Correcting American Fiscal Problems and Preserving Social Security

CORRECTING AMERICAN FISCAL PROBLEMS AND PRESERVING SOCIAL SECURITY -- (House of Representatives - May 10, 2005)

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, first, let me say what a pleasure it is to have the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) join us for our 30-something working group. I have to tell you, as the freshman in the group, and the person who has been here for the shortest tenure, one of the most incredible experiences I have had is to have the opportunity to learn from the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) and especially the inner workings of the budget and to be able to absorb the expertise, at least attempt to absorb the expertise that the gentleman has been able to provide this country with your leadership. So I cannot thank the gentleman enough for that.

And I really want to pick up on what the gentleman from Alabama was saying because this really is, the budget is a statement of our values. It is our values versus the Republican leadership values. And it really is probably the most comprehensive expression of the direction that we believe the country should go in and the priorities that we have in our caucus versus the priorities that they have.

And, you know, it is interesting, look at the group of us assembled here tonight. I do not think that you could have a more eclectic group of Members than the Members assembled here. I represent a district, Miami Beach, Ft. Lauderdale and Hollywood. The gentleman represents Alabama. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) and I share communities. And the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) represents, you know, a district in South Carolina. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) is here with us tonight. We could not have more diversity in our caucus and more diversity represented here tonight.

And if you look at the homogeneity on their side of the aisle, even when they do not have homogeneity in their caucus, they walk in lock step. They fall in line. They do what they are told. And that is regardless of the fact that they have crafted a budget that clearly says to the American people: We do not care. We do not care about you. We do not care about making sure that your children have a quality education. We do not care about making sure that if your child is sick that you can afford to take them to the doctor. They have engaged, at least since I have been here and that I have been able to note, in slash-and-burn politics.

I mean, the thing that I think is the most interesting is that, over the time that I have been involved in public service, you know, we are constantly trying to figure out, and the American public, people, I think, are trying to figure out, how do you define a Republican, and how do you define a Democrat?

And I think that the budget document that they have put forward is probably the best expression of how you define what it means to be a Republican. And clearly, what it means to be a Republican is to balloon the deficit, cause the Nation to go further and further into debt, mortgage our children's future, cut health care, cut education, both in the lower grades as well as student loans.

And if you look at our budget document that the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) put together, it also is an expression of our values and the direction that we would take the country. Our budget document, as crafted by the gentleman from South Carolina and the other Budget Committee Members would bring the budget into balance by 2012. It would make sure that we do not cut the programs that are the most important to the American people.

What are our priorities? Education, health care, making sure that we can improve the quality of people's lives and making the world a better place as opposed to improving the bottom line of the pocketbooks of the wealthiest Americans. I mean, that is essentially what the ultimate goal was, clearly, of the Republican budget document. And I think it is important that we help lay that distinction out in front of the American people so that, over the course of the next 18 to 22 months, they can make a decision as to whether we want to continue to move in the radical direction that they are taking this country or if we want to get things back on track.

http://thomas.loc.gov