The Republican Budget

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Thank you, Congresswoman Maloney. I'm pleased to be with you. I came up here as a new Member in a bipartisan spirit, and I really wanted to be standing here today embracing Mr. Ryan's plan; but I have to tell you, I'm worried about it. And I want to tell you why I'm worried about it. I'm worried about it for Sabrina, for Lucy, for Ruth, Lola, and Barbara.

I'm going to tell you about them. Sabrina is a small business owner. She has a little catering company. She called my office because she's looking for a way to get a small business loan so she can stay in business and improve it. It's hard today getting loans from the banks.

Lucy is a bright-eyed young student in a community college. She is thrilled to have a student loan, a Federal student loan.

Lola is a teacher who has a daughter with cerebral palsy, and she depends on services from the government to help her with her daughter.

And Ruth, Ruth is 91 years old. She used to be a ball of a fire, but she recently hurt herself. She just got out of the hospital, and she can't move around. She can hardly get out of bed. She depends on Meals on Wheels to feed her so she has food every day.

And then there is Barbara who's outlived most of her relatives. She's in a nursing home in my hometown, and she has Alzheimer's.

I know you ask me why I'm worried about them. You know why I'm worried about them, because they are the victims. They will be the victims of this proposed budget. And what's going to happen? Will Sabrina lose her business? Will Lucy have to drop out of school? Will Ruth go hungry? Will Lola have to give up her work so she can stay home with her daughter? Tell me something, who is going to take care of Barbara? Who's going to take care of her?

Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. No one. No one. She is going to have to quit her job and stay home and take care of Barbara.

Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Barbara is in no condition to take care of anybody. Listen, I think we all know, the American people know that we have to get our fiscal house in order. There is a deficit problem for us, but the American people want us to solve it in a responsible manner because I also know this: we still have a job problem out there. We have slow economic recovery. And now as we are just turning the corner, all of a sudden we have this plan, this bill, this proposal, this budget that independent analysts tell us is going to throw, what, 2 million people out of work, the majority of them women. It will really crush these people like Lucy, Ruth, and Lola and Barbara and Sabrina. We can tell each other hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of stories.

Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Thank you for putting a human face on what it's meaning for people who are coming to your office for help. But also what has to be part of this equation is that the economy is still very fragile, and you can't cut your way to prosperity. These deep cuts could put the economy in a tailspin. Chairman Bernanke, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, has testified that we need a balanced approach, that we shouldn't slash so severely. Many economists say that the American economy is doing better than Europe because we are not cutting as deeply as Europe is, so giving the economy a chance to recover.

So to go in with these draconian cuts, not only does it hurt people, such as with the stories you're telling us, but it could hurt the recovery, the overall economy that for the past 35 months has been growing private sector jobs and digging ourselves out of that deep recession, so it could possibly throw us back into it. You've raised an important point, and I yield back to you.

Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. I ask another question: What is the logic in taking little children out of Head Start programs when we know that the path to middle class, the path to be able to take care of your family, to take care of yourself, to be a tax-paying citizen is education? So I ask you, Congresswoman, why would we pass a budget that would take 27,000--I think even more, I think the last sequester bill would take 27,000 children out of child care, Head Start, and this new budget doubles down. Why would we do that?

Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Well, I think you pointed out that this budget is not only draconian and unfair; it is filled with contradictions. Why in the world would you let these tax breaks continue for big oil companies that are making a profit, and we're subsidizing some of them to the tune of 40 percent, yet you're going to take the future of our young kids and throw them off. It is a total, total contradiction; and it's completely wrong.

I want to point out the biggest contradiction in this budget. It repeals the Affordable Care Act, but keeps the law's budget savings and uses it to balance their budget. So they say in the budget they're going to repeal the Affordable Care Act. How are they going to repeal it? It passed the Congress; it is the law of this country. It was upheld by the Supreme Court. We had an election where this was a central point of debate; and, guess what, President Obama won the election, and he ran on the Affordable Care Act. So they say that they're going to repeal it. They don't have the votes to repeal it. And even if they did, he'd veto it. There's no way they can repeal it, so it is a complete--really a hoax. It's a hoax.

Then they claim to protect Medicare while ending Medicare as we know it for future seniors and our children and our grandchildren. And the biggest hoax, they sit there and say they are going to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and then they take the savings from the Affordable Care Act, the $718 billion that was put there from the providers, and they use that to balance their budget. So the numbers do not add up.

Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Let me ask you this: Does the repeal of the Affordable Care Act come with a repeal of people getting ill? I'm trying to figure out the logic here because if you repeal the Affordable Care Act, if you take Medicare and now you turn it into a voucher program or what they call ``premium support,'' which means literally thousands of dollars more coming out of the seniors' pockets to take care of themselves, you're not repealing illness. All you're doing with this Ryan budget is shifting the burden back to the middle class.

You hit it on the head when you said let's keep giving those tax breaks to the big oil companies, the people who want to move their companies offshore, to big corporations with huge profits paying almost nothing in taxes. Here's how we're going to clean up our fiscal house: we're going to tell people when they're oldest and they're sickest, you're going to have to pay more money, or just don't get sick.

Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. The gentlelady is correct. They're shifting the burden onto the middle class, the elderly, and the poor. Again, President Obama's budget contains $1.3 trillion in spending, and in that budget is $1.1 trillion in tax breaks. So where are the priorities of this country? Close the tax breaks, keep the food on the table, or close the tax breaks and reduce the deficit.

I think they're not sincere about wanting to reduce the deficit and the debt because if they were, they would take those tax loopholes and close them. Some are important such as the deduction for a family's home. That allows many middle class and moderate middle class Americans to own their own home. They are able to deduct that.

But there are all these other deductions that make no sense. Why in the world are we giving a subsidy to companies that move jobs overseas? It's crazy. If anything, the subsidy should be for companies in America making it in America, creating jobs in America, and paying their taxes, their Social Security, and their Medicare in America.

So this whole budget is an exercise in contradictions and it's an exercise in, really, lack of good judgment or values, and I hope that we are able to defeat it.

I hope that the Democratic plan will be the one that is finally the one that passes. This is just the same old same old from the last 2 years: slash the safety net and protect tax breaks. The Ryan approach just isn't a balanced or, I would say, fair or valued approach.

Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Thank you, Representative. I want to thank you for letting me join you here today.

I just want to say this. I know we've been standing up here and we've been critical of this Ryan budget and, respectfully, I think we're just saying it like it is. But I want to just say this, and I know you feel the same way. I hope that we can vet it.

You know, we're venting our feelings here today. And our constituents need to know that we're going to stay strong for them and the women of this country, the Lucys, the Sabrinas, the Barbaras of this country, and of course the men that we love, too. But I hope that we can find a way, that we can find a middle ground, we can find a reasoned budget that gets people back to work, that we secure our families and we get our fiscal house in order in a reasonable amount of time.

Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. I want to thank you, Congresswoman, and you raised some important points.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source