H. Res. 191, Rule for Consideration of the Conference Report on H. Con. Res. 95,  Concurrent Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2004

U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern
House Floor Statement
April 10, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, since this mammoth budget was made available to Members of this House only a couple of hours ago, it is difficult to know exactly what goodies and gimmicks are hidden inside of it.

We know enough, however, to know that this Republican budget is bad for the economy, bad for American working families, and bad for the future of our country. In other words, we know enough to vote ``no.'' I have to give the majority credit, though; they have brought the term ``creative accounting'' to new heights. Never before have I seen a ``unified'' budget conference report with two different budgets in it. I guess this is what they mean by ``new math.''

Under this model of budgetary mischief, the House tax cut costs $550 billion, while the Senate tax cut costs $350 billion. It is extraordinary, it is dishonest, and it is shameful.

Why is the Republican majority trying to get away with this trick? Because despite all of their rhetoric last year, they cannot get their own membership to agree to a single tax cut figure. They are stymied by a few Members of the other body who believe that maybe, just maybe, it is not such a great idea to spend over half a trillion dollars in tax cuts for the wealthy while the deficits explodes, while we are fighting a war overseas with unknown costs, while the baby boom generation nears retirement, while millions of seniors cannot afford their prescription drugs, and while our States are facing their worst fiscal agencies, their priorities are crystal clear. Instead of deficit reduction, economic stimulus, and adequate funding for things like homeland security, health care, veterans, education and environmental cleanup, the Republicans prefer tax cuts for millionaires. No wonder they do not want Members to read this budget.

Now tomorrow, Mr. Speaker, we are told that we will vote on the supplemental. That bill contains nearly $2 billion to help rebuild Iraq. What is striking to many people is that Congress seems to understand, rightly, in my view, that health care is important for the people of Iraq, that education is important for the people of Iraq, that rebuilding roads and bridges is important for the people of Iraq. But when we look at this budget, it is clear that the majority does not understand that health care or education or transportation is important for the people of the United States, the people who are actually paying for the war.

Those people, the American people, they deserve a budget that reflects their priorities, not the priorities of a wealthy few. They deserve a budget that actually pays for its tax cuts, not one that uses so-called dynamic scoring to claim that one minus one equals three. They deserve a budget that is fiscally responsible, that does not leave future generations crushed by even more debt. They deserve a budget that helps make college more affordable, that helps pay for prescription drugs, that strengthens homeland security, and keeps our promises to our veterans.

In short, Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve a lot better than this. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule and to vote ``no'' on the Republican budget.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.