House Floor Speech on Pay-As-You-Go Budget Rules

See video

... the gentleman from south carolina yield? mr. ryan: working in the budget committee to make sure that the war was inside of the budget and not outside of the budget as the bush o.m.b. was proposing. we were proposing that that funding be done within the budget, not outside the budget. mr. spratt: i now yield the balance of our time to mr. hoyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for one minute. mr. hoyer: i thank the chairman for yielding. i want to thank the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. ryan, for whom i have a great deal of respect. i said the other night he was my friend, but friends have disagreements, and on this, on fiscal policy, we have had a significant disagreement. i have heard a lot of speakers on this floor talk about how this bill doesn't get us to where we want to get. i have heard a lot of people talk about how we have four exceptions in this bill. most of the people have talked about the four exceptions in this bill, have repeatedly talked over the last four, five years as to how this was current baseline spending and certainly we didn't have to pay for current baseline spending, i.e. continuing taxes in place. you gued that was straight line baseline funding and didn't need to pay for it. we have taken the position we needed to pay for it and paid for the a.m.t. through the house. we paid for the tax extenders through the house. unfortunately our breath ren on the other side of the capitol did not pass. i voted against the a.m.t. extension. i was a small minority in the house because it wasn't paid for. if we're going to have discipline, we need discipline. there is only one real discipline, having to pay for what you buy. and doing the -- we paid for what we paid for what we bought. during the 1980's, we didn't and during the 2000's, we didn't. and there was an inevitable result, deficits exploded for the 20 years that republican presidents were in office and we didn't pay for things. the gentleman talks about spending and he talks about caps in his substitute. the gentleman knows full well that during the clinton years, spending rose about 3.5% per year on average of discretionary spending. the gentleman knows full well that for the eight years of the bush administration, it rose at the average of about 7% or twice as high as it rose during the 1990's. so in terms of caps, spending, which are in the budget, we ought to have budget caps and we ought to stick with the budget caps. and, in fact, the democrats, under the rule he said that we adopted, stuck with that rule even when it had consequences that were tough for us. he remembers the district of columbia vote by adding a member. it cost a little over $1 million. we had to pay for it and opened it up for n.t.r., which was a problem. but let me speak to the substance of this bill. the gentleman is correct. we have incurred extraordinary debt during the first six months. why? because the economic program and the fiscal policies that were argued for by the republicans and put in place by the republicans with little, if any democratic support, but they had the presidency, the house and the senate. led to the worst economy that this country has seen in 75 years. so according to mr. bernanke and others, we had an economic crisis confronting our country and if we did not act, we could possibly be in a depression, not just a severe recession. so we inherited the worst recession in 75 years when we took office. having been urged by the republican administration to put $700 billion on the fiscal tab in the last congress, urged by the president, by secretary paulson and by ben bernanke. the gentleman and i voted together on that bill. it was a tough bill. no one wanted to vote for it, but we believed there was a crisis and it was necessary. so we find ourselves having passed because we were still falling into a deeper recession in january and february of this year and responding to that with ...