluses were gone. In the largest budget deficits in American history, Mr. Speaker, $378 billion in 2003, $412 billion in 2004, $318 billion in 2005.
Now, you look at the Democratic budget, Mr. Murphy, and you will see that we balance the budget. Keep your 2008 forms. We do not raise your taxes. Just to prove what the other side is saying to us, keep them. We don't raise your taxes and we balance the budget. And I can't even wait until all of these pass and we can go all around the country, Mr. Murphy, and talk about what we have done. The largest increase, and I will be happy to yield to you in a second, my friend, the largest increase in veterans spending in the history of the VA. So all of the problems that our veterans have been having, backlogs, they don't have enough workers in the VA system to process the claims, all of that is going to be taken care of. All of our kids that are coming back and our adults and our soldiers coming back, there is $500 million in this bill for post-traumatic stress. There is money in here for amputees. There is money in here for prosthetics. There is money in here for brain injuries. There is money in here to make sure the veterans don't have a huge increase in their copay and user fees, as the Republican Congress and President Bush nickeled and dimed their veterans to death. And this budget that we prepared for the veterans was approved by Disabled Vets, Paralyzed Vets. Everyone has approved and said this is a monumental step.
So we can get into energy, and I'm sure we will tonight; we can get into Homeland Security, which I'm sure we will tonight; we can get into Labor, Health and Education, which I'm sure we will tonight, and basically say, Mr. Speaker, that we have delivered for the American people exactly what they want.
I understand what the polls say right now, but our budget has not been implemented yet. And when people go next year and they apply for a Pell Grant and they're allowed to get $700 more so they can send their kid to college, and their student loans rates are cut in half and they get the minimum wage in July, and there are community health centers being built all over our country so that middle-class families who can't afford health care can go to a clinic at least and get their kids care. When you have a million more kids on SCHIP. Next year this is all going to happen, and some will happen before that, the American people will recognize that it was the Democratic Congress that pushed this agenda. And let the President veto it, let him.
I yield to my friend from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Thank you very much, Mr. Ryan.
I think what happened here over the last 12 years, and I was watching it all from the outside, is that the Republicans, for a very long time, vastly overestimated the gullibility of the American people. They thought they could stand up here and say over and over again that the Republicans are being fiscally responsible, and that the American people wouldn't notice that they were racking up record amounts of debt, $3 trillion, up to $9 trillion now is the amount of Federal debt that this government has racked up. The fact that they wouldn't notice that every single dime for this war in Iraq and Afghanistan has been borrowed money. I think you give them too much credit, Mr. Ryan. You said they were spending like a bunch of drunken sailors. Well, drunken sailors spend their own money at least, they probably don't spend it very wisely, but their own money. These are like a bunch of thieving drunken sailors. They were spending other people's money, my money, my parents' money, my neighbor's money, all the while kind of pretending that we weren't ever going to have to pay it back.
So what we've seen here tonight and what we've seen over the last few days is a Republican minority now that continues to vastly overestimate the gullibility of the American people. They think they can stand here, try to make disappear everything that happened over the last 12 years, and that once again they can stand here and talk about being fiscally responsible, while the very mess that we're here cleaning up is all theirs in the making.
{time} 2100
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Now, Mr. Speaker, here is what we are doing. You mentioned that we have a balanced budget, in 5 years we are going to balance this budget. But on top of that, we are starting to fix some of the biggest messes they left this Democratic Congress.
Take for example the Alternative Minimum Tax. Now, not a lot of people know what this thing is. You know it if you are paying it, and you are going to start paying it year after year. More people will start paying more and more. This is the biggest middle-class tax increase potentially in the history of this country, imposed by a Republican Congress. And, guess what? We are going to fix it. We are going to take it on.
For the first time, legislation that comes before this House actually has to be paid for as we go along; the pay-as-you-go rule. Every spending increase that this Congress proposed has to be accompanied by either a revenue offset or a spending offset. That's real fiscal responsibility; rules passed by the Democratic majority here that are going to finally impose some fiscal discipline on this place.
So the Republicans and the minority can say over and over again whatever they want. They can hope that if they say it often enough that they will believe it and maybe a few people out there will believe it.
But what is going to happen here over the next few months is results, Mr. Ryan. It is going to be rhetoric matched with results: Fixing the AMT, balancing the Federal budget over 5 years, making sure that every bill that comes before this House is paid for as we go along, record increases for veterans programs, for education programs, for the things that people want to have funded in their communities.
There are finally going to be some words that are matched with actions here. As much as the other side of the aisle may try to make this disappear, they are going to find an American people that isn't as gullible as they used to think they were.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I would be happy to yield to my good friend, the Cardinal from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Ryan and Mr. Murphy.
Mr. Speaker, I am really pleased to be here with my colleagues from the 30-Something Working Group once again.
Just to jump off what our good friend Mr. Murphy was talking about, we are in the midst of the ``New Direction Congress.'' Mr. Ryan, Mr. Meek and I spent the last several years on this floor railing about the
``culture of corruption,'' railing against our good friends on the other side of the aisle, whose only interest when they spoke about tax cuts was providing those tax cuts to the wealthiest few in this country.
Now, what is amazing about our ability to move this country in a new direction is that we can really focus on those targeted tax cuts that will help the average working family, the regular folks, the people who don't have the ability to just kick back, put their feet up on the desk and live on Easy Street day in and day out.
We are talking about people who live paycheck to paycheck. Not poor people who live paycheck to paycheck, but people in middle America, who make sure that all their bills are paid, just like we are trying to do here with our PAYGO provision, but make sure all their bills are paid. But it takes every dollar they have to do it.
Then you add to their budget the increased price of gas, which increases the price of food, which impacts everything that regular, everyday working families have to deal with. And we hit them under the Republican-led Congress with an Alternative Minimum Tax, that was never supposed to be directed at them, but ultimately scooped up so many of those hardworking taxpayers. And you know we listened to the garbage rhetoric that is so tired on the other side.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, it is like the 1992-1993 talking points have been taken off the shelf somewhere in the cloakroom and dusted off.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I am glad the gentleman jumped in. It is like either they have a tape recorder that is stuck on rewind, or maybe we are trapped in ``Groundhog Day'' and we don't know it, or maybe they are just tired.
We used to be in meetings, and I have sat in many meetings where I have had colleagues and supporters express frustration because they marvel at our Republican friends' ability to come up with these pithy, cute, packaged messages and that ours aren't as cute and pithy and succinct.
Well, do you know what? That is because we don't have purely simplistic solutions to complex problems. The American people saw right through the pithy, cute, succinct, tired slogans that the Republicans have been throwing at them year after year and don't believe them anymore. They reached the point where they won't just take what they say when they repeat it over and over again at face value.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, let's look at what happened here in the last couple of days. Right here, about 20 minutes ago, we heard two of our friends on the other side, Mr. Speaker, talk about a balanced budget amendment. They just ran up $3 trillion in debt, raised the debt limit five times, and it is like it never happened. Let's put on a balanced budget amendment, the constitutional amendment.
It is unbelievable.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, they also talked about earmark reform. They were railing on and on about earmark reform.
Who brought earmark reform to Congress? We did. Who brought about the beginning of the end of the war in Iraq, hopelessly mired in a chaotic conflict in another country? If you rewind back to pre-November 7, what was their cute, pithy, succinct little saying? Stay the course. We can't pull out. We can't cut and run.
Who is scrambling to make sure they can protect their own political hides now and be supportive of making sure that we can withdraw, but in a responsible fashion? Well, it is they that spend plenty of time talking about that. We are the ones that are bringing about the beginning of the end of this war by putting those votes up on that board and bringing those bills to this floor that they refused to yield on.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, the beautiful thing about this is that for how many years they talked about the protecting the homeland, about homeland security, that it make us safer fighting there so we don't have to fight here, all their rhetoric hasn't delivered.
So here we come, right? We come with an increase in funding so we can fund the ``loose nukes'' program, the Nunn-Lugar program, so we have more people out with more money buying more loose nuclear weapons that are getting spread around the world, we put hundreds of millions of dollars more into this program, which is going to keep us safe.
Mr. Speaker, last week, the mother of all rhetorical contortions, we are passing a Homeland Security bill here, or trying to pass, where 3,000 Border Patrol agents will be funded; technology for all our ports to monitor chemical and biological weapons coming in; grants for first responders, police, fire. We also passed 50,000 new cops for the country for communities who can't afford them, a lot like mine. And they held up the bill. They held up the bill.
Mr. Speaker, we are trying to pass funding for 3,000 Border Patrol agents, and they are trying to hold up the bill. Now, who is for homeland security now? And on and on and on.
But what we have shown, and this is what I love about it, is that when these bills pass, those men and women who get hired to be Border Patrol agents will know it was the Democrats. When the minimum wage goes in this summer, they will know it was the Democrats. When you go to get a Pell grant, they will know it was the Democrats.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, when we bring an energy package the week before we leave for the July 4 recess that really begins to make sure that we end our addiction to foreign oil, they will know it was the Democrats. When we make sure we bring about an end to this war in Iraq, they will know it was the Democrats. And they will say repeatedly, ``they'' being the smart American citizens, American voters, they will say to our good friends on the other side of the aisle exactly what they said to them on November 7, after listening over and over to the same tired slogans, ``Talk to the hand. We don't want to hear it anymore. We see through your garbage. And we are voting to make sure we can move this country in a new direction.''
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, let me tell you what happened in my district, because it happened in 40 other districts around the country last fall.
All the people who are fiscal conservatives, people who were concerned about fiscal responsibility frankly probably voted Republican for a long time because they did believe that the words were backed up by the actions, finally saw through all that rhetoric. And all those true fiscal conservatives came out and voted Democrat.
My district hadn't been Democrat for 24 years. And, guess what? It wasn't just the social progressives and the anti-war activists who came out and said we want change. It was the fiscal conservatives, the people who were concerned about the absolute and utter incompetency in this Government that came out and decided to change this place.
And, guess what? They are seeing results here. They are seeing results because what they did was they saw a party that over the years started out as a collection of ideas that ended up just being a collection of special interests.
Mr. Speaker, the words they used were still the same. Their allegiances changed over time. Their allegiances didn't happen to sit with the ideas that they held. Their allegiances sat with the lobbyists and the special interests and the folks that they were protecting every single day on this House floor. Those voters who came out and voted Democrat based on fiscally sound and fiscally responsible principles last year are going to do the same thing 2 years from now because they are going to see that balanced budget. They are going to see the Alternative Minimum Tax. They are going to see the pay-as-you-
go rules. Those are all results. Those are going to be voters that will be sticking with the Democratic Party.
{time} 2115
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. They are not going to see a tax increase. Again, keep your tax forms from this year, compare them to what you fill out next year. There will be no tax increase. Period, dot, Mr. Speaker. When you wonder why the fiscal conservatives gave the Democrats a chance and why we are passing balanced budgets, why we passed a rule in the House called PAYGO which says if you spend money, you got to pay for it. You got to find a cut somewhere to cut it out.
Here is why they voted for us: This President and the Republican Congress, as we have stated ad nauseam on this floor, have borrowed more money from foreign interests in the last 6 years than any other President and Congress before them combined. Combined. From foreign interests.
Now, look here: Japan; China; UK; Caribbean; OPEC countries, $67 billion of our debt; Japan; China, $349 billion.
Now, we are trying to compete with China. And one of our friends was up here earlier today with an amendment. We have to compete against China. No kidding. Well, then why did you, he wasn't here, but why did his predecessors before him borrow over $600 billion from China, and then turn around and say, hey, aren't we competing with the bank we are borrowing from? How are we going to work this out?
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Ryan, one of the most perplexing bars on that graph is the amount of money that we have borrowed from OPEC nations. You want to talk about why we can't stand across the table from the countries that are pillaging American consumers with these ridiculously, monstrously high gas prices?
Guess what? We can't sit across and be an honest broker from them because they hold the mortgage to this country. The same can be said of the Chinese and the same can be said of European nations. We have lost so much of our ability to sit and be an honest broker in negotiations over energy policy and foreign policy, because they own our currency. They hold all of our debt.
So beyond how terrible this is for the American taxpayers, it is also terrible for the American foreign relations. It has to stop.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You stand here and scratch your head and wonder how it is they could allow it to get to this point. There is no logical, rational explanation. The only thing I could come up with is, A, they think we are dealing with Monopoly money here and it is not real money and it is not real debt; or, B, it is not really my personal debt, so it doesn't affect my personal bottom line, so it doesn't matter; or, C, which is the worst, they just didn't care.
It just didn't matter. Their rhetoric was of the utmost importance to them. Making sure they could continue to pass tax cuts that benefited the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans, the debt be damned, the deficit be damned, none of that mattered to them, as long as they could keep their contributors happy.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Even when they did spend money, they spent it in such a ludicrous way as to waste the taxpayers' money on essential programs like the prescription drug benefit. Even when they chose to roll out a brand new and expensive new domestic program, they overspent to the tune of potentially $50 billion a year by cutting a deal with the drug companies so as to prohibit the Federal Government from using its bulk purchasing power.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Murphy, to add insult to injury, the administration, now that they are not in power here, the administration is using its ability through their agencies to try to cram new formulas down the throats of our hospitals so their reimbursement rate is dramatically impacted, dramatically cut, so that they aren't able to serve the people who need the most help.
So not only are our seniors getting nailed by not being able to make sure that they have truly the lowest possible prices that they can pay, that we could negotiate on their behalf for prescription drugs, but our hospitals are facing major cuts at the hands of the administration without any input from elected officials, just bureaucrats in the Bush White House's administration.
They actually have one proposed formula change that would presume that hospitals are just going to game the system, so they are cutting money out of their budgets, just because. Pretty much just because they think they are going to play with their numbers. Because they are going to make that assumption, they are going to take the money away, rather than prove that they do that and then take the money away.
That is accountability? That is like what is that game that you play on the street, Three Card Monte. They are playing Three Card Monte with people's health care. I don't know. Maybe it is because most of the people who run this country in the Bush administration can afford to pay their own medical bills, so maybe it is just they have hired too many people who don't understand what it is like to try to pay the bills every month. Really, it is just beyond baffling.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I think it was a pretty simple formula. It was that we were going to squeeze and squeeze the people who have the least in this society, and that is the hospitals that care for the sick and the uninsured, it is the families that have the courage to send their loved ones off to war, it is middle-class families who can't afford to pay another dime. Those are the people that are going to get soaked in order to fund these giant tax cuts for the people.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. It is people who need to be able tomorrow pay for their gas in their car and who are running businesses who need to pay for the vehicles their employees are operating so they can make sure they can serve their customers so they can stay in business and pay their employees. Those are the people they are not thinking about.
I had a press conference a couple of weeks ago with Congressman Klein who also replaced a Member in a district that had not been represented by a Democrat for 26 years. We were out there with some of our small business owners who talked about the impact of gas prices on their bottom line.
I have a constituent in Southwest Ranches who runs a repair business. He literally last year employed 24 people, Mr. Ryan, and now employs 14. He directly attributes this to the fact that he can't afford the gas that he needs to be able to run his trucks around to the businesses that want to hire him to do the repair work. That is just unbelievable.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I think it is important for us to say, we know that the government can't do everything. We know that we can't solve every problem. We have got some basic responsibilities though, defense and what not.
One of the things we are doing here when it comes to gas and oil in the bill that we were on the floor today with, the Energy appropriations bill, is to invest into alternative energy sources. It is very important for us to recognize and for the American people to recognize what we are doing with our budget, because we had a lot of amendments and ``cut this'' and ``cut that.''
This bill passed out as a bipartisan bill on the House Energy and Water Subcommittee, led by Mr. Hobson from Ohio, who is a great ranking member and was a great chair of this committee. But, finally, over the hurdles of many Republicans, over the hurdles of the President, we are now investing into renewable energy and energy efficiency procedures here $1.9 billion, a 50 percent increase in energy efficiency and renewable energy technology. An additional $300 million was added from the joint resolution 2007 resolution we passed.
We are investing in biofuels. Solar energy, hydropower, geothermal, new vehicle technology, new materials technology so we can have lighter vehicles that don't use as much fossil fuel, weatherization grants, carbon capture and sequestration, climate change science research.
You want to talk about moving the country forward? This bill funds 3,500 scientists.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Could I ask you a question, Mr. Ryan? We are both on the Appropriations Committee and the committee is working very hard in a bipartisan way, I might add, to produce a product that we can really have the American people be proud of.
Is the President talking about signing this bill into law?
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. The President is talking about vetoing this bill, my good friend.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Vetoing this bill. Isn't this the same President that talked, again more words, no action, talked about the need for America to end our addiction to foreign oil in his State of the Union that we sat right in this Chamber and heard him say?
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Ms. Wasserman Schultz, I think in four or five or six State of the Union speeches in a row. Not just the last one.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Here we have a budget that actually funds scientists, funds research. There is a great report that has come out called Rising Above the Coming Storm, something along those lines, a beautiful panel of experts led by the former CEO of Lockheed Martin, probably not a Democrat, if I had to guess, but a very detailed report on what we need to do.
One of the key components was focus on basic research in the physical sciences. That is what this bill does. Our friend, when I mentioned this the other day, I said, this is a jobs bill. This is the next generation of people that are going to benefit from the research money. They are going to get into research. They are going to partner with businesses and spring out in more research and development and manufacturing and everything else.
He said, well, this is not a jobs bill. I take issue with what the Member from Ohio is saying.
Well, I am sorry. If we figured out a way to do research and create jobs from it and create new industries, isn't that a good thing? That we were able to get a real good bang for our buck in the investments that we have made?
I just think, Mr. Speaker, that illustrates the difference in philosophy. We have one party in this country who comes to the floor and says they can solve every complex issue with two words: Smaller government, lesser taxes, this and that.
We have a bill that doesn't raise taxes and we are able, because we peeled off $14 billion in corporate welfare that we were giving to the oil companies last year and we put it in alternative energy research, we were able to make that investment without raising taxes. Don't be mad at us. Don't be a hater.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I am not a hater. As a new Member, I am loving every minute of this, Mr. Ryan.
Listen to me: From every standpoint it makes sense. You talk about the jobs that an investment in alternative energy is going to bring. Undoubtedly it is going to make our air cleaner. It is going to reduce our contribution to global warming. We know in the long run it is going to bring prices down. It is going to be the thing that finally breaks our dependence on the high prices of foreign oil.
Also it is about national security. It is about finally breaking us free of dependency on the countries that produce that oil, that compromise a lot of our conversations in places in the world like the Middle East, compromised additionally by the amount of debt those OPEC nations hold. So, it is kind of a win-win-win-win-win-win scenario.
So the question is why didn't it happen? Well, it didn't happen because the agenda here wasn't about the economy. The agenda wasn't about cleaning up the air. The agenda wasn't about lowering gas prices. The agenda was about helping a bunch of people in the oil industry.
This is what happens when you break this place free of special interests. Good policy starts to happen. You get wins for everybody when you start making this about Main Street, right, instead of about the few people that get in the room and write the legislation based on how much money they have given to campaigns and how much influence they have inside the Beltway.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You know, Mr. Murphy, what you and Mr. Ryan just outlined is what Speaker Pelosi always talks about when we are in our Caucus meetings and when I have heard her talk about the direction that she is helping us lead this country, and that is the budget, and by extension the appropriations bills, are an expression of our values.
Mr. Ryan, you talked about our colleague on the other side, and I was in the Chamber when you stood up and talked about that. It really is an expression of our values and a stark contrast in the difference between ours and theirs. Their values were expressed in the energy bills that they passed in the 109th Congress, which gave away $14 billion in subsidies to the oil industry, which when we came into the majority we included in our first 100-hour agenda. The first six bills we passed, one of those was repealing those $14 billion in subsidies so we could responsibly use that money to expand alternative energy research. We earmarked that money appropriately and are holding it so that we can make sure we spend it on really ending our addiction to foreign oil.
So if you look at the Homeland Security bill, the Military Construction bill, the Energy and Water bill, all of the appropriations bills that we are going through right now, they are an expression of our values. They show these stark and clear differences between the way we choose to take this country, in the direction we choose to take this country, versus the direction that they had us on, which was careening into oblivion.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I think I work pretty hard. I get back to the district every minute I can. I see as many people as I am able to. But you don't have to work that hard to hear what the values of the American people are. I mean, you don't have to be everywhere at all times in your district to understand that when people were crying out for energy reform, energy reform wasn't giving more tax giveaways to big oil.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. No, but you do have to be listening. It is very easy to stand as a Member of Congress in front of a group of people, have a town hall meeting, be in a room sitting on your couch in your office, and you are there but you are not listening.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. All I mean by that is it makes it even more inexcusable that all you had to do was go out and listen a little bit to hear the cries from people.
There are these sort of ``are you kidding me'' moments that happen out there. They happened in my district, when people are asking, listen, do something about energy policy. And the ``do something'' was let's just empower the oil companies even more.
People are crying out for change in our policy towards Iraq, and the answer was we are going to commit ourselves to even more troops and even more money and an even greater failed policy.
People stand there and say, are you kidding me? Did you hear anything I said? And for 12 years, the answer increasingly was no. We didn't hear anything you said. We didn't try, and in fact our ears were attuned to a very different set of people.
So now, this revolution that happened here isn't terribly revolutionary. We are finally starting to listen to people again, and that means investing in alternative energy, that means setting a new course in Iraq, that means making it easier for kids to go to college.
These aren't new ideas. These are ideas that people have been talking about in bars and in diners and pancake breakfasts and pasta dinners for years.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I don't want to say it is fun, because there are a lot of people that are still struggling, but it is so much better now to go back to your district and people ask you, what are you doing about gas prices? And we have got a great budget, and it is not immediate. That is the painful thing that you have to realize. People are struggling and people who are driving from lab to lab, they somehow have to use a lot of transportation, it is hard.
But we have something here that we are passing from the House that is going to significantly over time reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and it is going to benefit the average American consumer.
So, let's look at this in the broad sense. Of all the promises, the Democrats made promises, they got in, we gave them a shot. We are taking advantage of this shot. One, we didn't raise taxes, first of all.
But look at what we did. If you are the average person sitting out there, you now in July will have an increase in the minimum wage to over $7 an hour. So anyone who is associated with that will get an increase. Those people slightly above will also get an increase. Included in that was a tax cut for small businesses, so that those people who are bearing the brunt of this will benefit as well.
Then you are getting $700 more in your Pell Grant. So if you have got kids in school, you are going to get an extra $700 a year grant money. If you are in Ohio, Governor Strickland's budget, a former Democratic Member of Congress who is now Governor, passed a budget where there is a zero percent increase in tuition in Ohio next year, zero percent the following year, which traditionally has been almost a 9 percent increase over the past 5 or 6 years.
So if you are a student in Ohio, you are getting a 9 percent cut in your tuition from an increase that would have happened to zero, and you are getting an extra $700 Pell Grant. You are talking about an almost
$2,000 tax cut for average families in Ohio if you go to school.
So you got the minimum wage, you got the Pell Grant, you have community health clinics, about $400 million increase between the supplemental and what we are doing in this year's bill. There will be hundreds of more health clinics around the country this year. People can get their healthcare. We are investing in research, 3,500 scientists will be funded through this bill in all of these different areas for alternative energy research. Increased funding in Head Start, Even Start, after school programs. This is a bill for the people.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. These are bills, because it is plural, that truly think about what the needs are of the average person, the person that we have been talking about for this whole hour that has a paycheck come in and has to figure out how they are going to pay all the bills with the money that comes in.
The help that we need to give them to do is to make sure not that we put money in their pocket, because like you said, Mr. Ryan, government can't do everything. Government is here to provide assistance when it is needed, when the person doesn't have the ability to deal with the issue on their own.
{time} 2130
Like the cost of a student loan, like making sure that they earn a minimal amount of money so they can pay their bills and making sure that the government ensures that the domestic homeland security needs are taken care of, that we have an appropriate number of Border Patrol which has been woefully and inadequately funded under the Bush administration.
They spend a whole lot of time beating on their chest and saying how important it is that we have a strong Border Patrol. The Bush administration did not fund as many or even ask for as many Border Patrol agents as the Clinton administration did. It is just rampant hypocrisy. That is all I have seen in the 2\1/2\ years that I have been here. It is blah, blah, blah. All they do is talk, and it is hollow and empty behind the words.
They have the wrong kind of transparency on their side of the aisle, and folks see through it. That is why they are counting on us to make sure that we take care of these things.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. One of the miracles of what is happening here, we are starting to change those priorities without spending more money in order to do that. You can tack onto your list of help to kids and families the fact that we passed legislation that could bring on average $4,000 in relief to students by lowering the interest rate on student loans. That is $4,000 back in the pocket of a young man or woman graduating from college, that is going to be looking to pile on a mortgage on top of their debt. And we did it at no additional expense to the taxpayers. We changed in a small way the amount of money that we guarantee to banks, and the banks are doing pretty well out there already, and we got $4,000 back in the pockets of American students and graduates without costing anybody else a dime. Same thing on the energy policy.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. When you look at why are we doing this, because we are competing against 1.3 billion people in China. We are competing with 1.2 citizens in India. Not only do we have to do that, but we have to put the pedal to the metal and increase the speed of what we are doing here. This is just the beginning of what we need to do to be competitive, to make sure that we have enough engineers and scientists doing the kind of research that we are passing bills on now, starting to lay the groundwork for, so more kids can afford college.
And we have to ask all of the citizens of this country to step up to bat and really make sure that you are developing your skills and talents to the best of your ability because we can't do it for you. We are going to help with funding and after school. We are going to make sure that kids get the kind of support that they need, but we need Americans to step up to bat and develop the kids so we can compete.
We only have 300 million people in the country. We are competing against 1.3 billion in China and 1.2 billion in India. We need everybody to develop to their fullest extent.
One final point, we are creating through these bills new industries that will pay dividends for our country. The alternative energy is one. With all of the funding in research, it is going to create things and scientists are going to develop things and partner with the private sector. Ten years from now, we can't even imagine what will come with this investment just this year.
In committee we had testimony that there was a blip in energy research, an increase in the late seventies when President Carter was here, and then it went right back down. In those 2 years, solar panels were developed. In those 2 years of that increase in funding.
Give these bright people the resources they need. And also, we have been able to move stem cell research which the President has vetoed. We can't even imagine the health care advances that will come from that research.
So we are creating new areas for young people to grow into and to create jobs for American people.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Ryan, you try to come up with what you can compare this to as far as the situation we are in and who we are dealing with here. It is like we are in the 21st century and we are negotiating with the Cro Magnon man, people who are stuck in the Paleozoic era. How do you even begin a conversation?
If it is not their values, maybe it is that they are literally--maybe the tape recorder is broken. Maybe they are stuck in the age of dinosaurs. You can watch TV and see there are commercials on with Cro Magnon man. Maybe they have infiltrated the United States Congress.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I see a commercial here. They are going to be mad at you. Why are you making fun of the caveman?
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I know, I know, I am going to offend the cavemen. But we work with a lot of them. People who think like cavemen. That is not a constituency I have to worry about too much right now. Really, that is what we have to deal with.
Can you imagine sitting around the negotiating table with a caveman. How easy would be it to move the caveman off their view. Not very easy. We need the American people to help continue to communicate with our colleagues and tug them into the 21st century where we are dwelling.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I am excited that we almost got to the end of the hour without a five syllable word until Paleozoic. That is in part why I joined the 30-something Working Group, to get that kind of vocabulary help.
There is a lot of anger coming from the minority side right now, and I think there is probably reason for them to be angry. When 1 or 2 percent of the population gets the run of the place for 12 years.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. They brought it on themselves. They have only themselves to blame.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. When the other 98 percent get their government back, I would be angry myself if all of a sudden my day was over.
But let's not overstate the partisan differences here because when we have put on the House floor good legislation for the American people, that student loan cut that we talked about, investment in alternative energy, stem cell research, when we put that before the House a lot of Republicans came over and supported it.
So there is a group of leadership, that is frankly the ones that come down the House floor and do most of talking, but there are a bunch of Republicans when Democrats finally put an agenda that is sticking up for regular people, they are going to support us on that. The newspapers and the TV talk shows are filled with the Republican leadership who, frankly, it seems to me, after 6 months on the job, don't speak for a lot of people on that side of the aisle.
I think what we are doing here over time is when you get past a lot of the rhetoric, a lot of the votes end up being pretty bipartisan because when you get beyond the leadership, you have Republicans who are appreciative of the fact that Democrats have finally returned this place to the American people.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. It is going to be interesting to watch the contortions with our friends on the other side of the aisle, you can see their strategy is to blame the $3 trillion that they ran up somehow on us when we weren't in charge of anything, and then they are going to start taking credit for things like the earmark transparency that we, we are in charge here, so if it passes, we have done it. What we have done they are going to try to take credit for.
But it will be so much nicer, I think, next year when all of this is passed and the American people recognize it is the Democrats that has done this. And if the President vetoes it, let's go out and campaign, take that one to the American people and let the President defend not hiring 3,500 scientists in DOE to do alternative energy research. Let him say he is going to veto the Pell Grants. It will be easier because we won't have to come to the floor as much, occasionally just to remind the American people what we are doing instead of trying to push what we are doing now. I think that will be a good time for us.
So we are happy that we do get some support. As I stated earlier, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson) has been a tremendous advocate for putting this budget together through the Energy Department, but the extremists in their party which have been governing their party for the last 6 years, are still coming kicking and screaming into the high-tech research and development economy that we are in now, and somehow think if they cut taxes for a millionaire and that millionaire invests that money in a plant in China, that somehow is benefiting average Americans. Wages have been stagnant for 30 years. So we are trying to create new economies, new sectors of the economy that will grow and provide opportunity for most people.
I just saw a poll yesterday, 7 in 10 Americans think the economy is getting worse for them. That is obviously not shared prosperity, and our friends come to the floor and say the stock market is doing great. Well, that is great if you have stocks. And even if you do, I don't know if it makes up for the stagnant wages and the 20 percent increase in health care costs.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. We need some more bipartisanship. And the Six in 06 agenda, the Medicare legislation to ensure that we can negotiate for lower drug prices, the repeal of the $14 billion in subsidies, the passage of the 9/11 Commission recommendations, the minimum wage, those bills had an average of 65 Republican votes. We are glad to have the rank and file Members who clearly were stymied and strangled by their leadership in the majority who are willing to do the right thing and come along with us.
I wish we could see more of that bipartisanship and wide open eyes on the war in Iraq because we still have a bunch of lemmings who continue to just be willing to walk off the plank and not ask any questions and continue the same mantra. It is really startling.
The bills that we put out on this floor to establish a timeline and to establish benchmarks and to ensure that we can begin to turn this conflict over to the Iraq government, maybe we got two Republican votes on those bills. And one we got one Republican vote on it.
You know, over the weekend, because we have been waiting, and they all say wait until September. There are 14 who went to the White House and said to the President, you have until September. We are going to hang with you, but in September we better see some results or else.
Over the weekend, in my papers we saw commentary from General Petraeus who said, you know, it is not looking like we are going to be able to do any significant draw down or any draw down of troops in September. In fact, we may need to be in Iraq for 10 years. Ten years.
Mr. Speaker, my children will be adults in 10 years. My oldest kids are 8. That means we will have spent virtually because what we are going on, 6 years in Iraq now, that means we will have spent my children's entire life in Iraq. Can you imagine. Their entire childhood twisted and mired in another country's conflict that we created for no good reason or at least for a reason that wasn't accurate with an administration who can't admit when they are wrong. There is no bipartisanship there, and let's just make that clear.
When, God forbid, when we are still twisted in this war in Iraq next year, we will do our best that we vote to bring those troops home and establish those benchmarks and some accountability. But if we don't have the votes to override a veto with our Republican colleagues, we will still be there next year, and that is what is going to decide the 2008 election.
It is not that I hope that happens because I don't. I want to make sure that the troops come home and are reunited with their family, but we will have a Democratic President at that point because the American people are done. Stick a fork in them, done.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, for all those people out there who came out to the polls and voted on national security or fiscal responsibility or competence in government, no matter what you hear late at night here or on the talk radio shows from the Republicans, pay attention to what happens here in the House of Representatives over the coming weeks and months.
Pay attention to the Democratic majority's plan to balance this budget, to pass on tax relief to people that need it, to start restoring order in this world so we are fighting the right fight at the right time. Pay attention to what happens here.
{time} 2145
As we have said over and over again, for the first time in over a decade, words are going to be matched with actions. From one side of this Chamber, from the Republican side, you're going to see words. From the Democratic side, you're going to see words and action to follow. As a new Member of the 30-somethings and as a new Member of this Congress, that's what makes me proud to be here, is that we're saying the right things and then we're doing the right things behind it. All those people who came out and cast their votes based on those ideas are going to find those ideas put into action here.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Let's reassure those soldiers and their families who are serving that this will not be another Vietnam when these kids come home. I think we've already seen that. In the VA budget, $1.7 billion above the President's request for medical services. We have major construction, $3.6 billion, $193 million over the President's request. For medical administration, these vets have been backlogged for years, mental health and substance abuse, increase $100 million over the 07 request. Assistance for homeless vets, health care sharing incentive fund. A lot of money that's going to take care of them.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Two things I just wanted to add on that. For veterans, it means the largest single increase in the 77-year history for veterans health care in the Veterans Administration. What that means is that the people that I serve and that you serve that are veterans who are waiting 7 and 8 months to get their health care taken care of at their local VA hospitals, they're going to get taken care of. Actions to match words, just like the gentleman from Connecticut said.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Let's just remember that we're doing all this without raising taxes. Check your form this year, compare it to next year, there will be no tax increase. We're reducing the budget. We balance it in 5 years, unlike what has happened over the past 6 years with a Republican House, a Republican Senate and a Republican White House.
Mr. Speaker, I think it's important to remind the American people of this, that they borrowed billions and billions, $644 billion from Japan, $349 billion from China, $100 billion in 06 from OPEC countries in order to begin the largest debt, $3 trillion. Our friends on the other side have raised the debt limit while they were in charge five times so they can borrow more money from Japan and China and put our national security at risk here and, quite frankly, not account for the budget in the United States like they should.
It was an honor to be here with our friend from Florida.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Same here.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Our friend from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Thank you, Mr. Ryan.
It's a privilege to be a part of the 30-somethings, Speaker Pelosi's working group. You can e-mail us at [email protected] You can visit us on the Speaker's Web page, www.speaker.gov and there's a link there to the 30-something's page.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________
