Providing for Consideration of H. Con. Res. 96, Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2015, and Providing for Proceedings During the Period from April 11, 2014, Through April 25, 2014

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank my friend, Mr. Woodall, for yielding me the time. I want to urge support for the rule and the underlying legislation.

I would be the first to tell you that this budget is not a perfect budget--no budget is actually perfect--but it is a good budget.

There are a couple of issues that do concern me, as I addressed Mr. Ryan last night; and we are worried that we haven't dealt with the wildfire issue to my satisfaction, which disrupts the appropriating process within Interior, but he assured me that he recognized that was a problem, and we are going to continue to work on it. I actually am going to vote for Mr. Woodall's budget when I have the opportunity to do that. It is the most conservative approach on the floor, and I appreciate that.

I think we ought to stop and remember that without Paul Ryan, we wouldn't have the choices in front of us today. The United States Senate has chosen not to have a budget once again this year, something that it frequently does. And with all due respect to my friends who do have a budget--and I am pleased that they do--in 2010, when they were actually in the majority, they didn't present a budget to this body, either.

It is Paul Ryan that has forced us to confront the fiscal crisis that is facing the country and has actually put something on the table to deal with it. Now, you don't have to agree with everything in it, but it has a lot of virtues to it. The first virtue is it actually focuses on the number one driver of the debt, and that is our unsustainable entitlement programs.

We have made a lot of progress in the last few years in this body on a bipartisan basis in reducing discretionary spending. We are actually spending $165 billion less in discretionary accounts than we were in 2008 when George W. Bush was President of the United States. I don't agree with all those reductions, and I suspect my friends on the other side don't either, but that is a tangible contribution to reducing the deficit and moving us toward balance.

What we haven't dealt with, what the President has largely refused to deal with, and what I suspect my friends in their budget will not deal with, but Paul Ryan has, are the real drivers of the debt: Medicare and Medicaid, in particular. There is an offer in there to sit down and deal seriously with Social Security, as well. And until we do those things--and Paul Ryan has started us on a path to do them--we will never bring the budget into balance.

Now, one of the other things I like about Mr. Ryan's budget is, gosh, it really does balance within 10 years. It makes a lot of tough choices. My friend, Mr. Woodall, actually gets there a little bit faster because he makes even tougher choices, but it balances.

My friends on the other side and the administration haven't presented a budget that balances in 10 years or 20 years or 30 years or 40 or 50--or just draw the lines right on out to infinity. I don't think that is what the American people sent us here to do. But until somebody actually has the courage to do what Mr. Ryan has done and what Mr. Woodall has done, that is the situation the country is going to be in.

The other thing I like about the Ryan budget, in particular, is that it actually incorporates in it the agreement that he arrived at with Senator Murray in the other body. Now, there was a lot of criticism about that because it probably wasn't what I would have negotiated if I got my way or probably Mr. Woodall or any other Senator, but it was a real agreement--only a 2-year agreement, but a real agreement. And against a lot of criticism, Mr. Ryan incorporated, okay, if that is going to be the settled law of the land, then that should be part of our budget. He put it in there, and I am proud of him for doing that.

Finally, again, it reduces not spending, but the growth of spending. We are going to hear a lot of talk about slashes and not investing. If you actually look at the Ryan budget, Federal spending still grows. It grows by about 3 1/2 percent a year. The difference is the Democratic alternative--well, excuse me--the current course is like 5.2 percent. That is not a great deal of difference. We could really restrain our deficit in the short term and ultimately bring ourselves into balance not by slashing everything, but by simply making some of the simple, commonsense reforms that my friend, Mr. Ryan, to great criticism, has advanced and put on this floor year after year after year.

So I want to urge the adoption of this rule, which is a terrific rule, because despite some complaints, the reality is my friend, Mr. Woodall, and the Rules Committee have put a variety of choices before this body.

We are going to have a budget from the Progressive Caucus that is very different than I would like, but it is going to get its opportunity. We are going to have a budget from the Congressional Black Caucus--again, different than I would choose, but it certainly deserves to be heard and examined. We are going to have Mr. Woodall's budget. So we are going to have several choices before we get to Mr. Ryan's budget, any one of whom might win, might actually persuade people.

At the end of the day, we are going to have multiple choices because of this rule, and so it deserves to be dealt with because it does, indeed, open the process. At the end of the day, I suspect Mr. Ryan's budget will be the one that passes. Again, I am very proud to do that, and I urge its passage.

[Begin Insert]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Ryan for again putting together yet another budget that balances in ten years. I know from the many meetings that we had on this side of the aisle that there was a lot of thought put into how we can maintain our commitment to fiscal balance, given the mounting debt, and the overall deterioration of our economic growth, brought about, in part, by the over 17 trillion debt.

Additionally, this budget maintains the Republican focus on dealing with the true drivers of our debt, entitlement programs. It would have been very easy, given that the Bipartisan Budget Act set the 302(a) allocations for Fiscal Year 2015, to not do a budget; however, this budget, this blueprint yet again allows us to share our vision for the future.

This budget reflects the discretionary caps which were agreed to in the Bipartisan Budget Act. As a member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, I have seen the devastating cuts in end strength and capabilities we will face if we continue with sequester. And, instead of making discretionary cuts for the fifth year in a row, we have redoubled our efforts in entitlement programs to ensure they are available for all in the future.

I was disappointed to see that the President reversed himself in his budget submission, removing Chained CPI from his budget proposal. However, House Republicans are willing to work with the President where possible and find common ground that will move our debt trajectory downward, instead of increasing at an exponential rate.

Many have criticized this budget for ``moving the goalposts'' and now transitioning to a Premium Support model for those 56 and below; however, Madam Speaker, we have to face the facts. Every year that we do not act it becomes harder and harder to preserve the current programs for those already at or near retirement. This budget recognizes that hard reality and adjusts itself accordingly.

Finally, Madam Speaker, I want to say a little about wildfires suppression costs. When devastating wildfires do occur and the costs exceed the Forest Service's budget, most often, other programs within the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee bear the costs. And that is not right. I am disappointed that this budget fails to consider how we can better budget for the true costs of wildfire suppression activities. My friend from Idaho, Mr. Simpson, has a deficit-neutral bill that would deal with this issue. Much of what we have considered on the floor the past few days has aimed at ensuring the true costs of programs are reflected in the budget. That is what Mr. Simpson's bill does and I hope we can consider it in the coming weeks.

I hope this budget serves as a wake-up call that it is time to act. Here in Washington, we can become numbed to the problems facing our country. But they are real, and they must be addressed. This budget reflects the Republican vision for the future, one where we are in control of our destiny, as opposed to turning over control to our creditors.

[End Insert]

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source