Cut, Cap, and Balance Act of 2011

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, Americans want jobs. After 200 days of Republican power in this House, not one jobs bill. This cut, slash, and burn legislation will not work.

We need an invest, grow, and build strategy. That's what Americans want from Congress. They want us to invest in education, invest in research, and invest in innovation so that America can remain a leader in the global economy. They want us to invest in infrastructure, build bridges, highways, clean energy and cut our dependence on foreign oil, because when we make it in America, that's when America will make it. Americans can make it.

Cut, yes. What we ought to cut are the Republican giveaways to the Big Oil companies, to the Wall Street barons, to the hedge fund managers who enjoy massive tax breaks. That's where the cuts ought to be. They ought to be cut out.

And what of this legislation that's before us? We ought to vote "no.''

* [Begin Insert]

Cut what doesn't create jobs for middle class families, like Republican giveaways to big oil companies. And save what actually works, like innovation to jumpstart new industries and education to help middle class people get good jobs.

I therefore rise in strong opposition to H.R. 2560, the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act. This bill is an extreme version of the Republican budget plan that would make permanent the dangerous budgetary and constitutional measures that would destroy Medicare and Medicaid, and reduce Social Security benefits for those who need them the most. The bill would also handicap the government's ability to respond to economic downturns and create jobs, and it fails to address some of the real drivers our debt--tax breaks for corporations and the rich and runaway Pentagon spending, including our misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This legislation is an affront to the very principles of this nation. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy in his inaugural address said, "If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.'' Unfortunately, it seems that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have no regard for this fundamental American value, as the bill they have brought to the floor today attempts to balance the budget on the backs of those with less for the benefit of those with more. It attempts to balance the budget on the backs of seniors, by taking away their Medicare benefits. It attempts to balance the budget on the backs of the disabled, by taking away their Social Security benefits. It attempts to balance the budget on the backs of low-income Americans, by taking away their Medicaid. And who stands to gain from taking away Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits? Special interests and the rich.

In addition to taking away Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits, H.R. 2560 would also subvert the federal government's ability to respond to downturns in the economy or special needs including a possible national security crisis. During inevitable cyclical downturns, it will be necessary to raise the debt limit to stimulate growth by cutting taxes and providing unemployment benefits to help people get back on their feet if they're laid off, among several proven effective measures. Furthermore, in the event of a security threat, we have an obligation to act. This bill, including the proposed balanced budget constitutional amendment would make it nearly impossible to respond to any economic or security crisis.

At the root of all of this is a system of misguided priorities. My Republican colleagues have determined that in order to balance the budget, we should prioritize cutting Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits, instead of addressing what got us into this current deficit--a porous, lopsided tax code designed to make the rich richer, and two unnecessary wars, one of which we continue to wage. This bill does nothing to end the tax breaks we currently provide for millionaires and billionaires, hedge fund managers and oil companies. Nor does it address runaway Pentagon spending. Based on CBO's most conservative estimates, the DOD alone is projected to spend nearly $300 billion on the Afghan and Iraqi wars from 2012 through 2015, and estimates by Harvard researchers which take into account long-term costs like caring for our veterans put the total cost of these wars in the trillions. Rather than ending tax breaks for corporations and millionaires and billionaires and bringing our troops home from Afghanistan, my friends on the other side of aisle want to cut Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security benefits for those Americans who need them.

I urge my colleagues to see this charade for what it is--an attempt to balance the budget on the backs of those with less for the benefit of those with more--and vote "no'' on H.R. 2560.

*[End Insert]

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source