Recognizing National Debt As Threat to National Security
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to lead this Special Order tonight as we consider the national debt as a security threat to the United States of America.
I thank Senator David Perdue for his leadership. He introduced a concomitant resolution in the Senate. I also thank the more than 50 Members of this body who are original cosponsors to this resolution.
I also thank the more than one dozen conservative groups that endorsed this resolution and have come to understand that a structural deficit that nears a trillion dollars every year, a national debt that exceeds $22 trillion, is indeed a threat to our national security.
Madam Speaker, I yield to my friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, when the gentleman from Texas talks about the crowd-out effect, that is what we see as one of the threats to our national security.
When you look at the spending that is being bloated and plussed-up and increased, the ramifications of borrowing more and more money for an insatiable appetite to spend the Federal revenues and beyond to the tune of almost a trillion dollars a year--and it will continue to rise, make no mistake about that, unless we do something--it will ultimately crowd out spending for things like the military, spending for things like transportation and infrastructure, spending for any discretionary item.
We are on that fast track today, so I appreciate my friend from Texas talking and discussing the crowd-out and the impacts on our future and our future generations.
Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Williams).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend, Congressman Williams from Texas, for his willingness to take a strong stand on this. I am particularly impressed by his reference to President Trump's National Security Strategy, which specifically mentions a portion of it is to bring down our national debt, to try to become a better fiscally situated nation.
That will help our national security, now and in the future. This is exactly what President Trump is talking about. That is what we are talking about. That is one of the issues that we have before us today.
I am grateful to my friend, the gentleman from Texas, who brought that forward and is supporting this important resolution.
Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to yield to my friend from Maryland (Mr. Harris), the great congressman.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland, and I appreciate his focusing on the interest, because he is right. In just a few short years, we will be spending more of our budget on interest than we do on defense; and then a couple of years after that, more on our interest than we spend on Medicare.
Think about that. Think about where we are headed because of our profligate ways.
In the first chart he showed, I was struck, as I remembered growing up in the Cold War era.
Madam Speaker, I think those of us who grew up in the Cold War era remember that contest between us and the former Soviet Union and the amount of money spent by both sides. It is dwarfed by the spending that we are embarking on today as a percent of our GDP. That is where we are. That is where we have come. So it continues to be a problem in so many ways and on so many levels.
Madam Speaker, it is my privilege now to yield to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Buck).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from Colorado, Mr. Buck, and I appreciate him raising that important issue, that it is an oddity, isn't it, in Congress, that somehow we segregate money. We segregate money and say, oh, well, this money doesn't matter so much. But it becomes fungible when you are looking at the accumulation of debt that we are heaping upon our future generations.
I appreciate the gentleman bringing that to our attention and reminding us, and I would just say, I appreciate his voting record, because I have watched it closely, and he is a man of his word when he says he has been fighting to balance the budget and reduce our deficit since he got here, because his voting record is actually true to that, and I appreciate that very much.
Madam Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cline).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cline), for his comments and his efforts and his willingness to stand on this important issue and recognizing--and promising to people and responding to that promise; because I can tell you, when I first considered even running for Congress, one of the things that motivated me was this horrific debt, which I have watched explode even more since I got here; not because I am here, but in spite of my efforts.
So, today, we are preparing to introduce our resolution, which will be later this week, Senator Perdue, his cosponsors, my 50 original cosponsors--more than 50 original cosponsors. And we recognize that, as of today, the national debt is more than $22 trillion. You have heard that. Can you hear it enough without taking action?
The resulting total interest expense for the fiscal year 2019 is $192 billion. $192 billion. Interest does not sleep. It doesn't take a holiday; it doesn't take a vacation. Interest accumulates without ceasing until you pay your debt.
Our national debt as a percentage of GDP is 104 percent. The last time a Federal budget was balanced and was signed was 1997.
Our total Federal tax receipts for fiscal year 2018 were $3.329 trillion. But somehow--and we all know how--our Federal outlays totaled $4.1 trillion, with a deficit of $780 billion. And we know how. We know how that happened. We look to each other in this body.
Since the last time Congress balanced the Federal budget in 1997, Congress has failed to maintain a fiscally-responsible budget and has relied on raising the debt ceiling. How many times have we raised the debt ceiling? It is almost more than you can count.
Congress failed to pass a balanced budget for fiscal year 2019 and failed to restore regular order to the legislative process by not allowing Representatives to offer and debate amendments. When we have regular order, it permits the House to separately debate and adopt all appropriation bills in a timely fashion and facilitates congressional oversight on Federal spending.
Estimates are Medicare will run out of money in 2026, Social Security in 2034.
As my friend from Virginia, Mr. Cline, said: Congress' ineffectiveness has caused the U.S. credit rating from Standard & Poor's to drop from AAA to AA+. Without a targeted effort to balance the Federal budget, our credit will surely continue to fall.
President Trump's National Security Strategy highlights the need to reduce the national debt through fiscal responsibility.
Former Secretary of Defense James Mattis warned that: ``Any nation that can't keep its fiscal house in order eventually cannot maintain its military power.''
Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats warned that: ``Our continued plunge into debt is unsustainable and represents a dire future threat to our economy and to our national security.''
Former Secretaries of Defense Leon Panetta, Ash Carter, and Chuck Hagel warned: ``Increase in the debt will, in the absence of a comprehensive budget that addresses both entitlements and revenues, force even deeper reductions in our national security capabilities.''
And former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen warned: ``I believe the single biggest threat to our national security is debt.''
And so what must the House do?
First, we have to recognize that the national debt is, indeed, a threat to our national security. We must realize that deficits are unsustainable, irresponsible, and dangerous.
We must restore regular order in the appropriations process, and we must commit to addressing the fiscal crisis faced by the United States.
I mentioned it before, but when you are spending a pot of money and you have limited resources, regardless of how great those resources are--I mean, we have had record tax revenue for the last 14 months, record revenue, more than any time in the history of the United States of America, and we still outspend that revenue.
As we do so, we have to borrow money, because we have created a structural deficit. So, foundationally, we put ourselves in a position where we have to borrow money; and when you have to borrow money, you have to pay interest. As you have to borrow more money, which we do, you are going to start crowding out what you can spend those limited resources on.
Who holds our debt? One of the biggest holders of our debt is also one of our greatest potential adversaries, and that is China. China has been, for the last 25 years, expanding their military, building a blue- water navy, expanding their capacity for rockets and missiles, and also taking in our debt.
This places us at risk if we are ever in a conflict, which I pray we never are. I hope we never are. But if we are in a conflict with an adversary who holds significant amounts of our national debt, we are at risk. And you have to acknowledge that.
What has helped us out so far is the fact that the U.S. dollar is the international medium of exchange in international transactions, economic transactions. If we were to lose that, the ability to borrow funds to sustain our unsustainable spending would go away. And I bring that back to China.
China has ambitions to make its own currency a regional currency of exchange. They would like to replace the United States dollar as the international medium of exchange as well.
What else is an actual physical problem when you have the kind of debt and deficit spending that we have is that you cannot pay to replace and maintain your internal infrastructure, and we see that today. Bridges, roads, airports, all of these need maintenance. They need upkeep. They need expansion. We need new roads. We need new highways, but we can't pay for it, because we are going to be in a position of being overextended. That places us at risk, because you do need internal infrastructure.
Madam Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield to my good friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Yoho).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida for taking time to come down and give us his insight on this monumental problem.
One of the things that he talked about, Madam Speaker, is that we have got to take care of our processes, our procedures. He is right. It doesn't matter whether it is Republican or Democrat; our processes have been broken.
I can't even begin to tell you. I have been here a little over 2 years. I bet you we have done a dozen and a half short-term spending bills, continuing resolutions. I bet it is that many. It seems to me like that many. I think we did three government shutdowns last year. I don't know when the next one is going to be. It wouldn't surprise me if it was 2 weeks from now, whenever it is. But the reason we do those things is because our budget process fails.
I remember sitting in a meeting and I heard someone say: We have got a 10-year budget plan to balance our budget. And I heard somebody else stand up and say: Well, I have been here 10 years. Ten years ago, I was told we had a 10-year budget plan, so we ought to be up to snuff. We ought to be balanced by now, because it is 10 years since that 10-year budget plan.
I think it was Mr. Yoho who said that.
Madam Speaker, I yield back to Mr. Yoho.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments.
Madam Speaker, reclaiming my time from the gentleman from Florida, when we look at that and the promises constantly, this is getting to my point: The process needs to get back to regular order. It needs to get back to 12 individual bills--this is what we talked about--12 individual bills that go through a process where there is debate; there are amendments; there is discussion; and there is accountability.
Nothing provides more accountability than bills that have single subjects; nothing provides more transparency than bills that have single subjects; and nothing allows the American people to see what we are doing in Congress like single subjects.
So when you take 12 subjects, which are your budget bills, and you combine 3 or 4 of them into a minibus and 6 or 7 into an omnibus, and you say vote on these things--usually we are given just a short period of time to read those things and analyze them anyway; usually they come in under some closed rule or some highly structured rule--well, you are preventing a couple of things:
Number one, we are not going to get to a balanced budget because, ultimately, what you are also preventing is accountability, because when the American people can see how you voted in a single area on a single issue, they know whether they agree with you or not. They know whether you should be doing that, and they will let you know. They give you the feedback. That is the accountability that we need if we are going to balance this budget over time and correct our course.
Now, there is an economic theory called path dependence. Sometimes it is called increasing returns. Kenneth Arrow wrote a lot about this, and what it boils down to is this: It is an analysis, really, of why decisionmakers make suboptimum decisions and then persist on the course even after they know it is a suboptimum decision.
Well, what typically happens is regimes and institutions are built up. There is feedback, and people will persist on that because they are building up regimes and institutions; and, ultimately, they have propelled themselves so far down, they are what we call locked in. To exit that path, the cost is so high that they don't want to exit that suboptimal path and move to a more optimal path.
But I am here to tell you tonight that as long as we stay on this suboptimal path where we don't have these 12 budget bills, we don't get back to regular order in budgeting, as long as we do CRs and then claim that we have done a normal budgeting path when we have created cromnibus bills or omnibus bills or minibus bills, we are not going to be able to exit the path that we are on.
If we are going to sustain this Nation, we are going to need to exit the path that we are on and move to a more optimal path.
That is really what this resolution is about. It is encouraging people from both sides of the aisle. I am not blaming one side or the other. I am just saying that if we are going to get this done, everybody in this House has to look internally. Everybody in this House needs to say: What are we doing with our process? Everybody needs to recognize that if we continue on this path, at some point there is no more path to run down.
We just heard from a series of speakers that the numbers go up and, at some point, you reach a tipping point, and that tipping point says you cannot go forward. I would rather we move over to a suboptimal path now and pay that price, which is typically a short-term, corrective price. In the scheme of things, it may take longer than just a short- term, but we have to move over because, if we don't, our choices are taken away from us.
I will tell you that if we would have gotten on the path 2 years ago, we would have had more choices and more options. Every day we go further down this path, the fewer options we have until the end. Mr. Yoho is correct, and all of my friends who have spoken tonight were correct, and the more than 50 cosponsors here, they are all correct: If we don't do something, it will be imposed upon us.
If it is imposed upon us, we won't have control. We will not be able to handle this in a way where we hurt the fewest people, where we can feather the landing as much as possible, where we can maintain our economic status, where people can still find jobs, and where people can achieve the American Dream that they perceive that they want to achieve. Those things get taken away from us because, ultimately, this country is built on individual freedom and individual accountability.
If we have to take that horrible measure of receiving something like our debts being called in, or we can't find lenders, or the cost of our loans--imagine if the cost of our debt today would just move up a couple of points--imagine what that would look like. If we can't do this of our own volition, we will be subject to someone else's will and the very essence of the American Dream--individual freedom and individual accountability--will go away. And why? Because that accountability will be foisted upon us by coercive forces.
Madam Speaker, I conclude tonight with gratitude to the 50-some-odd men and women who have signed on to this resolution. I implore all in this body to join myself, to join me, to join Senator Perdue and those who have signed on and sponsored a companion resolution in the Senate, and let's make the hard choices today so that we might preserve the freedoms for our children and grandchildren.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source