Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2006

By:  Joe Baca, Sr.
Date: March 17, 2005
Location: Washington, DC


CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 -- (House of Representatives - March 17, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BACA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition of H. Con. Res. 95, the Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2006.

This budget contains painful spending cuts to critical programs, continued large deficits, and a spiraling debt.

It is fiscally reckless, morally irresponsible and is a clear failure of leadership.

This budget is a sham. It fails to include funding for many of the President's key programs--such as Social Security privatization, the war in Iraq, and the cost of the Alternative Minimum Tax. It does not cut the deficit in half, as the Administration claims. When all omitted costs are included, it will raise the deficit by $2 trillion over five years.

This growing debt will be passed on to our children and grandchildren, leaving them to shoulder the burden of our fiscal irresponsibility.

This budget cuts critical programs that working families depend on, like Medicaid, education, community development and veterans' health care.

We have soldiers fighting for us in Iraq, and this budget doesn't even provide enough funding to pay for their health care when they return.

The budget will also endanger the health of millions of Americans, by proposing a $1.1 billion cut to food stamps, the Nation's number one investment in nutrition and defense against hunger.

If this budget passes, we will be forcing working families to make hard choices between buying groceries and paying their bills.

The budget also spends every single penny of the $1.1 trillion Social Security trust fund. We need to return to pay as you go budget rules, so that we can provide a solid source of funding for Social Security.

What is most disturbing, is that the resolution before us today is even more dangerous than the version the President sent to Congress.

The budget fails to offer the specifics of the President's budget. It proposes large cuts in funding, but without targeting specific programs, it leaves a myriad of programs vulnerable to cuts.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' We need a plan that is fiscally responsible and will fund the programs working families depend on.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov