Transportation, Treasury, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005
TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005 -- (House of Representatives - September 21, 2004)
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 770 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, H.R. 5025.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. STENHOLM
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Stenholm:
At the end of the bill, insert after the last section (preceding the short title) the following new section:
SEC. __. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be used by the Secretary of the Treasury to implement, pursuant to sections 8348(j)(1) and 8348(l)(2) of title 5, United States Code, any suspension of issuance of obligations of the United States for purchase by the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund, to implement, pursuant to sections 8438(g)(1) and 8438(h)(2) of such title, any suspension of issuance of obligations of the United States for purchase by the Thrift Savings Fund for the Government Securities Investment Fund, or to implement, pursuant to section 8348(k)(1) of such title, any sale or redemption of securities, obligations, or other invested assets of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund before maturity.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of Tuesday, September 14, 2004, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) and the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm).
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 ½ minutes.
Mr. Chairman this is a very simple amendment to restore a little bit of accountability and honesty around here about our fiscal policies. My amendment would prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury from dipping into retirement trust funds in order to circumvent the statutory debt limit.
The effect of my amendment would be to force Congress to take responsibility for the increase in the national debt by approving an increase in the debt limit before adjourning in October instead of deferring action until a lame duck session. There would be no risk of default if Congress met its responsibility to approve an increase in the debt limit before we adjourn for the election. The Treasury Department has repeatedly warned Congress that we are approaching the debt limit and need to increase it above its current level of 7.384 trillion.
Just 3 years ago, the administration stated that we would not need to raise the debt limit for 7 years and actually warned that we were in danger of paying off our debt too quickly. After 3 years of our current economic policies, projected surpluses have turned into record deficits; and we are being asked to increase the debt limit for the third time in 3 years to more than $8 trillion. But instead of taking responsibility to pay for the debt that we have run up as a result of our policies, the Republican leadership is relying on the Treasury Department to protect them from having to take this vote before the election by dipping into retirement trust funds to avoid breaching the statutory debt limit until mid-November.
When Treasury Secretary Rubin took these extraordinary actions as a last resort to avoid an imminent default during a crisis, he was loudly criticized by Republican leaders in Congress. The Republican majority in Congress passed legislation which would have taken these tools away from him, and some Republicans in Congress called for his impeachment. Today, instead of criticizing the Treasury Department for planning to dip into retirement trust funds, Republican leaders are actively encouraging the Treasury Department to take these same steps as a routine action used for political convenience.
It would be irresponsible to take funds from retirement trust funds simply to avoid a discussion of the fiscal problems highlighted by the need to increase the debt limit. Instead of honestly facing up to our ballooning national debt, the leadership of this body is talking about bringing up legislation this week that would add another $130 billion to that debt.
We should not pay for tax cuts by borrowing money against our children's future. Congress should be required to sit down and figure out how to make things fit within a budget just like families across the country do every day. I would say to my Republican colleagues that if they honestly believe that tax cuts with borrowed money is good economic policy, if they believe that deficits do not matter, they should be willing to stand up and vote openly and honestly on this floor to increase the credit card limit for our country to make room for those cuts.
There would be no need for these maneuvers to avoid a vote on the debt limit if the leadership were willing to work with us to stop the increase in deficit spending. The Blue Dog Democrats will gladly supply bipartisan support for an increase in the debt limit if it is accompanied by meaningful budget enforcement provisions, including the pay-as-you-go rules that were instrumental in turning budget deficits into surpluses in the 1990s. But we will not vote to approve a blank check that will allow the Government to continue runaway deficit spending.
If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to continue with our current economic policies that have us on a path of running up more than $10 trillion in debt, it will be up to them to provide the votes. We will work with them if they will work with us.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute to respond to the chairman.
I will say that everything he has said is 100 percent the truth. We did not mention Social Security. I deliberately did not mention Social Security because that is not the issue here. Everything the gentleman said in the letter from the Treasury is the truth. That is not the point of our amendment.
The point of our amendment is to have an up or down vote by this body to assume the responsibility, rather than allow, under the law, the Secretary of the Treasury to manipulate the funds in a legal way to avoid having a vote on this floor prior to November 2, to have an assumption of the responsibility of the fiscal matters of this country. That is all I am asking.
The chairman is exactly right: We do not need this. If he would assure me that we will have a vote, and since both of us agree on a balanced budget constitutional amendment, this is helpful to those of us like you and I, Mr. Chairman, that want to bring fiscal accountability. That is all we are asking. Let us not confuse this issue with anything other than a clear, plain, up and down vote of expression.
I have already offered on behalf of a substantial number of Democrats to support an up or down vote, if you will put some budget enforcing accountability back into our process.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time in order to close.
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, who has the right to close?
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) has the right to close.
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 2 ½ minutes.
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I hope everyone caught the significance of the exchange between the chairman and me, because I am not disagreeing with anything that he offered in opposition to this amendment, because what he said is 100 percent true. I hope everyone in this body understands the significance of this side offering the hand of bipartisanship to pass an increase in the debt ceiling, which we must do. If we did not do that, our Nation would default on our good credit, and that is intolerable, unthinkable.
The purpose of this amendment, though, is to try once again to get my friends on that side of the aisle to accept the responsibility for the economic policy that they have voted and revoted and voted and revoted and continue to do, and that is building the debt for our children and grandchildren at a rate unseen in our history of our country.
It took us 204 years to borrow the first $1 trillion. We are about to borrow $19 trillion in a year-and-a-half, and my friends on that side do not seem to care.
We are offering to put back pay-as-you-go for spending and tax cuts to be paid for. It does not mean we cannot cut taxes. In fact, I support repeal of the marriage tax penalty, I support doing the child tax credit. I would like to see it. But I want to see it paid for, not passed on to my three grandsons in debt because it is good politics right before an election.
We are offering sincerely to offer some votes. Bring it up and vote on it. Do not force the Treasury to go through the mechanizations that they will go through just to avoid voting on this prior to November 2.
Mr. Chairman, we are sending alerts, the Blue Dogs, in which we will put in writing our willingness to work with you on doing this, because it is the responsible thing for us to do. But we also think it is responsible for this body in a bipartisan way to begin to actually do something about the deficit, other than talk about it and increase it, as we will do later this week, by another $130 billion, unpaid for.
Our grandchildren do not have a vote. That is why it is so easy for us to say here today we can fight two wars, we can fund homeland security, we can fight the war on terrorism, we can do all of these things, but we are going to send the bill to our grandchildren. We are not willing to pay for it, any of it, today. In fact, even worse, we are willing to decrease the amount of money available to do all of these things.
Mr. Chairman, I ask for an aye vote on this, because it is the responsible thing for this body to do.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT