U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

25–917 2017

MEMBERS’ DAY 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MARCH 2, 2017 

Serial No. 115–03 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Budget 

( 

Available on the Internet: 

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/committee.action?chamber=house&committee=budget 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET 

DIANE BLACK, Tennessee, Chairman 

TODD ROKITA, Indiana, Vice Chairman 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

TOM COLE, Oklahoma 

TOM MCCLINTOCK, California 

ROB WOODALL, Georgia 

MARK SANFORD, South Carolina 

STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas 

DAVE BRAT, Virginia 

GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin 

GARY J. PALMER, Alabama 

BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas 

JAMES B. RENACCI, Ohio 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

JASON SMITH, Missouri 

JASON LEWIS, Minnesota 

JACK BERGMAN, Michigan 

JOHN J. FASO, New York 

LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania 

MATT GAETZ, Florida 

JODEY C. ARRINGTON, Texas 

A. DREW FERGUSON IV, Georgia 

JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky, 

Ranking Minority Member 

BARBARA LEE, California 

MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico 

SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts 

HAKEEM S. JEFFRIES, New York 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

SUZAN K. DELBENE, Washington 

DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania 

RO KHANNA, California 

PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington 

Vice Ranking Minority Member 

SALUD CARBAJAL, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

RICHARD E. MAY, Staff Director 

ELLEN BALIS, Minority Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held in Washington, D.C., March 2, 2017 ............................................... 1 

Hon. Diane Black, Chairman, Committee on the Budget .................................... 1 

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 2 

Hon. John A. Yarmuth, Ranking Member, Committee on the Budget ............... 3 

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 4 

Hon. Joyce Beatty, a Representative in Congress from the State of Ohio .......... 5 

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 7 

Hon. Peter J. Visclosky, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Indiana .................................................................................................................. 11 

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 12 

Hon. Vicky Hartzler, a Representative in Congress from the State of Missouri ....................................................................................................................... 15

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 17 

Hon. Bill Posey, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida .......... 20 

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 22 

Hon. Jim McGovern, a Representative in Congress from the State of Massachusetts ................................................................................................................. 26 

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 28 

Hon. David N. Cicilline, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Rhode Island ......................................................................................................... 31 

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 34 

Hon. Mark Walker, a Representative in Congress from the State of North 

Carolina ................................................................................................................ 39 

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 41 

Hon. Joe Wilson, a Representative in Congress from the State of South 

Carolina ................................................................................................................ 44 

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 46 

Hon. Trent Franks, a Representative in Congress from the State of Arizona ... 49 

Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 51 

Statements submitted for the record ..................................................................... 55 

Hon. Daniel T. Kildee, a Representative in Congress from the State of Michigan, prepared statement of ................................................................................. 55 

Hon. Gerald E. Connolly, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Virginia, prepared statement of .......................................................................... 56 

Hon. Ken Calvert, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, 

prepared statement of .......................................................................................... 57 

Hon. Michael K. Simpson, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Idaho, prepared statement of .............................................................................. 58 

Hon. Michael R. Turner, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Ohio, prepared statement of ................................................................................ 59 

(1) 

MEMBERS’ DAY 

THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET, 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m. in Room 

1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Diane Black [chairman of the committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Black, Arrington, Yarmuth, Jayapal, 

DelBene, and Jackson Lee. 

Chairman BLACK. This hearing will come to order. And good 

morning and welcome to the Budget Committee Members’ Day 

hearing. 

Before we begin, it looks like we are going to be scheduled to 

have votes before 10:30, maybe within the next 10 minutes or so. 

So I ask for unanimous consent that, consistent with clause 4 of 

House rule XVI, the chair will be authorized to declare a recess at 

any time. 

Without objection, the request is agreed to. 

We hold these Member Day hearings to hear firsthand from our 

colleagues about their ideas for the Federal budget, and we welcome those who come to the committee. This hearing is required by 

section 301(e)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act, and its intent is 

to provide a forum in which Members can relay their priorities for 

their district, their State, and, indeed, for our country. Nevertheless, recommendations on how to place the government on a sustainable fiscal path will especially be useful. 

This hearing is an important part of building the budget that actually addresses our Nation’s tremendous challenges. Moving forward, a balanced budget will require a strong commitment to 

spending restraint, and promoting more robust economic growth 

will be critical. Because budgeting is governing, it is important that 

every Member has the opportunity to participate in the conversation and be part of the process. We welcome the unique, diverse 

perspectives from Members on both sides of the aisle, and we look 

forward to receiving their testimony. 

Before we begin, I am pleased to yield to the ranking member of 

Kentucky, Mr. Yarmuth, for his opening statements. 

[The prepared statement of Diane Black follows:] 

2 


Insert offset folio 7 here 25917A.001
3 

Mr. YARMUTH. Thank you, Chairman Black. 

I am pleased to join you in welcoming our witnesses for Members’ Day. 

As we all know, budgets are much more than numbers on a page. 

They reflect our values as a Nation. So this is a great opportunity 

for Members to talk about their priorities for the country and their 

constituents. As we move into budget season, I am deeply concerned about Republican plans for the budget. 

Just this week, we learned that the President will propose in- creasing defense spending by $54 billion and cutting nondefense investments by the same amount to pay for it. Nondefense investments are already near their lowest levels relative to the economy 

than at any time since at least the Eisenhower administration. We 

can’t meet our responsibilities to the people we are elected to serve 

or grow our economy with massive cut after massive cut to investment after investment. 

We are talking about potentially devastating cuts to education, 

infrastructure, job training, community safety, clean water, clean 

air, safe food, safe medicines, a safe workplace, medical research on 

everything from Alzheimer’s to Zika and much more. 

The American people need more from us. They deserve more 

from us. They deserve a government that builds on the economic 

progress made over the past 8 years of the Obama administration, 

that makes investments to create new opportunities for their families and for our Nation. 

We all know the Republican leadership can pass a budget without bipartisan support, but bipartisanship will be required to fund 

discretionary programs during the appropriations process. So we, 

as a committee, can help craft that compromise with a budget that 

reflects this reality, or we can abdicate our responsibilities and 

pass a budget that does not. 

I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to keep this in 

mind as we begin debating the budget over the next few weeks. I 

look forward to hearing what our colleagues have to add to this 

conversation with their testimony today. 

So thank you, and I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of John Yarmuth follows:] 

4 


Insert offset folio 10 here 25917A.002
5 

Chairman BLACK. Thank you, Mr. Yarmuth. 

And as a reminder, Members will have 5 minutes to give their 

oral testimony, and their written statements will be submitted for 

the record. 

Additionally, members of the committee, which would be you and 

I at this point in time, will be permitted to question the witness 

following their statements. And I ask that you please keep your 

comments brief to expedite today’s proceedings. 

I would now like to recognize our first witness, the gentlelady 

from Ohio, Ms. Joyce Beatty. 

Thank you for taking your time to share your views with the 

Budget Committee. The committee has received your written statement, and it will be part of the formal hearing record. You have 

5 minutes to deliver your remarks, and you may now begin. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. JOYCE BEATTY, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO 

Mrs. BEATTY. First of all, let me say thank you, Chairman Black 

and to Ranking Member Yarmuth. I appreciate the opportunity to 

appear before the Budget Committee today. 

Certainly, as you know, the Federal budget is a blueprint for our 

Nation, and it is a statement of our national priorities. 

Unfortunately, President Trump’s proposal to increase defense spending by $54 billion while decreasing nondefense programs by 

the same level I believe will hamper our Nation’s ability to meet 

the needs of the American people. I implore this committee to view 

such drastic cuts to nondefense discretionary spending with extreme caution and urge investment in maintaining and increasing 

healthy living, affordable education, and a strong infrastructure so 

that all Americans, not just a select few, have the opportunity to 

achieve the American Dream. 

Let’s talk about education. Our budget should reflect a serious 

sustained investment in our Nation’s ability to compete in the 21st 

century. If we want to position ourselves to propel our Nation forward, we must recognize the importance of education in our 

workforce’s ability to compete in an ever-growing, ever-changing 

economy. 

Providing children with access to high-quality early childhood development is a cornerstone of human development and puts them 

on an early path to success and at the same time dismantles the 

too-often-traveled school-to-prison pipeline in communities of color. 

Moreover, the door to higher education should not be slammed 

simply because of skyrocketing tuition costs. We must make greater progress toward improving costs for higher education. We must 

robustly invest in education in order to create an economy that 

works for everyone, not just those at the top. We must maintain 

and continue Pell grants, the TRIO programs, to make higher education affordable and accessible to students. 

Affordable housing. Serving on the Financial Services Committee’s Subcommittee of Housing and Insurance and as a lifelong 

leader in developing affordable housing solutions in Ohio, I believe 

it is critically important for our budget resolution to include allocations that sustain current rental assistance for low-income families 

and fully restore the number of housing choice vouchers that have 

6 

been arbitrarily cut under sequestration. This would help curb 

homelessness, the homelessness epidemic in our country, especially 

in our veterans communities, and to assist more than the 11 million people who pay more than 50 percent of their income on rent. 

Safe, affordable housing, Section 8 voucher programs, opportunities 

for home ownership, support for community development are priorities that I believe our Nation would be proud to see in the fiscal 

year 2018 budget resolution. 

Lastly, infrastructure. According to the American Society of Civil 

Engineers, the United States has a significant backlog of overdue 

maintenance across our infrastructure systems and pressing need 

for modernization. However, we also have an opportunity in this 

budget resolution to improve the current conditions of our Nation’s 

infrastructure in a smart way. 

As we look to rebuild our crumbling bridges, roads, dams, we 

should consider implementing policies that allow technology to help 

our constituents move safely and easily to provide access to jobs. 

In my Ohio Third Congressional District in the city of Columbus, 

we were able to do just that, with implementation of the Department of Transportation’s Smart City Grant. The Central Ohio 

Transportation Partnership is one of the Nation’s epicenters for intelligent transportation systems to improve safety, enhance mobility, create ladders of opportunities for those who have been left behind, and to address climate change by reducing greenhouse gas 

emissions. 

As Members of Congress, let’s create a budget resolution that 

creates jobs, economic growth, fosters innovation, creativity, and increases the quality of life for working families while solving the 

Nation’s most pressing challenges. 

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Joyce Beatty follows:] 

7 


Insert offset folio 16 here 25917A.003
8 


Insert offset folio 17 here 25917A.004
9 


Insert offset folio 18 here 25917A.005
10 

Chairman BLACK. Perfect. Oh my goodness. We ought to give you 

a big round of applause. 

Thank you, Representative Beatty, for your comments. 

Does any member wish to request time to question Ms. Beatty? 

Mr. YARMUTH. Yes, I would. 

Chairman BLACK. You are recognized. 

Mr. YARMUTH. I appreciate it, Chairman Black. 

It seems to me that when we are talking about the kinds of investment you talked about, we are talking about, of course, the 

nondefense discretionary portion of the budget, which the administration has proposed cutting by $54 billion. Ultimately, that puts 

more and more pressure on State and local governments to pick up 

the slack if we cut this vital funding. 

How would you describe Ohio’s capability of making up the difference if we had these kind of draconian cuts in the budget here? 

Would we see Ohio be able to pick up the slack in education and 

housing and some of these other vital programs? 

Mrs. BEATTY. Thank you so much, Ranking Member Yarmuth. 

You would see great difficulties for the State of Ohio to do that. 

Ohio is the seventh largest State in this Nation. And just this 

week, we had county commissioners from across the Nation doing 

a fly-in. And in meeting with the county commissioners, who provide and oversee many of these services, they came in asking us 

to make sure that we testified so we could educate and make members of this committee and members of the administration more 

aware that you can do both. 

I am certainly not against providing funds and equipment for 

those who go fight for us and our country, but I think it is equally 

a disservice to not provide for those who are the least of us, to not 

provide for us to provide safety on the roads that we travel. I think 

that it would be a mistake for us to make the drastic cuts to those 

services. And those are the individuals that we represent. 

So part of my being here today was to talk about those things 

that shelter. You know, think about if someone took away the shelter over your head where you live in Washington and where you 

live in your districts. Think about those people that are waiting in 

line for their Section 8 voucher that for the first time that they are 

on their road to self-sufficiency, that we take that away. 

And, certainly, education is the economic engine of economic 

growth. And on both sides of the aisle, when we are in our district, 

we talk about the same thing. We talk about economic development. We talk about having a strong educational system and infrastructure. So I am hoping that maybe you give me one out of the 

three, at least, so we can help our constituents. 

Thank you for the question. And a short answer to that: no, we 

could not survive. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Thank you very much for your response. 

And I yield back. 

Chairman BLACK. Thank you, Mr. Yarmuth. 

And thank you again, Mrs. Beatty, for coming to testify. 

Mrs. BEATTY. Thank you. 

Chairman BLACK. Even though votes have been called, we are 

going to try to get you in, Mr. Visclosky. And you are now—if you 

are prepared, you may begin your testimony. 

11 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. PETER VISCLOSKY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA 

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Chairwoman, Mr. Yarmuth, members of the committee, I appreciate the opportunity—— 

Chairman BLACK. I don’t think your microphone is on. Is your 

microphone on? 

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Yes. 

Chairman BLACK. There you go. Maybe pull it a little closer. 

Thank you. 

Mr. VISCLOSKY. As a member of the House Appropriations Committee, I am very aware of the challenges involved in developing 

a budget that balances fiscal responsibility with the need to make 

investments to support a strong economy and strengthen our national security. This task was made no less difficult by the announcement this week that the President will be submitting a 

budget request that proposes a $54 billion cut to domestic programs. 

I am here today on behalf of my constituents of northwest Indiana and our Nation to advocate for a fiscal year 2018 budget that 

does not allow for significant reductions in Federal funding for investments in infrastructure and particularly public transit projects. 

Any such reductions would ultimately be counterproductive. According to the American Public Transportation Association, in 

2014, Americans took 10.8 billion trips on public transportation, 

representing a 58-year high. 

The perceived value of the benefits is reflected in the increased 

property values near transit stations. A study prepared in coordination with the National Realtor Association concluded that home 

values performed 42 percent better on average if they were located 

near public transportation. The APTA also estimates that, for every 

$1 invested in public transportation, $4 of economic returns are 

also generated. 

Recognizing these benefits, my district has adamantly supported 

the expansion and recapitalization of commuter rail service from 

Chicago to northwest Indiana. Investing in what is called the 

South Shore Rail Line will connect my constituents to Chicago’s 

$500 billion economy and nearly 4 million jobs. It will allow us to 

begin to draw Chicago’s economy to our region. Understanding 

these opportunities, 16 communities in my district have come together to dedicate a portion of their local economic development tax 

revenue for an improved rail commuter service. 

I would point out that Vice President Pence, in his role as Governor of Indiana, signed legislation into law in 2015 providing 

State funding to support this endeavor. These non-Federal dollars 

will match every Federal dollar provided, multiplying the positive 

effects of the Federal investment before we even begin to enumerate the economic development benefits. But the successful extension and recapitalization and associated economic benefits, 

along with other projects, not only in northwest Indiana but 

throughout our country, depend upon the availability of strong Federal funding to support transit projects. I would encourage you to 

keep this in mind as you develop your document. 

[The prepared statement of Peter Visclosky follows:] 

12 


Insert offset folio 25 here 25917A.006
13 


Insert offset folio 26 here 25917A.007
14 


Insert offset folio 27 here 25917A.008
15 

Chairman BLACK. Does any member seek time for questions? 

Thank you, Mr. Visclosky, for coming and testifying before the 

committee. 

We are now going to take a brief recess so that Members can go 

to the floor and vote, but we will reconvene immediately after 

votes. The committee stands in recess. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. ARRINGTON [presiding]. This hearing will come to order. We 

will now continue with our next witness panel. 

I would like to recognize Representative Vicky Hartzler from 

Missouri. Thank you for your time today. The committee has received your written statement. It will be a part of the formal hearing record. You have 5 minutes. Please leave room for questions in 

that 5 minutes to deliver your oral remarks. 

You may begin, Mrs. Hartzler, when you are ready. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. VICKY HARTZLER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Budget Committee. 

I sit before you today as a fellow Member who sat in those chairs 

just the last two Congresses. Four years ago, I asked for a waiver 

to sit on the Budget Committee in addition to the Armed Services 

and Agriculture Committees because I believe so deeply what I am 

here to share with you today. So thank you for allowing me to be 

here. 

Recent reports have indicated that the Trump administration intends to submit a budget with a defense top line of $603 billion for 

fiscal year 2018. And while I applaud the President’s intention to 

increase our military funding with a, quote, ‘‘$54 billion increase,’’ 

this assertion does not tell the whole story. 

The $603 billion number is actually only an increase from the sequestration levels that have wreaked havoc on our military for the 

past 7 years. It is only a 3-percent increase from the President 

Obama administration’s proposal in the Future Years Defense Program, or FYDP, and $58 billion less than Secretary Gates’ budget 

for what we really need. We need more. 

And I did bring some slides too for you to look at. So you can 

see where on here the Trump budget proposal is compared to the 

green line, which was the Gates budget before we had the Budget 

Control Act that had passed. So you can see it is behind what was 

projected to be needed years ago. 

Our military today is facing a severe crisis. We expect our men 

and women in uniform and the equipment they deploy to be able 

to decisively win a current conflict and posture our forces so another enemy doesn’t even think that they can challenge the United 

States if they tried. Yet this ability is in jeopardy. According to the 

vice chief of staff of the Air Force, less than 50 percent of the Air 

Force’s fighter and bomber force are able to fight and decisively 

win a highly contested fight against a near peer, such as Russia 

or China. In fact, an engine literally fell off a B–52 bomber while 

training in North Dakota recently. And here is a picture of President Eisenhower with a B–52, which is when it was first built. So 

you can see it is a very old aircraft. 

16 

According to the vice chief of staff of the Army, of the 58 brigade 

combat teams that our Nation depends on to deploy overseas and 

defend our freedoms we comfortably enjoy here, only three could be 

called upon to fight tonight. Based on current readiness levels, the 

Army can only accomplish defense requirements at a high military 

risk. 

As General Allyn stated in his testimony last month before the 

Armed Services Committee, if we continue down this path, the end 

result, quote, ‘‘is excessive casualties, both to innocent civilians and 

to our forces.’’ We cannot allow this to happen. 

According to the vice chief of naval operations, two-thirds, 67 

percent, of our Navy’s strike fighters, the planes that are launching 

the entirety of the Navy’s attacks against ISIS, cannot fly—67 percent. And, sadly, in 2015, the Marine Corps aviation deaths hit a 

5-year high, as aircraft failed or pilots lacked adequate training 

hours. This is unacceptable. 

Regardless of your budgetary priorities, I call on each of you to 

recognize that it is our responsibility in Congress to provide support for our men and women in uniform while they selflessly serve 

our Nation. 

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Thornberry and 

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman McCain have both 

laid out what the Department of Defense needs to begin buying 

back the readiness that has left our force hollow. Our military 

needs $640 billion to begin the restoration of its forces that the 

American people expect and need in today’s world. If we do not 

meet the budget of $640 billion for the Department of Defense, we 

will be shortchanging our military in capabilities they need to fulfill their mission. We will impose too great a risk in air dominance, 

naval presence, ship recovery, facilities maintenance, ground forces, 

medical readiness, nuclear deterrent requirements, national security, space defense, ballistic missile defense, and cyber capabilities. 

Each of these requirements is crucial to our national security, and 

it would not be met. 

Our men and women in the military must stand ready to and actively fight a resurgent Russia, an emergent China, an unstable 

North Korea, an unpredictable Iran, and widespread violent extremism. The demand for our forces has never been so high, and our 

readiness has never been so low. It is within our power to reverse 

this. 

I ask you to work with me and others on the Armed Services 

Committee to give our servicemen and -women the resources they 

need to build our military and keep our Nation safe. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Vicky Hartzler follows:] 

17 


Insert offset folio 33 here 25917A.009
18 


Insert offset folio 34 here 25917A.010
19 


Insert offset folio 39 here 25917A.011
20 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Representative Hartzler. 

I would like to now just move on to the next 5-minute presentation. So I appreciate your remarks. 

I want to recognize our next presenter, and that is Representative Bill Posey, Bill Posey from Florida. 

Mr. Posey, you have 5 minutes, and any questions would have 

to be reserved in that 5-minute timeframe. Please. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. BILL POSEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA 

Mr. POSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members for the opportunity to appear before you today. I thank you for the very difficult but important task that this committee does for our Nation. 

As you set budget priorities for fiscal year 2018 and beyond, I 

ask for your continued support for our Nation’s space program. And 

please know I also support your commitment to preserve Social Security and Medicare and to safeguard our coastal estuaries. These 

issues do not just impact my district; they touch us all. They are 

fundamentally a question of leadership. Hopefully, the United 

States will continue to lead the world in space and protect our environment for the next generation. 

American dominance in space is no longer a given. The Russians 

and the Chinese both have increasing capabilities and ambitions in 

space, and ceding this ultimate military high ground to any other 

Nation is unacceptable. 

In addition to public investments, the immense size and power 

of the American private sector is increasingly emerging as the vanguard of U.S. space leadership. We need to continue to empower 

and unleash the awesome potential of the U.S. economy with a regulatory framework that will take the bureaucratic shackles off our 

innovative private sector space industry partners. 

Public investments in the ever-expanding space economy are 

paid back many times over as new technology and engineering 

breakthroughs are made here on Earth. These technologies and capabilities are being created by American companies, employing an 

American high-tech workforce, and driving the American economy 

into the 21st century. 

We are told Social Security Board of Trustees estimates that, 

under current law, Social Security is projected to be unable to fulfill paying benefits beginning in 2034. It is imperative that we address this looming crisis now so that this safety net of earned benefits is available to fulfill the promises we have made to our seniors. 

Likewise, we are advised that the Medicare trust fund will be 

completely exhausted and unavailable to seniors within a decade. 

This vital program needs to be safeguarded and protected to preserve the quality and availability of health services for our seniors, 

as you know. 

Thank you for understanding we must also be good stewards of 

the ecology and economic well-being of our coastal areas. Many estuaries of national significance are in immediate need of attention, 

including the Indian River Lagoon. We are making progress in this 

area, but more needs to be done. Last year’s bipartisan reauthorization of the National Estuary Program implemented a new competitive grant competition to get much-needed funding to those esVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:12 Jul 19, 2017 Jkt 025917 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A917.XXX A917
21 

tuaries with the most urgent needs. Hopefully, this new opportunity can be fully funded so its benefits can be immediately realized. 

I thank you for your consideration as the committee crafts its fiscal year 2018 budget resolution and thank you for your time and 

the opportunity to appear before you today. I would be delighted 

to answer any questions with my remaining time. 

[The prepared statement of Bill Posey follows:] 

22 


Insert offset folio 40 here 25917A.012
23 


Insert offset folio 41 here 25917A.013
24 


Insert offset folio 42 here 25917A.014
25 


Insert offset folio 48 here 25917A.015
26 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Posey. 

We have some time remaining. So I would just ask my colleagues 

if they have any questions. 

No questions. 

We appreciate your time and your remarks. 

Mr. POSEY. Thank you. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. So now let’s move on to our next witness, and 

that is Representative McGovern. 

I will turn it over to you now for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. JIM MCGOVERN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS 

Mr. MCGOVERN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I will summarize my statement here. 

Mr. Chairman, hunger and food insecurity is still a problem in 

the United States of America. Despite the fact that we are the richest country in the history of the world, 42.2 million Americans 

lived in food-insecure households, including more than 13 million 

children and 5 million seniors. 

Hunger is a political condition. We can solve this problem if we 

had the political will. Unfortunately, up to this point, we haven’t 

demonstrated that. The Supplemental Nutrition Program, known 

as SNAP, is our Nation’s best chance to alleviate hunger across our 

country in both urban and rural areas. In fact, food insecurity rates 

among rural households are generally higher than urban households. About two-thirds of those who receive SNAP are children, 

seniors, or the disabled. Of those who can work, a majority do 

work, especially families with children. And the SNAP benefit is already meager at $1.40 per person per meal. 

Now, during the 114th Congress, the House Agriculture Committee undertook a thorough review of SNAP. Eighteen hearings, 

60 experts. And what we learned from experts, both conservative 

and liberal, is that SNAP benefits should not be cut and that the 

current benefit is inadequate. We learned that SNAP does not discourage work and that case management and job training programs can be successful in helping to move people out of poverty, 

but those efforts require a well-funded multiyear commitment. 

The bottom line is, we learned that SNAP works. What we did 

not hear from experts, as some have suggested, is the need to completely overhaul SNAP. In particular, efforts to convert SNAP into 

a block grant program would be catastrophic. Quite simply, blockgranting SNAP would wreck our hunger safety net. It would result 

in billions of dollars in cuts, would force States to reduce benefits 

or kick hungry people out of the program because of a hard cap on 

funding. The fact is that block grants are simply budget cuts in disguise. 

I would also like to highlight that the most recent projections 

from the Congressional Budget Office estimate that the 2014 farm 

bill will save about $104 billion over 10 years, with over $92 billion 

in projected savings coming from SNAP. Now, these savings have 

been achieved as enrollment in SNAP continues to decline from its 

post-recession peak. 

But let me caution the committee, however, that some of the 

caseload decline is attributable to the return of the 3-month time 

27 

limit in 20 States for nondisabled childless adults who are working 

less than 20 hours a week. This time limit has resulted in over a 

million people losing their benefits in 2016 alone, including many 

veterans, by the way. And they are losing these benefits, not because they are not hungry, but because of the arbitrary time limits. 

Lastly, we have heard a lot about national security here. I would 

argue to this committee that we need to expand the definition of 

national security to mean more than just the number of weapons 

we have in our arsenal. National security should mean the quality 

of life for our citizens. It should mean jobs. It should mean shelter, 

and it should mean access to food. And slashing nondefense discretionary funding, I worry that the focus will be on programs that 

benefit the most vulnerable. That does not serve our national security. 

In closing, my message to the committee is the same as it was 

last year, and it is simple: Do not balance the budget on the backs 

of America’s poor and struggling working families. SNAP is a program that works as intended. We shouldn’t change its entitlement 

structure. We shouldn’t cut it. And we shouldn’t make it more difficult for our constituents to access food assistance when they need 

it. If we want to strengthen the program, we should consider ways, 

quite frankly, to increase the SNAP benefit to an update in its formula. Recent research confirms that just a $30 increase in monthly 

SNAP benefits for households leads to healthier eating and lower 

rates of food insecurity. That, I think we can agree, is a worthy 

goal. 

And, with that, I thank you for the time. And if anyone has any 

questions, I am happy to answer them. 

[The prepared statement of Jim McGovern follows:] 

28 


Insert offset folio 49 here 25917A.016
29 


Insert offset folio 50 here 25917A.017
30 


Insert offset folio 58 here 25917A.018
31 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Representative McGovern. 

And now I am going to defer to our ranking member, Ms. 

Jayapal. 

Ms. JAYAPAL. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

And thank you so much for your testimony. Incredibly important 

program that lifts up people across the country. 

I know you had a lot of experts at your committee. You have 

mentioned a couple of things that they said they wanted to improve. Can you talk about some of the improvements to the program. Multiyear records you say, 3-month time limit, increase in 

the benefit. But do you have others? 

Mr. MCGOVERN. Yes. I mean, some of us have argued about increasing the benefit so that people would have the ability to make 

healthier options and not have to rely on food banks as much. We 

have talked about the success of many incentive programs that 

have allowed people with SNAP dollars to go into farmers markets 

or supermarkets and be able to purchase more in terms of healthy, 

nutritious food because of an incentive program. 

We talked about, you know, how we manage the individuals’ 

cases more comprehensively. So it is not just about how we provide 

people access to food but how we get them counseling and job training and kind of the wraparound services that will help them kind 

of transition off the program. It is a great idea. The problem is, you 

know, that requires expanding government and expanding programs, which I am not sure this Congress has the stomach to do. 

But the bottom line is that there is something wrong when there 

are 42 million people in this country who are hungry and food insecure. As a Member of Congress, I am ashamed of that fact, and I 

think it has to become a bigger priority. Nobody in this country 

should go hungry. 

Ms. JAYAPAL. Thank you, Representative. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Mr. McGovern. We appreciate your 

remarks. 

Let’s now move on to our next witness. I want to recognize Mr. 

David Cicilline from Rhode Island. 

Representative Cicilline, you have 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. DAVID CICILLINE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and distinguished 

members of the Budget Committee for convening this hearing 

today and for providing me with the opportunity to testify. 

As this committee continues to consider the current resolution on 

the budget for fiscal year 2018, I would like to use this time to 

highlight areas in which robust Federal funding will help create 

jobs and ensure that our Nation’s workforce is competitive in the 

21st century economy. 

But first I want to address reports that President Trump plans 

to cut $10.5 trillion over the next 10 years from the Federal budget. 

These proposed cuts are extremely troubling and would likely have 

devastating effects on the American economy. And we have seen 

the adverse effects of implementing deep cuts in hiring freezes on 

Federal agencies in the past. 

32 

The head of the Government Accountability Office has said that, 

when GAO reviewed the efficacy of past hiring freezes, they found 

that there was little savings or added efficiency and that many unintended consequences can arise. The proposed draconian cuts to 

nonmilitary spending are a step in the wrong direction. I urge the 

committee to reject these cuts so that the agencies and programs 

have the necessary and adequate funding to continue to serve the 

American people. 

We have to invest in American jobs and the American people. As 

you know, in July 2014, Congress passed the Workforce Innovation 

and Opportunity Act, which authorized critical workforce development programs, such as Job Corps and YouthBuild, that provide a 

combination of educational and training services to prepare individuals to enter the workforce and help them improve their prospects 

through job search assistance, career counseling, occupational skill 

training, classroom training, and on-the-job training. I hope that 

the committee will recognize that these proven high-impact programs deserve to be funded at a level that allows them to expand 

their reach and put more Americans back to work. 

It is also critical that our Federal budget prioritize ways to ensure that all children have access to a high-quality education. By 

ensuring that students have access to critical education programs 

at every level, we help ensure that they obtain the skills that they 

need to compete in the 21st century economy. In addition to providing students with skills in reading and mathematics, we should 

also ensure that we are helping students obtain critical training 

skills as well as social and career-ready skills. This can be accomplished, in part, through quality after-school programming. The 

21st Century Community Learning Centers Program represents a 

dedicated funding stream for these types of afterschool programs. 

21st Century Community Learning Centers were reauthorized 

under the Every Student Succeeds Act, and they help provide valuable skills, while also ensuring that low-income students have a 

place to go after school where they remain engaged, build stronger 

relationships with their peers, expand on what they have learned 

during the school day. Students who participate in these programs 

also exhibit fewer instances of drug use, violence, and teen pregnancy. These centers help promote family stability by giving working families the security of knowing that their children are in good 

hands after school ends. This is an issue that has bipartisan support. Last year, I was proud to work with my colleague, Congressman Lou Barletta, in urging the Appropriations Committee to ensure critical funding for the 21st Century Community Learning 

Centers. 

We also must ensure that students who want to are able to obtain a higher education. However, in the last three decades, the 

cost of higher education has risen by nearly 400 percent, resulting 

in more than a trillion dollars in outstanding student loan debt. It 

is unconscionable that taking on an insurmountable amount of debt 

is often a prerequisite for obtaining a college degree. We need to 

make sure that the cost never serves as an impediment to higher 

education. 

The Federal Pell Grant Program is one program that has helped 

to ensure that cost is not a roadblock to education for nearly 45 

33 

years. Senator Claiborne Pell from my home state of Rhode Island, 

who led the effort in Congress to expand financial aid for at-need 

college students through the Higher Education Act, and his efforts 

have helped ensure that more than 8 million low-income students 

receive financial aid to pay for tuition, books, and room and board 

each year. For many students, Pell grants are the only avenue 

available for them to pay for a college degree. And we need to ensure that this avenue remains open and, in fact, open for more 

young people. 

I thank my colleagues for your ongoing commitment to supporting working families and students and look forward to continuing to work with you to ensure that these programs that continue to deliver results for our constituents will be reflected in the 

budget you will ultimately present to the Congress. 

And, with that, I yield. 

[The prepared statement of David Cicilline follows:] 

34 


Insert offset folio 59 here 25917A.019
35 


Insert offset folio 60 here 25917A.020
36 


Insert offset folio 61 here 25917A.021
37 


Insert offset folio 62 here 25917A.022
38 


Insert offset folio 69 here 25917A.023
39 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Representative Cicilline. 

I will ask my colleagues if they have any questions. Please. 

Ms. DELBENE. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline. You talked about Pell 

grants, and I know one of the issues that has come up is availability year round. Can you speak to the need to make sure that 

is available? 

Mr. CICILLINE. Yes. I mean, I think there have been a number 

of proposals to ensure that Pell grants are available year round for 

summer learning but also that they be more generous so they can 

actually begin to meet the current needs of the cost of higher education. 

And so I think there is no better investment that we make as 

a country than investing in the education of our young people. It 

is the single best way to ensure future prosperity for the individual 

and for our economy and for our country. And I think that whatever this committee can do to make sure that that is available year 

round and in a more robust number will come back manyfold to 

benefit the American people. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline, for your remarks and 

your time. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Now I would like to introduce our next guest, 

Representative Mark Walker from the great State of North Carolina. 

Mr. Walker, 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. MARK WALKER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

Mr. WALKER. Thank you, Chairman Arrington and Vice Ranking 

Member Jayapal. 

I appreciate the opportunity to testify today. Recent reports from 

the Congressional Budget Office and the Government Accountability Office paint a dismal future. Without changes to the Federal 

budget, we are on a path to fiscal crisis with spending, deficits, and 

debt continuing to balloon out of control. I don’t believe that we can 

in good conscience neglect the stunning reality and pass on these 

burdens to our children, our grandchildren, and, of course, future 

generations. 

It is with these realities in mind that the Republican Study Committee’s Steering Committee adopted the following official position 

on January 24, 2017, of course, of this year: The fiscal year 2018 

budget resolution must reach balance within the 10-year window 

by reducing the size and scope of government and without tax increases and remain in balance thereafter in order to save important programs like Social Security and Medicare. Further, House 

Committees should take steps to produce legislation to implement 

a budget within the 115th Congress. 

I understand that balancing the budget is a significant challenge. 

I think we all do here in Washington. But it is a challenge that 

we as Congress must tackle head-on and without reservation. To 

put it simply, the Federal Government has a spending problem 

that must be addressed. That is not a talking point; that is reality. 

According to the CBO’s most recent Budget and Economic Outlook, annual outlays are projected to top $4 trillion for this time for 

40 

the first time in fiscal year 2018. Over the next decade, both spending and revenues will continue increasing above their historical 

norms, with the growth in spending outpacing the growth in revenues. This growth in spending will drive today’s $20 trillion national debt to more than $30 trillion by fiscal year 2027. 

A budget is more than just a spreadsheet of numbers. It is important to understand that the choices we will make in this budget 

and the consequences that follow from it have real, tangible effects 

on the people that we all represent. Trillion dollar deficits here in 

Washington and broken entitlement programs mean lower wages, 

less opportunity, and crippling uncertainty for all Americans and 

especially for those most in need of a handout. The Congressional 

Budget Office says that continuing the status quo will reduce economic growth, further shrink the labor force, and risk a fiscal crisis 

that would result in fewer jobs and lower wages for the American 

people. 

Under the current path, the major safety net programs will be 

insolvent, causing indiscriminate cuts to our most vulnerable citizens. The Disability Insurance trust fund will be depleted in 2023. 

The Medicare hospital insurance fund will be depleted by 2025. 

And Social Security trust fund will be depleted by 2035. 

So we have a choice: we can kick the can down the road yet 

again or act to stave off a pending fiscal crisis and protect the 

American people. That is why we have to act now. Some will ignore 

the writing on the wall and pretend the problem doesn’t exist. Still 

others will propose ideas that would exacerbate the problem. Instead, we need to act boldly and return to the principles of limited 

government and free markets that made us the most prosperous 

and free people in the history of the world. 

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates that 

balancing the budget by fiscal year 2027 will require $8.2 trillion 

in deficit reduction. Last year, the RSC’s proposed fiscal year 2017 

budget would have reduced spending by $8.6 trillion over that 10- 

year budget window while including policies that improve fiscal 

health on both Social Security and Medicare. I hope today the 

Budget Committee will continue to look to RSC’s budget proposals 

for policy ideas as you begin drafting the fiscal year 2018 budget. 

In closing, the RSC will once again this year produce a budget 

alternative, thanks to our task force led by Representative Tom 

McClintock, a senior member of this committee. While the RSC 

budget will be offered as an amendment in the nature of a substitute to the Budget Committee’s budget, please know that we review it as a complementary, not competing, proposal. 

The purpose of the RSC budget is to detail the solutions championed by our members with the expectation that the ideas first espoused in RSC’s budgets will over time be incorporated into the 

House budgets and passed into law. Please know that I and the 

members of the Republican Study Committee stand ready to work 

with you to pass a responsible, balanced budget resolution this 

year. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mark Walker follows:] 

41 


Insert offset folio 70 here 25917A.024
42 


Insert offset folio 71 here 25917A.025
43 


Insert graphic folio 78 here 25917A.026
44 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Representative Walker. 

We have got some time. Does anybody have any questions? 

I just want to say thank you. I am in agreement. So many 

things, challenges we face as a country. We have got a lot of ideas. 

What our country needs and what our people expect is courage. 

There is no greater opportunity to show that courage than in fiscal 

reform. Thank you for presenting that, Mr. Walker. 

And now we are going to go on to our next panelist. And I would 

like to recognize the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Joe Wilson, for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. JOE WILSON, A REPRESENTATIVE 

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 

Mr. WILSON. Mr. Chairman and committee members, I want to 

thank you for the opportunity to meet with you today. 

First of all, I would like to congratulate Chairwoman Diane 

Black for being named chairman of the Budget Committee and 

thank her for her leadership on this committee. 

As we face difficult economic times, I appreciate the dedicated efforts of the chairwoman, ranking members, and members of the 

committee. 

I am grateful to represent the Second Congressional District of 

South Carolina, a diverse and thriving district on the I–20 corridor 

that is home to a few of our Nation’s most critical national security 

and environmental cleanup missions: Fort Jackson in the Midlands 

and the Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site in the AikenBarnwell area. These unique missions contribute to our State and 

Nation in countless tangible ways. Each of these installations provides unique services to our country and requires our support. 

Fort Jackson is a critical part of our national security and military readiness. As the largest Initial Entry Training Center for the 

U.S. Army, Fort Jackson’s primary mission is to train thousands of 

disciplined, motivated servicemembers, training 53 percent of the 

Army’s basic training personnel and 56 percent of the women entering the Army each year. At a time when our Nation faces critical 

threats around the world, from ISIL, from North Korea to Iran, the 

mission at Fort Jackson has never been more vital to achieving 

peace through strength. 

Additionally, Fort Jackson supports other critical missions, including the U.S. Army Soldier Support Institute, the Army Chaplain Center, the National Center for Credibility Assessment, and 

the Army’s Drill Sergeant School. The impact of the base positively 

impacts the surrounding community as well as employing nearly 

3,500 civilians and providing services for 46,000 retirees and military family members. 

A little more than an hour down the I–20 corridor from Fort 

Jackson is the Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site in the 

Aiken-Barnwell community. This site is a national asset, responsible for supporting our nuclear weapons, missions, and conducting 

cutting-edge research. 

The Savannah River Site is home to the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, MOX, a critical component of our national security 

and environmental cleanup mission. Currently 70 percent completed, when finished, the MOX facility will be able to take weapVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:12 Jul 19, 2017 Jkt 025917 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A917.XXX A917
45 

ons-grade plutonium and reprocess it into green fuel, a more secure 

and sustainable option than potentially placing South Carolina and 

Georgia as a plutonium dumping ground. It is imperative that we 

continue funding this vital mission for our Nation’s nuclear security mission. 

In addition to MOX, the Savannah River Site is home to many 

other vital Department of Energy nuclear security environmental 

cleanup missions. Last year, the site celebrated a milestone, completing construction of the Salt Waste Processing Facility, which, 

along with the Defense Waste Processing Facility, will greatly enhance the speed and efficiency of the remediation of high-level 

waste. 

Other critical facilities include H-Canyon, the Nation’s only production-scale nuclear separations plant, and both K and L areas, 

which safely store nuclear materials. 

Additionally, the Savannah River Site conducts critical research 

through the Savannah River National Laboratory. The laboratory 

supports our Nation’s ability to produce tritium, to monitor and detect capabilities for nuclear nonproliferation and nuclear forensics. 

It also enhances technologies for a nuclear cleanup mission at SRS 

and around the country. 

I urge you to continue your support to the unique missions at 

Fort Jackson and the Savannah River Site that keep American 

families safe. 

Finally, as chairman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee 

on Readiness, I urge the chairwoman and committee to support a 

level of funding that will adequately provide for the military and 

provide for our national defense. The first priority of the Federal 

Government is to provide for the common defense, and I echo the 

calls of House Armed Services Chairman Mac Thornberry and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain in calling 

for the $640 billion to ensure that our servicemembers are trained, 

equipped, and resourced to complete their mission. 

Thank you, and I can’t believe I ended this quickly. Are there 

any questions? 

[The prepared statement of Joe Wilson follows:] 

46 


Insert graphic folio 79 here 25917A.027
47 


Insert graphic folio 80 here 25917A.028
48 


Insert graphic folio 86 here 25917A.029
49 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. 

I ask the ranking member, Ms. DelBene, if she has any questions 

or comments. 

Thank you, Mr. Wilson. 

Mr. WILSON. I am grateful for your service, and I am honored to 

be here. Thank you very much. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you for your time and remarks. Now I 

would now like to recognize our next panelist, Mr. Trent Franks 

from the great State of Arizona. Mr. Franks. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. TRENT FRANKS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA 

Mr. FRANKS. Well, first, may I thank you, Chairman Arrington 

and Ranking Member DelBene, for the opportunity to add my voice 

to those of many others concerned about the crisis facing our military. 

Mr. Chairman, our guardian class has consistently set before us 

the devastation that sequestration has wrought upon our military 

and the doubt that it has cast upon our ability to defeat existing 

and emerging threats, let alone deter them. 

For my part, I am here today to alert you to the dangerous state 

of our Nation’s strategic capabilities and what the Obama years 

have done to our ability to deter and defeat the deadliest weapons 

known to humanity. 

Under President Obama, the Kim dynasty in North Korea 

evolved from an eccentric regional problem with nuclear weapons 

into an extremely dangerous nuclear threat to the United States. 

And we are now very close to seeing them master the physics required to range the entire continental United States with their 

missile technology. 

Barrack Obama’s defense policies also placed Iran, the world’s 

largest financier and enabler of terrorism, on track to gain a nuclear weapons capability. And unlike the Soviet threat, nuclear 

Jihad, Mr. Chairman, cannot be deterred by fear of retaliation. It 

is an existential threat to the peace and security of the entire 

human family. 

And while the Obama administration debated whether or not we 

should develop and maintain a missile defense capability against 

such threats, our near-peer adversaries, who never had such 

qualms, were working tirelessly to exploit weaknesses in our missile defense architecture. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, effective missile 

defense is not only the last line of defense against a launched nuclear missile, it is our first line of defense against proliferation because it devalues such weapons as offensive military assets in the 

hands of our adversaries. 

However, the shameful reality is that, under President Obama, 

our near-peer adversaries developed their capabilities while ours 

atrophied. And while we drastically cut funding to the Missile Defense Agency, as is illustrated in the handouts that you have, 

China and Russia were rapidly developing and testing high-speed 

maneuvering weapons, including hypersonic glide vehicles recently, 

which are specifically designed to exploit the gaps and seams in 

50 

our missile defense architecture existing at the moment and currently defeating the systems we have in place. 

These new weapons are capable of traveling more than a mile 

per second and fly at flat trajectory to prevent our missile defense 

systems from tracking them. The threat has outpaced us, and we 

must invest the appropriate resources to defend against the new 

threats or lose our ability to deter potential adversaries. 

Moreover, as our near-peers find ways to defeat our current defensive capabilities, our strategic nuclear deterrent has fallen into 

desperate need of modernization. We currently spend about $25 billion a year on our nuclear arsenal. Well, that is about 5 percent 

of the DOD budget, which itself is only about 17 percent of our 

total budget. And what that means is, for less than one-tenth of 1 

percent of our gross domestic product that is spent on nuclear deterrent, we have prevented World War III for 70 years. 

So, to be successful, Mr. Chairman, a deterrent must be effective, 

reliable, and credible. And I would just say, in order to revitalize 

our military, to maintain a nuclear deterrent which is effective, reliable and credible, and to build a missile defense architecture capable of meeting identified emerging threats, we require a defense 

budget top line of $640 billion. The $603 billion top line visits a 

modest 3-percent increase over Mr. Obama’s projected fiscal year 

2018 defense budget of $584 billion. And if we intend to solve our 

readiness crisis, a budget of this size, it will force us to underfund 

our key capabilities, such as nuclear arsenal and deterrent, defending national security space assets and ballistic missile defense, just 

to name a few. If we are to make America safe again, a 3-percent 

increase will not suffice. 

So, in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, may I just say to all of us here 

that the first purpose of any government or its leaders is to protect 

the lives and security of its people, and the failure of this responsibility renders all others meaningless. 

Ronald Reagan once said to us that you and I have a rendezvous 

with destiny. We can preserve this the last best hope of mankind 

on Earth for our children, or we can sentence them to take that 

very last step into 1,000 years of darkness. If we do fail, at least 

let our children and our children’s children say of us that we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done. May history judge that this Congress was one that did all that could be 

done to protect the innocent in our own generation and to further 

ensure that American generations yet unborn will continue to walk 

in the sun light of freedom. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Trent Franks follows:] 

51 


Insert graphic folio 87 here 25917A.030
52 


Insert graphic folio 88 here 25917A.031
53 


Insert graphic folio 89 here 25917A.032
54 


Insert graphic folio 90 here 25917A.033
55 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Representative Franks, for your remarks. 

And I don’t see any other panelists. 

I would ask my colleagues if they have any final remarks before 

we conclude our committee hearing. 

Okay. 

This completes the committee’s business for today. I would like 

to thank all Members who shared their views before the Budget 

Committee. This committee stands adjourned. 

[The information follows:] 

The following statements were submitted for the Record. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kildee follows:] 

REP. KILDEE TESTIMONY FOR HOUSE BUDGET COMMITTEE

Good morning, Madame Chairwoman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the 

Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify here today on what I believe 

should be our nation’s priorities in our budget. 

A budget is a statement of our nation’s values. I believe we should be making investments in policies that grow our economy and create good-paying jobs, protect 

public health, and provide more opportunity and economic security for working families. 

Yet earlier this week, we saw the President push for huge increases to military 

spending by $54 billion in the next fiscal year. This is on top of the approximately 

$600 billion that we already spend on defense. And sadly, this additional military 

spending comes on the back of drastic cuts to domestic programs and agencies like 

the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institutes of Health. 

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, our current non-defense 

discretionary spending for next year is already projected to hit the lowest point 

since 1962. The proposal by the White House would push that number even lower, 

below 3 percent of our gross domestic product. 

Spending less than 3 percent of GDP on our domestic programs that provide support for public education, job training, medical research, nutritional assistance and 

so much more, frankly is unacceptable. 

Congress already passed the harmful, across-the-board sequestration cuts that imposed deep cuts in our discretionary programs. But the President, in putting forth 

a budget proposal that requires additional deep cuts to discretionary spending, is 

being reckless. 

Medical research could be especially in jeopardy. While I am thankful that Congress passed the 21st Century Cures Act last year, medical research is vital for all 

of us as a nation to continue pushing scientific knowledge and technology. It is also 

incredibly personal to many Americans, including my family, who have medical conditions that could be potentially cured by research. 

Like an estimated 400,000 other Americans, my wife has multiple sclerosis, a neurological disease currently with no cure. Like millions of other Americans, my 

daughter, Katy, has Type 1 Diabetes. While we have research that allows for the 

management of the disease, we still do not have a cure. 

Imagine if we were to invest in medical research to find cures for diseases like 

MS, or diabetes, or cancer. Cutting domestic programs like the NIH and other medical research is reckless, wrong and would set us back as a country. Under President 

Trump, the NIH may face a cut of $4 billion dollars, more than 10 percent of its 

annual budget. 

With our nation’s budget, there are other impacts to public health outside of medical research. The President has proposed severe cuts planned for the agency 

charged with protecting our air and water—the EPA. Cutting billions of dollars from 

the EPA is dangerous and would gut the agency focused on preventing the next 

Flint water crisis. 

Make no mistake, while the people of my hometown of Flint are strong and resilient, the community is still recovering from this crisis. It has been almost three 

years and people are still unable to drink water from their tap, an incredibly frustrating statistic in the richest country on earth. The impacts from what this community has suffered will be felt for a long time, with an entire generation exposed to 

high levels of lead. We can’t leave these kids behind—or other communities that 

rely on the EPA to ensure clean air and water. 

56 

We can—and should—make smart investments as a nation, including investments 

in infrastructure, education, public health and nutritional programs. 

The budget proposal issued by the President is not the responsible federal budget 

that my constituents expect and deserve. 

Thank you again for the chance to testify here today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Connolly follows:] 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018, COMMITTEE ON

THE BUDGET, REP. GERALD E. CONNOLLY (D–VA) 

Chairman Black and Ranking Member Yarmuth, I previously served on the Budget Committee, and I want to thank you for the opportunity to return to the Committee to testify on Fiscal Year 2018 budget priorities. 

I come from local government where we passed bipartisan, balanced budgets each 

of the 14 years I served on the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors. While budgets 

are certainly values-based documents, they do not have to represent just one set of 

values. They can be inclusive, and should represent the diversity of the people they 

will ultimately affect. I regret to note that the Republican budget resolution that 

came before the House was neither balanced nor bipartisan. Despite leveling relentless criticism against President Obama for fiscal mismanagement while he was actually decreasing the deficit, the first budget of the new Republican unified government would increase the national debt by $9.5 trillion over the next ten years. Life 

comes at you fast, as does the reality of governing. It is my hope that in the spirit 

of pragmatic governing—the kind demanded at the local level of government—we 

can coalesce around a set of shared priorities that keep this country both safe and 

strong. 

I opposed the Republican budget resolution because it was not a serious document, it targeted American families and their healthcare, and it did not even feign 

the pretense of responsible budgeting or policymaking. Likewise, President Trump’s 

forthcoming budget has been reported to have such mindless and draconian cuts 

that many Republicans have already declared it dead. 

That being said, I would like to use my time before the Committee, as I have in 

the past, to lay out a few priorities I believe should be included in the FY2018 budget. 

Our first shared priority should be ending the deep and indiscriminate cuts of sequestration for both defense and domestic spending. Don’t just take my word for it. 

Listen to the representatives of the Veterans of Foreign Wars who have spent the 

week visiting Members’ Capitol Hill offices to deliver the message that sequestration 

‘‘is the most significant readiness and national security threat of the 21st century.’’ 

I would note that the VFW—in outlining its number one priority—does not differentiate between domestic and defense spending. Domestic and defense investments are complementary, and there are myriad examples of the relationship between the two creating a return on investment for the American taxpayer. A strong 

education system provides our military with its next generation of leaders. My district routinely sends more students to the U.S. military academies than any other 

Congressional district, in part, because Northern Virginia has a superb public education system. It was President Dwight D. Eisenhower, the former Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe during WWII, whose vision of a National System 

of Interstate and Defense Highways gave us what we know today as the Interstate 

Highway System. The internet and GPS began as military research projects that 

now have nearly ubiquitous commercial applications. We must invest in both defense and domestic priorities and reject the Faustian bargain that would fund one 

and not the other to the ultimate detriment of both. 

The alternative we seek is one that appreciates the power of government investments to both spur growth and guard from costly triage spending when the bills 

come due for our neglected funding priorities. 

We can start by investing in the federal workforce that will carry out this mission. 

In recent years, no other group in our country has been demonized, demoralized, 

and asked to sacrifice more for the sake of deficit reduction than our federal workforce. All told, federal employees have contributed $182 billion to deficit reduction 

over the last six years. The reinstatement of the Armageddon Rule, the hiring 

freeze, and gag orders that inhibit whistleblowers constitute a downright hostile 

agenda towards federal workers. When my colleagues use federal employees as both 

a piggybank and a punching bag, they are undermining the very thing they purport 

to champion; efficient and effective government. 

That is why I have reintroduced the FAIR Act (H.R. 757), which would provide 

federal employees with a 3.2 percent wage adjustment, restore years of lost wage 

57 

increases, and which represents the difference between last year’s 5.3 percent request and the Obama Administration’s 2.1 percent increase. 

We must remember that the hard working men and women of the federal workforce—85 percent of whom are based outside of Washington D.C.—are our friends 

and neighbors. They are providing essential government services in every community across America, whether it is on the front lines of national security, caring for 

our nation’s seniors and veterans, or guiding families through our national parks. 

I would also ask that the Budget Committee be mindful of the obligation the federal government has to the providing funding for and ensuring the functionality of 

the Washington D.C. Metrorail system. This includes the federal government’s annual $150 million commitment to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (Metrorail). The federal government must pay its fair share. Since 40% of 

rush-hour riders are federal employees and the 16 million annual visitors to the nation’s capital rely on Metrorail, the federal government has a unique responsibility 

to help fund the operation of this vital transportation system. 

There are in fact investments we can make now that will save money, and potentially lives, in the long run. I recently joined every Democratic Member of the House 

Foreign Affairs Committee in writing to the Budget Committee arguing on behalf 

of a robust International Affairs budget. And once again, you do not have to take 

my word for it. More than 120 retired generals and admirals recently wrote a letter 

to Congress on this matter. They wrote, ‘‘the State Department, USAID, Millennium 

Challenge Corporation, Peace Corps and other development agencies are critical to 

preventing conflict and reducing the need to put our men and women in uniform 

in harm’s way.’’ We cannot starve our foreign aid and diplomacy missions and expect that increased defense spending alone will keep America safe. 

I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for hosting Members’ Day. 

Budgets can be values-based documents without being ideological manifestos, and 

I would hope that the burden of governing fosters a sense of pragmatism about the 

value of government investment. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Calvert follows:] 

COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET: MEMBER’S DAY HEARING, STATEMENT BY REP. KEN

CALVERT

Chairman Black: As we have seen, the United States is facing an extraordinarily 

difficult fiscal situation driven by soaring government expenditures, continued 

weakness of the economy and years of unchecked government spending that has left 

us facing a national debt of almost $20 trillion. Republicans must do whatever we 

can to reduce unchecked and inappropriate spending and I believe we have an exciting opportunity ahead of us to submit a fiscally responsible federal budget to the 

American people. 

If we are to maintain the budget caps, then my primary concern is how to be a 

defense hawk and a deficit hawk. While I support ending the defense sequester, I 

also realize that we must operate according to current law. In a proactive attempt 

to address these difficult budgetary challenges, I introduced the Rebalance for an 

Effective Defense Uniformed and Civilian Employees (REDUCE) Act, H.R. 295. The 

current ratio of active duty military personnel vs. civilian personnel is out of balance. From 2001 to 2014, the active duty military has shrunk by four percent while 

the number of civilian defense employees grew by 15 percent. Under the Obama Administration, the Department of Defense followed through on plans to drastically cut 

active duty end strength—cuts that compromised readiness and assumed more risk. 

Meanwhile the Department of Defense civilian workforce remained virtually untouched. It is time for the Pentagon to make permanent reductions in a thoughtful 

manner that will result in a more efficient civilian workforce. 

H.R. 295 would reduce our defense civilian workforce by 15% by FY 2028 through 

the flexibility of attrition as well as giving more weight to performance in a Reduction in Force. The legislation also mandates that the reductions occur over a five 

year period and gives the Secretary of Defense authority to incentivize early retirements. Ultimately, H.R. 295 would generate an estimated $125 billion in savings 

over five years that would be redirected back into the Department for modernization, readiness, and acquisition. To that end, I request that the Fiscal Year 2018 

(FY18) Budget reflect these reforms and the need to rebalance the DOD civilian 

workforce. 

Furthermore, as Chairman of the Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, I have seen firsthand the result of the current and unsustainable state 

of emergency wildfire funding. In the face of disaster, agencies such as the United 

58 

States Forest Service are forced to divert funding from critical accounts such as fire 

prevention and non fire accounts to pay for fire suppression. 

For this reason, I support the principles outlined in Representative Michael Simpson’s legislation H.R. 167, the Wildfire Disaster Funding Act, of the 114th Congress. 

The version to be reintroduced in the 115th Congress is cost-neutral legislation that 

would fund wildfire suppression so catastrophic wildfires would be eligible for the 

disaster spending cap adjustment, just like hurricanes, floods, and similar natural 

disasters. As a former small business owner, I can attest that reliable budget numbers are essential in accurately and effectively planning for emergencies. The current state of wildfire funding and detrimental fire borrowing simply does not allow 

for this, leaving unhealthy forests that are more susceptible to expensive catastrophic wildfires. I support science-based funding for wildfires and the FY18 Budget should include a wildfire funding fix. 

Chairman Black, I am confident that the Republican majority in Congress can 

take these bolder approaches to achieve the ultimate goal of balancing our budget 

over time while finding ways to reform government spending in order to help America’s global competitiveness and lay the foundation for economic growth. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Simpson follows:] 

TESTIMONY FOR MEMBER DAY HEARING, REP. MIKE SIMPSON

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk with you today about an extremely important issue. 

Like many of my Western colleagues, I have seen the impacts of catastrophic 

wildfires first hand as they rage across my district each summer, threatening the 

lives and property of my constituents. I have seen where catastrophic fires have 

scorched the land so badly that nothing will grow. I have also seen where preventative measures—like hazardous fuels removal, timber harvesting, and grazing in 

areas susceptible to fire—have protected resources, property, and lives from fires 

that would have been much worse without them. Effective forest management can 

prevent a routine fire that is manageable and easy to control from becoming a catastrophic one that costs millions to contain and years to recover from. 

Hazardous fuels, like dry undergrowth and foliage that is extremely susceptible 

to fire, can cause fires to burn hotter, spread more quickly, and climb up to the top 

of the trees, making it much more difficult to control. Removing these fuels is a key 

tool for preventing catastrophic wildfires. I have seen areas where a fire destroyed 

everything in its path only to stop short at an area where brush and undergrowth 

had been removed. 

Containing catastrophic fires costs us millions, even billions of dollars each year. 

Typically, only 1–2% of the fires we fight each year are considered catastrophic. Yet 

we spend a disproportionate amount of money trying to get them under control. For 

example, last year just 10 fires cost more than $300 million. So it makes good budget sense to spend some money preventing catastrophic wildfires before they escalate 

rather than spending millions to fight them once they are out of control. 

Unfortunately, the way we currently budget for wildfire doesn’t make sense. 

Today most of the funding we provide for hazardous fuels removal never makes it 

to the ground. When wildfire suppression costs exceed the agencies’ fire budget, the 

agencies are forced to borrow from other accounts, like hazardous fuels reduction, 

to pay for fire suppression. There is no guarantee that Congress will make those 

accounts whole by the end of the fiscal year. Even if we do, that funding comes to 

the agencies far too late for it to do any good. 

Robbing non-fire accounts to pay for fire suppression means that the Forest Service has fewer resources available for forest management, so fires get worse and suppression costs end up devouring the agency’s budget. The way we currently budget 

for fire has created a devastating cycle of fire borrowing that is costing taxpayers 

and destroying our forests. 

Fire borrowing was intended to be an extraordinary measure, but agencies routinely have had to rob other budgets to pay for fire suppression. 

Recent fire seasons have cost taxpayers upwards of one billion dollars. Those costs 

will only go up unless we take action to end this destructive cycle of fire borrowing. 

That is why Representative Schrader and I plan to reintroduce the Wildfire Disaster 

Funding Act. This legislation enjoyed broad bipartisan support in the 113th and 

114th Congress. It was cosponsored by 150 Members of Congress and supported by 

a broad coalition of over 300 organizations, ranging from the Wilderness Society to 

the NRA. 

This bill recognizes that catastrophic wildfires are major natural disasters, like 

hurricanes and floods, and would budget for them accordingly. Routine wildland 

59 

firefighting costs would continue to be funded through the normal appropriations 

process, while catastrophic fires would be eligible for disaster funding when the fiscal year suppression accounts are exhausted. This approach would allow the Forest 

Service and DOI to avoid borrowing money from prevention accounts which only exacerbates the wildfire problem for future years. 

It’s important to note that we are already spending this money—we already fully 

fund wildfire suppression each year. But fire borrowing is such an inefficient practice that we are only spending more money each year to fight bigger fires. We are 

doing nothing to manage forests in such a way to prevent fires that rage out of control and cost millions to contain. 

There are a number of steps that we need to take to address forest health and 

management issues, but fixing the wildfire suppression budget must be the first 

one. Until we address this issue, anything we do to increase management activities 

in our forests, like hazardous fuels removal, timber harvest, conservation, or trail 

maintenance, will continue to get lost in fire transfers. Fixing the wildfire budget 

is the critical first step in making our forests healthier and, ultimately, reducing 

the cost of wildfires in the future. 

We must do something to end fire borrowing. It is destroying our forests, it is 

costing taxpayers billions of dollars, and, quite frankly, as funding intended for one 

purpose is siphoned off for another, it is taking away Congress’s ability to determine 

how appropriated dollars are spent. I look forward to working with you to find the 

best way to address this issue, and I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to 

testify today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Turner follows:] 

CONGRESSMAN MICHAEL R. TURNER (OH–10), WRITTEN STATEMENT

Chairman Black, Ranking Member Yarmuth, and distinguished members of the 

House Committee on Budget, thank you for allowing me to offer my statements 

today. 

The Administration has indicated plans to submit a budget request of $603 billion 

for national defense base requirements. While I commend President Trump’s initial 

efforts to rebuild our military, this proposal will not address the critical needs of 

our military and as a consequence will not allow the successful execution of its strategic objectives. The proposed $603 billion only represents a mere 3.2 percent increase compared to the Fiscal Year 2018 funding levels projected in President 

Obama’s last budget request. 

The Budget Control Act (BCA) placed a tremendous burden on our national defense and military capabilities.The BCA’s devastating budget cuts have allowed our 

military’s capabilities to atrophy, our force size to shrink, and as a result we are 

assuming too much risk in our military preparedness to fight and win against nearpeer and peer competitors. In its review of the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review 

(QDR), the bipartisan National Defense Panel strongly advocated for a funding 

baseline consistent with then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ budget request for 

FY2012. In FY2018 Secretary Gates’ projected a topline amount of $661 billion for 

national defense. President Trump’s request would be $58 billion short of that number. 

With the onset of sequestration, 2011 is the last time the Department was able 

to engage in an honest and strategic assessment of global threats and the necessary 

capabilities to effectively deter those threats. 

The Armed Services Committee, under the leadership of Chairman Thomberry, 

was tasked with identifying critical capability gaps as well as the resources needed 

to to fund national defense and begin addressing these critical shortfalls. The committee assessed that $640 billion was the bare minimum necessary to even begin 

the process of rebuilding our military and reversing the damaging cuts that have 

led to serious readiness challenges throughout the military services. 

The Department of Defense defines readiness as ‘‘the ability of military forces to 

fight and meet the demands of assigned missions.’’ The Armed Services Committee 

has heard numerous testimonies from senior military leadership on readiness shortfalls and how they are assuming too much risk in training and operations.. Recently, General Daniel Allyn, Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, stated ‘‘our Army requires modernized equipment to win decisively, but today we are outranged, 

outgunned and outdated’’. His statements, disconcertingly similar to other service 

Chiefs and Vice Chiefs, point out that we are ‘‘assuming risk and mortgaging our 

future readiness.’’ General Joseph Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 

when speaking on critical munition shortfalls stated that ‘‘our current global invenVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:12 Jul 19, 2017 Jkt 025917 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\A917.XXX A917
60 

tories are insufficient for theater missile defense, standoff, and air-to-air munitions 

needs’’. 

The U.S. currently faces one of the most complex security environments in recent 

history and our military is continually being asked to do more with less. The restoration of our national defense must be our top priority. Continuing down the path 

of budget driven defense strategies rather than capability driven defense strategies 

places too great a burden on our men and women in uniform and severely impacts 

our ability to defend our interests at home and abroad. Reversing this damaging 

trend in national security and military readiness will not be accomplished in one 

year, but as you form your budget submission I urge you to support a national defense base of $640 billion which is what’s required to begin the process of rebuilding 

our military. 

[Whereupon, at 12:03 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]