Providing for Consideration of H.R. 2551, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2012
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. House Resolution 359 provides for a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 2551, the fiscal year 2012 Legislative Branch Appropriations bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule providing for consideration of H.R. 2551. This rule represents a continuance of fulfilling the new Republican majority's pledge to implement a more open legislative process in providing for consideration of a bipartisan list of 16 amendments, which is more than at any time dating back to at least 1988. Twelve amendments were made in order in both the second session of the 103rd Congress and the first session of the 104th.
This is in stark contrast to the past two Congresses in which Democrat domination of this House provided for a collective grand total of four amendments that were allowed to be debated during the past 4 years, when three were made in order during the first session of the 110th and one in the first session of the 111th.
In fact, even considering a Legislative Branch appropriations bill is a change of pace from Democrat control when 2 years yielded no consideration of standalone funding legislation, second sessions of both the 110th and the 111th Congresses. In other words, with the consideration of this single rule and bill, the House Republican majority is making in order four times as many amendments on standalone legislative branch appropriations legislation as were provided for in the previous 4 years of liberal Democrat House domination combined.
Given the terrible budgetary mess we inherited from the liberal Democrats, the underlying bill reflects the Republican House majority's continued drive for restoring the fiscal restraint that is so desperately needed in this city.
The bill appropriates $3.3 billion for legislative branch entities, including $1.2 billion for House operations and $2.1 billion for legislative branch agencies and other offices, including the Capitol Police, Congressional Budget Office, the Library of Congress, the Government Accountability Office, and Government Printing Office. This total is $227 million, or 6 percent less than the current funding, and $472 million, or 9 percent less than requested by the offices and agencies covered by this bill.
The cuts come on top of the 2.5 percent, or $115 million, cut from fiscal year 2010 contained in H.R. 1473, which was the fiscal year 2011 continuing resolution deal that was ultimately signed into law.
That bill provided $4.5 billion for the legislative branch, including a reduction of $55 million in funding for the House from the year before, and provides a 5 percent cut in Member, committee, and leadership office expenses, except for the Appropriations Committee, which offered a larger 9 percent cut.
At this point, Mr. Speaker, I will insert at this place in the Record a budgetary outline of H.R. 2551.
Out of the $1.2 billion provided in this bill for House operations:
$574 million is provided for operating members' offices, $39 million (or 6%) less than current funding and $60 million (or 9%) less than requested.
$293 million for allowances and expenses, $24 million (representing 8%) less than current funding and $15 million (or 5%) less than requested.
$153 million for salaries and expenses of House committees, $10 million (representing 6%) less than current funding, and $10 million (or 6%) less than requested. -and-
$178 million for functions performed by the various House officers and employees, including the Clerk of the House, the Sergeant at Arms, and the Chief Administrative Officer, $16 million (or 8%) less than current funding, and $26 million (representing 13%) less than requested.
Furthermore, the bill provides funding levels for the following agencies:
$490 million for the Architect of the Capitol, which is $37 million (or 7%) less than the current level, and $129 million (or 21%) less than requested.
$340 million for the Capitol Police which is equal the current funding, but $47 million (or 12%) less than requested.
$575 million for various activities of the Library of Congress which is $53 million (or 9%) less than the current level and $91 million (or 14%) less than requested.
$113 million for activities of GPO which is $22 million (or 16%) less than current funding and $35 million (24%) less than requested.
$44 million for CBO which is $3 million (or 6%) less than current funding and $3 million (or 7%) less than requested.
$511 million for GAO which is $35 million (6%) less than current funding and $46 million (8%) less than requested.
Even with all of these funding reductions, it's easy for those who look at Washington, D.C., and see only political dysfunction to oppose providing any funding at all for the legislative branch. While they may see this bill simply as a vehicle for fattening the paychecks of congressional staff and other undesirables, we must remember the important work these support people provide in the function of the most important branch of government.
Contrary to popular belief, congressional staffers work notoriously long hours for relatively little pay and help us represent the views of our constituents. Furthermore, hundreds of thousands of constituents throughout the country are helped to navigate the Federal bureaucracy every day by our local case workers working in nearby district offices. Their work here is hardly the self-enrichment many people are led to believe by populist media sources eager to pose the catchiest headlines.
At the same time, we must remember the many important functions this funding provides in serving and protecting the American public. Given ever-evolving security threats, this bill funds the Capitol Police who protect critical infrastructure as well as secure the safety of the thousands who visit Capitol Hill every day. And we thank the Capitol Police for their invaluable service.
Furthermore, this bill's funding provides for the maintenance, operation, development, and preservation of 17.4 million square feet of buildings and more than 460 acres of land throughout Capitol Hill, including the House and Senate office buildings, the U.S. Capitol, Capitol Visitor Center, the Library of Congress buildings, the Supreme Court buildings, the U.S. Botanic Gardens, the Capitol power plant, and other facilities which are needed for Presidential inaugurations and other ceremonies of national importance.
The responsible funding level in this bill provides adequate funding for the critical functions of the legislative branch but also represents a step in the right direction towards enhancing government efficiency. During these times of fiscal restraint, this bill underscores the new House Republican majority's will to share in the pain of difficult spending decisions.
Mr. Speaker, not too long ago, it used to be that if funding levels weren't rising fast enough, then Congress was seen as cutting a program. That reality is no longer. When the new House Republican majority says we're going to cut spending, we actually reduce spending. This is the commonsense understanding of the American people which is reflected in the underlying legislation. And I will urge my colleagues over and over to support this rule and to support the underlying legislation.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Colorado would have the American people believe that we can't make any cuts in spending at the Federal Government level, but I don't believe that argument is going to go very far. The American people know that we can make big cuts in spending at the Federal Government level, and Republicans are making sensible cuts in spending at the Federal Government level. In the leg branch, it's not a huge amount of money that we have control over; but we believe, on our side of the aisle, that we should make spending cuts everywhere.
Many millions of Americans have lost their jobs since the Democrats took control of this Congress in January of 2007. We had a 4.5 percent unemployment rate when they took over, and now we've had north of a 9 percent unemployment rate for several years. Those people didn't have any choice at all about whether they continued their income or not. What we're saying is, we want to continue the vital functions, those particularly that serve the American people. We want to keep this Capitol looking great.
We want to keep the Capitol Police force at full force. We want to give them the tools that they need. But everybody in Washington, D.C., can work a little harder and spend a little less money to make it easier on the American public, and that's what we're recommending in this bill. And I believe this rule does a very good job of representing the amendments that were presented to the Rules Committee.
Mr. Speaker, I could go on and on about what are the problems that we're facing here, but I think it's better if I quote someone who put some of the situation that we have here in perspective. And so I'd like to quote a Washington Post article by Charles Krauthammer, a brilliant essayist, who put forward this article.
He said other solutions are being suggested by ``the man who ignored the debt problem for 2 years by kicking the can to a commission.
``Promptly ignored the commission's December 2010 report.
``Delivered a State of the Union address in January that didn't even mention the word `debt' until 35 minutes into the speech.
``Delivered in February a budget so embarrassing--it actually increased the deficit--that the Democratic-controlled Senate rejected it 97-0.
``Took a budget mulligan with his April 13 debt plan speech. Asked in Congress how this new `budget framework' would affect the actual Federal budget, Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Elmendorf replied with a devastating `We don't estimate speeches.' You can't assign numbers to air.
``The flip-flop is transparently political. A clever strategy it is: Do nothing and invite the Republicans to propose real debt reduction first; and when they do--voting for the Ryan budget and its now infamous and courageous Medicare reform--demagogue them to death.
``And then up the ante by demanding Republican agreement to tax increases. So first you get the GOP to seize the left's third rail by daring to lay a finger on entitlements. Then you demand the GOP seize the right's third rail by violating its no-tax pledge. A full spectrum electrocution. Brilliant.
``And what have been Obama's own debt reduction ideas? In last week's news conference, he railed against the tax break for corporate jet owners--six times.
``I did the math. If you collect that tax for the next 5,000 years--that's not a typo, 5,000 years--it would equal the new debt Obama racked up last year alone. To put it another way, if we had levied this tax at the time of John the Baptist and collected it every year since--first in shekels, then in dollars--we would have 500 years to go before we could offset half of the debt added by Obama last year alone.
``Obama's other favorite debt reduction refrain is canceling an oil company tax break. Well, if you collect that oil tax and the corporate jet tax for the next 50 years, you will not have offset Obama's deficit spending for February 2011.''
Mr. Speaker, there you have it: Liberal hypocrisy exposed in another brilliant Krauthammer essay.
The choice before the American people is clear. We can either continue accommodating the passions of the liberal elite in cementing a bloated dependency state fueled by job-crushing tax increases, or we can trim spending so private sector employers and innovators, who are the real creators of wealth, can do what they do best in healing the wounds of unsustainable government largesse.
Mr. Speaker, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle simply cannot stand any kind of cuts. What they want are tax increases and continued irresponsible spending.
Republicans are bringing a different message, a message from the American people.
I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I don't think that Members of Congress should be extravagant in their spending in any way whatsoever, but I think it's up to the voters to hold those Members responsible for what they do. If there is a Member that is leasing a car that's paying an exorbitant amount of money, then the voters should turn that person out if they think they're wasting their money. I would certainly think that person is wasting his or her money. That's up to the voters to take care of.
We're doing our part here in the Congress. We are balancing between making sensible cuts and making sure that the public is well served when it visits Washington, D.C., and the public should be well served by the individual Members. And I hope that if there are abuses on the part of any Member of Congress, no matter which party he or she belongs to, that the voters will look into that and take care of that person. But that is not our exact responsibility here. Our responsibility is, as it is everywhere, to allow a certain amount of money to be spent in the Members' offices, and then each Member should be held individually responsible.
Mr. Speaker, we have discussed at great length today why America needs this rule and this bill. Voting for these measures will allow the House to continue its work toward resolving the debt crisis currently gripping the Nation. As we continue this debate, we must remember the simple truth that tax increases have been tried before and led us to the mess that we have today.
We should not be raising taxes because tax increases do nothing more than fuel parasitic, wasteful government spending. We are cutting the spending for the leg branch in a very responsible way, and that's what we should be doing. But it is past time that we pursue an innovative idea, one that is unparalleled in modern American history, and that is to cut spending and shorten the long arm of government that is currently choking economic prosperity. That is what is happening in every appropriations bill that we're passing.
As we rapidly approach our Federal debt ceiling, our economy is struggling and people are looking for jobs. Americans crave accountability and belt-tightening in Washington and need the Federal Government to stop draining job-creating resources from the private sector to fund misguided adventures in social engineering. They demand action and they deserve answers.
H.R. 2551, for which this rule provides consideration, reflects the House Republican majority's unending commitment to restore the fiscal discipline that is so long overdue in this city. It represents a sensible balance between the vital need for budget restraint and funding the critical functions of the legislative branch.
Without compromising the safety or security of critical infrastructure, this bill further trims the fat and encourages efficiencies while demonstrating that we are not immune to feeling the effects of much needed spending cuts that are so desperately needed throughout our bloated Federal bureaucracy.
It is for these reasons that I urge my colleagues to vote for the rule and the underlying bill so that we can begin to restore the trust Americans have in their Federal Government.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source