Congressional Black Caucus--Road to Ruin: House Republicans Fail on the Budget
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JEFFRIES. Madam Speaker, it is an honor and a privilege, once again, to come to the House floor on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus and join with my distinguished colleague from Ohio, Representative Joyce Beatty, as we anchor this Congressional Black Caucus Special Order--the CBC hour of power--where, for 60 minutes, we get an opportunity to talk to the American people about issues of great importance to the African American community, to our democracy, and, certainly, to our country at large.
Today, we are here to discuss, tragically, the House GOP's continued failure to demonstrate the ability to govern in a basic fashion--that is to pass a budget, which is required by statutory law, as of April 15. That deadline has come and gone, and we are still waiting for the House majority to present a budget to this body for our consideration.
We were told for years by people, including by the current Speaker of this great House, that the most fundamental tenet of governing is the passage of a budget. Yet, even with Republicans in firm control of both the House and the Senate, it seems that this Congress is still unable to get its act together. It is a stunning act of legislative abdication of basic responsibilities. We are going to explore that tonight, not just from a procedural standpoint, but from a standpoint of how this is indicative of this majority's unwillingness and inability to do the business of the American people.
It is now my honor and my privilege to yield to my distinguished colleague, my coanchor, my classmate--the always eloquent and effervescent gentlewoman from the great city of Columbus in the great State of Ohio, Representative Joyce Beatty.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank Congresswoman Beatty for a very thorough presentation and for pointing out that the Speaker, himself, and the Republican majority have indicated that they should be judged based on their capacity to complete the basics of their job responsibilities, which include the passage of a budget resolution. In fact, it was then- Congressman Ryan who, in 2012, stated that failing to enact a budget has serious consequences for American families.
There are at least three current health crises that we are trying to deal with in America and throughout the world, but Republicans have abdicated their responsibility: the Zika virus, the Flint water crisis, and the opioid addiction that is ravaging communities in the inner cities, in suburban America, and all throughout the rural parts of this country; yet House Republicans have failed not just to put forth a budget that would provide a roadmap to deal with these issues, but they have chosen to simply ignore these crises in a manner that represents such a stunning departure of what responsible Members of Congress should be doing at this particular point in time.
I am thankful that we have been joined by the distinguished gentlewoman from the great Lone Star State, who has always been thoughtful and eloquent on issues of importance not just to her district, which is anchored in Houston, Texas, but through her membership and leadership on the Homeland Security Committee as well as on the House Judiciary Committee. She has been so thoughtful and effective on a great many issues in the context of our safety, of our well-being, of criminal justice reform, of course, and of the protection of civil liberties--all issues that are fundamental to our democracy in the same way that a budgetary roadmap is fundamental to our democracy.
Let me yield to Representative Sheila Jackson Lee.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas. She raises several important points.
One of the things that has struck me during my time here in Congress is that, under Republican reign, we have consistently seen government by crisis on one issue after the next.
From the group of people that spend so much time messaging the point to the American people that they believe in fiscal responsibility, where is the fiscal responsibility in failing to put forth a budget consistent with the law that you supported?
The other thing that amazes me--and the gentlewoman from Texas raised the point about the Supreme Court case that was argued earlier today on the immigration executive order issued by the President--I sit on the Judiciary Committee along with the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee and we hear almost every week about how lawless this President allegedly has been in terms of his time in office.
Now, it is interesting to consistently hear the lectures about how lawless this President has allegedly been from people who believe that President Barack Obama exceeded his authority on January 20, 2009, the moment that he took the oath of office because there are folks who still cannot believe that this man is the President and leader of the free world. So I never buy that lawlessness argument.
This is a group now that supports essentially undermining the Constitution over in the other house of this Congress. The President has done his job in putting forth the Supreme Court nominee, who is clearly qualified not according to Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, but according to Orrin Hatch himself, one of the leading Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, amongst others.
The lawlessness is not taking place at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It is taking place right here in the United States Congress under the leadership of House and Senate Republicans.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JEFFRIES. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the thoughtful observations of the gentlewoman from Texas.
I think we want to bring Representative Stacy Plaskett into this conversation in terms of the stunning inability to present a budget.
As Representative Jackson Lee said, what else is there to do in terms of satisfying the extreme elements of your party? Privatize Social Security and throw older people out of their homes across the country? What else can you do?
We are going to explore some of these draconian cuts that were in a budget that apparently is not extreme enough.
I yield to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Ms. Plaskett), my good friend and colleague by way of Brooklyn, New York, I point out. We are so thankful for her presence here in the Congress. It is my honor now to yield to her.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Plaskett. She raised several important points. She noted that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle continue to embrace this notion of trickle-down economics, which is sort of the foundation of many of the slash-and- burn cuts that are contained in at least a budget document that has been passed in prior years and the document that was put forth by the Committee on the Budget this year, this belief that if you lower the tax rate for millionaires and billionaires, that it will result in some residual benefit to the American people. But there is an irony in the embrace even of that term, ``trickle-down economics.''
With the leadership of Representative Bobby Scott and others, the CBC has consistently put forth a budget designed to open the floodgates of prosperity for working class Americans and middle class folks all throughout this country, but what the Republicans want to do is trickle-down economics. The only thing that you get with that philosophy, you may get a trickle, but you are guaranteed to stay down.
We are thankful that Representative Scott for so many years has consistently put forth through his leadership a budget from the Congressional Black Caucus designed to be both fiscally responsible and consistent with our ideals as a country that looks out for the least of those amongst us.
Let me now yield to the distinguished representative from the Commonwealth of Virginia, Mr. Bobby Scott.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JEFFRIES. Would the gentleman indulge one question?
It was mentioned during that very thorough presentation of what is contained in the CBC budget the 10-20-30 program, and of course 10-20- 30, an initiative that has been championed by the CBC through the leadership of Representative Jim Clyburn, would put forth a formula where 10 percent of the funding allocation would go to counties where 20 percent of the population has been living below the poverty line for 30 or more years. Is that correct?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank the distinguished gentleman. In fact, what Representative Clyburn has consistently pointed out, which I think is important in an era where we are trying to find common ground and deal with the problems confronting the American people, if you look at a breakdown of persistently poor counties across the country and overlay that with congressional districts, a majority of those counties are actually represented by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
This is something that we believe should be embraced by the Speaker and our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, as it would benefit, by the numbers, the constituents that they represent even more so than those of us within the CBC or on this side of the aisle.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Scott.
Let me now ask my colleague, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty), to just react to some of what we have heard.
One of the things that I thought was interesting in the presentation related to this budget is that if you look at the numbers, they are so extreme. I was on the Committee on the Budget during my first 2 years in Congress, but these numbers are even more extreme than what I remember in the 113th Congress. The budget apparently will cut $157 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program over a 10- year period.
The Republican budget that came out of the committee would cut roughly $2 trillion from Medicaid. When I was on the committee, the number was $700 million. I thought that was out of control, $700 million. Now we are at $2 trillion over a 10-year period apparently.
And then we have got cuts in higher education. The proposal is $185 billion over 10 years.
You have to ask the question: Why would anyone propose such draconian cuts?
The answer is clear. This is not something that is often talked about, but the objective is to create a situation where you can dramatically lower the tax rates for the wealthiest amongst us. The top tax rate right now is 39.6 percent, but what the budget that has been put forth by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would do is that it would create two tax rates, one at 10 and the other at 25 percent. So what you will see is a tax cut that goes from 39.6 percent to 25 percent.
The way that you balance a budget and pay for it is on the backs of working families, the middle class, senior citizens, children, the disabled, the poor, the afflicted, and everybody else who doesn't fall into the category of millionaire or billionaire.
Now, you wonder how it could be possible that anyone could think that they could get away with such a draconian budget. Well, again, the argument is trickle-down economics.
But what I found fascinating--and maybe you could react to this, Representative Beatty--is that if you actually look at a side-by-side comparison of the economy 8 years under President Clinton with a side- by-side comparison of the economy 8 years under George W. Bush, and then a side-by-side comparison of the economy 8 years under President Obama, I think it is pretty clear who actually has been the responsible fiscal stewards.
There were 20.3 million jobs created under the Clinton Presidency. America lost 650,000 jobs in 8 years under the Bush Presidency. America has now gained more than 14 million private sector jobs under 8 years of the Obama Presidency.
What has been demonstrated is that the argument that if you lower tax rates, you create economic prosperity, is phony. Because Bill Clinton raised the top tax rate to 39.6 percent. It didn't seem to adversely impact the economy. In fact, it was humming between 1992 and 2000. George Bush comes to office, lowers the tax rate for high-income earners from 39.6 percent to 35 percent. We had the greatest recession in the history of modern America; the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
President Obama comes into office and he raises the top tax rate again from 35 to 39.6, more than 14 million jobs are created, the unemployment rate has dropped under his tenure from over 10 percent to 5 percent, the deficit has been reduced by more than a trillion dollars. The stock market has gone from 6,000 to over 16,000. Now it is up to 18,000. I haven't been in the 401(k) system as long as Congressman Scott, who clearly is monitoring the situation. So the prosperity numbers have been phenomenal.
I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty) for her reaction.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank you for laying that out. And I think history can be judged by objective observers as it relates to fiscal responsibility. But a few facts that perhaps some in the Chamber may have had amnesia about, but maybe it bears going through.
Sequestration and painful budget cuts as it relates to the extreme agenda of some here in the Congress have been brought to us in a manner that has cost us both jobs and the ability to experience accelerated financial growth.
We saw in the aftermath of a severe economic shock the approach that was taken by our friends over in Europe of extreme austerity did not bear financial fruit. It was the stimulus package that was put forth-- with not a single vote from anyone on the other side of the aisle--that was actually the financially responsible approach taken to help deal with the train wreck that President Obama inherited and to get the economy back on track.
But, of course, the objective from the very beginning--not my words, but the words of the Senate majority leader on the other side of the Capitol--was to make the President a one-term President.
I just don't even understand the philosophy of a President who takes office, inherits the worst economy since the Great Depression, and the number one agenda is to make sure that he is a one-term President. But that was an unsuccessful political endeavor. He gets a second term.
The first thing that some of my good friends on the other side of the aisle decide to do, as we approach the end of the fiscal year in 2013, was to shut down the government for 16 days. It cost us $24 billion in lost economic productivity. That is not hyperbole. Those are facts.
And what was it all for?
Because there is this obsession--perhaps clinical in nature--with the Affordable Care Act. This is why we voted more than 50 times to destroy it, defeat it, delay it, and do everything possible to stop it.
What could be possibly wrong with making sure that preexisting conditions don't prevent someone here in the greatest country in the history of the world from being able to get adequate medical care? What is wrong with more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans actually having health care?
Yet, in the budget that apparently is not extreme enough, we would take away the Affordable Care Act.
So these are just some of the facts. I wish we had some more time to explore it. That is not hyperbole. Historians will judge this Presidency and this Congress. I, of course, am of the belief that many will conclude that this is a Congress that has majored in obstruction, minored in dysfunction, and done everything possible to pursue a degree in legislative malpractice to the detriment of the American people. And I am hopeful that we can just get back on track and try to find common ground to do the business of the American people, which is why each and every one of us was sent here to the people's House.
I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source