Department Of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2008
Floor Speech
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008 -- (House of Representatives - June 12, 2007)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, you know, it is amazing that the liberal leadership in the House is living up to the moniker of the hold-on-to-your-wallet Congress, and we see that they can't even get out of paragraph 1, Title I, of the bill without spending more money.
And I want to commend the gentleman from Iowa for offering his amendment. Sounds really simple, $79,000, make a reduction of $79,000 in spending and make it out of the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management. It's the right type thing to do.
In my district in Tennessee, people don't like what the Federal Government spends, and we are hearing from our constituents. They are looking at this bill, $36.3 billion, 6 percent more than was requested, 13.6 percent more than last year. And in the middle of all this money, we can't find a way to fund the fence, which is one of the things that people want to see, securing our southern border?
Now, my constituents are upset about that. They know that this is hypocrisy. They know that people are trying to skirt around the edges. They have caught on to this secret slush fund and going back to the way they were and the way things used to be done. And quite frankly, Mr. Chairman, it's something that they don't like, and they are hopeful that we are going to be down here making certain that we put some sunlight on what is taking place.
When you've got a group that is so addicted to the taxpayer dollar that they cannot get out of paragraph 1, Title I, of that bill without spending more money, you've got a problem. And my constituents know that that problem is not that the taxpayers aren't sending enough money up here. My constituents know that the problem is the Federal Government who has a spending problem. They know that it is the bureaucracy that has too much power over how that money is spent, and they know that it is the government that has a ceaseless and insatiable appetite for their hard-earned dollars.
So I commend the gentleman from Iowa. I commend him for being diligent and reading the language in this appropriations bill. I commend him for being diligent and making certain that he goes through this bill to find ways to reduce what would be spent, to cut out the waste, to look for areas where it can be pulled in and tightened up and reductions can be made.
You know, I know a lot of people in this House didn't like the Deficit Reduction Act, when we made a step in the right direction, reducing, cutting in that 2006 Deficit Reduction Act, cutting more than $40 billion, and poof, it all goes away with one stroke of their budget pen. Given the opportunity, they're going to spend more, and they're going to hide it and not tell you exactly where it is.
And the issue of earmarks, Mr. Chairman, it comes up in nearly every conversation that we're having in our districts. Let's have a way to evaluate those earmarks. Our constituents deserve to know before that vote takes place rather than after that bill comes out of conference committee.
In order to fund all this fun that the leadership is having, we face the single largest tax increase in American history. It is certainly, certainly inappropriate, and going in here and beginning to find places to make cuts, as the gentleman from Iowa has done, is the right type way to go.
If you cannot find $79,000 out of a $36.3 billion budget, you've got a problem. If you can't reduce some out of a 6 percent increase more than was requested, 13.6 percent more than last year, then you've got a problem. It is a spending problem. It is something that needs to be dealt with by the Federal Government.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source