Deficit Reduction Act of 2005

DEFICIT REDUCTION ACT OF 2005 -- (House of Representatives - November 08, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for allocating this time to me.

We began this session with an idea and a plan that would privatize Social Security. I thought that was the worst idea that we would encounter. But now that that argument is at last behind us, now we can see the reality of the President's budget process. This proposal that we are about to entertain on Thursday is a fiscal disaster. It not only forces painful cuts to programs that serve regular people; it awards large new tax cuts to people who already are the most privileged in our society.

When President Clinton left office, the country was running a $236 billion surplus. We were on track to have a $5.6 trillion surplus over the next 10 years. Now, let me tell you what that would have done. That would have allowed us to fix Social Security, to fix Medicare, to pay down the debt, and to provide modest tax cuts for middle-income Americans. Instead, we have cut taxes five times while we are fighting two wars.

And what is the result? Well, a month and a half ago to 2 months ago, the Humvees just arrived in Iraq. The body armor has just begun to arrive in Iraq. For those men and women who serve us honorably every single day in the American military, the equipment is just starting to arrive.

But what do we have time to do here? Let us cut Medicare. Let us chop Medicaid. Let us go after student loans. Let us cut back on home heating oil for the most vulnerable among us in the Northeast; and, with a straight face, let us cut taxes by $70 billion over the next couple of weeks.

Think of this Congress, what it did with the Clinton surplus: $5.6 trillion of surplus projected over 10 years, and this Congress cuts taxes and yanks $1.3 trillion out of the budget and then declares Social Security has a problem after they have taken that money away.

You hear from the Members of this body on the other side of the aisle about supply-side economics. I do not know any primary supply-side economists left who are accepted in the academy. Nobody buys that argument any more based upon the budget deficits the Nation is running.

We were on a sterling course of fiscal responsibility in this body. Just when people said it could not be done, we got it done. We balanced the budget, projected large-term surpluses, and we had this grand opportunity to take on some of the issues we would all like to address. But what has happened now? Is there anybody here who believes that we are not going to need a lot more money for Iraq? A lot more money for Afghanistan? Those dollars are going to be necessary. The same institution that voted to send us there, this Congress, I hope will not dare to cut back on what these men and women need. But I can tell you this: the budget they have put in front of us takes us precisely there. You cannot have it both ways, and we have learned that the hard way. But I will say this about the majority in this body, they will keep going.

Most conventional political figures see a stop sign and they stop. Not here, they will keep going. Cut programs for the neediest and cut taxes for the strongest. I am reminded of Matthew when he said it is our goal and our job to clothe the naked and to feed the poor; and the Republicans here would add, and to take care of the wealthy and to take care of the strong.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov