U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

80–207 PDF 2013

MEMBERS’ DAY 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MARCH 6, 2013 

Serial No. 113–2 

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 

PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin, Chairman 

TOM PRICE, Georgia 

SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey 

JOHN CAMPBELL, California 

KEN CALVERT, California 

TOM COLE, Oklahoma 

TOM MCCLINTOCK, California 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

DIANE BLACK, Tennessee 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

BILL FLORES, Texas 

TODD ROKITA, Indiana 

ROB WOODALL, Georgia 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

ALAN NUNNELEE, Mississippi 

E. SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia 

VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri 

JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana 

LUKE MESSER, Indiana 

TOM RICE, South Carolina 

ROGER WILLIAMS, Texas 

SEAN P. DUFFY, Wisconsin 

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland, 

Ranking Minority Member 

ALLYSON Y. SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania 

JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky 

BILL PASCRELL, JR., New Jersey 

TIM RYAN, Ohio 

GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida 

JIM MCDERMOTT, Washington 

BARBARA LEE, California 

DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

HAKEEM S. JEFFRIES, New York 

MARK POCAN, Wisconsin 

MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico 

JARED HUFFMAN, California 

TONY CA ́ RDENAS, California 

EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon 

KURT SCHRADER, Oregon 

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

AUSTIN SMYTHE, Staff Director 

THOMAS S. KAHN, Minority Staff Director 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held in Washington, DC, March 6, 2013 ................................................. 1 

Hon. Dennis A. Ross, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Florida ............................................................................................................ 2 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3 

Hon. Earl Blumenauer, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Oregon ....................................................................................................... 5 

Hon. Gene Green, a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas .. 7 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 9 

Hon. Steve Daines, a Representative in Congress from the State of Montana ................................................................................................................ 10 

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

Hon. Ami Bera, a Representative in Congress from the State of California .............................................................................................................. 13 

Hon. Scott DesJarlais, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Tennessee ...................................................................................................... 14 

Hon. Richard Nugent, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Florida ............................................................................................................ 16 

Hon. Ann Kirkpatrick, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Arizona ........................................................................................................... 17 

Hon. Scott Peters, a Representative in Congress from the State of California .............................................................................................................. 19 

Hon. Randy Neugebauer, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Texas .......................................................................................................... 21 

Hon. Ed Whitfield, a Representative in Congress from the State of Kentucky .............................................................................................................. 24 

Hon. Bradley S. Schneider, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Illinois ........................................................................................................ 25 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 27 

Hon. Paul D. Tonko, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

New York ....................................................................................................... 28 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 30 

Hon. John C. Carney, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Delaware .................................................................................................... 31 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 33 

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

Carolina ......................................................................................................... 34 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 36 

Hon. Jim McDermott, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Washington .................................................................................................... 37 

Hon. Keith Ellison, a Representative in Congress from the State of Minnesota ............................................................................................................. 38 

Hon. Donna M. Christensen, a Delegate in Congress from the Virgin 

Islands ............................................................................................................ 40 

Hon. Elizabeth H. Esty, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Connecticut ................................................................................................ 42 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 43 

Hon. Joe Courtney, a Representative in Congress from the State of Connecticut .......................................................................................................... 44 

Graph: ‘‘S&P Medicare Index’’ .................................................................. 47 

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

of Virginia ...................................................................................................... 47 

Hon. Dina Titus, a Representative in Congress from the State of Nevada . 48 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 49 

Hon. Ron Barber, a Representative in Congress from the State of Arizona ................................................................................................................ 50 
Page

IV 

Hearing held in Washington, DC, March 6, 2013—Continued 

Hon. Ron Barber, a Representative in Congress from the State of Arizona—Continued 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 52 

Hon. Matt Salmon, a Representative in Congress from the State of Arizona ................................................................................................................ 54 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 56 

Hon. Andy Barr, a Representative in Congress from the State of Kentucky .............................................................................................................. 58 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 60 

Hon. Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of New Mexico ..................................................................................... 61 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 63 

Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of Washington ............................................................................................................. 64 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 66 

Hon. Bill Foster, a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois .. 68 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 69 

Additional statements submitted for the record: 

Hon. Julia Brownley, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California ............................................................................................ 70 

Hon. Cheri Bustos, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Illinois ................................................................................................. 71 

Hon. Judy Chu, Chair, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus 

(CAPAC) ................................................................................................. 72 

Hon. Danny K. Davis, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Illinois ................................................................................................. 76 

Hon. Suzan K. DelBene, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Washington ........................................................................................ 78 

Hon. Marcia L. Fudge, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Ohio .................................................................................................... 79 

Hon. Tulsi Gabbard, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Hawaii ................................................................................................ 82 

Hon. William R. Keating, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Massachusetts .......................................................................... 82 

Letter, dated Mar. 11, 2013, from Hon. Ben Ray Luja ́n, a Representative in Congress from the State of New Mexico .................................. 84 

Hon. Gloria Negrete McLeod, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of California ........................................................................... 86 

Hon. Markwayne Mullin, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Oklahoma ................................................................................. 87 

Hon. Robert Pittenger, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of North Carolina ................................................................................... 88 

Hon. Martha Roby, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Alabama ............................................................................................. 88 

Hon. Janice D. Schakowsky, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Illinois ....................................................................................... 89 

Hon. Carol Shea–Porter, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of New Hampshire ................................................................................. 90 
(1) 

MEMBERS’ DAY 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 6, 2013 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET, 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:04 a.m., in room 210, 

Cannon Office Building, Hon. Vicky Hartzler, presiding. 

Present: Representatives McClintock, Hartzler, Warlorski, Rice, 

Van Hollen, McDermott, Cicilline, Pocan, Lujan Grisham, and Blumenauer. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. This hearing will come to order. Good morning 

and welcome to the Budget Committee Members Day hearing. 

Before we begin, as it looks like we are scheduled to have votes 

early this afternoon, so I ask unanimous consent that consistent 

with clause 4 of House rule 16, the chairman is authorized to declare a recess at any time. Without objection, the request is agreed 

to. 

This is a hearing we hold every year to hear from our colleagues 

about their views on the budget. This hearing is directed by section 

301(e)(1) of the Budget Act, and its intent is to bring about a forum 

in which members can relay their priorities for their district, for 

their State, and indeed for our country. 

We are pleased to have a diverse group of members from both 

sides of the aisle who are scheduled to make presentations, and we 

look forward to receiving their testimony. 

Before we begin, I would like to turn to my colleague, Mr. Blumenauer and see if you have any comments you would like to 

make. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Madam Chair. I look forward to 

hearing from our colleagues. It is interesting every year to have an 

opportunity for people to share with us their priorities. We all 

agree that it is vital to reduce the deficit over the next decade, 

using a steady and predictable approach. I am hopeful that we will 

be able to use this opportunity to look at what is in the best interests not only for our constituents, but for the country as a whole 

now and in the future. 

Crafting a budget resolution is an exercise in demonstrating priorities. Mr. Van Hollen, were he here—he is, unfortunately, unable 

to be at two places at once. I know he is coming back from the Capitol and the leadership meeting—will be talking about focusing on 

job creation, continuing an economic recovery that we have all 

worked hard on the last few years. 

I think it is clear that the sequester is exactly the wrong thing 

for the country to do right now. According to the CBO, it is going 
2 

to cost in the neighborhood of three-quarters of a million jobs in 

this year alone and reduce the economic growth that we could otherwise expect by about a third. 

Mr. Van Hollen will be putting forth a budget alternative that 

my Democratic colleagues will be working with him to develop to 

replace the sequester with an equal amount of deficit reduction but 

is obtained in a more balanced way. And that will be a theme you 

will hear throughout these deliberations, thinking about being able 

to do it in a balanced and thoughtful way. The overwhelming majority of the American public, according to public opinion surveys 

and I think common sense, approach this hoping that we will be 

able in a balanced, bipartisan way to make some progress. 

I look forward to participating here with you and perhaps circling back later in the day to share some of my own biases. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. It sounds very good. Thank you very much, Mr. 

Blumenauer. 

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 will be permitted 

to question the witness following their statements, but out of consideration of our colleagues’ time and to expedite today’s proceedings, I ask that you please keep your comments brief. 

I now will call our first witness, Mr. Dennis Ross from Florida. 

You are recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DENNIS ROSS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA 

Mr. ROSS. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you members of the Budget Committee for your time and opportunity today 

to engage in this dialogue regarding the budget. 

I have introduced H.R. 239, the Zero-Based Budgeting Ensures 

Responsible Oversight, or ZERO, Act which requires agencies and 

departments to draft their budgets starting at a zero baseline instead of current funding levels as they do today. To do that, my bill 

requires every department under the President’s budget to Congress to provide four things. 

First, they must provide a description of each activity that requires an appropriation from Congress. 

Second, they must cite to Congress the legal basis under which 

they may lawfully receive an appropriation. 

Third, they must offer three alternative funding levels. 

And fourth and finally, they must provide a summary of the cost 

effectiveness to the taxpayer for each activity that requires an appropriation from Congress. 

This is to ensure that every expenditure is justified. Removing 

the baseline from agency and department budgets and implementing zero-based budgeting instead would get rid of the automatic spending increases that encourage increased spending. 

For these reasons, I would like to speak to you about the budget 

process reform and the need to pass the ZERO Act into law. 

As the Citizens Against Government Waste explained in their 

support of my bill, quote, baseline budgeting is one of the most sinister ways that politicians claim to cut spending when they are actually increasing spending. For example, if an agency’s budget is 
3 

projected to grow by $100 million but only grows by $75 million, 

according to baseline budgeting, that agency sustained a $25 million cut. That is equivalent to someone who expects to gain 100 

pounds but only gains 75 pounds and then says, well, I have lost 

25 pounds. The Federal Government is the only place where this 

absurd logic is employed. 

Zero-based budgeting has been widely successful with State and 

local governments. Since 2008, Idaho has taken zero-budgeting one 

step forward and used it as a tool to prioritize programs based on 

statutory requirements. Under the direction of Governor Butch 

Otter, the Idaho Budget Bureau is identifying programs and activities outside of the central mission of the agency, eliminating or 

moving programs to other agencies that are not in line with the 

central mission of the agency and has been able to better prioritize 

agency resources and functions accordingly. Idaho has used zerobased budgeting for strategic planning and prioritizing, which has 

put agencies in a better position to make recommendations when 

faced with tough budget cuts. 

We just took a $42 billion across-the-board cut without any attempt to prioritize agency and department missions. Sequestration 

was bad policy and we could have avoided it had we addressed the 

cuts ahead of time. If Congress had used the zero-based budgeting 

application, as required under H.R. 239, and given agencies and 

the departments a chance to review their activities and streamline 

duplicative programs, we would not be in this battle of who to 

blame over sequestration and our finances would be better for it. 

Furthermore, zero-based budgeting also has support across the 

aisles. Initially introduced in the 1970’s, the administration then 

implemented a zero-based budgeting to control expenditures within 

the agencies’ budgets. In 1976 under a Democrat-controlled Congress, appropriating committees selected independent agencies to 

test the applicability of zero-based budgeting, and the agency requests were available for review by the authorizing committees. 

Agencies were required to consider alternative levels of funding for 

discretionary programs, sometimes three to four alternatives, and 

the practice lasted until 1994. My bill requires very similar details. 

With America facing $16 trillion in debt and credit rating agencies demanding that we put ourselves on a path to pay off debt to 

remain creditworthy, it is time to rethink how Congress writes our 

budgets. If American families and businesses know how to assess 

their spending and programs every year, so should Congress. It is 

imperative that we do away with the baseline budgeting tricks and 

gimmicks and become better stewards of the taxpayer money. 

I urge the committee to pass H.R. 239, the ZERO Act, to smoke 

out waste in the Federal agencies and departments and put taxpayers back in check. 

I thank you for this opportunity and yield back the balance of my 

time. 

[The prepared statement of Dennis Ross follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DENNIS A. ROSS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Thank you members of the Budget Committee for your time and for this opportunity to engage in the dialogue regarding the budget. 
4 

I have introduced H.R. 239, the Zero-based-budgeting Ensures Responsible Oversight, or ZERO Act, which requires agencies and departments to draft their budgets 

starting at a zero baseline, instead of current funding levels as they do today. To 

do that, my bill requires every department under the President’s Budget to Congress to provide four things: 

1. Provide a description of each activity that requires an appropriation from Congress; 

2. Cite to Congress the legal basis under which they may lawfully receive an appropriation; 

3. Offer three alternative funding levels; 

4. Provide a summary of the cost effectiveness to the taxpayer for each activity 

that requires an appropriation from Congress. 

This is to ensure that every expenditure is justified. Removing the baseline from 

agency and department budgets and implementing zero-based budgeting instead 

would get rid of the automatic spending increases that encourage increased spending. For these reasons, I would like to speak to you about budget process reform 

and the need to pass the ZERO Act into law. 

As the Citizens Against Government Waste explained in their support of my bill, 

HR 239: 

‘‘Baseline budgeting is one of the most sinister ways that politicians claim to cut 

spending when they are actually increasing spending. For example, if an agency’s 

budget is projected to grow by $100 million, but only grows by $75 million, according 

to baseline budgeting, that agency sustained a $25 million cut. That is equivalent 

to someone who expects to gain 100 pounds [but] only gaining 75 pounds [and takes] 

credit for losing 25 pounds. The federal government is the only place where this absurd logic is employed.’’ 

Zero-based budgeting has been widely successful with state and local governments. 

Since 2008, Idaho has taken zero-based budgeting one step forward and used it 

as a tool to prioritize programs based on statutory requirements. Under the direction of Governor Butch Otter, the Idaho Budget Bureau is identifying programs and 

activities outside of the central mission of the agency, eliminating or moving programs to other agencies that are not in line with the central mission of the agency, 

and has been able to better prioritize agency resources and functions accordingly. 

Idaho has used zero-based budgeting for strategic planning and prioritizing, which 

has put agencies in a better position to make recommendations when faced with 

tough budget cuts. 

We just took a $42 billion across-the-board cut without any attempt to prioritize 

agency and department missions and functions. Sequestration was bad policy and 

could have been avoided if we had addressed cuts ahead of time. If Congress had 

used the zero-based budgeting as required under H.R. 239 and given agencies and 

departments a chance to review their activities and streamline duplicative programs, we would not be in this battle of who to blame over sequestration. And our 

finances would be better for it. 

Furthermore, zero-based budgeting also has support across the aisles. 

Initially introduced the late 1970s, the Administration then implemented zerobased budgeting to control expenditures within agencies’ budgets. In 1976, under a 

Democratic Congress, appropriating committees asked selected independent agencies to test the applicability of zero-based budgeting, and the agency requests were 

available for review by the authorizing committees. Agencies were required to consider alternate levels of funding for discretionary programs, sometimes three to four 

different alternatives, and the practice lasted until 1994. H.R. 239 requires very 

similar details. 

With America facing $16 trillion in debt, and credit rating agencies demanding 

that we put ourselves on a path to pay off that debt to remain credit-worthy, it is 

time to re-think how Congress writes our budgets. If American families and business know how to assess their spending and programs every year, so should Congress. It is imperative that we do away with the baseline budgeting tricks and gimmicks and become better stewards of the taxpayer’s money. I urge the committee 

to pass H.R. 239, the ZERO Act, to smoke out waste in the federal agencies and 

departments and put taxpayer spending in check. 

Thank you and I yield back the balance of my time. 
5 

ADDENDUM

COUNCIL FOR CITIZENS AGAINST GOVERNMENT WASTE, 

1301 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W. SUITE 1075, 

Washington, DC, February 8, 2013. 

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, Washington, DC 20515. 

DEAR REPRESENTATIVE: Rep. Dennis Ross (R-Fla.) has introduced H.R. 239, the 

Zero-based budgeting Ensures Responsibility (ZERO) Act, which would require that 

all departments and agencies in the federal government switch from baseline budgeting to zero-based budgeting. On behalf of the more than one million members and 

supporters of the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW), I urge 

you to support this legislation. 

Baseline budgeting is one of the most sinister ways that politicians claim to cut 

spending when they are actually increasing spending. The Congressional Budget Office defines the baseline as a benchmark for measuring the budgetary effects of proposed changes in federal revenue or spending, with the assumption that current 

budgetary policies or current services are continued without change. Baseline budgeting, therefore, builds automatic future spending increases into Congress’s budgetary forecasts and tilts the budget process in favor of increased spending and taxes. 

For example, if an agency’s budget is projected to grow by $100 million, but only 

grows by $75 million, according to baseline budgeting, that agency sustained a $25 

million cut. That is equivalent to someone who expects to gain 100 pounds only 

gaining 75 pounds taking credit for losing 25 pounds. The federal government is the 

only place where this absurd logic is employed. 

H.R. 239 would require that, effective January 1, 2015, all departments and agencies of the government utilize zero-based budgeting. The ZERO Act additionally requires that each department and agency provide a description of each activity that 

requires an appropriation from Congress; cite to Congress the legal basis under 

which they may lawfully receive an appropriation; offer three alternative funding 

levels; and provide a summary of the cost effectiveness and efficiency to the taxpayer for each activity that requires an appropriation from Congress. 

Eliminating the inflated budget baseline will force Congress to justify and account 

for increased spending instead of hiding behind automatic increases. I urge you to 

support the ZERO Act. All votes on 

H.R. 239 will be among those considered in CCAGW’s 2013 Congressional Ratings. 

Sincerely, 

THOMAS A. SCHATZ, President, 

Council for Citizens Against Government Waste. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you, Mr. Ross. 

Do we have any questions for the witness? 

All right. Thank you very much. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, as we are waiting for our next 

witness, I might just share some observations that I was going to 

offer later in the hearing, if that is all right. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF HON. EARL BLUMENAUER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. This is one of the opportunities for us to enter 

into the record our own thoughts and observations before we move 

forward into the more formalized efforts before the committee. 

I have a personal desire that—maybe it is a hope that at some 

point there is a chance to go back and forth on the Budget Committee not so much in terms of the way that we have done it in 

the past, but opportunities to really as a committee, at least informally, zero in on areas where there might actually be some agreement. 

I am personally keenly interested in our being able to, in this 

committee, deal with some of the aspects of the defense budget. 

Here is an area where I think all of us decry the effects of sequestration, sort of the meat axe approach. We all agree that we want 
6 

the United States to have unparalleled military might and the ability to protect and defend this country, but I think most of us would 

agree that we are spending too much for the wrong people to do 

the wrong things. 

We have a nuclear arsenal that is going to cost about three-quarters of a trillion dollars this next 10 years, and much of it is directed towards the threats of the Cold War and the former Soviet 

Union, long after that ceased to exist. We have probably conservatively 10 times the nuclear weapons that are necessary to deter 

anybody on the planet and render their country uninhabitable. We 

are maintaining not one, not two, but three redundant delivery systems, nuclear submarines, bombers, and land-base missiles, again 

far more than we need and candidly far more than we can afford. 

We have not used these devices in 68 years. All this redundancy 

piles up costs and does not help us for the threats that we face 

today, real threats that have resulted in having two wars. We are 

dealing with terrorism. We need to, I think, adjust that effort. 

I hope that we stop defending east Germany from western Russia. 

I hope at some point we talk about how we come to grips with 

the reality of an all-volunteer military and an all-volunteer military 

that is as large as it is now. The costs in the long run are as egregious as anything that we are facing with other entitlements, and 

we really have not talked about how we are going to cope with 

that, either right-sizing it or providing more resources. 

In the area of health care—and our friend, the chairman, Mr. 

Ryan, has charts that talk about how the path we are on is 

unsustainable. But the question is how do we change that path. 

And there are many parts of the country where people have already not only implemented health care reform, they are accelerating it. And rather than having an ongoing debate to minimize 

to try and get in the way of health care reform, we should be accelerating it. 

I represent a State, Oregon, where we have made a commitment 

to the Federal Government to reduce our Medicare spending 2 percent a year over the next 5 years, and the Federal Government 

takes it seriously enough to have bet $1.9 billion that we can do 

it. If we did this nationally—and it is being done in private clinics 

and in some areas of the country—that would save more than the 

entire sum we are talking about in sequestration over the next 10 

years. 

It has been a pleasure to work with Chairman Ryan over the 

years on agricultural reform. I hope that we take the fact that we 

have not yet reauthorized the bill and that the Budget Committee 

might help shape some of this. I fully expect the chairman will do 

something dealing with crop insurance, but seeing if there are 

ways that we can accelerate that with direct payments with crop 

insurance and sending messages that we want. 

And last but not least, I have talked with the chairman. I have 

talked to the ranking member about this committee doing something publicly about the infrastructure deficit that we face where 

America is falling apart. The President mentioned 50,000 structurally unsound bridges. These are things that I hope we are able 
7 

to give attention to that will make a big difference in this budget 

and beyond. 

I appreciate the opportunity to be with you, share a few of my 

biases. I look forward to working with the chair and the ranking 

member. 

And I yield back. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you, Mr. Blumenauer. 

Are there any questions for our witness? 

All right. Thank you very much for sitting in here and helping 

with the hearing today. 

Hello, Mr. Van Hollen. 

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. How are you? 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Very good. Glad you could make it. do you have 

any comments that you would like to make? 

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Just it is great to join with you to hear testimony from our colleagues on ideas they have with respect to the 

budget, how it affects our national priorities and local priorities. So 

thank you. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Sure, very good. 

Our next witness is Representative Gene Green from Texas. So 

please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF HON. GENE GREEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you and good morning. I appreciate the Budget Committee allowing us to have this opportunity again. 

I am pleased to be here today to present my views on the fiscal 

year 2013 budget resolution. This committee is faced with many 

difficult choices as it crafts this year’s congressional budget. Democrats and Republicans must work together to produce a budget that 

simultaneously helps meet our economic, health care, energy, and 

social challenges. 

My first concern is energy provisions. Madam Chairman, as you 

craft the House Budget Committee and any budget reconciliation 

directives, I want to state my strong opposition to any efforts to 

single out the oil and natural gas industry for tax increases. By repealing the existing tax incentives, we will destroy thousands of 

small businesses across our country. The average independent production company has only 12 employees, the definition of a true 

small business. The oil and natural gas industry is also one of the 

largest employers in our country, supporting more than 9.2 million 

jobs. 

Madam Chairman and Ranking Member, it is important to highlight that the U.S. oil and natural gas industry does not receive tax 

subsidies. In fact, there is not a single targeted tax credit in the 

Internal Revenue Code available to the oil and natural gas industry. Yet, you would never know that given how our administration 

and several of our colleagues characterize the issue. 

Instead, the U.S. oil and natural gas industry is allowed to take 

deductions to cover the cost of doing business which has been afforded to all businesses since the beginning of our country’s income 

tax system. In return, the industry delivers $86 million a day to 

the Federal Government in revenue. Any change to these tax incentives should be addressed in a comprehensive tax reform. 
8 

That said, the United States needs to continue researching and 

developing alternative energy sources which will lead us away from 

our dependence on fossil fuels. I support bills that will increase the 

funding to research and development projects dealing with new and 

cleaner energy sources, as well as provide financial incentives to 

produce energy from wind, solar, biomass, geothermal and other 

sources. 

And I would like to ask that a copy of a report that was done 

by the Texas Alliance talking about not only oil and gas taxes, but 

also fracking and a number of issues be placed in the record. 

Another priority in our district is the Port of Houston. Our port 

is the largest foreign tonnage port and the largest petrochemical 

port in the country. In fact, it moves the second largest amount of 

cargo in the country. The commerce that occurs in our port is critical to our Nation’s energy and chemical sectors and to our ability 

to trade and move goods throughout our country. 

The number one issue that faces support today and will face support in the future is maintenance dredging by the Army Corps of 

Engineers. In 1998, the Federal Government invested $700 million 

in deepening and widening the Houston ship channel, an investment we have benefitted from tremendously. However, as the years 

have passed, the silt has settled and reduced the draft in the channel significantly. Today only .4 percent of the channel is dredged 

to its proper depth across the entire width of the channel. That is 

astounding and our Nation’s investment is rapidly deteriorating. 

We have been fortunate to get funding that we received over the 

past several years—last year an extra $700,000 for maintenance 

dredging—for a total of just over $24 million was included, and 

$100,000 of new funding was provided towards studying the widening and deepening of the Houston ship channel to the turning 

basin. An increase of $800,000 does not sound like a lot and it is 

not, when the dredging needs alone are near $60 million per year. 

But it is good to get an increase on any program Government-wide 

when we are right for cuts. 

I am asking you today that when this committee does write its 

budget, that you include as much as possible for harbor maintenance. As we confront the dual challenges of adapting policies that 

create jobs and reduce the debt, funding for dredging projects is an 

item that, while costly, will have more than a positive impact on 

our economy than a negative impact on our deficit. 

The Texas Transportation Institute performed a study and determined that direct economic impact of the loss of a 1-foot draft costs 

$373 million. The majority of this impact is lost business opportunities due to light loading of non-containerized vessels. If the 

dredging crisis at the port continues to worsen, this cost will quickly accelerate. 

Another issue important in our area in southeast Texas is NASA. 

It is difficult to overstate the importance of a robust NASA program if the United States is to continue to be the world leader in 

space exploration. I am frustrated by the administrations’ position 

over the last few years—and this has been different administrations—to move away from NASA-led human space flight towards 

commercial contracts. The multi-purpose crew vehicle program and 

the space launch system must be funded at current authorized lev-
9 

els if the multi-purpose crew vehicle is to stay on track for 2014 

exploration flight test and the space launch system on track for the 

integrated multiple purpose crew vessel flight demonstration in 

2017. 

Johnson Space Center is just outside our district and has a long 

history of being a premier NASA installation. I am proud of that 

legacy but concerned that NASA will disregard the law passed by 

Congress and move away from the programs that ensure NASA’s 

future as the preeminent human space flight agency in the world. 

Maintaining a commitment to these vehicles means our country 

will continue to be a pioneer in science, technology, and space 

flight. These crucial programs must be funded at the levels authorized by Congress so that NASA has the resources necessary to 

meet its deadlines. 

I implore my colleagues and the administration to continue to invest in our future by supporting NASA-led human space flight. 

Madam Chairman, thank you for the opportunity, and I will be 

glad to yield back my time or answer questions. 

[The prepared statement of Gene Green follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. GENE GREEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

CHAIRMAN RYAN, RANKING MEMBER VAN HOLLEN AND MEMBERS OF THE COM- MITTEE: I am pleased to be here today to provide my views on the Fiscal Year 2013 

Budget Resolution. 

This committee is faced with many difficult choices as it crafts this year’s congressional budget. 

Democrats and Republicans must work together to produce a budget that simultaneously helps meet our economic, health care, energy, and social challenges. 

ENERGY PROVISIONS

Mr. Chairman, as you craft the House budget resolution and any budget reconciliation directives, I want to state my strong opposition to any efforts to single out 

the oil and natural gas industry for tax increases. 

By repealing the existing tax incentives, we would destroy thousands of small 

businesses across our country. The average independent production company has 

only 12 employees—the definition of a true small business. 

The oil and natural gas industry is also one of the largest employers in our country, supporting more than 9.2 million jobs. 

Mr. Chairman, it is important to highlight that the U.S. oil and natural gas industry does not receive tax subsidies. In fact, there is not a single targeted tax credit in the Internal Revenue Code available to the oil and natural gas industry. 

Yet, you would never know that given how the Administration and several of our 

colleagues characterize the issue. 

Instead, the U.S. oil and natural gas industry is allowed to take deductions to recover the costs of doing business, which has been afforded to all businesses since 

the beginning of our country’s income tax system. In return, this industry delivers $86 million a day to the federal government in 

revenue. Any changes to these tax incentives should be addressed in the context of 

comprehensive tax reform. 

That said, the United States needs to continue researching and developing alternative energy sources which will lead us away from our dependence on fossil fuels. 

I support bills that would increase funding to research and development projects 

dealing with new and cleaner energy sources as well as provide financial incentives 

to produce energy from wind, solar, biomass, geothermal, and other sources. 

PORT OF HOUSTON

Another priority in our district is the Port of Houston. Our Port is the largest foreign tonnage port and the largest petrochemical port in the country. In fact, it 

moves the second largest amount of cargo in the country. 

The commerce that occurs at our port is critical to our nation’s energy and chemical sectors and to our ability to trade and move goods throughout our country. 
10 

The number one issue that faces the Port today and will face the Port in the future is maintenance dredging by the Army Corps of Engineers. In 1998, the Federal Government invested $700 million in deepening and widening the Houston Ship Channel. An investment we have benefitted from tremendously. 

However, as the years have passed silt has settled and reduced the draft in the 

channel significantly. Today, only .4% of the channel is dredged to its proper depth 

across the entire width of the channel. That is astounding. Our nation’s investment 

is rapidly deteriorating. 

We have been fortunate to get the funding we have received over the past several 

years. Last year, an extra $700,000 for maintenance dredging for a total of just over $24 million was included and $100,000 of new funding was provided toward study on 

the widening and deepening of the Houston Ship Channel to the Turning Basin. An increase of $800,000 does not sound like a lot, and it’s not, when our dredging needs alone are near $60 million. But, it is good to get an increase at all as every 

program, government-wide, is eyed for cuts. 

I am asking you today that when this committee does write its budget that you 

include as much as possible for harbor maintenance. 

As we confront the dual challenges of adopting policies that create jobs and reduce 

the debt, funding for dredging projects is an item that, while costly, will have more 

of a positive impact on our economy than a negative impact on our deficit. 

The Texas Transportation Institute performed a study and determined that a di- rect economic impact of the loss of 1 foot of draft is $373 million. 

The majority of this impact is lost business opportunities due to light loading of 

non-containerized vessels. If the dredging crisis at the port continues to worsen, this 

cost will quickly accelerate. 

NASA

It is difficult to overstate the importance of a robust NASA program if the United 

States is to continue to be the world leader in space exploration. 

I am frustrated by the Administration’s decision over the last few years to move 

away from NASA-led human space flight and towards commercial contracts. 

The Multi Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) program and the Space Launch System 

(SLS) must be funded at current authorized levels if the MPCV is to stay on track 

for the 2014 Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1) and the SLS on track for the integrated MPCV-SLS flight demonstration, Exploration Mission (EM)-1, in 2017. 

Johnson Space Center, just outside our district, has a long history of being a premiere NASA installation. 

I am proud of that legacy, but concerned that NASA will disregard the law passed 

by Congress and move away from programs that will ensure NASA’s future as the 

preeminent human space flight agency in the world. Maintaining the commitment 

to MPCV and SLS means our country will continue to be a pioneer in science, technology and space flight. 

These crucial programs must be funded at the levels authorized by Congress, so 

that NASA has the resources necessary to meet its deadlines. 

I implore my colleagues and the Obama Administration to continue to invest in 

our future by supporting NASA-led human space flight. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to be here and I yield back the 

balance of my time. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you, Mr. Green. 

Do we have any questions for our witness? 

Okay, thank you very much for being here. I appreciate it. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Now we will hear from the Honorable Steve 

Daines from Montana. 

STATEMENT OF HON. STEVE DAINES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA 

Mr. DAINES. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Thank you for inviting me here to testify. 

As I sit before the Budget Committee this morning, I am reminded of the reason I decided to run for Congress. It was not because I was having a mid-life crisis. Rather, I realized the severity 
11 

of our national financial crisis and the damaging impact it will 

have on my kids and my grandkids if responsible action is not 

taken today. 

Our Federal budget has been balanced just five times in the past 

50 years. This practice has resulted in our present $16 trillion-plus 

debt and it is simply unsustainable. 

I come to Washington with a little different resume. I spent the 

last 28 years in the private sector. I am not a lawyer. I am engineer, and I know firsthand how important it is not only to balance 

the budget which in the private sector—that is just breaking even, 

but actually creating surpluses. That is called a profit in the private sector. Balancing is not enough. You actually have to generate 

more income than you spend. Debt wears down any potential for 

growth and a business will ultimately collapse under its pressure. 

Further, I was motivated by competition and the competitive 

forces of the free market. When I was in the private sector, I woke 

up every morning knowing that if I did not give 100 percent effort 

and find ways to deliver value to our customers, to be innovators, 

to continuously find ways to do more with less, our competitors 

would beat us. The companies that I worked for were held accountable for results we produced. That is far different than what we 

have here in Washington with a ‘‘spend it or lose it’’ mentality as 

it comes to managing the finances, and it is unfortunately very 

prevalent across this institution. 

Balancing the budget, demanding accountability, demanding results, promoting efficiency. These principles are at the core of the 

success in the private sector that are also championed and adhered 

to by the people of Montana, which I represent. And I believe it is 

time to bring these common sense principles back to Washington. 

I would also like to highlight that I believe the Federal Government fundamentally has a spending problem. It is not a revenue 

problem. As you know, the Congressional Budget Office released a 

study last month that found that our Federal revenues will exceed 

the 40-year average next year and will remain above that average 

throughout the next decade. This will occur even if Congress does 

not raise a single dollar in new taxes. I strongly support reforming 

our tax code to make it simpler, to make it fairer, and to promote 

economic growth, but I believe this should be in a revenue neutral 

fashion. 

Federal spending, on the other hand, will remain above historic 

averages throughout the next decade. As all of you know, the 

growth in entitlement spending is the primary driver of this 

unsustainable spending and our escalating debt crisis. We must 

enact cost-saving reforms to these programs to preserve them for 

future generations without weakening the critical services provided 

to today’s beneficiaries. I have two grandmothers—each are 94 

years old—that depend on their Medicare and their Social Security. 

This is not about touching what Gramma gets. This is about ensuring that my four kids will have something when they retire. 

Lastly, as a Congress, I believe we too need to be motivated. I 

supported the no budget/no pay legislation passed in January and 

am pleased it appears to have motivated the Senate to take up a 

budget for the first time in 4 years. 
12 

I believe we need to take this principle even one step further— 

and this goes back to perhaps my private sector instincts—by tying 

it to a balanced budget and making the performance for pay standard permanent. 

I recently introduced the Balanced Budget Accountability Act 

which would terminate member pay after April 15th if our respective chamber does not pass a budget that maintains a glide path 

to balance by fiscal year 2023. That is the idea of balance the budget within 10 years. In the private sector, if you do not produce results, you do not get paid. I think it is about time that Congress 

should be no different than the way it operates out in the free markets, in the private sector. 

Thank you again for inviting me to testify. I look forward to 

working with the Budget Committee as we work to balance the 

budget and invigorate job creation and economic growth for this 

country. 

I yield back my time. 

[The prepared statement of Steve Daines follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. STEVE DAINES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA

Thank you Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen for inviting me to 

testify. As I sit before the Budget Committee this morning I am reminded of the 

reason I decided to run for Congress. It wasn’t because of a mid-life crisis; rather 

I realized the severity of our national financial crisis and the damaging impact it 

will have on my children and grandchildren, if responsible action is not taken today. 

Our federal budget has been balanced in only five of the past 50 years. This prac- tice has resulted in our present $16 trillion plus in debt and is simply 

unsustainable. I have 28 years of experience in the private sector, and I know firsthand how important it is not only to balance the budget—which in the private sector, we’d call breaking even—but in creating annual surpluses. Debt wears down 

any potential for growth, and a business will ultimately collapse under its pressure. 

Further, I was motivated by competition in the free market. I used to wake up 

every day knowing that if I didn’t give 100% effort and find ways to deliver value 

to our customers, to innovate, and to continuously find ways to do more with less, 

our competitors would beat us. The companies I worked for were held accountable 

for the results we produced. This is far different than the ‘‘spend it or lose it’’ mentality that unfortunately is prevalent throughout our federal government. 

Balancing the budget, demanding accountability and results, promoting efficiency—these principles are at the core of success in the private sector, and they 

are championed and adhered to by the people of Montana. It is time to bring these 

commonsense principles to Washington. 

I would also like to highlight that the federal government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. As you know, the Congressional Budget Office released 

a study last month that found that federal revenues will exceed the 40 year average 

next year, and will remain above the average throughout the next decade. This will 

occur even if Congress does not raise a single dollar in new taxes. I strongly support 

reforming our tax code to make it simpler and fairer and to promote economic 

growth, but this should be done in a revenue-neutral fashion. 

Federal spending, on the other hand, will remain above the historic average 

throughout the decade. As all of you know, the growth in entitlement spending is 

the primary driver of this unsustainable spending and our escalating debt crisis. We 

must enact cost-saving reforms to these programs to preserve them for future generations, without weakening the critical services provided to today’s beneficiaries. 

Last, as a Congress, I believe we too need to be motivated. I supported the No 

Budget, No Pay legislation passed in January and am pleased that it appears to 

have motivated the Senate to take up a budget for the first time in four years. I 

believe we need to take this principle one step further by tying it to a balanced 

budget and making the performance pay standard permanent. I recently introduced 

the Balanced Budget Accountability Act, which would terminate member pay after 

April 15 if our respective chamber does not pass a budget that maintains a glide 

path to balance by fiscal year 2023. In the private sector, if you don’t produce results, you don’t get paid. Congress should be no different. 
13 

Thank you again for inviting me to testify. I look forward to working with the 

Budget Committee as we work to balance the budget and invigorate job creation and 

economic growth in our country. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. You actually timed your comments so that it 

came out exactly at 0.00. I have never seen that before. So for a 

new Member of Congress, you are well suited to represent your district. So thank you for your comments today. I appreciate it. 

Mr. DAINES. Okay. Thanks, Madam Chairman. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Now we will take a brief recess as we wait for 

additional members to testify. This hearing is now in recess, subject to the call of the chair. 

[Recess.] 

Mrs. HARTZLER. I call this hearing back into session. 

We are enjoying hearing from various members on their priorities for our budget and their thoughts about our Nation’s financial 

condition. So we are glad that you are here today to share your 

thoughts. I believe on our list, the order—we had Mr. Ami Bera 

first. So if you would like to proceed, please go ahead. 

STATEMENT OF HON. AMI BERA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Mr. BERA. Absolutely. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Thank 

you, Ranking Member. Members of the committee, thank you for 

the opportunity to testify on behalf of the residents California’s 7th 

Congressional District. 

As you begin discussions towards fiscal year 2014’s budget resolution, I want to call your attention to two projects of critical importance to Sacramento County: the Sacramento-American River 

levee system and the Folsom Dam. 

Sacramento, which sits where the Sacramento and American Rivers converge near the Bay Delta, has the second highest flood risk 

in the United States. A flood in the Sacramento region would be 

devastating to 1.4 million people who live in our metropolitan area. 

The flood risk could result in interstate closures of I-5 and I-80 

which are needed as evacuation routes, a shutdown of Sacramento 

International Airport, destruction of homes, hospitals, and most 

importantly, a tragic loss of life. Flooding could result in billions of 

dollars in potential damage and it could take weeks to months to 

pump the water out of the area. 

To date, the Army Corps has identified 10 projects of national 

economic importance through signed chief reports. The Natomas 

levees are one of these critical projects. The levees date from the 

1870’s when farmers began building nearly 1,100 miles of protection around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to control flood 

waters and create farmland. Today these levees are in desperate 

need of critical repair to help prevent a catastrophic disaster. 

Robert Bea, professor of engineering at the University of California-Berkeley, warns in terms of damage, deaths, and long-term 

costs, a rupture of the delta levees would be far more destructive 

than what happened in Hurricane Katrina. This is a ticking bomb. 

We all witnessed the devastation caused by Superstorm Sandy this 

past November. However, unlike a slow-moving hurricane, a breach 

of the levees could occur with little or no warning. 
14 

In 2006, former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a 

state of emergency for California levees. He signed an executive 

order directing agencies to identify, evaluate, and repair critical 

systems. Sacramento is still waiting for these repairs. 

For example, the Natomas Basin is surrounded by 42 miles of 

levees. 18 miles of those levees have been repaired and updated by 

the Sacramento Flood Control Agency. However, the final 24 miles 

are still slated to be completed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Army Corps is responsible for upgrading and maintaining a vast amount of the delta levees. We need to ensure the proper 

amount of funding is granted to these and other projects. 

Again, the Natomas levees are just 1 of 10 Army Corps of Engineer chief report projects based in locations ranging from Iowa to 

Florida, Louisiana to California. These 10 projects are shovel-ready 

and will provide on-the-ground jobs immediately once funded. 

As you begin assembling the 2014 budget, I urge you—I urge this 

committee—to make sure the U.S. Army Corps chief report projects 

are given sufficient funding to maintain and protect our communities. Thank you. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you, gentleman. That was very interesting. 

Do we have any questions for our witness? 

I will have to say this was new information to me being from 

Missouri. So I appreciate you coming today making us aware of 

this situation. 

Mr. BERA. Thank you. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you very much. 

Now I will have Representative DesJarlais. 

STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT DESJARLAIS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Chairman Hartzler, Chairman Ryan, and Ranking Member Van Hollen, and distinguished members of the Budget 

Committee, thank you for having me here today to discuss the fiscal year 2014 budget. This is an issue of top concern to my constituents in Tennessee’s 4th Congressional District. 

While my district, like many others across the country, has certainly experienced its fair share of economic hardship, we are fortunate that some of the most innovative and talented small business 

owners this country has to offer have chosen to call the 4th District 

their home. These individuals and the businesses they own employ 

tens of thousands of hard-working Tennesseans. In fact, last Congress, my colleagues on the House Oversight Committee and I held 

a hearing with some of these job creators in order to identify what 

they are doing right now and how their successes can be replicated 

at a national level. But while the businesses in my district are 

doing their part and growing and creating jobs, the Federal Government seems more interested in putting up roadblocks to 

achievement than acting as a partner in ensuring their success. 

Business owners from across my district certainly have no shortage of frustrations regarding their Government in Washington. 

Naturally these complaints will vary depending on the type of business. Some are very niche issues and others just general com-
15 

plaints that I am sure that each of us have heard from the folks 

back home. 

But there is one concern that I hear from nearly every single 

business owner in my district regardless of their industry, size of 

their business, or even political affiliation. That is our country’s 

unsustainable debt. 

Business owners in my district know that today’s deficit spending 

will have to be paid for with tomorrow’s tax increases. They know 

our reckless spending growth puts America at risk of staggering 

tax increases or worse, even economic collapse. This economic uncertainty is causing business owners, both large and small, in my 

district to hold back on hiring and capital investment. If you think 

about it, any successful business faces important decisions on longterm plans and outlooks, and while they can control the direction 

of their business, they cannot control the fiscal uncertainty of the 

Federal Government. This uncertainty diminishes hiring and investment which then curtails economic expansion. Further, governing through a seamlessly endless stream of CR’s only exacerbates the problem. What businesses truly want is a long-term, comprehensive plan to control the deficit spending. 

Since arriving to Congress I have twice supported Chairman 

Ryan’s budgetary proposal, commonly referred to as the Path to 

Prosperity. I along with the vast majority of my constituents applaud the chairman for his strong leadership on this issue. Chairman Ryan put forth the common sense proposal that would put an 

end to the deficits so that we can start paying down our $16 trillion-plus deficit and debt. One of the ways that he does this is 

through preserving and protecting Medicare so that it remains solvent for both current seniors and future generations. Not only was 

this plan heralded by business owners in my district as a prudent 

first step, our seniors appreciated that Mr. Ryan’s plan kept the 

promises that were made to them. 

Unfortunately, while the Path to Prosperity passed the House 

two times, the Senate refused to work with us. Rather, they let politics trump policy. As a result, we are still without a plan to control 

long-term spending. 

Businesses in my district cannot understand why Washington 

continues to promise them everything but the one thing that they 

have asked for: certainty. 

I hope the House will work its will and pass a budget that will 

achieve balance and provide the certainty businesses in my district 

need. I hope that we will find a more receptive audience in the 

Senate and White House during the 113th Congress than we did 

in the 112th. In writing this budget, I hope that the chairman will 

pursue the same approach that prioritizes our spending, protects 

our seniors, and avoids job-crushing taxes on business owners. 

I simply fail to understand why the idea of putting a budget in 

place is viewed by some as extreme. Rather, I would argue that it 

is extreme to operate without a budget. We have seen what it has 

gotten us: 4 years of trillion-dollar deficits. If we continue to ignore 

the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and its subsequent adaptations, we should simply repeal the act and stop pretending that 

this Congress has any desire to operate the way our constituents 

expect. 
16 

Mr. Chairman, members of this committee, enough is enough, 

and that is the message that the people of Tennessee’s 4th Congressional District are asking me to transmit to this committee. 

I thank you for letting me testify. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you very much, gentleman. Well stated. 

Any questions? 

All right. Thank you very much for being here today. 

I am glad to welcome Mr. Nugent from Florida, who is enjoying 

the snow outside I am sure. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD NUGENT, A REPRESENTATIVE 

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA 

Mr. NUGENT. Well, this is a treat I will tell you. It reminds me 

of where I grew up back in Chicago. But that is the reason I left 

that area too. [Laughter.] 

Mrs. HARTZLER. We are glad you are here today. 

Mr. NUGENT. Well, thank you, Chairman and Ranking Member, 

for the opportunity to share with you my budget priorities for Florida’s 11th Congressional District. 

I understand that all districts are different in their own way. 

Their demographics, industries, and cultures make them all 

unique. Florida’s 11th District is no exception. Its population consists of well over 200,000 senior citizens. These citizens rely heavily 

on Social Security and Medicare, benefits they have earned and 

that they have been promised. In previous testimony before this 

committee, I have pledged not to change Social Security and Medicare benefits for those at or near retirement. I am here today to 

reaffirm that commitment. 

I am also aware of the need to ensure solvency of these programs 

in the short, in medium, long term. If we do nothing—if we do 

nothing—Social Security and Medicare, as we know it, will not 

exist for future generations. In fact, the latest information we have 

from the board of trustees of Medicare indicates that if nothing is 

done to shore up the program, Medicare’s main trust fund will be 

exhausted with 11 years. When that happens, any senior who is relying on a program at that time can expect the program to change 

significantly. The changes will be abrupt. They will be serious and 

they will have a negative effect on the quality of life for just about 

every senior citizen living in America. 

To be clear, Chairman, it is the group that will include millions 

and millions of seniors who are already enrolled in Medicare. On 

the other hand, if we act now, we can keep the benefits just as they 

are for individuals who are already on the program, as well as for 

those nearing Medicare age. It is important to note that if we keep 

the program just as it is for those folks 55, it means the full 10 

years will go by before any savings will be realized, and when the 

bankruptcy date is 11 years out and the savings take 10 years to 

kick in, we do not have any time to waste. Next year, if nothing 

is done, it will have to go to 56, 57, and up, and the year after that, 

if nothing is done, we will only be able to keep the program the 

same for those 58 and up. And that is as the trend goes. And to 

me that is totally unacceptable. 

I have promised my constituents I would do everything in my 

power to save and preserve Medicare for as many of them as pos-
17 

sible. And the longer Congress delays, the harder it will be to keep 

that promise. 

I urge you to do everything you can to find a way that we can 

come together to save Medicare and to maintain its current form 

for as many people as we can without bankrupting the entire system. 

I do not envy the tasks that this committee has in putting forth 

a responsible proposal that gets back to a balanced budget. The decisions you make will be difficult. As our $16 trillion debt indicates, 

those decisions have never been more necessary than they are right 

now. 

In my own experiences budgeting as Hernando County sheriff, I 

had to make tough choices that were not always popular. It sometimes meant scaling back programs that I myself started. It was 

not easy. However, those actions had to be taken to ensure that my 

office could effectively serve its core principle. 

I understand the budget that you are all dealing with is a lot bigger in the numbers and the type that I worked as sheriff of 

Hernando County, Florida. And I know the implications are far 

larger and more widespread. But the underlying principle remains 

the same. We need to cut unsustainable spending, identify the core 

mission of the Federal Government, and prioritize our resources 

based upon that. In my opinion, keeping our promises to our seniors, making sure they are able to receive the benefits they have 

earned is a fundamental part of that mission. 

I want to thank you again for allowing me to be here today to 

give you my opinion as to where we should go forward. Thank you 

so very much. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you, gentleman. 

Do we have any questions? 

All right. Thank you very much for being here today and speaking out on behalf of your senior citizens in your district. 

Mr. NUGENT. Thank you. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. I welcome Honorable Ann Kirkpatrick from Arizona. Glad you are here today and look forward to hearing your 

comments. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ANN KIRKPATRICK, A REPRESENTATIVE 

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA 

Ms. KIRKPATRICK. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and 

thank you, Ranking Member Pocan. 

I really appreciate this opportunity to talk with you about the 

budget priorities for my district. I am here representing Arizona’s 

District 1. It is a large, rural district that runs from the Utah border in the north all the way down to communities below Tucson in 

southern Arizona. My district includes some of Arizona’s best 

known regions, peoples, and traditions: the Grand Canyon, Sedona 

Red Rocks, Native American tribes, the Copper Corridor, ranching, 

farming, and small towns. 

We embrace our western and tribal traditions, but we also welcome education and innovation. District 1 includes Northern Arizona University, which is exploring new approaches to clean energy 

and natural resources. District 1 touches southern Arizona where 
18 

the University of Arizona has emerged as a national leader in cancer research and biotech. 

A district as large and diverse as ours has many challenges, but 

also many opportunities. I mentioned that we have one of the great 

natural wonders of the world, the Grand Canyon. We also have 11 

other national parks. The Grand Canyon and these parks are not 

only environmental treasures, they are economic drivers. The 

Grand Canyon brings $700 million a year to the economy and employs 12,000 people. Overall, Arizona’s national parks attract 10.5 

million visitors a year. Thousands of jobs and small businesses are 

connected to the national park in my district. 

Today I ask this committee to properly fund the National Park 

Service because national parks create jobs and drive our local 

economies. 

Earlier I mentioned higher education in District 1, but I also 

want to raise some urgent concern about elementary schools in our 

district. District 1 is the largest recipient of Impact Aid in the Nation. As you know, Impact Aid compensates school districts for revenue they lost because of their proximity to federally owned, tax 

exempt property. Because District 1 has 12 national parks and 12 

Native American tribes, a majority of this land is governmentowned or controlled, and that means Impact Aid is often the primary source for funding and operating our schools. About 50 of our 

schools receive Impact Aid. They rely on it to pay the most basic 

resources and to fund a qualify education for all of our children. 

Our schools need Impact Aid to help them manage everything from 

transportation to staffing, from construction to classroom size. I am 

asking this committee to properly fund Impact Aid because every 

child deserves a quality education no matter where he or she lives. 

Another important priority for my District 1 is Indian Health 

Services. I mentioned that we have 12 Native American tribes. 

That means that 25 percent of the district is Native American. 

These are residents of some of the most remote and rural communities. Median income is about $7,000. These folks often struggle 

with access to the most basic medical care and resources, and their 

primary source of health care is Indian Health Services. 

The Indian Health Services has this important responsibility as 

the result of government-to-government agreements between the 

United States and the tribes. In District 1, IHS provides Native 

Americans with primary care, inpatient care, outpatient visits, and 

more. Nationally it provides health care to 1.9 million people belonging to 565 federally recognized tribes. IHS operates 254 health 

care centers, 16 hospitals, 74 health stations, and four school 

health centers nationally. I am asking this committee to properly 

fund IHS because the health care for Native Americans is not optional. It is essential. 

Thank you very much. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you, lady. 

Do we have any questions for our witness? 

All right. Thank you very much for being here today. 

Ms. KIRKPATRICK. Thank you. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Representative Peters from California, thank 

you for being here. 
19 

STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT PETERS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Mr. PETERS. Thank you, Madam Chair and Representative 

Pocan, for giving me this opportunity to address these impacts. 

Thank you. 

Congress failed San Diego and America last week by not working 

together to find a sensible alternative to the sequester. It is a piece 

of legislation that was intentionally crafted to be so nonsensical 

that Congress would be forced to do everything in its power to 

avoid it. 

I am here today because we have a choice. We can choose to continue down this path and let the American people down or we can 

decide to make a change. And I hope we will view March 27th, 

which is the end of the continuing resolution, as an opportunity to 

pass a budget and not another opportunity to avoid our responsibilities. 

We could turn the indiscriminate cuts in the sequester into targeted cuts that are part of a larger and balanced deficit reduction 

strategy, a strategy that does not cut critical infrastructure investments, stifle scientific innovation, or compromise our national defense. 

Let me give you a few examples from my district in San Diego, 

and I have spoken repeatedly about how my district is disproportionately affected by the sequester. 

The infrastructure investments we have made in the Port of San 

Diego have helped the port become San Diego’s window to national 

and international commerce, as well as the main driver of our economy. The port is the fourth largest port in California and one of 

17 commercial strategic ports in America. That means they are 

available to our military if they need to ship supplies out of them. 

It oversees two marine cargo terminals, two crew ship terminals, 

and hundreds of maritime leases to small businesses. Since 2001, 

the port has received almost $22 million in Federal funding for critical infrastructure projects. That has allowed the port to hire more 

San Diegans and boost San Diegans’ economy. 

The American Society of Engineers found that with an additional 

investment in our ports of $15.8 billion between now and 2020— 

$15.8 billion—our national system of ports provide $270 billion in 

U.S. exports and $697 billion in GDP. 

The main drivers of the San Diego economy, though, are the scientific research community and our military. In fiscal year 2012, 

San Diego firms received more than $130 million from the National 

Science Foundation and $850 million from the National Institutes 

of Health. It is these types of investments that have created hundreds of thousands of jobs, boosted our economy, and allowed San 

Diego to become the second largest life science cluster in the 

United States. The sequester could undo this progress. The immediate cuts to NIH from sequestration are 8.2 percent or equivalent 

to a cut of $2.5 billion. This could result in the loss of 33,000 research-related jobs in 2013 and a $4.5 billion decrease in economic 

activity. We all see innovation as one of our ways to move forward 

as a country, and the uncertainty caused by not having a budget 

reduces our national competitiveness. 
20 

The sequester threatens our border. It would cut customs and 

border protection work hours by 5,000 agents, increasing the time 

it takes to screen people and shipments. Those inefficiencies will 

drive up costs and also harm businesses because trade cannot move 

across the border, the legal trade that we need. 

And almost one in four jobs in San Diego are defense-related. 

Nearly 25 percent of defense contractors are small businesses. Already shipbuilding and maintenance contracts have been canceled, 

including 10 ship repairs in San Diego. Manufacturing companies 

that rely on defense funding could lose 223,000 jobs, 30,000 in our 

county, about. Neglecting ship repairs will not only hurt morale but 

lead to job loss and threaten our readiness. 

The Navy will be forced to put a freeze on hiring civilians. Many 

of them are veterans. With 11.5 percent of our communities of veterans unemployed and a shocking 25 percent of veterans between 

18 and 24 still struggling to find employment, any further reduction in job opportunities for our Nation’s heroes is unacceptable. 

We can do better. 

I know that protecting these areas of investment are ideas that 

both Democrats and Republicans can agree on. Now is the time to 

ignore those party pressures and do what is right for the American 

people. Our fiscal problems are real, and I know you are aware of 

that. You have heard that, all. We need to address those in the 

smartest strategic way. The budget process will allow us to put 

aside the indiscriminate nature of the sequester and to give us an 

opportunity to protect our infrastructure, science and technology 

communities, and the military that not only are driving forces of 

our economy but are obviously at the root of our security as a country. We can increase revenues by closing tax loopholes, stop spending in the tax code on things we cannot afford, and we can decrease 

our spending on wasteful programs and cutting redundant and outdated programs and waste, fraud, and abuse. 

Finding common ground does not mean we have failed. It does 

not mean we have abandoned our principles. Let’s show San Diego 

and America that Congress can do its job. Let’s pass the balanced 

budget without the sequester and address the revenue and spending challenges that we face. 

I thank you both for your work and for the opportunity to appear 

today. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you very much, gentleman. 

Do we have a question? Sure. 

Mr. POCAN. Great, thank you. Thank you, Representative Peters. 

I understand you talked about how the budgeting process hurts 

San Diego specifically, but you mentioned in your testimony that 

it hurts American competitiveness. Can you elaborate a little bit on 

that, please? 

Mr. PETERS. Sure. And I will just tell you the story I heard at 

the Salk Institute, which is one of the research institutes we are 

very proud of. They depend heavily on funding from the National 

Institutes of Health. And they explained to me that kids who are 

educated and want to go into science and do really high-end 

science—you know, you have to be almost 40 years old before you 

get one of those labs where you can start to compete for those 

grants. And then you are competing in the smartest classroom you 
21 

can imagine. Everyone is extremely smart. It is peer-reviewed. And 

typically only 25 percent of those grants have been funded. So you 

can imagine, even in good times, a 75 failure rate. 

Well, now we are funding about 7 percent of those grants. And 

what they told me is that young people who are deciding where to 

do their science are looking at Congress, looking at the American 

Government and really asking themselves are we committed to 

consistent and adequate funding for scientific research. 

And the problem is there are now opportunities to do those research projects in other countries that are making those investments. So we face the prospect that the next cure for a great disease or the next Qualcomm, which is in my district, or the next 

Google or Microsoft is invented by someone who is educated here, 

maybe someone who is educated at the University of California-San 

Diego, but who moved to China or Europe or Israel or Brazil where 

they are making the investments in science that they need to do 

the research. 

It is not just a matter of the funding level now, but it is also the 

uncertainty caused by really the way we have not addressed our 

budget issue. So I think if we could get through the budget process 

and provide some assurance that we are going to be consistent, we 

are going to fund science in a consistent and adequate way, we 

could continue to lead the world. But we should not take that for 

granted. We should do our job. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you very much. 

Mr. PETERS. Thank you so much. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Our next witness will be Randy Neugebauer 

from Texas. Thank you for being here, gentleman. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RANDY NEUGEBAUER, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Thank you, Madam Chairman, Ranking Member, for allowing me to be here this morning. 

I ask unanimous consent that my written statement would be 

made a part of the record. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. So ordered. 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Thank you. And I would just like to make 

some general reflections here because I know that your time is 

short. 

One of the things that I think is most concerning is the direction 

that we are headed, and that is the reason this budget process is 

going to be so important not only this year but in the years to 

come. The example that I use when I am back in the district—because when you start talking about trillions of dollars to the American people, they do not have the concept of what a trillion dollars 

is. I am not sure that I do. A lot of people use a lot of analogies 

that you could take a trillion dollars and go around the moon twice 

and back to earth if you were doing them end to end and all of 

those kind of things. 

But really, let’s talk about what is important, and what is important is the analogy that I use is we have got a little family making 

$27,000 a year. Unfortunately, this little family is going to be 

spending around $37,000 or $38,000 a year. So they are going to 

be spending $10,000 to $11,000 more a year than they are making. 
22 

And they just got their credit statement the other day, and they 

found out they owe $166,000 on their credit card. And when I ask 

the people in my district how many people in the room think that 

family has any kind of future, nobody raises their hand. And I ask 

the question where do you think that family is headed, and the 

most prevalent answer is they are headed to bankruptcy. 

And then when I tell them, well, that little family I just described to you is the United States of America, they are a little bit 

shocked. And what they understand is in their own budgets that 

a family living beyond their means is on an unsustainable path. 

We have to stop that and we have to stop it now because, quite 

honestly, we are reaching, I think, a tipping point in this country 

with $16.6 trillion in debt, whether we will ever be able to pay that 

back. Two things are the consequences of that. 

One, we are mortgaging the future of our children and our 

grandchildren. 

The other is that the growing share that Government is of the 

economy—every time the Government takes money out of the economy, that is capital that could be used to create jobs and opportunity in this country for today’s generation. And so these huge 

deficits not only are punishing the people today, but they are certainly going to be the consequences for future generations. 

One of the things that I think we have to understand is we have 

got to stop measuring our commitment to certain aspects of our 

Government by how much money we spend. We seem to make ourselves feel good when we say, well, we increased spending for that 

or we increased spending for this. And that is the way we say, well, 

we must be doing a good job because we are spending more money. 

But when you look—and this Budget Committee I know has done 

that—across the board in a number of areas of our Government, 

well, we have spent more money, but actually the results have 

been declining. We have to go back more to a results-oriented budgeting process and not a spending-oriented process. 

Now, I want to make this point, and we use these analogies but 

I think it helps put it in perspective of how important it is that we 

move to a balanced budget. And I know this committee has set a 

goal to do that in 10 years. I think 10 years is the maximum we 

can wait. We may need to do it shorter. But let me let you know 

where we are today to put this in perspective. 

Everybody understands a mortgage. Many of us have had a mortgage on our home, and the standard term on a mortgage today is 

you can still get a 30-year mortgage. Now, Mr. Bernanke has been 

buying down the yield for the Treasury. I call him a ‘‘deficit enabler’’ because he is keeping interest rates very low. He is making 

it very cheap to borrow money right now for the Government to run 

these deficits, but at some point in time, these rates will not be at 

this level. 

Well, let’s say the Budget Committee could wave your wand and 

balance the budget tomorrow. Now we have got this $16.6 trillion 

that we owe. Right? So how are we going to pay that back? Well, 

let’s do what some people could do and let’s take out a 30-year 

mortgage and pay this back over the next 30 years. And let’s go 

to a more traditional 30-year mortgage rate or a 30-year bond rate, 

which would be around 4.25. Then the question is what would the 
23 

payments be on $16.6 trillion over the next 30 years. You are not 

going to like this answer. It is about $960 billion a year, just shy 

of $1 trillion. And so even if we balance the budget, for example, 

in the next 10 years, our total debt will be over $20 trillion by the 

time we hit that. And so just alone today, if we do not do something very quickly here, it is going to take $1 trillion out of the 

economy every year just to pay the debt service on what we have 

done. 

Like this little family that is living beyond their means, we are 

going to have to get America back living within our means. 

And one of the last points I would make here is our budget process is unfortunately broken. This baseline budgeting is not working. Here is another analogy I use with my folks in the 19th Congressional District and they get that. And I talk to them about 

what is a revenue neutral transaction in Washington, D.C. And 

what I say to them is I would like for you to give me a $100 bill. 

In exchange for that, to make sure that this is a revenue neutral 

transaction, I am going to give you 10 $10 postdated checks that 

you can cash over the next 10 years. And that is a revenue neutral 

transaction and there should not be anybody that would be unwilling to do that. 

You know, I have not gotten one taker of that because they understand that, one, they do not know whether my check is going 

to be good next year or the year after that. And that is $100 we 

are spending today with the promise that you are going to get $10 

a year savings over the next 10 years. And that is how we got to 

$16.6 trillion. 

Here is a little postscript of how important this is. You know, 

when I came to Congress in 2003, America was a super power. Our 

capital markets were the envy of the world. But just recently we 

had some students from Abilene Christian University in Abilene, 

Texas, and they came. They were college students and they came 

here during the inauguration as a part of their government class. 

And so we were on the steps of the Capitol and we were taking pictures. I then gave those students an opportunity to see if any of 

them had a question. The most interesting question that I received 

that day was a young woman from China, and her question was, 

Congressman, will you all be able to pay us back? 

And it made me stop and reflect that the nation that was once 

considered the gold standard of the world—our currency still enjoys 

preference by many countries. But I am going to tell you that that 

is waning because what they realize is what people realize about 

that little family that is spending $11,000 more a year than they 

are making and owes $164,000 on their credit card, that that cannot remain for a long period of time. 

I thank you for your time and I hope that we will begin to look 

at some radical ways to change the direction of our country. And 

we are depending on the Budget Committee to help us with that 

process. 

With that, I yield back. 

Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you very much, gentleman. Well stated. 

I appreciate that. 

Now we have the Honorable Ed Whitfield from Kentucky. 
24 

STATEMENT OF HON. ED WHITFIELD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Chairman Hartzler, thank you and Ranking 

Member Pocan. And thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to visit briefly with you this morning. 

I would like to start off by saying, first of all, how much we appreciate the time and effort that all of you spend on the budget 

process. 

I will have to say that I agree with my friend from Texas that 

I believe also that the budget process is broken, and I genuinely 

believe that one of the reasons that Congress has such a low approval rating is that many people across America perceive that if 

Congress cannot do its most basic task of adopting a budget, then 

that contributes to the impression that this is an ineffective body. 

And I went back and I looked at the history of the budget process 

in the U.S. Congress. Of course, back in 1921, it was the first year 

that the President started submitting a budget to Congress. And 

we went through that process from 1921 to 1974, and the Congress 

would work with the President’s budget. And then, of course, in 

1974 we passed the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act. And since that time, Congress has only met the deadline 

for passing the budget resolution six times since 1974. Congress 

did not adopt any budget resolution for six fiscal years, 1999, 2003, 

2005, 2007, 2011, and 2012. 

Now, the process that I think contributes to the feeling of the 

American people that Congress is so ineffective is that more and 

more the budget debate and the budget process has become so partisan because we use the budget to highlight philosophical differences on primarily these big mandatory spending areas, which 

obviously is where we have our problem. But many people, when 

a budget does pass, assume that all of the cuts or reductions or 

changes are automatically taking effect even though everyone recognizes that the authorizing committees have to come back and 

make those changes. 

When I go to civic club meetings, people frequently—and I am 

sure many of you have experienced this too. They ask you why is 

it that Congress cannot even pass a budget. Well, probably they do 

not really understand it. 

But I think to get to the bottom line here is the current process 

in my view is not working very well, and I think it is factually correct when you say that Congress has only met the deadline six 

times since 1974. The Congress has not even passed a budget at 

all for 6 years. And I think you would agree with me that the entire Congress becomes so consumed with this process each year 

that it interferes with our ability to authorize, do oversight, and everything else. 

So my point is that even back in 1995 the GAO did a study of 

the history and future direction of the budget process and even at 

that time was pointing out the great difficulties that we face. That 

is why many of us way back in 1999 suggested that maybe one way 

that could improve the process is go to a 2-year budget cycle. And 

I had been told that every President since Ronald Reagan—I cannot speak emphatically that President Obama supports this, but I 

have heard that he is not opposed to it—would support a 2-year 
25 

budget process so that one year Congress could be totally consumed 

by the budget. The next year they could do the authorizing, the 

oversight, and so forth. 

But back in 1999, we brought a budget resolution to the floor to 

go to a 2-year budget cycle. It was defeated on the House floor by 

8 or 9 votes. Even the chairman of the Appropriations Committee 

voted for it. And of course, Senator Pete Domenici of New Mexico 

was one of the leaders. 

But I would just say as one member speaking for my little group 

of constituents in Kentucky, 700,000 of them, it has been my experience that the budget process, the confusion, the chaos of the 

budget process, the lack of accomplishment of the budget process 

has contributed greatly to the impression of the American people 

that the U.S. Congress as an institution is not very effective. And 

it is not your all individual faults. I think it is all of our faults. 

And I simply wanted to make that comment just out of a sense 

of frustration that I have had but, once again, want to thank you 

all personally for your efforts and what you continue to do. Thank 

you. 

Ms. WARLORSKI [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Whitfield, and your 

comments are duly noted. 

Mr. Schneider from the great State of Illinois? 

STATEMENT OF HON. BRAD SCHNEIDER, A REPRESENTATIVE 

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS 

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you, Madam Chairman, Congressman 

Pocan. It is good to see you. Thank you for this opportunity to testify today on the fiscal year 2014 budget resolution. 

Let me state emphatically we have an urgent need to address 

our Nation’s budget deficit and secure our long-term fiscal stability. 

This effort requires thinking beyond across-the-board, wholesale 

cuts or budget freezes. It necessitates that we reevaluate how every 

single dollar is spent. 

Mr. Chairman, I join you in support of this goal but urge caution 

against making misguided cuts that may jeopardize our national 

security and global competitiveness or that disproportionately impact our most vulnerable populations: our seniors, students, and 

middle class families. That is exactly why we need a smart approach to deficit reduction that reduces spending and increases revenue responsibly. 

We need to be smarter about how we spend taxpayer dollars. 

Just one example. The Federal Government spends $18 billion on 

47 separate employment and job training programs with inconsistent results. We need to refocus our Federal funding of programs 

that produce real substantial results, which is why I, with my colleague, Lou Barletta, introduced the America Works Act. This legislation seeks to close the skills gap between employers with job 

openings and job seekers inadequately prepared for the 21st century economy. And it does so at no new cost to Government. It is 

a smarter, more efficient use of dollars we already spend on three 

of our Federal worker training programs: Perkins, TAA, and WIA. 

Beyond technical education, if we are to maintain our preeminent role in the world, it is essential that we provide all of our 

children with the opportunity for a quality education to help ensure 
26 

that they have the skills and capacity to be ready for success in college and career. Research shows that future success starts with a 

strong, early learning foundation, with crucial intellectual development occurring in the first 3 years of life. Provided with positive 

educational experiences during these first years, children demonstrate improved academic achievement. They are more likely to 

read and do math at grade level, to make constructive life choices, 

and to graduate from high school. 

I echo the call President Obama made in his State of the Union 

Address for this Congress to expand access to high quality preschool to every child. Pre-K provides the foundation for a child’s future success in school and helps reduce achievement gaps. 

As Congress looks to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act, we must establish a continuum of early learning so 

that our children, parents, and teachers are provided with the resources they need to ensure a bright future for the next generation. 

By investing in our children now, we are preparing a future workforce that will be able to compete in the 21st century global economy so that future medical breakthroughs, new green technologies, 

and other innovations are developed here in the United States 

rather than abroad. 

If we want to promote innovation, to stimulate economic growth 

and put people back to work, we must also tend to our Nation’s infrastructure. It is imperative for this Congress to place renewed 

focus on our infrastructure and that we enact a long-term, fully financed transportation authorization. Too many of our roads, 

bridges, and ports are in desperate need of repair. We must promote a robust, polymodal transportation system, including modernized mass transit systems. In order for our economy to operate at 

its optimal level, our infrastructure must as well. 

In my home district, Waukegan Harbor is presently closed to 

commercial navigation, putting a strain on other ports and draining our local economy. Waukegan Harbor’s closing hurts shipping, 

but so too do historically low lake and river levels that reduce and 

restrict cargo capacity. We must be responsible stewards of our 

natural resources and environment, and we must provide the Environmental Protection Agency with the resources it needs to keep 

our air and drinking water in our communities clean and safe and 

our waterways open and clear. Irresponsible cuts to this agency are 

short-sighted and will put our recovery at risk. We must continue 

to lead the world as guardians of our natural resources and environment, ensuring sustainability, and thereby ensuring our longterm prosperity and security. 

Many U.S. manufacturers across the country are global leaders 

in sustainable technology development. These industries create 

high-paying, quality jobs and promise sustainable economic growth 

for our country. We should foster this type of innovation, not slash 

away at its potential. 

Another area of our budget where we cannot afford to be shortsighted is foreign engagement and its associated economic assistance. As we work to address our deficit, the foreign assistance 

budget may seem like an easy target, but cutting it would seriously 

undermine our diplomatic efforts in the world. We live in an increasingly complex and dangerous world that demands U.S. leader-
27 

ship. The foreign assistance budget provides funding for our embassies, including security for our diplomats who promote U.S. national interests around the world and demonstrate the values and 

principles that define us as a Nation. A strong diplomatic presence 

is essential to preserving the United States’ positive influence and 

leadership in bilateral and multilateral relations with our allies 

and addressing the challenges with our adversaries. Understanding 

the fiscal challenges we face, we must also recognize that we are 

not going to balance the budget by slashing foreign assistance. 

We are nearly a week into the sequester that went into effect on 

March 1st, the impact of which will begin to be felt by our constituents through, among other areas, fewer police officers on patrol in 

our communities, canceled Head Start services, eliminated meal 

services for low-income seniors. Coupled with recent reductions in 

spending, sequestration will slow economic growth, even risking a 

contraction throughout our economy. Rather than these imprudent, 

across-the-board cuts that in the aggregate will do harm to our constituents and our economy, both parties must come to the table to 

craft a comprehensive, balanced, measured approach to deficit reduction. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you again 

for the opportunity to address you today to outline my priorities for 

the fiscal year 2014 budget. 

[The prepared statement of Brad Schneider follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 

testify today on the fiscal year 2014 budget resolution. 

Let me state emphatically, we have an urgent need to address our nation’s budget 

deficit and secure our long-term fiscal stability. This effort requires thinking beyond 

across-the-board wholesale cuts or budget freezes. It necessitates that we reevaluate 

how every federal dollar is spent. 

Mr. Chairman, I join you in support of this goal, but urge caution against making 

misguided cuts that may jeopardize our national security and global competitiveness, or that disproportionally impact our most vulnerable populations—our seniors, 

students and middle class families. That is exactly why we need a smart approach 

to deficit reduction that reduces spending thoughtfully and increases revenue responsibly. 

We need to be smarter about how we spend taxpayer dollars. Just one example: 

the federal government spends $18 billion on 47 separate employment and job training programs, with inconsistent results. We need to refocus our federal funding on 

programs that produce real, substantial results, which is why I, with my colleague 

Lou Barletta, introduced the AMERICA Works Act. This legislation seeks to close 

the skills gap between employers with job openings and job seekers inadequately 

prepared for the 21st Century economy and it does so at no new cost to the government. It is a smarter, more efficient use of the dollars we already spend on three 

of our federal worker training programs—Perkins, TAA and WIA. 

Beyond technical education, if we are to maintain our preeminent role in the 

world, it is essential that we provide all our children with the opportunity for a 

quality education to help ensure that they have the skills and capacity to be ready 

for success in college and career. 

Research shows that future success starts with a strong early-learning foundation, 

with crucial intellectual development occurring in the first three years of life. Provided with positive educational experiences during these first years, children demonstrate improved academic achievement, are more likely to read and do math at 

grade level, to make constructive life choices, and graduate from high school. 

I echo the call President Obama made in his State of the Union Address for this 

Congress to expand access to high-quality preschool to every child. Pre-K provides 

the foundation for a child’s future success in school, and helps reduce achievement 

gaps. As Congress looks to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education 
28 

Act, we must establish a continuum of early learning so that our children, parents 

and teachers are provided with the resources they need to ensure a bright future 

for the next generation. 

By investing in our children now, we are preparing a future workforce that will 

be able to compete in the 21st Century global economy, so that future medical 

breakthroughs, new green technologies, and other innovations are developed here in 

the U.S. instead of abroad. 

If we want to promote innovation, to stimulate economic growth and put people 

back to work, we also must tend to our nation’s infrastructure. It is imperative for 

this Congress to place renewed focus on our infrastructure and that we enact a longterm, fully financed transportation authorization. Too many of our roads, bridges 

and ports are in desperate need of repair. We must promote a robust, polymodal 

transportation system, including modernized mass transit systems. 

In order for our economy to operate at its optimal level, our infrastructure must 

as well. In my home district, Waukegan Harbor is presently closed to commercial 

navigation, putting a strain on other ports and draining our local economy. 

Waukegan Harbor’s closing hurts shipping, but so too do historically-low lake and 

river levels that reduce or restrict cargo capacity. We must be responsible stewards 

of our natural resources and environment, and we must provide the Environmental 

Protection Agency with the resources it needs to keep the air and drinking water 

in our communities clean and safe, and our waterways open and clear. 

Irresponsible cuts to the Agency are shortsighted and will put our recovery at 

risk. We must continue to lead the world as guardians of our natural resources and 

environment, ensuring sustainability, and thereby ensuring our long-term prosperity and security. 

Many U.S. manufacturers across the country are global leaders in sustainable 

technology development. These industries create high-paying, quality jobs and promise sustainable economic growth for our country. We should foster this type of innovation, not slash away at its potential. 

Another area of our federal budget where we cannot afford to be shortsighted is 

foreign engagement, and its associated economic assistance. As we work to address 

our deficit, the foreign assistance budget may seem like an easy target, but cutting 

it would seriously undermine our diplomatic efforts in the world. 

We live in an increasingly complex and dangerous world that demands U.S. leadership. The foreign assistance budget provides funding for our embassies, including 

security for our diplomats who promote U.S. national interests around the world 

and demonstrate the values and principles that define us as a nation. A strong diplomatic presence is essential to preserving the United States’ positive influence and 

leadership in bilateral and multilateral relations with our allies and addressing 

challenges with our adversaries. Understanding the fiscal challenges we face, we 

must also recognize that we are not going to balance the budget by slashing foreign 

assistance. 

We are nearly a week into the sequester that went into effect on March 1st, the 

impact of which will begin to be felt by our constituents through, among other areas, 

fewer police officers on patrol in our communities, canceled Head Start services, 

eliminated meal services for low-income seniors. Coupled with recent reductions in 

spending, sequestration will slow economic growth, even risking a contraction 

throughout our economy. Rather than these imprudent, across-the-board cuts that, 

in the aggregate, will do harm to our constituents and our economy, both parties 

must come to the table to craft a comprehensive, balanced, measured approach to 

deficit reduction. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you again for the opportunity to address you today to outline my priorities for the fiscal year 2014 budget. 

Ms. WARLORSKI. Thank you, Mr. Schneider. 

Mr. Tonko? 

STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL TONKO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you. Acting Chair Warlorski, Acting Ranking 

Member McDermott, and distinguished members of the Budget 

Committee. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to testify 

before you today on the blueprint for our Nation’s priorities and 

statement of our values: the budget. 

As a former member of this committee, I know the difficult 

choices we all must make in putting together this document each 
29 

year, but I also know that it is our duty and, indeed, our constitutional responsibility to build this framework together. Indeed, 

blaming the President for failure to stop indiscriminate, across-theboard cuts known as sequestration when the authority lies entirely 

at our feet is little more than an excuse. The power to levy taxes 

and to invest those funds is exclusively our duty as the legislative 

branch, and we have plenty of work to do. 

After 36 consecutive months of private sector job growth and over 

6 million jobs added since the great recession, our economy is on 

its way to recovery. It would seem that our progress remains 

steady and consistent. 

Just yesterday the financial markets closed at an all-time high. 

The recovery of the financial sector has been the most robust because taxpayers shored up the industry when it was on the ropes. 

We all hoped that saving Wall Street would translate into recovery for Main Street, but despite Wall Street’s recovery and record 

profits for businesses, our families and small businesses continue 

to struggle to make ends meet. Those who are unemployed are 

working more hours and taking home less pay. Too many are still 

unemployed or under-employed. We cannot solve the Federal Government’s budget problems without first helping families’ household budget problems. There are programs that we can and must 

prioritize in our Nation’s budget that will give our hard-working 

families the opportunity to earn a decent living for the work that 

they do, programs that will grow the economic powerhouse that is 

the American middle class and that will lift people out of poverty 

and into the mainstream economy. 

To that end, let me share a few words from President John F. 

Kennedy. These are remarks that were prepared but never delivered at the Trade Mart in Dallas, Texas, November 22nd, 1963. 

Our late President wrote: we cannot expect everyone, to use the 

phrase of a decade ago will, quote, talk sense to the American people. End quote. 

Kennedy’s remarks continued—and I quote—but we can hope 

that fewer people will listen to nonsense, and the notion that this 

Nation is headed for defeat through deficit or that strength is but 

a matter of slogans is nothing just plain nonsense. End quote. 

Those words are as true as we sit here today as they were in the 

1960’s. By putting people back to work, we will defeat the deficit. 

It will not defeat us. And we know that our Nation’s strength is 

not in slogans. It is in her people. And it is our people, their 

dreams, ideas, aspirations, their work, their grit, effort, education, 

health, liberty, and strength that we must as a Nation support and 

bolster through investments, investments in education that train 

and retrain our workers to compete in the global economy with cutting-edge skills from the trades all the way through to Ph.D.’s. We 

must ensure that any student that works hard and seeks a higher 

education is able to obtain one, no matter their financial background. 

That is why I encourage increased funding for teachers, student 

aid, and training programs, investments in innovation that realize 

we are competing in a global race on clean energy and ideas. We 

must bolster our research and development accounts and empower 
30 

programs like APRA-E that foster new businesses and entrepreneurs. 

We must invest in our infrastructure. We cannot expect to compete in the 21st century global economy with 19th or 20th century 

infrastructure. We must fix our structurally deficient roads and 

bridges and upgrade our water treatment and distribution systems 

which we have ignored for far too long. 

But this is not enough. We must also increase accounts that support energy transmission upgrades, high-speed rail, ports, mass 

transit, and much more. We require the best infrastructure in the 

world to move our goods, our services, our information, and people 

if we are to remain competitive in a global marketplace. 

Finally, I have long been supportive of investments we make as 

a nation in our natural and cultural resources. The foresight of previous generations in establishing our national parks, wilderness 

areas, and cultural and historical lands was a great gift to us that 

has paid many dividends over the years. Every generation has 

drawn on the environmental accounts of this Nation, and none 

more so than ours. 

Climate change is the bill that is coming due. We must act now 

by making investments that will reduce the vulnerability of communities and businesses across our Nation to this threat. We cannot afford to delay any longer. 

We are a great Nation. We rose to the world leadership position 

we hold by working together, not by pulling apart. A budget that 

rewards the wealthiest amongst us and asks the most from those 

who have least is not only unwise but unfair. It is un-American. 

I hope we can move past the campaign slogans and failed economic 

theories to address the challenges we face and do what is right and 

just for all our citizens. 

Again, I thank you as members of this committee for the opportunity that you have allowed me today. 

With that, I yield back, Madam Chair. 

[The prepared statement of Paul Tonko follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL D. TONKO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

CHAIRMAN RYAN, RANKING MEMBER VAN HOLLEN, DISTINGUISHED MEMBERS OF

THE BUDGET COMMITTEE: Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to testify before you today on the blueprint for our nation’s priorities and statement of our values—the budget. As a former member of this committee, I know the difficult choices 

we all must make in putting together this document each year. But I also know that 

it is our duty, and indeed, our Constitutional responsibility to build this framework 

together. 

Indeed, blaming the President for failure to stop indiscriminate, across-the-board 

cuts known as ‘‘sequestration’’ when that authority lays entirely at our feet is little 

more than an excuse. The power to levy taxes and to invest those funds is exclusively our duty as the legislative branch—and we have plenty of work to do. 

After thirty-six consecutive months of private sector job growth and over six million jobs added since the Great Recession, our economy is on its way to recovery. 

It would seem that our progress remains steady and consistent. 

Just yesterday, the financial markets closed at an all time high. The recovery of 

the financial sector has been the most robust because taxpayers shored up the industry when it was on the ropes. We all hoped that saving Wall Street would translate into recovery for Main Street. But despite Wall Street’s recovery and record 

profits for businesses, our families and small businesses continue to struggle to 

make ends meet. 
31 

Those who are employed are working more and taking home less pay. Too many 

are still unemployed or under employed. We cannot solve the federal government’s 

budget problems without first helping families’ household budget problems. 

There are programs that we can and must prioritize in our nation’s budget that 

will give our hard-working families the opportunity to earn a decent living for the 

work they do—programs that will grow the economic powerhouse that is the American middle class and that will lift people out of poverty and into the mainstream 

economy. 

To that end, let me share a few words from President John F. Kennedy. These 

are remarks that were prepared, but never delivered, at the Trade Mart in Dallas, 

Texas November 22, 1963. He said, ‘‘We cannot expect that everyone, to use the 

phrase of a decade ago, will [quote] talk sense to the American people [end quote].’’ 

Kennedy’s remarks continued, ‘‘But we can hope that fewer people will listen to nonsense. And the notion that this Nation is headed for defeat through deficit, or that 

strength is but a matter of slogans is nothing but just plain nonsense.’’ 

Those words are as true as we sit here today as they were in the 1960’s. By putting people back to work, we will defeat the deficit, it will not defeat us. And we 

know that our nation’s strength is not in slogans; it is in her people. And it is our 

people—their dreams, ideas, aspirations, work, grit, effort, education, health, liberty, 

and strength—that we must, as a nation, support and bolster through investments. 

Investments in education—that train and retrain our workers to compete in a 

global economy with cutting edge skills—from the trades all the way through to 

Ph.D.’s. We must ensure that any student that works hard and seeks a higher education is able to obtain one, no matter their financial background. That is why I 

encourage increased funding for teachers, student aid and training programs. 

Investments in innovation—that realize we are competing in a global race on 

clean energy and ideas. We must bolster our research and development accounts, 

and empower programs like ARPA-E that foster new businesses and entrepreneurs. 

We must invest in our infrastructure. We cannot expect to compete in the 21st 

century global economy with 19th or 20th century infrastructure. We must fix our 

structurally deficient roads and bridges, and upgrade our water treatment and distribution systems which we have ignored for far too long. But this is not enough. 

We must also increase accounts that support energy transmission upgrades, high 

speed rail, ports, mass transit and much more. We require the best infrastructure 

in the world to move goods, services, information, and people if we are to remain 

competitive in a global marketplace. 

Finally, I have long been supportive of investments we make as a nation in our 

natural and cultural resources. The foresight of previous generations in establishing 

our national parks, wilderness areas, and cultural and historical lands was a great 

gift to us that has paid many dividends over the years. Every generation has drawn 

on the environmental accounts of this nation, and none more so than ours. Climate 

change is the bill that is coming due. We must act now by making investments that 

will reduce the vulnerability of communities and businesses across the nation to this 

threat. We cannot afford to delay any longer. 

We are a great nation. We rose to the world leadership position we hold by working together, not by pulling apart. A budget that rewards the wealthiest among us 

and asks the most from those who have least is not only unwise and unfair, it is 

un-American. I hope we can move past campaign slogans and failed economic theories to address the challenges we face and do what is right and just for all our citizens. 

Again, thank you Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen and the rest 

of the committee for allowing me this opportunity today. I yield back. 

Ms. WARLORSKI. Thank you, Mr. Tonko. 

Mr. Carney? We are going to try to get through Mr. Carney’s testimony and then possibly Mr. Wilson. It depends on when we are 

going to break for votes here. But, Mr. Carney, you are now recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN CARNEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

Mr. CARNEY. Thank you, Acting Chairwoman Warlorski and Acting Ranking Member McDermott and members of the committee. 

Good morning. Thank you for allowing me to testify about what 
32 

Congress should focus on as we work to put the Nation on a sustainable fiscal path in the coming decades. 

The last 2 years have been consumed by fights over deficit reduction and spending priorities. Instead of agreeing on a comprehensive plan, we have hurtled from crisis to crisis. Right now, we are 

on a course, frankly, that nobody wants. As people in Delaware tell 

me, that does not make much sense. 

While it is true that we have been able achieve $3.9 trillion in 

deficit reduction through this long and frustrating process, economic experts say that our current approach is not the right one. 

Our piecemeal efforts have yielded more than $3 in spending cuts 

for every $1 in revenue. Some of the cuts we have made, particularly through sequestration, will hurt a broad array of important 

programs that help grow our economy in the long term. All of the 

nonpartisan experts agree that more revenue needs to be part of 

the plan. Both sides have acknowledged that tax reform is important and necessary, and we should use it as a mechanism to avoid 

the sequester in a balanced way by generating revenue and implementing more responsible spending cuts. 

Instead of indiscriminate cuts to important investments in education, training, infrastructure, and research in the short term, we 

ought to make cuts more gradually, and we ought to focus our efforts on the fundamental problem that is going to drive our deficits 

in the long term: rapidly rising health care costs. Between 2000 

and 2030, the number of seniors will more than double, and senior 

receive more benefits than they pay in through Medicare by a 3- 

to-1 ratio today. Since 2008, Medicare Part A outlays have exceeded payroll tax revenue, and that problem will continue to worsen. 

So we face a serious challenge here. 

But addressing this problem does not just mean dealing with the 

effects of an aging population. Unnecessary procedures, duplicative 

tests, and widely varying costs depending on the hospital or region 

are also real problems that must be addressed. We need systemic 

change, and the Affordable Care Act takes steps in this direction. 

The combined effects of an aging population and rising health 

care costs will cause Medicare costs to nearly double over the next 

10 years. That is just not sustainable. As I see it, we really have 

two choices as we move forward. 

One is the idea that the Federal Government would provide premium support to Medicare recipients. I do not support that approach for two reasons. First, we cannot force our seniors to pay 

thousands of dollars each year out of pocket for premiums that 

they cannot afford. And second, this approach does not address the 

real drivers of our ballooning health care costs. It simply shifts the 

costs to seniors. 

The right approach is to make systemic changes to our health 

care system that incentivizes doctors to provide quality over quantity, bringing down costs across the board. Along the way, we need 

to make sure that whatever we do does not harm the quality of 

care seniors currently receive or their ability to afford that care. 

I recently joined several of my colleagues for lunch with Dr. Zeke 

Emanuel, former health care advisor at the Office of Management 

and Budget, who talked to us about several promising ideas that 

are worth considering as we move forward. 
33 

One is to accelerate the shift away from the fee-for-service health 

care system. Pilot programs within the Affordable Care Act that 

focus on bundled payments and accountable care organizations are 

showing promise. We could expand these programs and implement 

a countrywide change from paying for each procedure to paying for 

the overall delivery of care. 

Second, we should ensure that Medicare is getting the best possible price for expensive medical equipment like wheelchairs and 

oxygen tanks. This approach is working well in some parts of the 

country for certain types of equipment. So we should look at enhancing its scope. 

Third, we should reduce over-utilization in our health care system by promoting price transparency that allows patients to know 

how much their health care actually costs them, and we should tell 

patients which providers are delivering quality care at an efficient 

price. 

No matter what we do, these health care challenges are going to 

require buy-in from all sides: hospitals, doctors, insurance companies, and providers, Democrats and Republicans, and of course, the 

American people. The longer we wait, the harder it will be to fix 

the problem. If we fail to address our health care crisis, we can cut 

all we want from important investments like infrastructure and 

education, but we will not be any closer to putting the Nation on 

a sustainable fiscal path. 

Thank you very much for the opportunity to share these 

thoughts, and thank you for the great work that you do for our 

country as part of this committee. 

[The prepared statement of John Carney follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN C. CARNEY, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE

Good morning. Thank you for allowing me to testify about what Congress should 

focus on as we work to put the nation on a sustainable fiscal path in the coming 

decades. 

The last two years have been consumed by fights over deficit reduction and spending priorities. Instead of agreeing on a comprehensive plan, we’ve hurtled from crisis 

to crisis. Right now, we’re on a course that nobody wants. As people in Delaware 

tell me: that’s stupid. 

While it’s true that we’ve been able to achieve $3.9 trillion in deficit reduction 

throughout this long and frustrating process, economic experts say that our current 

approach is not the right one. Our piecemeal efforts have yielded more than $3 in 

spending cuts for every $1 in revenue. Some of the cuts we’ve made—particularly 

through sequestration—will hurt a broad array of important discretionary programs 

that help grow our economy in the long-term. 

All the nonpartisan experts agree that more revenue needs to be part of the plan. 

Both sides have acknowledged that tax reform is important, and we should use it 

as a mechanism to avoid the sequester in a balanced way—by generating revenue 

and implementing more responsible cuts. 

And instead of indiscriminate cuts to important investments in education, training, infrastructure and research in the short-term, we ought to make cuts more 

gradually. Let’s focus our efforts on the fundamental problem that is going to drive 

our deficit in the long-term: rapidly rising health care costs. 

Between 2000 and 2030, the number of seniors will have more than doubled. And 

seniors receive more benefits than they pay in—by a 3 to 1 ratio. Since 2008, Medicare Part A outlays have exceeded payroll tax revenue, and that problem will continue to worsen. So we face a serious challenge. 

But addressing this problem doesn’t just mean dealing with the effects of an aging 

population. Unnecessary procedures, duplicative tests, and wildly varying costs depending on the hospital or region are also real problems that must be addressed. 

We need systemic change, and the Affordable Care Act takes steps in this direction. 
34 

The combined effects of an aging population and healthcare cost inflation will 

cause Medicare costs to nearly double over the next 10 years. That’s not sustainable. 

As I see it, we really have two choices as we move forward. One idea is that the 

federal government would provide premium support to Medicare recipients. I don’t 

support that approach for two reasons. First, we can’t force our seniors to pay thousands of dollars each year out-of-pocket for premiums that they can’t afford. Second, 

this approach doesn’t address the real drivers of our ballooning healthcare costs. It 

simply shifts the costs to seniors. 

The right approach is to make systemic changes to our health care system that 

incentivize doctors to provide quality over quantity—bringing down costs across the 

board. Along the way, we need to make sure that whatever we do doesn’t harm the 

quality of care seniors currently receive, or their ability to afford that care. I recently joined several of my colleagues for lunch with Dr. Zeke Emanuel, former 

health care advisor at the Office of Management and Budget, who talked about several promising ideas that are worth considering as we move forward. 

One is to accelerate the shift away from a fee-for-service healthcare system. Pilot 

programs within the Affordable Care Act that focus on bundled payments and accountable care organizations are showing promise. We could expand these programs 

and implement a country-wide change from paying for each procedure to paying for 

the overall delivery of care. 

Second, we should ensure that Medicare is getting the best possible price for expensive medical equipment like wheelchairs and oxygen tanks. This approach is 

working well in some parts of the country for certain types of equipment, so we 

should look at enhancing its scope. 

Third, we should reduce overutilization in our health care system by promoting 

price transparency that allows patients to know how much their healthcare actually 

costs. And we should tell patients which providers are delivering quality care at an 

efficient rate. 

No matter what we do, these health care challenges are going to require buy-in 

from all sides: hospitals and doctors, insurance companies and providers, Democrats 

and Republicans, and the American people. The longer we wait, the harder it is 

going to be to fix the problem. If we fail to address our healthcare crisis, we can 

cut all we want from important investments like infrastructure and education, but 

we won’t be any closer to putting the nation on a sustainable fiscal path. 

Thank you very much. 

Ms. WARLORSKI. Thank you, Mr. Carney. 

Mr. Wilson, we are going to go, and then we will vote. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOE WILSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 

Mr. WILSON. Madam Chair and colleagues, thank you for the opportunity to be here today. I sincerely appreciate the opportunity 

to speak before you. I would like to first thank Chairman Paul 

Ryan for his leadership on this committee. These are difficult economic times, and I appreciate the dedicated efforts of the chairman 

and all of the members on their efforts. 

I represent the 2nd Congressional District of South Carolina, 

which includes the Army’s base at Fort Jackson in Columbia, as 

well as the Department of Energy’s Savannah River site in Aiken 

and Barnwell Counties. Both of these installations are vital to our 

national security as they provide unique, one-of-a-kind resources to 

our country. I appreciate working together with my colleague, Congressman Jim Clyburn, as Fort Jackson is adjacent to his district, 

and also part of the Savannah River site is located in the district. 

Fort Jackson serves as the Army’s largest initial entry training 

facility. Between the fiscal years of 2007 and 2012, the number of 

soldiers who were trained at Fort Jackson ranged from 35,000 recruits to a maximum of 46,000. Due to the sequester, the Army has 

informed us that $75 million of funding will be cut from Fort Jackson. This facility provides training for our men and women who 

selflessly serve our Nation and defend our freedoms while pro-
35 

moting democracy around the world. These dedicated brave men 

and women in uniform should not be subjected to budgeting confusion. As you work to draft the fiscal year 2014 budget, please do 

all that you can to secure the funds necessary for the training of 

our men and women at Fort Jackson. 

About an hour southwest of Columbia lies the Department of Energy’s Savannah River site. This site is a national security asset 

which disposes of weapons-grade nuclear materials, conducts cutting-edge research, and supports our country’s nuclear weapons 

missions. This site played a key role in nuclear weapons production 

starting in the early 1950’s which led to Cold War victory. Sequestration has had a tremendous impact on the site, causing over $100 

million in cuts and over 2,000 possible furloughs. 

That being said, there are concerns also about cutting funding for 

the mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility which currently is under 

construction at SRS. This facility also called MOX for the mixed 

oxide fuel it will create is in line for our country’s means to honor 

our nuclear nonproliferation agreement with Russia. In the agreement made in the year 2000, each of our countries agreed to dispose of 34 metric tons of excess military-grade plutonium. This 

equates to over 17,000 nuclear bombs being removed from the 

world. Even more, this facility will convert the military-grade plutonium into commercial nuclear power rods which will power 

homes and businesses across the United States. The project is over 

60 percent completed and currently employs 2,300 workers with 

another 2,000 ancillary jobs with the project. 

In addition to the hard-working and dedicated employees at the 

facility, finishing MOX is imperative for a multitude of national security reasons. Slade Gordon, a member of the 9/11 Commission 

stated, quote, every dollar diverted from the MOX facility delays 

the effort to get rid of plutonium and delay provides more time for 

the material to be stolen. If we default on our end of the agreement, Russia will have no incentive to dispose of their own excess 

weapons-grade plutonium. I share Mr. Gordon’s concerns. It is in 

our mutual interest for America and Russia to continue working together. 

Apart from the future funding of the MOX project, sequestration 

has ravaged funding across the board at SRS. The environmental 

management side of the site will lose over $100 million in funds, 

and contractors expect to furlough 2,000 employees beginning April 

1st. Please keep in mind that these are completely separate from 

the aforementioned MOX workers. From H Canyon to the tank 

farms, environmental cleanup funds have been slashed. Moreover, 

the Savannah River National Laboratory, SRNL, cannot benefit 

monetarily from its inventions and does not possess a line from 

within the budget, making it heavily reliant upon trickle-down 

funding from other facilities within the DOE nuclear complex. 

A significant decrease in funding for SRNL poses a direct threat 

to our national security as the laboratory is tasked with training 

all FBI forensic agents, is key to developing new military technologies implemented in the war on terror, and directly supports 

the environmental cleanup mission of legacy defense waste across 

the country. 
36 

Your committee has extremely tough choices ahead. I fully understand. I simply ask as you go through the budgetary process, 

you fully consider the critical national security missions of both 

Fort Jackson and the Savannah River site. The individuals at both 

installations are dedicated to serving our country and putting our 

national interests of the United States before themselves. 

Thank you for your attention today under the stressed time that 

we have. But I have a full statement that I will provide. 

[The prepared statement of Joe Wilson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOE WILSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to speak here before you today. I would like 

to first thank Chairman Ryan for his leadership of this Committee. These are difficult economic times and appreciate the dedicated efforts of the Chairman and 

Members of the Committee. 

I represent the Second Congressional District of South Carolina which includes 

the Army’s Base at Fort Jackson in Columbia, as well as the Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site in Aiken and Barnwell. Both of these installations are national assets which provide unique one-of-a-kind—to our country. 

Fort Jackson serves as the Army’s largest initial entry training facility. Between 

fiscal years 07 to 12 the number of Soldiers who were trained at Fort Jackson 

ranged from 35,000 recruits to a max of 46,000. Due to the sequester, the Army has 

informed me that $75 million of funding will be cut from Fort Jackson. This facility 

provides basic training to our men and women who selflessly give of themselves to 

defend freedom and spread democracy across the world. These dedicated individuals 

should not be subjected to political games. As you work to draft the Fiscal Year 

2014 budget, please do everything you can to secure funds to train our men and 

women at Fort Jackson. 

About an hour southwest of Columbia lies the Department of Energy’s Savannah 

River Site. This site is a national asset which disposes of Weapons Grade nuclear 

materials, conducts cutting edge research, and supports our country’s nuclear weapons missions. 

Sequestration has had a tremendous effect at the Site, causing over $100 million 

in funds to be cut and over 2000 possible furloughs. That being said, what further 

concerns me are widespread rumors that the President is considering severely cutting funding for the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility (MFFF) currently under 

construction at SRS. This facility, also called MOX for the Mixed Oxide Fuel it will 

create, is in line to be our country’s only means to honor a 2000 Agreement with 

Russia which called on each of our countries to dispose of 34 metric tons of excess 

military grade plutonium. That equates to over 17,000 nuclear bombs being taken 

out of the world. Even more, the Facility will convert the military grade plutonium 

into commercial nuclear power rods which will power homes and businesses across 

the United States. The Project is over 60% completed and currently employs 2300 

hundred workers with another 2000 ancillary jobs associated with the Project. 

In addition to the hardworking and dedicated workers at the Facility, finishing 

MOX is imperative for a multitude of national security reasons. Slade Gordon, a 

member of the 9/11 Commission, stated that ‘‘Every dollar diverted (from the MOX 

Facility) delays the effort to get rid of plutonium, and every delay provides more 

time for the material to be stolen.’’ If we renege on our end of the Agreement, Russia will have no incentive to dispose of their own excess weapons grade plutonium. 

Do you feel comfortable allowing Russia to possess such material? I do not. 

Notwithstanding the future funding of the MOX Project, sequestration has ravaged funding across the board at SRS. The Environmental Management side of the 

Site alone will lose over $100 million in funds and contractors expect to furlough 

over 2000 employees starting April 1. Please keep in mind, these are completely separate of the aforementioned MOX workers. From H-Canyon to the Tank Farms, 

funds have been slashed. Moreover, the Savannah River National Laboratory 

(SRNL) cannot benefit monetarily from its inventions and does not possess a line 

item within the Budget, making it heavily reliant upon trickle down funding from 

other facilities within the DOE Nuclear Complex. This doesn’t bode well for the 

SRNL when all other installations are also getting cut. 

Your Committee has extremely difficult choices to make. I fully understand. I simply ask that as you go through the budgetary process, you fully consider the critical 

national security missions being carried out at both Fort Jackson as well as the Sa-
37 

vannah River Site. The individuals at both installations are dedicated to serving 

their country and putting the national interest of the United States before themselves. Please give them the tools they need to get the job done and to keep us safe 

here at home. 

Ms. WARLORSKI. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. Duly noted. 

And we will take a brief recess so members can go to the floor 

to vote. This hearing is now in recess subject to the call of the 

chair. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. RICE [presiding]. The hearing of the Budget Committee will 

come back to order. 

Mr. McDermott, you are recognized for 5 minutes. I want you to 

keep in mind, though, that we have votes starting at roughly 12:45. 

So if the witnesses will be kind enough to keep their verbal comments to 5 minutes, then we can move on through this. 

With that, I will start by recognizing Mr. McDermott. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JIM McDERMOTT, A REPRESENTATIVE 

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As we often hear, budgets are moral documents. They are a 

statement by a country about what they want their future to be 

and where they are going to spend their resources. 

And one of the things that is lost, I think, in some of this sequester business that is going on right now—because people are looking 

at short-term things, who will be laid off tomorrow, who will be 

laid off next week, who will have a month-long furlough in the 

month of May. But the real damage of the sequester is that it affects the long-term investments in research that this country does. 

Now, the President has said he wants to innovate our way to 

continue to lead the world. Our ability now to produce manufactured goods and that sort of thing is—we are in real competition 

around the world. But in terms of innovation, this country has led 

the world. It is why our universities are filled with students from 

outside because they want to come and learn what it is the Americans are doing or what it is in the water or whatever it is that is 

making us so creative and so competitive. 

A huge amount of what happens in our innovation and our research and development, R&D as it is called, is from the Federal 

Government. Right now, we are spending $142 billion a year. Now, 

it is spread out through Defense and Health and Human Services 

and Energy and NASA and the National Science Foundation, Agriculture, Commerce, Transportation, Interior. The National Institutes of Health is the one that I know best because of the development in Seattle of a global health industry. And we have things 

going on in AIDS and tuberculosis and malaria. And all these programs are funded by the Federal Government. 

Now, the way it works is that the Federal Government has X 

number of dollars. They give it to the National Institutes of Health. 

Each one of the institutes, whether it is Infectious Diseases or Pulmonary Disease or whatever, gets a certain amount of money, and 

then they receive grants—they receive grant requests. And in the 

past, we were doing—about 20 percent of the grant proposals were 

funded. That is what we did. And in fact, we increased funding in 

the National Institutes of Health in 2003, and then it dropped sig-
38 

nificantly from 2004 to 2009. And this has brought us to the point 

where about 6 percent of grant proposals made to the National Institutes of Health are funded. So we have dropped from 20 to 6 percent. 

Now, what does that mean? Well, it is just a number. Right? No, 

it is not. What it means is that you have young people who spend 

6-7 years. I have got a nephew who is at Harvard in virology, and 

he is spending 7 years to get his Ph.D. When he comes out, the expectation is that there will be grant money for which he can apply 

to continue the research that he has been doing while he is a graduate student at Harvard. The fact is that he is going to have a 6 

percent chance out of 100 of getting his research funded. 

Now, you say, well, you know, that is the luck of the draw. 

Right? Well, the problem with that is we have trained these people. 

We have trained hundreds of people in this regard, and when they 

come out, they got debts and they are marketable in other areas 

and we lose them. 

Singapore is recruiting wildly. The guy who created Dolly was 

taken from England from one of the universities and given full— 

whatever he wanted in Singapore. And that is very common across 

the world. There are countries who are making tremendous investments in health and human services. 

And the United States, in deciding in this document, is making 

a decision about things that are going to go on 3 and 4, 5, 7, 8 

years from now. And I am already hearing from my friends on the 

faculty at the university that they received phone calls from NIH 

saying do not hire anybody. Hold off. Your grant has been approved, but we are not sure we are going to be able to give you the 

money. And in my view, that is like the Indian tribes in the West 

where we always knew when a tribe was going to end when they 

began to eat the seed corn. The seed corn is what you save for next 

year’s crop. And we are, in this country, beginning to eat our seed 

corn when we do not fund research. 

Thank you. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you, Mr. McDermott. 

At this time, I would like to recognize the gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Keith Ellison, for 5 minutes, sir. 

STATEMENT OF HON. KEITH ELLISON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 

Mr. ELLISON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would also like to 

thank the ranking member. 

The Congressional Progressive Caucus is a caucus, a collection of 

members, which I am here representing today to discuss our budget. The name of our budget will be The Back to Work Budget. And 

our budget focuses on America’s number one priority which is job 

creation. We bring unemployment in our budget down to 5.3 percent within 3 years by including robust investments in construction 

workers, teachers, cops, fire fighters, and youth. 

We are also fiscally responsible, reducing the deficit over the long 

term by nearly $2 trillion relative to current law. 

On the issue of jobs, we focus our attention not on deficit reduction, but on getting Americans back to work, which is the best deficit reduction you can have. While the U.S. economy is growing, or-
39 

dinary Americans continue to struggle and unemployment remains 

unacceptably high. The Back to Work Budget creates nearly 7 million jobs in this year alone, putting Americans back to work rebuilding and repairing our country and laying the groundwork for 

future economic growth. 

We substantially increase infrastructure investment to a level 

the American Society of Civil Engineers says is necessary to close 

our infrastructure gap. We fund modernization of at least 35,000 

public schools. We help States rehire nearly 300,000 teachers who 

have been laid off since 2008, as well as laid-off cops, fire fighters, 

and other public employees. We also boost consumer demand by reinstating the Make Work Pay tax credit for 2 years and protect the 

struggling long-term unemployment by extending emergency unemployment compensation. 

Investment. Investment, not austerity, is what our economy 

needs to get working again. Working families have been working 

harder and harder for less and less. Our budget rebuilds our economy so that it works for everyone not just a privileged few. 

Also, we have been cutting core programs that Americans rely on 

to the bone, slashing everything from student loans to medical research to nutrition assistance. In 2011, the budget alone included 

$500 million in cuts to the Women, Infants, and Children Nutrition 

Program; $1.6 billion in cuts to environmental protection; $400 million in cuts to home energy assistance; $300 million in cuts to the 

Community-Oriented Policing Services program. If this year’s Republican budget is like the last two, it will continue to decimate 

programs that protect the middle class, gutting Medicaid, and giving low-income people a ladder into the middle class. 

We need to take a look at spending reductions, and we propose 

that we take a look at Pentagon spending. We need a sustainable 

Pentagon budget that reflects a sound national security strategy. 

Defense spending doubled over the last decade. With two wars 

drawing to a close, we need a leaner, more agile Pentagon to combat 21st century threats. Our budget focuses on the needs of modern warfare and national defense, simply reducing Pentagon spending to 2006 levels. 

Finally, we talk about a fair tax system. We also need to replace 

a broken tax system that favors corporate special interests and the 

wealthy with one that works for all Americans. Income inequality 

is getting worse. Over the last 3 decades, the income of the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans rose 155 percent while the bottom 80 

percent saw incomes rise just by 41 percent. And our income tax 

system exacerbates this inequality. Workers who earn money from 

wages often pay a higher effective tax rate than individuals like 

Mitt Romney or Warren Buffet who earn money from stocks and 

dividends. 

Our budget gets rid of the tax preference for investment income, 

an approach President Reagan signed into law. It also creates fair 

tax rates for millionaires and billionaires, enacts a financial speculation tax, and eliminates corporate tax subsidies for oil, gas, and 

coal companies. 

This approach is supported by the American people. In a recent 

polling comparing the Republican budget plan to replace the sequester with the Progressive Caucus plan, nearly twice as many 
40 

people supported the Progressive Caucus plan. In fact, 47 percent 

of Republicans who participated in this survey preferred the Progressive Caucus plan to the sequester. 

Americans want Congress to ask the wealthiest and corporations 

to pay a fair share in order to protect the security of millions of 

Americans to get health care and other assistance in the social 

safety net when people face tough times. Americans want Congress 

to focus on getting them back to work now rather than gutting the 

very investments we need to grow our economy. 

Thank you. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you, Mr. Ellison. 

The chair now recognizes Mrs. Donna Christensen from the Virgin Islands. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DONNA CHRISTENSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGIN ISLANDS 

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Thank you, Chairman Rice, members. Good 

afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important budget which will set the stage, I think, for whether this country continues to lead or becomes a secondary player. The latter I 

know we all agree is unacceptable. 

First of all, I would recommend the Congressional Black Caucus 

budget to the committee. In brief, the CBC budget would cancel the 

sequester, offer several options for raising a significant amount of 

revenue. We invest in education, infrastructure, housing, job training, and modernize our military. It includes Assistant Leader 

Clyburn’s 10-20-30 program that ensures a portion of funds in all 

programs will be targeted to distressed communities. In it, we 

strengthen Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and all of the safety net programs, and we still reduce the deficit. Once it is finalized, 

I hope that the committee would accept it as part of my testimony. 

I also want to address a few specific areas. 

First is the Affordable Care Act. Regardless of what position any 

one of us may have taken on the bill, it is now the law of the land, 

and it must be fully funded. It is not only a moral imperative, but 

it is an economic imperative that the access to health care that this 

bill promised be fulfilled for the over 30 million Americans who are 

now uninsured. There are many scientifically sound reports that 

demonstrate the savings that would be realized by the preventive 

care and the expanded access to treatment, whether it is diabetes 

care, prevention of end-stage renal disease, or early heart disease 

care or others. The new approaches to care tied to payment reform, 

such as the Accountable Care Organization or medical homes and 

others, will likewise realize savings in lives and in costs. And the 

health equity provisions that were included through the work of 

the Tri-Caucus which will reduce health disparities are more savings. As a frame of reference, a recent report by the Urban League 

found the excess health care costs annually due just to disparities 

is about $82 billion per year. 

The work of the Patient-Centered Outcome Research Institute 

that the ACA created also promises to improve health care and outcomes which will further result in improved health and health care 

savings. 
41 

This is not an all-inclusive list. There are other provisions that 

will also improve the health of our residents and the health of our 

economy. Not only should both be our goal, but we should also be 

determined to change our poor standing in health internationally. 

Although we spend more on health care than any other industrialized country, we are 37th in health status and 40th and 41st in 

infant and maternal mortality. We can change this shameful standing by just eliminating health disparities. 

For the health and well-being of our fellow Americans and to reduce the escalation of health care spending, we cannot afford to not 

fully fund and implement the Affordable Care Act. 

Secondly, I want to refer you to H.R. 6482 introduced in the last 

Congress by Congressman Burgess and myself and which will be 

reintroduced this year. It would amend the Congressional Budget 

Act of 1974 respecting the scoring of preventive health savings. If 

we scored savings, including outside of the customary 10-year window, I do not believe we would be having the budget battles with 

the gridlock over deficit reduction that is currently paralyzing the 

Congress and holding back our recovery. 

Third, I want to speak to the concerns of the offshore territories. 

We are often left out of important programs or underfunded at levels that do not allow us the benefits that the States realize. Our 

allotment for LIHEAP is a good example where the .1 to .5 percent 

allotment for all of the territories does not make a dent in the Virgin Islands where the cost of our electricity is over 50 cents per kilowatt. And some seniors and low-income families are already going 

without electricity. An excerpt from a CRS memo is included in my 

written testimony which illustrates this point. 

Our residents do not benefit from SSI. Medicaid is capped and 

underfunded with an unfair match. We are left out of important 

education, health care, labor, and other programs that inhibit our 

ability to provide the services our residents need and deserve. I remind the committee that we are Americans who serve our country 

in the armed forces alongside of our fellow citizens from the 50 

States and in greater numbers per capita than many States. 

Lastly, I want to alert the committee to legislation we have recently reintroduced for the fourth time. It is H.R. 374, the Derek 

Hodge Virgin Islands Improvement Act of 2013. This legislation 

which creates a new IRA based in the Virgin Islands has the potential to raise revenue for the Virgin Islands but also an even more 

significant amount of revenue for the Federal Treasury. In this 

time of extreme economic distress in the U.S. Virgin Islands, I hope 

we can get it passed this year to provide needed relief at home, as 

well as to help this Congress provide a needed offset where it may 

be needed or help our efforts to reduce the deficit. 

I thank you again for the opportunity to testify. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you, Mrs. Christensen. 

The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Connecticut, Mrs. 

Elizabeth Esty. 
42 

STATEMENT OF HON. ELIZABETH ESTY, A REPRESENTATIVE 

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify today on the fiscal 

year 2014 budget resolution. 

As the committee prepares this year’s budget resolution, I want 

to emphasize the need for smart cuts to reduce the deficit while 

maintaining important investments in priorities that reflect our 

values as a country. That means supporting the hard work and innovation of American businesses that are creating jobs and helping 

to bring back our economy. 

Throughout a tough economy, manufacturers and small businesses in Connecticut and across the country have been innovating 

and making major strides. In my district, I have heard from manufacturers, small business owners, and labor leaders alike a shared 

sense that we are finally on the verge of better days. Mr. Chairman, their struggles and hard work to make it through the recession are about to pay off. 

But now they are concerned that this Congress may inexplicably 

ruin their gains by making dangerous, across-the-board cuts. My 

friend, John Herrity, President of the Connecticut State Council of 

Machinists, put it perfectly when he said that after all the progress 

our manufacturers have made, quote, to lose all that momentum 

just defies common sense. Now more than ever, we must preserve 

investments in American products and the highly skilled employees 

who make them. 

And now more than ever, we need to make smart investments in 

our infrastructure. These investments will create immediate jobs in 

construction and engineering industries, and investments in our 

transportation infrastructure will allow our businesses to move 

their products and services to market more efficiently and lay the 

foundation for future economic growth. A major complaint I have 

heard from businesses in Connecticut is the time and money they 

lose from delays caused by congestion and gridlock. Washington 

budget politics should not add to that gridlock. 

Additionally, now is the time to make strategic investments in 

research and development so that we continue to lead in cuttingedge technologies and new products people around the world want 

and need. 

Our budget should also reflect our commitments to our seniors. 

More than 125,000 people in my district receive Social Security. 

More than half a million people in Connecticut rely on Medicare. 

Many seniors in my district are concerned about the future of these 

critical programs and they have every reason to be, having seen 

proposals out of Congress in recent years to privatize Social Security and voucherize Medicare. I urge you to reject proposals that 

would end Medicare as we know it. It would be a mistake to endanger these programs and break long-held commitments to our seniors instead of adopting common sense reforms to preserve and 

strengthen Social Security and Medicare for current and future 

generations. 

With increases in severe weather affecting Connecticut and many 

other parts of the country, we also need to ensure that families 

have the support they need to survive and get by. This winter and 
43 

for several past winters, Connecticut has endured historic winter 

storms. We must fund home energy assistance programs like 

LIHEAP for families across the country who are struggling to stay 

warm. LIHEAP serves around 120,000 households in Connecticut, 

and this critical program has already received drastic cuts in recent years. Before sequestration, Federal funding for LIHEAP in 

Connecticut stood at $72 million, down from $98 million in 2011. 

We face additional cuts if sequester goes through. During harsh 

winters, it is not right to leave families struggling to heat their 

homes and to keep their children safe from the weather. We need 

to make LIHEAP funding a priority in 2014. 

Finally, I would like to emphasize the need for funding to help 

prevent gun violence. As a Representative for Newtown, Connecticut and as a mother, I feel a special responsibility to help 

meet the needs of that community and to the parents who have 

suffered such unimaginable horror. Gun violence is costing lives in 

cities and towns across the country and it is a national crisis. 

Again, budgets reflect our priorities and I think we can all agree 

that fewer priorities are greater than protecting the lives of our 

children. I urge the committee to restore funding for public safety 

and law enforcement initiatives to reduce gun violence. We need 

funding for research on the causes of gun violence, for mental 

health, and for States to upload their information to the national 

data system. 

We can and should start with easy, smart cuts and revenue increases. There are already several proposals on the table that I 

support to repeal subsidies for big oil and big gas, eliminate outdated subsidies for agriculture, and to enact a Buffett rule so that 

the wealthiest are paying their fair share. It is certainly not an exhaustive list and we have a lot of work to do, but the American 

people are frustrated, and rightly so, with our punting responsibility to make these tough choices. We need to get acting doing our 

jobs so the American people can get back to doing theirs. 

Thank you for your time and attention and thank you for your 

hard work. 

[The prepared statement of Elizabeth Esty follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ELIZABETH H. ESTY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and members of the 

Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify today on the fiscal year 2014 

budget resolution. 

As this committee prepares this year’s budget resolution, I want to emphasize the 

need for smart cuts to reduce the deficit while maintaining important investments 

in priorities that reflect our values as a country. That means supporting the hard 

work and innovation of American businesses that are creating jobs and helping to 

bring back our economy. 

Throughout a tough economy, manufacturers and small businesses in Connecticut 

and across the country have been innovating and making major strides. In my district, I’ve heard from manufacturers, small business owners, and labor leaders alike, 

a shared sense that we’re finally on the verge of better days. 

Mr. Chairman, their struggles and hard work to make it through the recession 

is about to pay off, but they’re now concerned that this Congress may inexplicably 

ruin their gains by making dangerous, across-the-board cuts. 

My friend John Harrity, President of the Connecticut State Council of Machinists, 

put if perfectly when he said that after all the progress our manufacturers have 

made, ‘‘to lose all that momentum just defies common sense.’’ Now more than ever, 
44 

we must preserve investments in American products and the highly skilled employees who make them. 

Continuing to construct two Virginia-class submarines a year, a recent gain championed by my friend Congressman Joe Courtney, has both helped boost our nation’s 

defense and helped manufacturers save and create jobs in Connecticut. This effort 

has included the work of around 120 suppliers in my own district—high tech manufacturers like Ward Leonard Electric Company in Thomaston and Jonal Laboratories in Meriden who are making top-quality, cutting edge products. We should do 

right by our national security and our manufacturers and maintain funding for the 

construction of two Virginia-Class subs a year. 

Our budget should also reflect our commitments to our seniors. More than 

125,000 people in my district receive Social Security. More than half a million people in Connecticut are on Medicare. Many seniors in my district are concerned about 

the future of these critical programs, and they have every reason to be—having seen 

proposals out of Congress in recent years to privatize Social Security and voucherize 

Medicare. I urge you to reject proposals that would end Medicare as we know it. 

It would be a mistake to endanger these programs and break long-held commitments to our seniors instead of adopting commonsense reforms to preserve and 

strengthen Social Security and Medicare for current and future generations. 

With increases in severe weather affecting Connecticut and many other parts of 

the country, we also need to ensure that families have the support they need to survive and get by. This winter and for several past winters, Connecticut has endured 

historic winter storms. We must fund home energy assistance programs like 

LIHEAP for families across the country who are struggling to stay warm. 

LIHEAP serves around 120,000 households in Connecticut, and this critical program has already received drastic cuts in recent years. Before sequestration, federal 

funding for LIHEAP in Connecticut stood at about $72 million, down from $79.5 

million in 2012 and down from around $98 million in 2011. Connecticut will now 

face additional cuts as sequestration cut LIHEAP nationally by $185 million. During 

harsh winters, it’s not right to leave families struggling to heat their homes and 

keep their kids safe from the weather. We need to make LIHEAP funding a priority 

in 2014. 

Finally, I want to emphasize the need for funding to help prevent gun violence. 

As the Representative for Newtown, Connecticut and as a mother, I feel a special 

responsibility to help meet the needs of that community and to the parents who 

have suffered such unimaginable horror. But gun violence is costing lives in cities 

and towns across the country. It’s a national crisis. 

Again, budgets reflect our priorities, and I think we can all agree that few priorities are greater than protecting the lives of our children. The Budget Committee 

should restore funding for public safety and law enforcement initiatives to help reduce gun violence. In addition, funding for research into the causes of gun violence, 

for mental health, and for the states to improve the upload of criminal records into 

the National Instant Criminal Background Check System to keep guns out of the 

hands of criminals. 

We can and should start with easy, smart cuts and revenue increases—there are 

already proposals on the table that I support to repeal subsidies for big oil and big 

gas, eliminate outdated subsidies for agriculture, and to enact a ‘‘Buffet Rule’’ so 

that the wealthiest are paying their fair share. 

That’s certainly not an exhaustive list of the cuts we can make, nor are the programs I’ve discussed an exhaustive list of what I believe we can and should fund. 

But I respectfully urge all to keep in mind, as you write this budget resolution, that 

we were elected to make decisions that are in the best interest of the American people. We can’t keep punting the responsibility of making tough choices when it comes 

to our budget, as this Congress did by allowing mandatory across-the-board cuts to 

go through on March 1. 

Our constituents are looking for us to do our job, so that they can do theirs. Let’s 

pass a budget that reflects our values as Americans. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you, Mrs. Esty. 

The chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Joe 

Courtney. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOE COURTNEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT 

Mr. COURTNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And first of all, I 

want to compliment my colleague from Connecticut. This is her 
45 

maiden presentation before the House Budget Committee, and I 

compliment on her great testimony and associate myself with her, 

again, broader range of issues that definitely affect our great State. 

My focus here this morning really is to talk about one issue 

which is Medicare. This is a committee which last year and apparently this year again seems to be the place where the strongest effort is being made, in my opinion, to butcher a program which has 

done so much in terms of raising life expectancy for seniors since 

it was enacted in 1965, signed into law by Lyndon Johnson out in 

Independence, Missouri, the first cards issued to Harry Truman 

and Bess Truman, and has also in my opinion helped create a 

health care system that again has done great things in terms of pediatric—excuse me. Not pediatric care but care for seniors and people on disability. 

In essence, what the committee proposed last year was to take 

this program, basically convert it into a private health insurance 

program for people aged 55 or less, and raise the age of eligibility 

to people aged 67. Again, if we go back to 1965, we had a private 

health insurance market for seniors in this country. The problem 

is only half of seniors either had the means or could satisfy the risk 

analysis that insurance companies imposed on any book of business 

that they have. And obviously, people over the age of 65 are a highrisk population in this country. 

The genius of Medicare was to create a universal pool of tens of 

millions of seniors, spread risk out, create a standard premium, 

provide a payroll tax system of revenue. And again, the results are 

clear. Life expectancy has been added by a factor of 8 years for 

Americans since the passage of the Medicare law. 

Despite the fact that we have had ups and downs in terms of its 

financial strength measured by the trustees for Medicare, we are 

now at a place where this committee last year and apparently this 

year is using budget reasons as an excuse to, again, fundamentally 

restructure this program despite the fact that even in the last year, 

we have seen tangible progress in terms of the financial solvency 

of this program. Doug Elmendorf testified through CBO just a few 

weeks ago that the projected baseline for the next 10 years for 

Medicare was actually going to be $230 billion less than the year 

before. 

And I brought with me, Mr. Chairman, a chart prepared by 

Standard & Poor’s which shows why this is happening. The per 

capita expenditure on Medicare which, again, going back just to 

2008, was running probably three times higher than the inflation 

rate, has dropped dramatically. And actually this number has even 

gone down since this chart was prepared just in the last few 

months or so. We are seeing a historic drop in terms of per capita 

spending for Medicare. Why is that happening? Mr. Elmendorf has 

told us it is for structural reasons created by the Affordable Care 

Act. Whether it is hospital readmission penalties, that again is 

changing dramatically hospital practices just in the last 3 years, 

equalization of payments for Medicare Advantage which is saving 

the taxpayer billions of dollars without endangering access to Medicare Advantage, and prevention and wellness programs covering 

cancer screenings, closing the donut hole, smoking cessation, annual checkups. These are all working. And Standard & Poor’s 
46 

chart, which I just showed you, demonstrated that. And it is working without, again, damaging people’s eligibility or access to this 

program or the scope of their benefits. 

We can do more. There is no question we can do more. And 

again, thoughtful people on the right and the left are already having serious conversations and discussions about the fact that it is 

time to phase out fee-for-service over the next 8 or 9 years. Hospitals are ready for it. Providers are ready for it. This is what will 

work. Raising the eligibility age, kicking 65- and 66-year-olds off of 

Medicare, according to CBO, would save about $113 billion. But the 

damage it would do to employer programs—- and I was with a 

shipyard in my district, EB, Electric Boat, which has some older 

workers who actually would like to maybe move on in terms of retirement, but they are frozen by the fact that their retirement benefits—their health benefits are something that they do not want to 

concede and let up. If we push that retirement eligibility age for 

Medicare to age 67, you are going to create job block in the older 

sectors of our population and not allow our workforce to refresh 

itself and creating new opportunities for younger people. 

We can do better. We can save more money than any of these 

proposals that have been put forth in terms of privatizing Medicare 

or raising the age of eligibility. Coming from the insurance capital 

of America, we know a little bit about insurance in this country, 

and there are better ways that we can, again, save money, which 

is a clear challenge in terms of demographics in this country, without, again, damaging the basic structure of a program which has 

transformed the lives of seniors over the last 47 years. 

And with that, I yield back. 

Mr. RICE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you, Mr. Courtney. 

Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent that a copy of the 

graph shown by Mr. Courtney be included in the record. 

Mr. RICE. No objection? 

[The graph provided by Joe Courtney follows:] 
47 

Mr. RICE. Thank you very much, Mr. Courtney. 

The chair now recognizes for 5 minutes the Honorable Mr. Connolly from Virginia. 

STATEMENT OF HON. GERALD E. CONNOLLY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Cicilline, members of the committee. It is great to be back at the Budget Committee. I served in my first term here on the Budget Committee, 

and I have sat through this session as a members of the committee 

in terms of members’ comments. And so in light of that experience, 

I will not read my prepared statement, and with permission, I will 

enter it into the record. 

I will only make two points, echoing everything my colleagues 

have said, but I want to make two points. And I understand, given 

the partisan division here and in the Congress, these two points 

will fall on deaf ears, but I still think they are worth making. 

One is that sequestration and the pending Ryan budget, like the 

previous two Ryan budgets, only this one is going to be worse, constitute a disinvestment in America. We are disinvesting in R&D. 

We are disinvesting in education. We are disinvesting in infrastructure, and we are disinvesting in human capital. No great country 

stays great when it does that. China is not doing that. And we will 

pay a price a generation hence for these disinvestments. 

And so it seems to me every budget represents our values, and 

the budget that is about to come before the floor I fear does not 

represent these values and will do harm to our country in the long 

run. 

The second point I want to make is on behalf Federal employees. 

Just today, you know, we considered a rule and later today we are 

going to vote on a continuing resolution that will freeze salaries for 

Federal employees for the third year in a row. Now, we have al-
48 

ready changed the compensation package, the retirement benefit 

package, for prospective Federal employees. We have frozen their 

salaries for 2 years, and they have already contributed over $100 

billion to debt reduction. The only employee group, working group, 

in America that was asked to do that. 

We face a crisis. 47 percent of Federal employees are eligible for 

retirement in the next decade. How will we recruit and retain the 

talent we need, the skilled workforce we need for the future? It, 

after all, serves our constituents. Every one of us will feel that 

pinch over time in our respective districts. 

Public service is a noble calling. Most Federal employees do a superlative job. They work hard. They work long hours. They provide 

quality skills on behalf of our constituents. They deserve our respect, and I urge that, whatever we do in the next budget, we try 

to reflect that respect, that dignity, and not ask them to continue 

to be the only group in America to make a sacrifice in the name 

of the national debt. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your hard work 

and Mr. Cicilline. And thank you so much for giving us this opportunity today. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you, Mr. Connolly, for putting up with me. 

The chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Nevada, Mrs. 

Titus. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DANA TITUS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEVADA 

Ms. TITUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and ranking member. I 

also want to thank Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen for holding this hearing and for their hard work to resolve our 

Nation’s fiscal challenges. 

It is important that we remember the Federal budget is more 

than a theoretical document that is only debated in Washington 

with no impact on families throughout the United States. Instead, 

the Federal budget is a blueprint for our Nation’s future. It is a 

statement of our national priorities. Our budget should be a path 

forward for a strong middle class and jobs for every person who is 

looking for a chance at the American dream. 

The choices we make here determine if a family in Las Vegas is 

living paycheck to paycheck or is saving money for their children’s 

education. Our budget determines if States like Nevada will become the Saudi Arabia of solar power and home to thousands of 

clean energy jobs that cannot be outsourced or if we will continue 

to rely on fossil fuels that harm our environment and create jobs 

overseas instead of here at home. 

Accordingly, I would like to take the few minutes I have today 

to highlight what I believe should be the pillars of our budget. 

First, we must make it very clear that we will preserve and protect 

Medicare and Social Security. We cannot change these programs in 

any way that will break the safety net that has sustained the most 

vulnerable in our society. I do not support raising the retirement 

age for Social Security recipients because I do not feel it is fair to 

ask the construction worker building the next great resort on the 

Las Vegas Strip to work 2 more hours in the blazing sun so we can 

protect tax breaks for billionaires. And I will not support turning 
49 

Medicare into a voucher program because I do not think it is fair 

to ask a senior in District 1 to choose between medicine and food 

so we can continue to provide tax breaks for big oil. 

Second, our budget should be a serious investment in our Nation’s ability to compete well into the 21st century. The Silver State 

is also the solar State with more than 300 sunny days a year. The 

development of this renewable energy source is smart policy in a 

number of ways. Congress should continue supporting funding for 

our State energy programs which leverage funds in support of renewable energy projects and energy efficiency programs. Our budget should preserve the solar Investment Tax Credit, which is particularly important to developing large solar projects. The extension of the ITC will give the solar energy industry the long-term 

certainty that is so vital to any business sector. 

We should make investments in infrastructure and energy efficiency by continuing incentives for utilizing green building practices. We should also prioritize reducing energy usage in older construction with retrofit programs for office buildings, retail stores, 

schools, and homes. 

And when it comes to building an economy geared toward middle 

class growth, it is essential that we also invest in our critical infrastructure and transportation systems. Our roads, railroads, and 

airports are central to America’s economic success, and we must 

make them a priority. 

Congress must continue to support the FAA’s NextGen implementation that is at the heart of modernizing our air traffic control 

system. It will lead to increased safety for the flying public while 

also reducing fuel costs and increasing efficiency for our airlines. 

Our railroad infrastructure also remains critical to our economy. 

I believe that development of a high-speed rail is a challenge that 

we must take on. Congress must work with private industry and 

the States to advance high-speed rail projects that hold so much 

promise for the job creation and economic success we need. 

In the end, the most crucial investment we can make for the future of our Nation is in the next generation of Americans. We must 

make education a top priority and give our children the skills and 

training they need to be the innovators of the future. In short, we 

cannot afford to be penny wise and pound foolish when it comes to 

supporting education and research and development. 

Again, I thank you for your attention, and I look forward to 

working with you and our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 

produce a budget that takes a balanced approach to improving our 

economy and investing in our Nation’s future. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dana Titus follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DINA TITUS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEVADA

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member. I want to also thank Chairman 

Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen for holding this hearing and for their hard 

work to resolve our nation’s fiscal challenges. 

It is important we remember that the federal budget is more than a theoretical 

document that is only debated in Washington, with no impact on families throughout the United States. 

Instead the federal budget is a blueprint for our nation’s future; it is a statement 

of our national priorities. Our budget should be a path forward for a strong middle 

class and jobs for every person who is looking for a chance at the American Dream. 
50 

The choices we make determine if a family in Las Vegas is living paycheck to paycheck, or saving money for their children’s education. 

Our budget determines if states like Nevada will become the Saudi Arabia of solar 

power, and home to thousands of clean energy jobs that cannot be outsourced. Or, 

if we will continue to rely on fossil fuels that harm our environment and create jobs 

overseas instead of here at home. 

Accordingly, I want to take the few minutes I have today to highlight what I believe should be the pillars of our budget. 

First, we must be clear that we will preserve and protect Medicare and Social Security. We cannot change these programs in any way that will break the safety net 

that has sustained the most vulnerable in our society. 

I do not support raising the retirement age for Social Security recipients because 

I do not feel it is fair to ask a construction worker building the next great resort 

on the Las Vegas Strip to work two more years in the blazing sun so we can protect 

tax breaks for billionaires. 

And, I will not support turning Medicare into a voucher program because I do not 

think it is fair to ask a senior in District One to choose between medicines and food 

so we can continue to provide tax breaks for Big Oil. 

Second, our budget should be a serious investment in our nation’s ability to compete well into the 21st Century. 

The Silver State is also the Solar State, with more than 300 sunny days a year. 

The development of this renewable energy source is smart policy in a number of 

ways. 

Congress should continue supporting funding for our State Energy Programs 

which leverage funds in support of renewable energy projects and energy efficiency 

programs. 

Our budget should preserve the Solar Investment Tax Credit which is particularly 

important to developing large solar projects. The extension of the ITC will give the 

solar industry the long-term certainty that is so vital to any business sector. 

We should make investments in infrastructure and energy efficiency by continuing incentives for utilizing green building practices. We should also prioritize reducing energy usage in older construction with retrofit programs for office buildings, 

retail stores, schools, and homes. 

When it comes to building an economy geared toward middle class growth, it is 

essential that we invest in our critical infrastructure and transportation systems. 

Our roads, railroads, and airports are central to America’s economic success, and 

we must make them a priority. 

Congress must continue to support the FAA’s NextGen implementation that is at 

the heart of modernizing our air traffic control system. It will lead to increased safety for the flying public while also reducing fuel costs and increasing efficiency for 

our airlines. 

Our railroad infrastructure also remains critical to our economy. I believe that development of high speed rail is a challenge we must take on. Congress must work 

with private industry and the states to advance high speed rail projects that hold 

so much promise for job creation and economic success. 

In the end, the most crucial investment we can make for the future of our nation 

is in the next generation of Americans. We must make education a top priority, and 

give our children the skills and training they need to be the innovators of the future. 

In short, we cannot afford to be penny wise and pound foolish when it comes to 

supporting education, and research and development. 

Again, thank you for your attention. I look forward to working with you and our 

colleagues on both sides of the aisle to produce a budget that takes a balanced approach to improving our economy and investing in our nation’s future. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you, Mrs. Titus. 

The chair recognizes for 5 minutes the gentleman from Arizona, 

Mr. Barber. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RON BARBER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA 

Mr. BARBER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and ranking member. I 

am pleased to be here today to bring to your attention some funding needs that are critical in my district in southern Arizona and 

to the Nation. 
51 

I agree that spending must be reduced to address our budget deficit and national debt. I have five grandchildren and I do not want 

their future weighed down by the debt that we have created. I am 

sure I join with millions of parents and grandparents across the 

Nation who feel this way. 

There is no doubt that spending must be reduced to address our 

national debt, but spending across the board, spending mandated 

by sequestration, is not the way to make the kind of responsible 

and fact-based spending cuts that this Nation needs. 

Let me talk about the impact on our State, my district, and on 

the Nation. Sequestration is already taking its toll. Because Arizona is on the U.S.-Mexico border, sequestration cuts are especially 

serious, and those consequences, if allowed to continue for long, 

will degrade the security of our entire Nation. In a letter this week 

to Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, the Department of Homeland Security Secretary, Janet Napolitano, wrote: reductions mandated by 

sequestration will necessitate furloughs, hiring freezes, and the 

elimination of overtime pay for a significant portion of our frontline law enforcement personnel which will impact negatively on 

staffing levels in Arizona. 

This is not the right way to go. Reduced overtime and furloughs 

on CBP border patrol agents will result in diminished capability 

and capacity to detect and interdict illicit activities along southern 

Arizona’s border with Mexico, one of the most porous areas of the 

border in the whole Nation. It will also reduce the income of these 

agents by 20 percent. That is the wrong way to treat these brave 

men and women who put on the uniform every day to protect the 

homeland. 

So first and foremost, Mr. Chairman, before we make any decisions about spending for the future, we must give the American 

people certainty and reverse the sequester before the full impacts 

are felt by the American families, businesses, and our economy. We 

must work immediately to adopt a bipartisan and balanced budget 

package. 

Moving forward, Mr. Chairman, we must clearly show our commitment to a more secure border with Mexico. We have made improvements but there are many yet to be made. As only one of nine 

members with a border district on the southwest border, I know 

firsthand that many of the people I represent still feel unsafe in 

their own homes. That is not right. No American should feel unsafe 

in their homes because of incursions from across the border. We 

need robust funding for agents, technology, and communications on 

the border. 

We must also make new investments in our ports of entry to improve infrastructure and to increase staffing levels to ensure that 

the ports are secure and that legal commerce flows expeditiously. 

Mr. Chairman, let me now speak about defense. Among the 50 

States, Arizona ranks fifth nationally in the number of employees 

in defense-related jobs. More than 42,000 Arizonans work in the 

aerospace or defense industry jobs, and the industry is responsible 

for more than 153,000 indirect jobs in our State. Raytheon Missile 

Systems in Tucson, for example, manufactures Tomahawk, Maverick Sidewinder, and many of the other missiles that we need in 

our current conflicts. Raytheon also partners with Israel on the 
52 

Iron Dome protection system that is essential to Israel’s safety and 

security. 

Also in my district, we have two military installations that are 

essential to our national security: Davis-Monthan Air Force Base 

and Fort Huachuca. I am very proud to represent these patriotic 

service members and their families and our civilian workforce that 

works in Department of Defense-related jobs. 

We must protect these assets that are so critical to our national 

defense and security. Morale in the armed forces has been seriously 

affected by the uncertainty in the cuts imposed by sequestration. 

By making robust investments in our national defense, we will ensure our readiness and security while dispelling economic uncertainty and creating new economic growth. 

Southern Arizona is also home to over 85,000 veterans. America’s 

veterans have made every sacrifice we have asked of them to protect our Nation and protect our freedoms. As we set our budget priorities for this fiscal year and each one after that, we must honor 

the promises that we have made to our veterans. 

And finally, many Americans come to my district from other 

parts of the country to retire. As a result, we have over 128,000 

seniors living in my district. They have invested all of their working lives in a retirement income and medical care assurances in Social Security and Medicare. They are concerned and I am concerned 

about the long-term solvency of these programs. But we know for 

a fact that Medicare is solvent till 2024, Social Security till 2033. 

We have time to do the right thing to continue their solvency without making drastic cuts or privatizing these critical systems and 

services. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for the opportunity to discuss 

the fiscal challenges facing our Nation. They cannot be overstated. 

But neither can we afford to shrink from our responsibilities—— 

Mr. RICE. Mr. Barber—— 

Mr. BARBER [continuing]. To stop investing in this Nation’s future. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Ron Barber follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. RON BARBER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA

MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET: Thank you for 

inviting me to be with you this morning to address some funding needs that are 

critical to my district in Southern Arizona. 

First of all, Mr. Chairman, I would like to discuss the impacts that the sequestration has had on my state and on my district. And I mean the very real impacts that 

already have occurred. 

Because Arizona is on the U.S. Mexico border, sequestration consequences are especially serious. And those consequences—if allowed to continue for long—will degrade the security of our entire nation. 

In a letter this week to Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, Department of Homeland 

Security Secretary Janet Napolitano wrote that, ‘‘Reductions mandated by sequestration will necessitate furloughs, hiring freezes and elimination of overtime pay for 

a significant portion of our frontline law enforcement personnel, which will impact 

staffing levels in Arizona.’’ 

Reduced overtime and furloughs of CBP Border Patrol agents will result in a ‘‘diminished capability and capacity to detect and interdict illicit activity along Arizona’s border with Mexico.’’ 

So first and foremost, Mr. Chairman, before we make any decisions about spending for the future we must give the American people certainty and reverse the se-
53 

quester before the full impacts are felt by American families, businesses and our 

economy. We must work immediately to adopt a bipartisan and balanced budget 

package. 

Spending must be reduced to address our national debt. But the across-the-board 

cuts mandated by sequestration are not the way to make the kind of intelligent, 

fact-based spending cuts that this nation needs. 

Mr. Chairman, moving forward, our budget must clearly show our commitment 

to a more secure border with Mexico. 

We have made improvements in securing our border—but the job remains unfinished. 

As one of only eight members in the House representing the Southwest border 

and as a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I know that we still have 

more to do so the people who live and work along our southern border feel safe in 

their homes and on their land. 

That is not the case today in some areas of my district—and in other areas of 

the border. 

We need robust funding for agents, technology and communications at the border. 

We also must make new investments in our ports of entry to improve infrastructure and increase staffing to ensure that the ports are secure and commerce flows. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to turn now to defense. 

Among the 50 states, Arizona ranks fifth nationally in the number of employees 

in defense-related jobs. 

More than 42,000 Arizonans work in aerospace or defense industry jobs and the 

industry is responsible for more than 153,000 direct, indirect and induced jobs. 

Our aerospace industry, from the workers at the plant, to the pioneering scientists 

and engineers at the drafts board, work tirelessly to provide this country the ability 

to meet any threat, around the world, and here at home. 

Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson manufactures Tomahawk, Maverick Sidewinder and many other missiles. Raytheon also partners with Israel on the integral 

Iron Dome protection system that is imperative to Israel’s safety and security. 

In addition to our state’s thriving defense industries, southern Arizona is home 

to two major military installations and an Air National Guard Wing: 

• Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson 

• the Army’s Fort Huachuca in Sierra Vista 

• And the 162nd Fighter Wing of the Arizona Air National Guard just across my 

district line 

I am proud to represent these brave service men and women, their families, and 

our civilian workforce in Southern Arizona. 

Pilots at Davis-Monthan train every day in A-10s so that they can provide close 

air support for our soldiers when deployed overseas, flying low and slow and picking 

off insurgents. 

Soldiers at Fort Huachuca learn human intelligence tactics to provide us with 

critical insights in the field on our enemy’s capabilities, to help find the 

vulnerabilities that will turn the tide of war. 

Pilots at the 162nd fighter wing of the AZ Air National Guard train foreign allies 

and build future relationships that strengthen our global security and international 

partners. 

By making robust investments in our national defense we will ensure our readiness and security while dispelling economic uncertainty and creating new economic 

growth. 

Southern Arizona is also home to over 85,000 veterans. America’s veterans have 

made every sacrifice to defend our nation and protect our freedoms. As we set our 

budget priorities this fiscal year and each one after it, we must honor the promises 

we have made to our veterans and ensure that they receive the compensation, 

health care, educational opportunities, and employment assistance that they deserve. 

Our budget must also honor and reflect our commitments to seniors who have put 

in a lifetime of hard work, helping to make our economy grow and make our nation 

strong. They deserve a safe, healthy and secure retirement. I represent nearly 

130,000 seniors and am committed to protecting and preserving Social Security and 

Medicare for the seniors in my district and for generations to come. I oppose any 

efforts to phase out Social Security and Medicare or proposals to replace these programs with privatized systems that jeopardize the livelihood of the millions of seniors who depend on them. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you again for this opportunity. The fiscal challenges facing 

our nation cannot be overstated. But we can neither afford to shirk from our responsibilities nor can we stop investing in this nation’s future. 
54 

I look forward to working with all of my colleagues—from both sides of the aisle— 

to reach a fair, balanced and bipartisan approach to sequestration. 

And I look forward to working with all of my colleagues in putting our nation on 

a solid financial footing so we can face our challenges with the strength that can 

come only from lowering our debt. 

Thank you. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you very much, sir. 

The chair recognizes the Honorable Mr. Salmon from Arizona. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MATT SALMON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA 

Mr. SALMON. Thanks a lot, Mr. Chairman and members of the 

committee. 

I would ask for unanimous consent to have my written testimony 

entered into the record. 

Mr. RICE. Without objection. 

Mr. SALMON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This is my second opportunity to serve in Congress. I served back 

in—I started in 1994 to the year 2000. We had some fiscal issues 

then. In fact, when I first came to Congress, I think we had about 

$135,000,000 deficit, and I was apoplectic about that because I was 

concerned that we were mortgaging our children’s future away 

then. 

But, boy, how times have changed. In the last decade since I 

have been gone, we went from a $1.789 trillion budget in the year 

2000 to a $3.796 trillion budget this year, 53 percent higher than 

it was when I was here. 

Mr. Chairman, I do not think that is responsible. I believe that 

we have got to pay as we go just like every American family has 

to do, just like every American business, every hospital, every 

church. Nobody spends the way that we spend like drunken sailors 

on shore leave. And I think that we owe the American public a little bit more. 

In fact, last year in our budget, 43 cents out of every dollar that 

we spent was borrowed and we continue to borrow like there is no 

tomorrow. In fact, I have heard jokes about some families saying 

that they tried to use their MasterCard to pay off their Visa bill. 

It seems like that is what we are doing time and time again. 

But there will be a comeuppance. There was a commercial that 

used to run when I was a kid. It was the FRAM man, and he used 

to say you pay me now or you will pay me a lot more later. Well, 

that is where we are at. We see the calamities that are happening 

across the water in Greece and we think that could never happen 

to us. But, Mr. Chairman, it can. If we do not get our fiscal house 

in order, there are going to be a lot more people hurt a lot worse 

than—people are talking about the sequester that is hurting people’s lives. Well, the fact is if we do not do something now, people 

will be hurt a lot worse, and the longer we punt this thing, the 

more difficult it is going to be to dig our way out. 

So, Mr. Chairman, I came back to Congress—actually I left voluntarily. I did a term limit pledge and I left after three terms. I 

came back to Congress not just because I like Washington, D.C. I 

came back because I really do believe that we have got to fundamentally change the way we do things. We just had our fifth 

grandchild last year, and as I look into that precious baby’s eyes 
55 

and I think what kind of future is that baby going to have if we 

do not get our financial house in order right now. 

And so, Mr. Chairman, my biggest goal is to balance this budget 

as quickly as we possibly can and to start paying down the debt. 

And I think that in order to do that, we ought to look at everything. No sacred cows. And we ought to cut out things that are not 

big priorities. I think that we ought to look at something that we 

tried back when I was in Congress before with the Contract with 

America. We identified three cabinet-level agencies that we were 

willing to get rid of. The Federal Department of Commerce has not 

had a Secretary of Commerce in over a year. Well, if it is so easy 

to do without a Secretary of Commerce for a year, maybe it is easy 

to do without the whole Department of Commerce. What value are 

they really adding? 

I also believe that we ought to take a look at our taxation policies. We are driving companies overseas. If we really want to fix 

things, then let’s stop having the most oppressive, high corporate 

tax rate in the entire world. Right now, we are at 35 percent. It 

is the highest corporate tax rate in the world. President Obama has 

said that that policy is actually hurting American businesses and 

driving them overseas. Well, let’s take him up on it. Let’s lower the 

corporate tax rate to about 25 percent or lower and let companies 

repatriate into this country without penalizing them. Let them 

come back to this country and bring their assets. 

Marco Rubio said something I think that is very appropriate. He 

said we do not need more taxes. We need more taxpayers. 

Now, the goal is to run the Government. I understand that. We 

want to run the Government. We want to take care of this country. 

But let’s stop confusing what our goals are. It seems like sometimes our goals are to punish people for being successful. How 

about we reward people for being ingenious? And that means in 

Government too. If we find better ways of doing things, cheaper 

ways of doing things, we ought to reward agency heads for doing 

that and the people that work in those agencies for finding better 

ways, more cost effective ways to do things. 

I also would like to change the way we do our budgeting in general. This baseline budgeting to me is for the birds. No company, 

successful company, looks at what they got last year and says, well, 

you will get that plus some next year regardless of how effective 

you were at spending that money and how effective you were at 

achieving your goals. Let’s try to move toward a baseline budget 

and reward people for getting the job done. I understand that with 

our food stamp program, we actually have a bonus program where 

we bonus people, we bonus States for the amount of people that 

they pay out welfare to or give out food stamps to. How about we 

reward people for getting folks off of food stamps and getting them 

into jobs instead of rewarding people for growing Government? 

Mr. Chairman, I can see that my time is just about expired, but 

I would just like to inject a little bit of common sense back into the 

equation and do things like the rest of America has to do it: pay 

as we go and not borrow our way into oblivion. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Matt Salmon follows:] 
56 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MATT SALMON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Chairman Paul Ryan, Ranking Member Chris Van Hollen, Members of the House 

Budget Committee, good morning and thank you for calling this hearing for Members to come and share their concerns with the current fiscal health of the United 

States and express our hopes for the future direction of our Federal budget. I appreciate the opportunity to participate in this year’s Members’ Day and I look forward 

to working with the members of this committee to bring common sense spending 

reforms to the 113th Congress. 

REVIEWING CURRENT FISCAL CONDITIONS

As many of you know, from 1995 through 2001, I was honored to represent the 

people of Arizona in this esteemed body. When I left, adhering to my three term 

limit pledge, a Republican Congress had worked with a Democrat President, Bill 

Clinton, to change our budget trajectory from endless deficits to a budget surplus 

of $236 billion in 2000. We also accomplished many government reforms that not 

only made government more efficient and less expensive, but also lifted the heavy 

and costly burden of government regulations, mandates and taxes. We released 

America’s greatest asset: our entrepreneurs who created jobs and wealth that benefited the whole country and enabled us to balance our budget. It is important to 

note that those reforms and spending reductions did not come easily. In fact, as 

many of you remember, we actually shut the government down for 28 days while 

we haggled, argued and ultimately found a compromise. As painful as it was, the 

budget show down of 1995, set the stage for the prosperity that followed. 

Now, let me be clear, I am not advocating a budget shut down. I’m illustrating 

that the choices we faced back then were tough, but we did it. Now, we as a Congress face an even more enormous challenge; but in the end we must be responsible, 

lead, and make tough choices in order to confront those challenges and emerge a 

better nation. Just as in the 90’s, this will be hard. Because of the enormity of our 

current fiscal situation it will require that we work together and make those difficult choices that will allow our country and our economy to emerge better than 

before. 

The economy’s performance, both short term and long term, depends heavily on 

how we conduct our fiscal policy. The fiscal challenges facing this Congress are not 

new. It is important that we put the federal budget on a sustainable, long-term path 

that promotes economic growth. We’ve proven before that a divided government can 

act in a fiscally responsible way, and, the need is far greater than ever now. To put 

it in perspective, total government spending in outlays in 2000 was $1.789 trillion— 

today, that number is 53% higher ($3.796 trillion). Even more concerning, in just 

four years (2008 to 2012), government spending increased by over 21%. That is simply unsustainable. 

Some have tried to say that we need a ‘‘balanced’’ approach that increases taxes 

again on the American people. I reject that premise. This year, according to CBO, 

the government is expected to have the highest revenues in the history of this country; yet, we will still have a budget deficit of about $850 billion. This is proof: we 

have a spending problem. As Senator Marco Rubio has said before, ‘‘We don’t need 

more taxes. We need more taxpayers.’’ 

COMBATTING GOVERNMENT DUPLICATION, REDUNDANCY, AND WASTE

First and foremost, this Congress must start reducing the actual size of the government. In order to do that, we must begin to identify and consolidate redundant 

programs. According to a recent report, if the government would even just follow 

the recommendations given to them by the duly appointed Inspectors General, we 

could save an additional $67 billion. That is just scratching the surface. 

Also, important to solving short-term budget deficits is the elimination of purely 

wasteful government spending. Some of the more ludicrous examples include: (1) 

$27 million on Moroccan pottery classes; (2) $4.5 billion on improper food stamp 

payments; and (3) $25 billion each year to maintain vacant federal properties. In 

a time where average American families are tightening their belts and looking for 

ways to stretch their stagnant or diminishing paychecks, it seems insulting that the 

Federal government dumps billions of dollars each year into inefficient (and often 

times pointless—i.e.: $947,000 for food on Mars, the planet) government pork. 

To prove that we are serious about cuts, we should have a top down review of 

our government. We need to seriously look into reducing the number of agencies and 

departments. As the annual GAO study shows, there’s duplication and ineffective 
57 

programs throughout the government. One easy example is the duplication that exists between the Department of Education and the Department of Labor. 

It is critical that the U.S. government treat its budget like any normal family or 

business would. Congress should be allocating our resources based on needs and 

benefits, rather than history. 

ADDRESSING FUTURE FISCAL CONCERNS (MANDATORY SPENDING/MEDICARE)

While finding and eliminating government waste is critical, that alone will not address the looming long-run budgetary crisis. We must tackle our mushrooming entitlement programs. One necessary step to reduce our long-run spending is to begin 

tackling our mushrooming entitlement programs—most importantly, Medicare. The 

dramatic growth in Medicare spending and the accumulation of total future obligations are weighing down the program. One solution I have advocated for would be, 

over time gradually increasing the retirement age for both Social Security and Medicare to 72. With Americans living longer, healthier lives it makes sense to raise the 

retirement age in order to preserve these programs’ solvency. Just by raising the 

retirement age to 70, the Business Roundtable estimated a savings of $300 billion 

in Medicare spending and an extension of Social Security’s solvency for 75 years. 

Failing to act to reform and therefore save these entitlement programs is irresponsible. In fact, if we don’t act now, there may not be enough resources in the systems 

to provide promised services to the couple retiring today. 

ZERO-BASED BUDGETING

Finally, to help Congress reduce wasteful spending, I advocate we adopt a zerobased budgeting process. Through this approach, every line item of the budget must 

be approved versus just the year to year changes. With zero-based budgeting, we 

can begin to properly identify and eliminate wasteful and obsolete programs while 

bringing a new level of transparency to our constituents. By justifying each line 

item in the Federal budget, we can begin to truly identify where the Federal government has overstepped its constitutional authority, created duplicative or ineffective 

programs and thereby reduce spending while transferring power back to the States 

where it belongs. Zero-based budgeting would enable us to start lowering our deficit, 

bringing us towards a balanced budget within ten years (FY2024). 

BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT

Balancing the budget should be the number one priority of every Congress, especially the 113th. This is why I hope the House Budget committee will support a balanced budget amendment. With a balanced budget amendment, Congress would finally be held accountable for reckless spending using our grandchildren as collateral. It is our responsibility as Members of Congress to ensure a brighter future for 

our future generations. 

PAY-FOR-PERFORMANCE LEGISLATION

This responsibility to our constituents is why I suggest adopting legislation requiring a pay cut should Congress fail to pass a budget that balances within 10 

years. When I go back to the district to meet with constituents, the number one 

complaint is the lack of progress Congress has made in the past two years in balancing the budget. Pay-for-Performance legislation would add the extra incentive 

some may need to find common-sense, effective budget reductions. 

TAXATION POLICY

When trying to balance the budget, some of my colleagues in Congress have suggested higher taxes on corporations and individuals. I cannot stress how opposed I 

am to this proposition. As it stands now, the United States has the highest corporate tax rate of 39.2 percent (Japan is now at 36.8 percent after their recent cut). 

Having a corporate income tax rate well above the 25 percent average of other developed nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 

(OECD) puts us at a large disadvantage when competing for new investment. To 

bring more jobs back to American shores and restore a friendly economic environment for businesses to prosper, we must act to reduce our corporate tax rate. Reducing the corporate income tax rate is a bipartisan effort, supported openly by President Obama on his website and in recent press conferences. We must lead our nation back towards the path of prosperity by incentivizing companies to move back 

to the U.S. and bring much needed jobs, research and development, and growth with 

them. 
58 

CONCLUSION

Again, I thank the Committee for their time, and for the warm invitation from 

Chairman Ryan and Ranking-Member Van Hollen. I hope the House Budget Committee takes into consideration my thoughts on how to address government waste, 

long-run mandatory spending, the benefits of a zero-based budgeting process, the 

need for a balanced budget amendment, and my ideas on Pay-for-Performance legislation to help incentivize a balanced budget. In addition, I urge my colleagues on 

the Budget Committee to take to heart my suggestions to lower corporate income 

tax rates in order to help further stimulate our sluggish economy. I look forward 

to working alongside this great committee as the House brings the FY 2014 budget 

to the House floor for a vote. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you, Mr. Salmon, very much. 

The chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Barr. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ANDY BARR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY 

Mr. BARR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I want to 

thank the committee for the opportunity to share with you some of 

the budget priorities I hold for the coming year and which I am 

here to emphasize on behalf of the people of the 6th Congressional 

District of Kentucky. 

As a new Member of the House, I strongly support the call of the 

American people to reduce Government spending and bring the national debt under control. As I have traveled around my district, 

people have consistently told me that restoring fiscal responsibility 

is their number one priority and that they sent me to Washington 

to force the Government to live within its means. Accordingly, I am 

committed to cutting spending, reducing the size of Government, 

promoting economic growth, and putting our budget on a path to 

balance. 

Today I would like to talk about a number of things, namely entitlement reform so that these programs can be sustainable for the 

future, a permanent fix to the sustainable growth rate for physicians, properly budgeting for natural disaster relief, keeping taxes 

low to encourage economic growth, and the importance of ensuring 

a strong national defense in a tough budget environment. Our debt is currently $16.7 trillion. It was $16.4 trillion when I 

took office only 8 weeks ago, and we all know that the debt, even 

with the $620 billion tax increase the President got at the start of 

the year, will continue to skyrocket in the coming years if nothing 

is done to reform our Government. 

Mandatory spending has consumed a growing share of our Nation’s budget over the years, and the trend, if left unreformed, will 

only make our budget crisis worse. In 1972, mandatory spending 

accounted for 37 percent of the budget. 30 years later in 2012, 

nearly 58 percent of our spending is devoted to mandatory programs. If the status quo spending is left unreformed, the reality is 

that the growth in mandatory spending programs will continue to 

consume an increasing share of our budget and squeeze out our 

ability to devote resources to other important priorities. In fact, the 

anticipated growth in health care spending, other entitlement 

spending, and the interest on the national debt is projected to consume 100 percent of Federal revenues in the next 15 years. This 

means that every single dollar of spending that Washington puts 

towards discretionary programs in the future would be adding to 

the debt. This puts our children and grandchildren in an unaccept-
59 

able and untenable position. So we need to reform Medicare and 

our other entitlements if we want to maintain the ability and flexibility to invest in other important priorities without adding to an 

unsustainable debt. 

As part of comprehensive Medicare reform, we have to reform 

our payment policies without diminishing seniors’ access to physicians. I hope the committee can encourage efforts to repeal the current sustainable growth rate formula. This, of course, was originally developed to control the amount that Medicare will pay for 

health care services. However, it has proven to be an ineffective 

drain on our budget that gets worse each year that it is left unresolved. Further, the uncertainty each year of whether Congress will 

come up with a fix causes tremendous anxiety for physicians. It 

harms their ability to budget properly for their practices and jeopardizes their ability to take in and treat more seniors. Rather than 

reimburse per service provided, we need to replace the SGR with 

a program that incentives quality, efficiency, and access. This will 

provide certainty for health care providers that is permanent and 

durable and allow them to get back on focusing on patients, helping patients heal while reining in out-of-control overall costs in 

health care. 

Another reform that I would like to encourage the committee to 

focus on is the need to properly budget for natural disaster relief. 

Anytime a natural disaster strikes, I share the sympathy of all 

Americans and support a prompt and compassionate Federal response where needed. But rather than add to the debt every time 

we face a difficult decision, I believe we should work to find ways 

to budget for and pay for natural disaster aid packages. This 

means adequately prefunding disaster relief accounts bringing disaster spending under spending caps and additional reforms to ensure that disaster relief designation is being appropriately applied. 

I am willing to work with the committee on a number of potential 

reform proposals to improve how we pay for disaster relief. 

I would also like to emphasize the importance of focusing on economic growth when it comes to discussing taxes. While many in 

Washington are short-sightedly calling for another round of tax increases on top of the $620 billion that the President pushed for in 

January, I strongly believe that this is the wrong approach. Raising 

taxes will only further weigh down the economy and slow job creation efforts in the private sector. And we know that additional 

revenue is never actually dedicated to deficit reduction. Instead, it 

is always used to finance more Government. It is always used as 

an excuse to not reform Government. 

The bottom line is that tax increases are a lousy deficit reduction 

strategy. If we want to maintain the most vibrant, dynamic economy in the world, I believe we must reform the tax code in ways 

that broadens the base, gets serious about simplification and closing tax loopholes, and lowers and consolidates marginal rates. This 

approach will enable American businesses to better compete and 

provide much needed tax relief to American families. 

Finally, I would like to talk about defense and national security. 

Defense spending represents approximately 18 percent of the Federal budget yet has been forced to absorb nearly half of the spending reductions occurring in the past 2 years. Given our military’s 
60 

already disproportionate contribution to deficit reduction, I encourage the committee to use its tools to ensure that our military has 

the resources it needs to properly defend the American people. We 

must always ensure that our military’s readiness is not compromised by an inability in Washington to reform our mandatory 

spending objectives. 

Thank you very much. I would like to thank the committee for 

the opportunity to present my priorities in the coming year. I look 

forward to working with the committee. Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Andy Barr follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ANDY BARR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank this Committee for the opportunity to share with 

you some of the budget priorities I hold for the upcoming year, and which I am here 

to emphasize on behalf of the Sixth District of Kentucky. 

As a new Member of the House, I strongly support the call of the American people 

to reduce government spending and bring our national debt under control. As I have 

traveled around my district, people have consistently told me that restoring fiscal 

responsibility is their number one priority, and that they sent me to Washington 

to force the government to live within its means. Accordingly, I am committed to 

cutting spending, reducing the size of government, promoting economic growth, and 

putting our budget on a path to balance. 

Today, I’d like to talk about a number of things—namely, entitlement reform so 

that these programs can be sustainable for the future; a permanent fix to the sustainable growth rate physician fee schedule; properly budgeting for natural disaster 

relief; keeping taxes low to encourage economic growth; and the importance of ensuring a strong national defense in a tough budget environment. 

SPENDING AND ENTITLEMENT REFORM

Our debt is currently $16.7 trillion. It was $16.4 trillion when I took office only 

8 weeks ago, and we all know that the debt—even with the $620 billion tax increase 

the President got at the start of the year—will continue to skyrocket in the coming 

years if nothing is done to reform our government. 

Mandatory spending has consumed a growing share of our nation’s budget over 

the years, and the trend, if left unreformed, will only make our budget crisis worse. 

In 1972, mandatory spending accounted for 37 percent of the budget; thirty years 

later, in 2012, nearly 58 percent of our spending was devoted to mandatory programs. 

If the status quo spending is left unreformed, the reality is that the growth in 

mandatory spending programs will continue to consume an increasing share of our 

budget and squeeze out our ability to devote resources to other priorities. In fact, 

the anticipated growth in health care spending, other entitlement spending, and interest on the debt is projected to consume 100% of federal revenues in the next 15 

years. 

This means that every single dollar of spending that Washington puts towards 

discretionary programs in the future would be adding to the debt—this puts our 

children and grandchildren in an unacceptable and untenable position. So, we need 

to reform Medicare and our other entitlements if we want to maintain the ability 

and flexibility to invest in our other programs, without adding to an unsustainable 

debt. 

SUSTAINABLE GROWTH RATE

As part of comprehensive Medicare reform, we have to reform our payment policies without diminishing seniors’ access to physicians. I hope the committee can encourage efforts to repeal the current Sustainable Growth Rate method, also known 

as the SGR physician payment schedule. The SGR was originally developed to control the amount that Medicare will pay for healthcare services; however, it has proven to be ineffective and a drain on our budget that gets worse each year it is left 

unresolved. Further, the uncertainty each year of whether Congress will come up 

with a fix causes tremendous anxiety for physicians—it harms their ability to budget properly for their practices, and therefore jeopardizes their ability to take in and 

treat more seniors. 
61 

Rather than reimburse per service provided, we need to replace the SGR with a 

program that incentivizes quality, efficiency, and access. This will provide certainty 

for healthcare providers that is permanent and durable, and allow them to get back 

to focusing on helping their patients heal, while reining-in out of control overall 

costs in healthcare. 

PROPERLY BUDGETING FOR NATURAL DISASTER RELIEF

Another reform that I’d like to encourage the committee to focus on is the need 

to properly budget for natural disaster relief. Any time a natural disaster strikes, 

I share the sympathy of all Americans and support a prompt and compassionate federal response where needed. But rather than add to the debt every time we face 

a difficult decision, I believe that we should work to find a way to budget and pay 

for disaster aid packages. This means adequately pre-funding the disaster relief accounts, bringing disaster spending under the spending caps, and additional reforms 

to ensure that the disaster relief designation is being appropriately applied. I am 

willing to work with the committee on a number of potential reform proposals to 

improve how we pay for disaster relief. 

KEEPING TAXES LOW TO ENCOURAGE ECONOMIC GROWTH

I’d also like to emphasize the importance of focusing on economic growth, when 

it comes to discussing taxes. While many in Washington are shortsightedly calling 

for another round of tax increases—on top of the $620 billion that the President 

pushed for on January 1—I strongly believe this is the wrong approach. Raising 

taxes will only further weigh down the economy and slow down job creation efforts 

in the private sector. And we know that the additional revenue is never actually 

dedicated to deficit reduction—instead, it is always used to finance more government; it is always used as an excuse not to reform government. The bottom line is 

that tax increases are a lousy deficit reduction strategy. 

If we want to maintain the most vibrant, dynamic economy in the world, I believe 

that we must reform the tax code in a way that broadens the base, gets serious 

about simplification and closing tax loopholes, and lowers and consolidates marginal 

rates. This approach will enable American businesses to better compete and provide 

much-needed tax relief to American families. 

STRONG NATIONAL DEFENSE

Finally, I’d like to talk about defense and national security. Defense spending represents approximately 18 percent of the federal budget, yet has been forced to absorb nearly half of the spending reductions occurring in the past two years. Given 

our military’s already disproportionate contribution to deficit reduction, I encourage 

the committee to use its tools to ensure that our military has the resources it needs 

to properly defend the United States and keep its citizens safe in the future. We 

must always ensure that our military’s readiness is not compromised by an inability 

in Washington to properly set spending priorities. 

Protecting the military from disproportionate and discriminatory cuts is important 

in Kentucky’s Sixth District, where the Blue Grass Army depot provides essential 

munitions to the Defense Department and the U.S. warfighter overseas. 

I’d like to thank the committee for the opportunity to speak here today. I am 

eager to support your efforts to reduce the size of government, promote economic 

growth, and put our nation’s budget on a path to balance in the near future. 

Mr. RICE. I thank the gentleman for his testimony. Are there any 

questions? 

Seeing none, thank you. 

The chair now recognizes the gentlelady from New Mexico, Ms. 

Grisham, for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 

Ms. LUJAN GRISHAM. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, thank 

you for having me here today and to have the opportunity to talk 

about some issues that are important to my constituents. I would 

like to talk about the nexus between job creation and the health 

care system and how the choices made by this committee on both 
62 

areas can secure a strong future that produces long-term economic 

growth. 

Although the economy continues to recover, it has been far too 

slow in creating jobs. In fact, if the economy continues to grow at 

the same pace as the last 18 months, it will take another 10 years 

for the labor market to fully recover. We cannot afford to wait that 

long. And the millions of individuals and families in need of a job 

cannot wait either. 

I believe we need to strengthen and invest in critical infrastructure like the health care system as a key way to create jobs here 

at home and to protect our most vulnerable citizens. According to 

a 2012 Bureau of Labor Statistics study, the health sector is going 

to be the leader in job growth throughout the rest of this decade. 

The BLS projected the health sector to create 4.3 million jobs by 

2020, a 30 percent, while the rest of the economy creates jobs at 

a 13 percent rate. It is no surprise that the health care providers 

are major employers in my district, including Presbyterian Health 

Care, Lovelace Health System, Molina Health Care, and the University of New Mexico Hospital. Simply put, health care services 

and delivery is where the jobs are. 

Unfortunately, the budget path chosen by this committee in the 

recent past has put this job growth in jeopardy. Medicare is going 

to suffer $11 billion in cuts due to sequestration. In addition, it 

plans to turn Medicare into a voucher program and block grants 

Medicaid to States. This is exactly the wrong approach. 

The continuing resolution does not include a requested $949 million to implement health insurance exchanges under the Affordable 

Care Act which are scheduled to begin enrolling participants in October of this year. Funding is needed for IT infrastructure to process eligibility verifications, call centers, and other assistance to 

help individuals and small businesses select and enroll in health 

plans. These cuts and proposed changes will have a devastating effect in my district and on each of those providers I mentioned who 

will lose critical funding in fiscal year 2013 and 2014, translating 

into further loss of jobs and lifesaving medical care to New Mexicans. 

For example, Presbyterian is expected to lose $10 million. UNM 

Hospital could lose between $10 million and $20 million in funding. 

Lovelace will lose upwards of $5 million. They also have a low occupancy rate, around 65 percent, and are losing a Medicaid contract. 

At the same time, New Mexico is experiencing a 12-month job 

growth rate of negative .9 percent, including a rate of negative .4 

percent in December, equaling a loss of 3,200 jobs. 

While the Veterans Administration programs are exempted from 

sequestration budget cuts, veterans themselves are not protected. 

VA facilities are not easily accessible, particularly in rural and 

frontier States such as New Mexico, and veterans often must rely 

on Medicare or Medicaid for health and long-term services. To the 

extent that access to care is impacted by cuts to Medicare or Medicaid, veterans are also impacted. 

I want to also highlight the unprecedented cut to Indian Health 

Services, which is permanently authorized by the Affordable Care 

Act. IHS is reliant on Medicare and HHS for their funding and is 

persistently underfunded. And now this year IHS will get twice the 
63 

cuts. The sequester will cut $198 million from IHS services, $22 

million from IHS facilities, and $3 million from the special diabetes 

programs for Native Americans. But we must keep in mind that 

IHS also receives funding from Medicare and will experience a 2 

percent decrease in these payments. This will make it much harder 

for IHS to deliver the services and care to their populations. The 

cuts will also make it harder for people in rural areas to access the 

care they need. 

Let me close with this. In between serving my constituents here 

in Congress and at home, there is one special constituent, my 

mother, for whom I also serve as her primary caregiver. And like 

many other adult children that serve as caregivers for their parents and their adult disabled children, we navigate the health care 

system together to get them the care and support they need. But 

caregiving requires time and many have to spend personal resources in order to make sure their loved ones get the services that 

they need. Cutting Medicare and Medicaid will put additional financial pressure on millions of family caregivers and threatens 

their short-term and long-term financial security. 

Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, we can undo the damage 

done to job creation and make a concerted effort to strengthen our 

investments in health care with the 2014 budget. I look forward to 

working with you on a balanced approach to find solutions that will 

solve these problems. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Michelle Grisham follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Van Hollen, thank you for having me here today 

and to have the opportunity to talk about some issues that are important to my constituents. 

I would like to talk about the nexus between job creation and the health care system, and how the choices made by this committee on both areas can secure a strong 

future that produces long term growth. 

Although the economy continues to recover, it has been far too slow in creating 

jobs. In fact, if the economy continues to grow at the same pace as the last 18 

months, it would take another ten years for the labor market to fully recover. We 

cannot afford to wait that long, and the millions of individuals and families in need 

of a job can’t wait either. 

I believe we need to strengthen and invest in critical infrastructure like the 

health care system as a key way to create jobs here at home and protect our most 

vulnerable citizens. 

According to a 2012 Bureau of Labor Statistics study, the Health sector is going 

to be the leader in job growth throughout the rest of this decade. The BLS projected 

the Health sector to create 4.3 million jobs by 2020—a 30% increase—while the rest 

of the economy creates jobs at a 13% rate. 

It is no surprise that health care providers are major employers in my district, 

including Presbyterian Healthcare, Lovelace Health System, Molina Healthcare, and 

the University of New Mexico Hospital. Simply put, health care services and delivery is where the jobs are. 

Unfortunately, the budgetary path chosen by this committee in the recent past 

has put this job growth in jeopardy. Medicare is going to suffer $11 billion in cuts 

due to sequestration, in addition to plans that turn Medicare into a voucher program and block grants Medicaid to states this is exactly the wrong approaches. 

The Continuing Resolution does not include a requested $949 million to implement health insurance exchanges under the Affordable Care Act, which are scheduled to begin enrolling participants in October of this year. Funding is needed for 

IT infrastructure to process enrollments and payments, eligibility verification, call 

centers, and other assistance to help individuals and small businesses select and enroll in health plans. 
64 

These cuts and proposed changes will have a devastating effect in my district and 

on each of those providers I mentioned who will lose critical funding in FY13 and 

FY14, translating into further loss of jobs and lifesaving medical cuts for New Mexicans services—for example: 

• Presbyterian is expecting to lose $10 million because of sequestration. 

• UNMH could lose between $10-20 million in funding. They recently announced 

that they finished the previous quarter with a $5 million dollar loss. While they 

think they can make up that loss throughout the year, the additional cuts they will 

experience because of sequestration will make it hard without cuts to services and 

jobs. 

• Lovelace will lose upwards of $5 million. They also have a low occupancy rate 

around 65% and are losing their Medicaid contract, which represents a third of their 

revenue, putting jobs and services to the whole community at risk. 

At the same time, New Mexico is experiencing a twelve month job growth rate 

of negative 0.9%, including a rate of negative 0.4% in December equaling a loss of 

3200 jobs. 

Veterans will suffer because they are not protected by the proposed cuts to 

healthcare. VA facilities are not easily accessible, particularly in rural and frontier 

states such as New Mexico. It is difficult for a disabled veteran to travel hundreds 

of miles to the closest VA facility. Veterans often rely on Medicare or Medicaid for 

health and long-term care services. Cuts to Medicare or Medicaid will hurt veterans. 

I also want to highlight the unprecedented cut to Indian Health Services, which 

was permanently authorized by the Affordable Care Act. IHS is reliant on Medicare 

and HHS for their funding and is persistently underfunded. And now this year, IHS 

will get hit twice by the cuts. The sequester will cut $195 million from IHS Services, 

$22 million from IHS Facilities and $3 million from SDPI. 

But we must keep in mind that IHS also receives funding from Medicare, and will 

experience a 2% decrease in those payments. This will make it much harder for IHS 

to deliver the services and care to their populations. These cuts will also make it 

harder for people in rural areas to access the care they need. 

Let me close with this. In between serving my constituents here in Congress and 

at home, there is one special constituent, my mother, for whom I also serve as her 

caregiver. Like many other adult children that serve as primary caregivers for their 

parents and disabled adult children, we navigate the health care system together, 

to get them the care and support they need. 

But caregiving requires time and many have to spend personal resources in order 

to make sure their loved ones get the care they need. Cutting Medicare and Medicaid will put additional financial pressure on millions of caregivers and threatens 

their short term and long term financial security. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Van Hollen, we can undo the damage to job creation and make a concerted effort to strengthen our investments in health care with 

the FY2014 budget. I look forward to working with you to find a balanced approach. 

If we close corporate tax loopholes, cut subsidies to big oil and reduce Medicare and 

Medicaid prescription drug costs, we can invest in our healthcare infrastructure, 

prevent cuts in services and cut the budget deficit. We need to get it right today, 

or it will be a missed opportunity for years to come. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you for your testimony. 

Are there any questions? 

If not, thank you very much. 

The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Washington, Mr. 

Larsen, for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON 

Mr. LARSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, 

and thanks for the opportunity to testify on the need to invest in 

our economic future to create jobs and opportunity in this country 

and in northwest Washington State. 

At the beginning of each Congress, I write a set of goals that 

guide my and my office’s actions. These goals create a focal point 

for my office and they are a daily reminder of what is important 

for my district and for our State. My number one goal is to invest 

in the foundation of long-term economic growth that creates jobs 
65 

and opportunity in the Pacific Northwest. It is with this goal in 

mind that I come here to advocate for essential programs that promote growth and opportunity. 

40 percent of all jobs in Washington State are linked to foreign 

trade. More than 8,500 Washington State companies exported their 

products in 2010. 91 percent of those were small- and mediumsized businesses with fewer than 500 employees. So when we export our products around the world, we create jobs at home. 

As a result, I urge this committee to fully fund the State Trade 

and Export Promotion program, or STEP, which helps States work 

with small- and medium-sized businesses to find new markets and 

overcome hurdles to exports. Although STEP is a pilot program, it 

has a proven track record that helps businesses grow and create 

jobs in our State. Washington State received less than $1.5 million 

in Federal funds for STEP in fiscal year 2012. But that small pot 

of money went a long way. Our STEP activities have helped over 

400 businesses and helped generate more than $200 million in export sales. Unfortunately, Congress did not appropriate funds in 

fiscal year 2013, but I urge this committee to restore funding to 

STEP this year. 

The U.S. Commercial Service is another effort that is essential 

in helping our businesses export. Inexperienced firms look to the 

Commercial Service for advice and guidance when they want to export their products. The Commercial Service facilitated $54 billion 

in U.S. exports in 2011, helping 18,500 companies, including 317 

companies in Washington State. I urge the committee to fully support the U.S. Commercial Service. 

Growing our exports will only work if manufacturers are strong. 

So I urge this committee to adequately fund the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, or MEP, which helps small- and medium-sized 

U.S. manufacturers become more profitable and productive and is 

known in my State as Impact Washington. MEP helped create or 

keep more than 60,000 high-wage jobs in the U.S. last year. For 

every $1 of Federal investment, MEP generates nearly $20 in new 

sales growth and $20 in new client investment, translating to $2.5 

billion in new sales annually. In Washington State last year, MEP 

created or saved more than 1,500 jobs. 

Mr. Chairman, we need a next generation of highly skilled workers to maintain our strength in manufacturing and trade, and that 

is why I ask you to fully fund post-secondary education programs 

that invest in our students. The Pell Grants program and the Carl 

Perkins Career and Technical Education Act help today’s students 

to gain the skills they need to become tomorrow’s workers. As the 

price of higher education continues to increase, we need to make 

sure that students and their families keep their access to college 

and training programs that allow them to get the best jobs. Pell 

Grants help 8,500 students and families that I represent in the 2nd 

District of Washington State. Many of these students and the 5.5 

million students who receive Pell Grants nationwide could not afford college without Pell Grants. Higher education, whether at a 4- 

year university, a 2-year community college, a 2-year technical college, is a young person’s best path to a higher salary and great opportunities. Loans and grants through the Carl Perkins Education 

Act help students get critical job skills that they can use to get 
66 

jobs. In northwest Washington, 949 students use Perkins Grants 

and Perkins Loans to gain skills in advanced manufacturing, engineering, and nursing. 

With that, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I appreciate the 

opportunity to testify before you today, and I encourage this committee to invest in what I see as the foundation of long-term economic growth that creates jobs and opportunity in this country. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Rick Larsen follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

CHAIRMAN RYAN/RANKING MEMBER VAN HOLLEN, AND MEMBERS OF THE COM- MITTEE: Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the need to invest in our economic future to create jobs and opportunity in Northwest Washington state. 

At the beginning of each Congress I write a set of goals to guide my and my office’s actions. These goals create a focal point for my office and are a daily reminder 

what is important for my district and Northwest Washington. My number one goal 

is to invest in the foundation of long-term economic growth that creates jobs and 

opportunity in the Pacific Northwest. It is with this goal in mind that I come here 

to advocate for essential programs that promote growth and opportunity. 

Forty percent of all jobs in Washington state are linked to foreign trade. More 

than 8,500 Washington state companies exported their products in 2010. Ninety-one 

percent of those were small and medium-sized enterprises with fewer than 500 employees. When we export our products around the world, we create jobs here at 

home. 

I urge this committee to fully fund the State Trade and Export Promotion (STEP) 

program, which helps states work with small- and medium-sized businesses to find 

new markets and overcome the hurdles to exports. Although STEP is a pilot program, it has a proven track-record of helping businesses grow and create jobs in 

Washington state. Washington state received less than $1.5 million in federal funds 

for the STEP program in Fiscal Year 2012. This small pot of money went a long 

way. Washington state’s STEP activities have helped over 400 businesses and 

helped generate more than $200 million in export sales, bringing a huge benefit to 

our overall economy. Unfortunately, Congress did not appropriate funds in Fiscal 

Year 2013 for this program. I urge this committee to restore funding to STEP this 

year. 

The U.S. Commercial Service (USCS) is another effort that is essential in helping 

our businesses export. Inexperienced firms look to the Commercial Service for advice 

and guidance when they want to export their products. The Commercial Service facilitated $54 billion in U.S. exports in 2011, helping 18,500 companies nationwide, 

including 317 companies Washington state. I urge the committee to fully support 

the U.S. Commercial Service. 

Growing our exports will only work if our manufacturers are strong. I urge this 

committee to adequately fund the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), 

which helps small- and medium-sized U.S. manufactures become more profitable 

and productive, and is known in my state as Impact Washington. MEP helped create or keep more than 60,000 high wage jobs in the United States last year. For 

every one dollar of federal investment, MEP generates nearly $20 in new sales 

growth and $20 in new client investment, translating to $2.5 billion in new sales 

annually. In Washington state last year, MEP created or saved more than 1,500 

jobs. 

We need a next generation of highly skilled workers to maintain our strength in 

manufacturing and trade. That is why I ask you to fully fund post-secondary education programs that invest in our students. The Pell Grants program and the Carl 

D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act help today’s students to gain the 

skills they need to become tomorrow’s workers. As the price of higher education continues to increase, we need to make sure that students and their families keep their 

access to colleges and training programs that allow them to get the best jobs. Pell 

Grants help 8,500 students and families I represent in the Second District of Washington state. Many of these students, and the 5.5 million students who receive Pell 

Grants nationwide, could not afford college without Pell Grants. Higher education, 

whether at a four-year university, a two-year community college, or at a two-year 

technical college, is a young person’s best path to a higher salary and great opportunities. Loans and grants through the Carl D. Perkins Act help students get critical 
67 

job skills that they can use to get jobs. In Northwest Washington, 949 students use 

Perkins Grants and Perkins Loans to gain skills in advanced manufacturing, engineering, and nursing. 

With that Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I appreciate the opportunity to 

testify today and I encourage the Committee to invest in what I see as the foundation of long-term economic growth that creates jobs and opportunity. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you for your testimony. 

Are there any questions? Mr. McDermott? 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. Tell me, Mr. Larsen, what you think the impact of sequester will be on your district. You have got a number 

of military establishments there and other research facilities and 

so forth. Tell me what you expect from that. 

Mr. LARSEN. Well, thank you, Mr. Ranking Member. 

With regard to the sequester, what we do know is that about 

1,200 civilian employees at the naval bases in the district will be 

furloughed. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. Is that a 1-day furlough or month-long furlough? 

Mr. LARSEN. Well, up to 22 days total each between now and the 

end of the fiscal year. That is what we do know. 

We also know that housing authorities in my district are making 

decisions now about which folks do not get vouchers, making the 

waiting lists longer because of the impact of the sequester. We 

know that 10,000 fewer seniors—I am sorry—seniors in Snohomish 

County receive 10,000 fewer meals delivered to them who currently 

receive their meals through the Meals on Wheels program through 

the Snohomish County Senior Services. 

So there are impacts that we all read about in the paper, and 

there are impacts that no one is covering. But the fact of the matter is there are real impacts to middle class folks, to seniors due 

to the sequester. 

As a result, it does seem more reasonable to replace it with a 

more balanced approach. It would still include cuts. It would include reductions in spending growth over 10 years, and it would 

also include tax revenue. That seems reasonable to me. There does 

not have to be a lot of vitriol about that. It just seems that if you 

want to address the impacts, that you can take a more balanced 

approach to it and still achieve the deficit reduction goals that most 

of us all share. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. I was waiting to hear if you would say anything about airports. 

Mr. LARSEN. I can do that too. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. What is that? 

Mr. LARSEN. I can address airports if you would like. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. Well, my understanding is that the FAA has 

closed some smaller airports because they feel like they cannot 

cover them with the kind of folks that you need to have to make 

an airport safe. 

Mr. LARSEN. There are really two categories here. There are 

what we call contract towers, and then there are FAA towers. So 

the contract towers are those that are operated through contracts 

with other groups, private groups, and the FAA has come out with 

a list of about 249 contract towers with the potential of being 

closed. About 100 of those will be closed. And that list has gone 
68 

out, and many of those are smaller airports around Washington 

State. 

In addition to that, on the next list, the additional list, are other 

airports that are currently FAA-operated towers, including Paine 

Field in Snohomish County. And it is on the list because it falls 

below—I will be as quick as possible, Mr. Chairman. It falls below 

the number of operations that FAA has identified as being eligible 

for closing. The issue with Paine Field, however, is not only is 

there a lot of general aviation operations, it is also the home of the 

Boeing facility where we manufacture. Most of the Boeing airplanes in the world are manufactured in my district. And as well, 

it is a major hub for repair. It is a repair station operated by a different company. And these are large platform airplanes that have 

to fly in and out. If you close that tower, you are going to slow 

down operations. You are going to slow down the efficiency of Boeing operations and as well of the repair station operations, and 

that will have a ripple impact throughout the entire Northwest 

economy, which obviously has a large dependency on our aerospace 

suppliers. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. Thank you. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Larsen. 

The chair is pleased to recognize the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. 

Foster, for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL FOSTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, for 

the opportunity to speak before the committee today. 

So as this committee prepares its budget for fiscal year 2014, I 

urge you to consider the differences between the fraction of investment that our country makes with the idea of maximizing economic 

growth and the fraction of the investments our country makes because of the kind of people we are. There are things like military 

investments, taking care of our elderly that, if viewed honestly, do 

not have any economic return on investment, and yet we have to 

make these. There are other investments that we make because of 

the long-term and short-term economic growth. 

And so I would like to highlight the importance of preserving our 

investments in the highest payoff activities that our government is 

involved in, namely education and research and development. Both 

of these have, obviously, been severely threatened by the sequestration and other budget cuts that are talked about. 

My district in the Chicago area spans two great scientific centers, 

Argonne National Laboratory and Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory where I worked for 20 years. The economic impact of Argonne and Fermi Lab in Illinois is estimated to be more than $1.3 

billion annually and has historically and will in the future have 

enormous spinoff benefits throughout our country. Projects in the 

pipeline at these labs hold even more promise for revitalizing our 

energy and manufacturing sectors. 

For example, the Argonne National Laboratory was recently se- lected for an award of $120 million over 5 years to establish a new 

batteries and energy storage hub, which is a very serious and well 

thought-out effort, competitively bid and won by Argonne National 
69 

Lab in an effort to achieve revolutionary advances in battery performance. They are targeting battery improvements in excess of a 

factor of 5, which will make battery driven cars a reality and an 

economic reality as well as a theoretical one. 

This project like many others that could and will create new industries and support thousands of jobs now faces an uncertain future. By some estimates, the cuts from sequestration to R&D will 

result in the loss of 600,000 jobs over the next 3 years, and we 

would not only lose these near-term R&D jobs, we will see the ripple effects in communities, and we will see the long-term damage 

from the loss in economic competitiveness in our country. 

With wages as a record low percentage of the economy, it is not 

time to retreat or to stop investing in American innovation which 

supports the high-wage activities. We need to maintain this competitive advantage now and more in the future. 

And the second subject that I would like to highlight is the issue 

of donor States and the redistribution of wealth among the States 

in our country. Illinois is one of many donor States, that is, a State 

that is under financial distress in no small part because of the fact 

that Illinois only receives back about 75 cents for every dollar in 

taxes that it pays to the Federal Government. There are many 

other States in a similar situation. In Illinois’ case, this multiplies 

out to about $1,600 per person in Illinois and roughly $20 billion 

for the entire State. If even a fraction of this money returned to 

the State, we would not have a fiscal crisis in Illinois at this moment. 

So Illinois and other donor States can no longer afford to continue subsidizing the recipient States to the extent that they do. I 

urge the leadership of this committee to craft a budget that replaces the mindless cuts of the sequester with sensible investments 

that maximize the return on investment of Federal investments instead of mindless cookie cutter cuts and also one that begins to address the imbalance of donor and recipient States. While there are 

areas where cuts are reasonable and necessary, it is unreasonable 

and irresponsible to make these deep cuts in programs like investments in research and development that do provide a high return 

on investment and are already underfunded. 

Thank you. I will yield back my time. 

[The prepared statement of Bill Foster follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BILL FOSTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

I’d like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for the opportunity to speak 

before the Committee today. 

As this committee prepares a budget for fiscal year 2014, I urge you to reverse 

the devastating cuts to education and R&D that have been enacted by sequestration. 

The Chicago area is home to three scientific centers: Fermilab, Argonne National 

Laboratory, and the University of Illinois’ National Center for Supercomputing Applications. 

The economic impact of Argonne and Fermilab in Illinois is estimated to be more 

than $1.3 billion annually, resulting in a twenty percent return on investment for 

the federal government. 

Projects in the pipeline hold even more promise for revitalizing our energy and 

manufacturing sectors. 
70 

• For example, the Argonne National Laboratory was recently selected for an 

award of up to $120 million over five years, to establish a new Batteries and Energy 

Storage Hub, in an effort to achieve revolutionary advances in battery performance. 

This project, and many others that would create new industries and support thousands of jobs, now face an uncertain future. 

By some estimates, the cuts from sequestration to R&D will result in a loss of 

600,000 jobs over the next three years. 

• We won’t only lose these R&D jobs, but we’ll see ripple effects in communities. 

Tax receipts and consumer spending that would otherwise have helped grow our 

economy and create thousands of jobs, will be extinguished. 

When wages as a percentage of the economy, are at an all-time low, it’s not the 

time to retreat and stop investing in American innovation. We need to maintain a 

competitive advantage now more than ever. 

What’s more, as a donor state, Illinois isn’t responsible for our national debt, and 

shouldn’t be forced to shoulder even more of the burden. 

• Illinois currently spends $1 in taxes to every 75 cents it receives in federal 

funding. This discrepancy accounts for $20 billion a year flowing out of the state 

and redistributed to others. 

• Illinois and other donor states can no longer afford to continue subsidizing recipient states at the expense of our own economies. 

I urge the leadership of this Committee to craft a budget that replaces these 

mindless, across the board cuts with a responsible and balanced alternative. While 

there are areas where cuts are reasonable and necessary, it is unreasonable and irresponsible to make deep cuts to programs, like investments in research and development, that provide a high return on investment and are already underfunded. 

Thank you. 

Mr. RICE. Thank you for your testimony. 

Any questions? 

Seeing none, thank you for your testimony, Mr. Foster. 

The chair sees no more witnesses. If there is no objection, the 

committee will take a brief recess with the intention to adjourn 

when votes are called. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. RICE. The chair sees no further witnesses, and if there is no 

objection, the committee will stand adjourned. 

[Additional statements submitted for the record follow:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JULIA BROWNLEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

As we look toward the Fiscal Year 2014 budget, Congress has a tremendous responsibility to work together to find a balanced approach that addresses our budget 

deficit, while allowing for smart and strategic investments toward our long-term 

economic growth. 

In this testimony, I will address two very specific examples in Ventura County 

where smart investments would yield significant economic growth not only in my 

district, but smart investments across our great nation. 

I proudly represent Ventura Harbor, which is one of our nation’s ten largest fishing harbors. Ventura Harbor serves a critical role in my county’s infrastructure and 

economy, and it requires regular maintenance to ensure its efficient use, but the 

funds appropriated to maintain Ventura Harbor have repeatedly fallen short of 

what is needed. 

In fact, according to the Army Corps of Engineers, nearly 1,000 federal ports and 

harbors across the nation have not been adequately maintained due to inadequate 

budget requests and appropriations despite the funding being available through the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

We cannot grow our economy if we are not keeping these critical components of 

our infrastructure operational and I would ask the committee to fully appropriate 

the funds needed to maintain the ports and harbors in my district, and across the 

country. 

Another important economic driver in Ventura County is agriculture. 

Altogether, farming and farm-dependent businesses provide an estimated 31,000 

jobs in Ventura County, generate $2.1 billion in revenue, and occupy more than 28% 

of my county’s land. 
71 

However, Ventura County farmers are constantly under threat from invasive species and diseases that threaten our crops and our family farms. 

Most recently, citrus farms—that account for nearly 40% of harvested acreage in 

my district—are facing a new battle against the devastating and deadly diseasespreading Asian Citrus Psyllid which is a disease to citrus without any remedies. 

Citrus growers in Florida have been fighting this deadly pest for years, and econo- mists estimate the disease caused more than $4.5 billion in economic damage and 

more than 8,200 jobs since it was discovered in 2005. We, as a nation, should offer 

learned and preventive solutions to ensure we never replicate the same economic 

disasters that our sister state has endured. 

We need to ensure our own federal agencies that provide essential services to 

safeguard our country’s agriculture industry from destructive invaders get the resources they need to protect the farms and farmers across the country and in a district like mine where agriculture is the life blood and the historical fabric of communities like Oxnard, Camarillo, Filmore, and Santa Paula. 

Our nation’s economic recovery depends on a vibrant agriculture industry—how 

could we possibly turn our backs on a pest that has almost destroyed an industry 

in Florida and not use our knowledge to proactively fight a deadly crop-destroying 

pest in other parts of our country? We must protect my county’s economic vitality, 

which if it were destroyed, could take at least a decade or more to recover. 

These are only two examples of many where our priorities can lead to economic 

opportunities or economic destruction, not only in Ventura County, but across the 

nation. I urge this committee and my colleagues to address our budget priorities 

using a balanced approach that allows us to invest in our future economic growth. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CHERI BUSTOS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Thank you Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen for the opportunity 

to testify before the House Budget Committee today. 

I’m here today to talk to you about the first piece of legislation that I introduced 

as a member of Congress last month that has picked up support among both my 

Democratic and Republican colleagues. That is a bill called the Government Waste 

Reduction Act. 

Before I talk about the specifics of the bill, let me start by telling you a little bit 

about why I introduced this bill and why I think it is so important. Like so many 

people across my region of Illinois, I learned at a young age that balancing the family pocketbook and living within our means is a question of values. 

While some advocate getting our fiscal house in order by balancing the budget on 

the backs of the middle class, I think this is the wrong approach. I also think the 

across-the-board, automatic spending cuts known as sequestration that took effect 

on March 1, and that could harm vital interests in my district, like the Rock Island 

Arsenal, are also the wrong approach. That is why I have been against sequestration from the very beginning. 

What we need to do is to come together in a bipartisan fashion and work on a 

replacement to sequestration. We need to focus on common sense solutions that 

would reduce the deficit while preserving the important programs that so many 

middle class people across Illinois rely on. 

The Government Waste Reduction Act does just that. The bipartisan bill moves 

forward on recommendations the Government Accountability Office (GAO) made in 

reports issued in 2011 and 2012 that would reduce duplication in government, save 

taxpayer money, enhance revenue, and root out waste. Some estimates suggest that 

just implementing these GAO recommendations would save the government 200 to 

300 billion dollars. 

Here is how the bill works. This bill establishes the Independent Government 

Waste Reduction Board tasked with implementing these GAO recommendations. 

The Board would consist of 15 Members, 6 determined by the House, 6 by the Senate, and 3 by the Administration. 

The Members would develop detailed and specific proposals related to the GAO 

recommendations, and they would be required to submit a legislative proposal that 

implements the recommendations. This proposal would then come to Congress for 

an up or down vote. Nothing in the proposal could cut benefits for veterans, members of the Armed Forces, or for seniors. 

Here are some highlights from the GAO report that might be good places to start 

when looking for cost savings. 

• The federal government has 47 job training programs, 44 of which overlap. Simply consolidating these programs that overlap can save taxpayer money while not 

impacting program quality. 
72 

• Our federal approach to surface transportation is described by GAO as ‘‘fragmented, lacks clear goals, and is not accountable for results.’’ There are over 100 

programs and 5 agencies within the Department of Transportation that are involved 

in surface transportation. Again, looking at ways to smartly consolidate some of 

these programs would save money while not impacting quality. • Finally, our ‘‘fragmented’’ approach to food safety has been described as ‘‘an inefficient use of resources.’’ The Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, and an additional dozen or so agencies are involved in food safety in 

some way. We should look at ways to smartly consolidate these programs where it 

makes sense. 

As you can see, unnecessary duplication in government programs leads to inefficiencies and the loss of taxpayer money. My bill will serve as a bipartisan starting 

point for efforts to reverse this trend and lower our deficits in a responsible, common sense way that protects the middle class people of Illinois and our nation. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify today. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JUDY CHU, CHAIR, CONGRESSIONAL ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN CAUCUS (CAPAC) 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on behalf of the Congressional 

Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC). I am honored to have the opportunity to 

share some of the issues that are facing the Asian American and Pacific Islander 

(AAPI) community and ways that Congress can address our community’s concerns. 

CIVIL RIGHTS

Civil Rights Enforcement 

The Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice is critical to protecting the rights of all Americans. Unfortunately, the AAPI community continues 

to face a variety of issues: hate crimes are on the rise, voting rights are under attack, and employment discrimination is rampant. DOJ’s Civil Rights Division is critical in combating these problems. 

According to the FBI, 6,628 hate crime incidents involving 7,699 offenses were reported by law enforcement agencies in 2010.i Nearly half of the attacks were racially-motivated, with anti-AAPI bias accounting for 5.1 percent of the incidents (up 

from 3.4 percent in 2008). Anti- Muslim bias now accounts for 13.2 percent or reported incidents (up from 7.5 percent in 2008).ii Without the proper resources, the 

Civil Rights division of the U.S. Department of Justice will be unable to ensure that 

hate crime offenses are aggressively investigated and prosecuted. 

AAPIs continue to face discrimination at the polls and numerous barriers that disenfranchise certain communities.iii With more resources, the Civil Rights division 

can expand efforts to protect citizens’ voting rights by addressing voting rights violations. 

A record number of Muslim workers in the United States have experienced alleged employment discrimination, including claims that co-workers called them ‘‘terrorist’’ or ‘‘Osama’’ and employers barring them from wearing religious garb or taking prayer breaks.iv Muslims make up less than 2 percent of the United States population, but they make up about one-fourth of the 3,386 religious discrimination 

claims filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2009. Many of 

these practicing Muslims are of Asian descent. The Civil Rights division must be 

funded fully to increase efforts to eradicate this type of discrimination. 

Community Relations 

Not only must we protect our civil rights, but we must foster an environment 

where all citizens feel respected and accepted. The Community Relations Service 

(CRS) in the Department of Justice can help promote these types of attitudes. CRS 

serves as the Department’s ‘‘peacemaker’’ for community conflicts and tensions arising from real or perceived discriminatory practices based on race, color, or national 

origin and helps communities prevent and respond to alleged violent hate crimes 

committed on the basis of actual or perceived race, color, national origin, gender, 

gender identity, sexual orientation, religion or disability. To carry out its goal, CRS 

implemented several strategies and programs including an Anti-Racial Profiling 

Program and Sikh Cultural Awareness program. We support full funding for CRS. 

IMMIGRATION

Immigrant Integration and Citizenship 

The Office of Citizenship plays a key role in immigrant integration by leading initiatives to promote citizenship awareness; supporting national and community-based 
73 

organizations that prepare immigrants for citizenship by providing grants, educational materials, and technical assistance; and building collaborative partnerships 

with state and local governmental and non-governmental organizations to expand 

integration and citizenship resources. This office must be fully funded to support immigrant integration efforts, including funding for new programs supporting English 

language acquisition and citizenship education. 

We strongly support this request because these funds will greatly benefit the 

AAPI community and are critical to the success of the United States. Immigrants 

who integrate into U.S. society go on to become informed voters, active community 

members, innovators, entrepreneurs and job-creators. 

The Office of Citizenship has already helped thousands of people prepare to become citizens through Congress’s support and it has helped to reinforce the network 

of excellent state service providers around the country. Strong support for integration programs boost human potential and make us a stronger nation. 

Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties 

We also support funding for the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Civil 

Rights and Civil Liberties. It is important for the AAPI community that OCRCL— 

which oversees the 287(g) and Secure Communities programs—has the funding to 

support proper oversight and training so that ICE is not a conduit for discriminatory and abusive law enforcement practices. 

EDUCATION

Early Education Programs 

For many Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, achievement gaps begin well before kindergarten. Multiple studies have shown that investing in quality early learning programs can yield a significant return-on-investment by reducing the costs of 

special education, high school dropouts, teen pregnancy, crime, incarceration, and 

dependence on social services later in life, and increasing the likelihood of college 

attendance and completion. Nearly 13% of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders 

live in poverty,v and certain subgroups such as the Hmong and Tongans have poverty rates of 29.9% and 18.1% respectively.vi Access to early childhood education is 

critical to breaking this cycle and giving children a chance to succeed. For this reason, it is critically important to the AAPI community that our budget protect funding for Head Start, the Early Learning Challenge Fund, Child Care and Development Block Grants, and IDEA Part C grants to expand access to high-quality early 

childhood education. 

English Language Learners 

One of the primary education challenges facing Asian American and Pacific Islander students are language barriers due to the high rates of limited English proficiency (LEP) within the AAPI community. Hispanic and Asian children are much 

more likely to be limited English proficient and linguistically isolated than non-Hispanic black and white children.vii Approximately 24 % of all LEP students are Asian 

American. 

In addition, many AAPI students come from homes where English may not be the 

primary language spoken. As a result, many of these students enter school with limited English proficiency, and it may take several years for them to develop the language skills needed for academic success. According to the Census Bureau, the four 

languages spoken by the largest LEP populations after Spanish are Chinese (6%), 

Vietnamese (3%), Korean (2.5%), and Tagalog (1.9%). In addition, Southeast Asian 

immigrant and refugee communities report drastically higher rates of limited 

English proficiency than the general U.S. population. While only 8.7% of the U.S. 

speaks English ‘‘less than very well,’’ the rate is much higher for Southeast Asian 

populations: 39% for Cambodians, 37% for Hmong, 38% for Laotians, and 52% for 

Vietnamese Americans. 

The English Learner Education program is the Department of Education’s primary program for serving English language learners and providing critical resources 

to help AAPI students develop and improve their English language acquisition. 

Therefore, CAPAC requests that funding for this critical program remain intact. 

Higher Education 

Although Asian Americans are sometimes portrayed as universally excelling in 

school, disaggregated data shows that a large number within the community fall 

well below national averages with respect to both income and education. While 

AAPIs had the highest overall college graduation rates (44 %) of any group of students in 2000, certain subgroups have much lower rates of degree attainment. Only 

13.8 % of Pacific Islanders, 13.8 % of Vietnamese Americans, 5.8 % of Laotian Amer-
74 

icans, 6.1 % of Cambodian Americans, and less than 5.1 % of Hmong Americans successfully completed college. 

In addition, a large proportion of AAPI students are from low income backgrounds, the first in their families to attend college, and struggle to secure the financial resources to support themselves while in school.viii Based on analysis of the 

National Postsecondary Student Aid Survey (2008), AAPIs also have greater financial need than other racial groups when taking into account expected family contribution and total aid. To increase degree attainment, institutions must recognize 

the unique needs and challenges that exist within the AAPI community, and begin 

addressing factors that are contributing to the low completion rates among these 

groups. 

AANAPISI Program 

The authorized Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institution (AANAPISI) program was created to designate Minority Serving Institutions that support low-income Asian American and Pacific Islander students with 

a variety of targeted services to help them overcome barriers to a college degree and 

put them on a path to success. The AANAPISI federal program is unique because 

it acknowledges the distinctive challenges facing AAPI students in college access 

and completion. It is important to our community that the committee provides $5 

million in discretionary funding to the AANAPISI program to ensure that the higher 

education needs of underserved AAPI students are met. 

TRIO Program 

Likewise, TRIO programs provide hundreds of thousands of students with the 

necessary support to enroll in and graduate from college and, ultimately, help narrow the gap between low-income, first-generation students and their peers. Adequate funding for TRIO programs is essential to helping the estimated 4,700 AAPI 

participants pursue and complete postsecondary education. 

HOUSING

Housing Counseling Assistance and Foreclosure Relief Programs 

Housing counseling programs that are able to work with the community in a linguistically and culturally appropriate manner have been essential in assisting 

AAPIs in navigating through various housing opportunities and the foreclosure crisis. In fact, AAPIs make up a substantial portion of the population in 6 of the 10 

U.S. cities with the highest foreclosure rates. 

While homeownership rates between 2008—2009 for AAPIs have held steady at 

59%, some sub-populations have experienced major declines. Hmong homeownership 

rates dropped from 50% to 42%, Bangladeshi homeownership rates dropped from 

48% to 42%, and Korean homeownership rates from 51% to 49%.ix

A study by the Asian Real Estate Association and the UCLA Asian American 

Studies Centers saw AAPIs experience a significant loss of equity following the national foreclosure crisis.x The average loss from 2007 to 2009 was $42,900 for Asian 

Americans and $47,000 for Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders. The national equity loss during that same period was $9,100. 

Financial and foreclosure assistance is also much needed in AAPI communities. 

AAPIs who defaulted on their mortgage loans were more likely to enter into foreclosure because they were not aware of alternative options like loan modifications. 

They were also at a higher risk of predatory lending and scams. 

In order to assist these homeowners, we must first consider how to best reach and 

serve these communities. The AAPI community is compromised of two-thirds immigrants and refugees, represents 50 ethnic groups, and 100 language groups. Furthermore, there are nearly a million Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders. With 

these diverse needs, it is critical that there is support for housing counseling organizations—organizations that have built trust and rapport with minority and immigrant communities and can provide linguistically and culturally appropriate services 

to these constituencies. Housing counselors can provide these services only if they 

receive the proper funding to do so. 

Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) 

Generally speaking, HUD programs are critical to our local communities and create opportunities for some of our most vulnerable populations. In particular, the 

Community Development Block Grants are important to the AAPI community because they provide funding to improve housing, living environments and economic 

opportunities for those with low and moderate incomes. 

There is no question that the economic crisis has had a tremendous impact on 

wealth. In the AAPI community, this impact has been more pronounced since house-
75 

holds have loss 54% of wealth between 2005-2009—primarily through the loss of 

wealth in property.xi The loss of wealth has put significant restraints on the AAPI 

community’s ability to revitalize their neighborhoods. 

Likewise, poverty rates have steadily increased within the AAPI community. 

Some parts of the community are living at 38% poverty rates and have larger than 

average households. Poverty has forced many AAPIs who were once homeowners to 

become renters. At the national level and for seven metropolitan areas, Asian homeowners live in overcrowded conditions at a greater proportion than the total population. 

That is why the Community Development Block Grant is vital to the AAPI community since the formula for awarding grants takes into consideration a community’s poverty rate, population, and presence of overcrowding. These funds must be 

protected to rehabilitate, improve, and restore our communities. 

Native Hawaiian Block Grants 

One in five Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders live in poverty. They are a 

population at high risk of foreclosure who continue to experience adverse treatment 

as renters comparable to Hispanic and African American renters. 

The Native Hawaiian Block Grants have been vital for new construction, rehabilitation, acquisition, infrastructure, and various support services for Native Hawaiians. More specifically, these grants provide affordable housing assistance to low-income native Hawaiians eligible for residence on Hawaiian Home Lands. We must 

continue to provide this vital assistance by funding the Native Hawaiian Block 

Grant at previous levels. 

HEALTHCARE

Access to healthcare remains a key issue for many AAPIs. 15.1% of Americans 

are uninsured, but that rate is higher for certain AAPI groups. In particular, South 

Asians, such as Bangladeshis (22.5%) and Pakistanis (22.9%), and Southeast Asians, 

such as Cambodians (21.3%), Hmongs (15.9%), Laotians (18.5%), Thais (19.9%), and 

Vietnamese (18.7).xii

Affordable Care Act 

The Affordable Care Act will provide these individuals and their families with improved access to affordable healthcare and essential health care services. Under the 

new law, Medicaid coverage will be expanded to cover children and adults with incomes up to 13.3 % of the federal poverty level. Almost 1.3 million AAPIs will be 

newly eligible for Medicaid. This Medicaid expansion will provide coverage to many 

AAPI individuals and families who would otherwise go without quality, affordable 

health coverage.xiii,xiv To ensure that health insurance is affordable, the law will 

also provide refundable tax credits to offset a portion of the cost of health insurance 

premiums. It is estimated that close to 1.5 million AAPIs will be eligible for premium tax credits to purchase coverage. 

These coverage expansions should have a significant impact on AAPIs with low 

or moderate incomes. It is critical that the FY 2014 Budget fully funds the Affordable Care Act to ensure that we are on track to providing health coverage to the 

neediest members of the AAPI community. 

Community Health Centers 

For far too long, the health challenges of AAPIs have gone unnoticed and the dangerous effects of this lack of knowledge and awareness have been deeply felt by the 

community. Among some Pacific Islanders, 20 percent of births are pre-term. Deaths 

from breast cancer are four times higher among some Asian-born women compared 

to their U.S. born counterparts. Rates of vaccine-preventable liver and cervical cancer among the Hmong community in California are 3 to 4 times higher than those 

of other Asian American groups. 

One important way to address these disparities is to fund community health centers. Community health centers provide quality, cost-effective services, and are often 

the first in line to provide affordable care to the communities they serve. These centers play a critical role in expanding access by serving as a trusted safety net for 

AAPI communities and providing culturally and linguistically competent services to 

address some of the key barriers confronting AAPIs. Community health centers 

bring healthcare providers, services, and facilities to areas that are not often covered by other providers. We urge the committee to provide adequate funding for 

community health centers. 
76 

Hepatitis B 

Among the most serious conditions affecting the AAPI community is hepatitis B, 

an infection of the liver and the leading cause of liver cancer worldwide. About 1.3- 

1.5 million people in the U.S. are chronically infected with hepatitis B, with approximately 5,000-6,000 people dying each year from hepatitis B related liver disease or 

liver cancer. Over half of the chronic hepatitis B cases and resulting deaths in the 

U.S. are concentrated among AAPIs. What is tragic about these deaths is that they 

are completely preventable with a vaccine that has been available for 20 years, but 

a lack of funds, limited patient and provider awareness, as well as heightened stigmas, have precluded many AAPIs from seeking the screenings and treatment needed to prevent these unnecessary deaths. 

We must protect funding for testing initiatives, surveillance, and the viral hepatitis coordinator programs to increase awareness and vaccinations for Hepatitis B. 

Addressing Sequestration 

Sequestration comes at a time when major federal health initiatives are underway, including rapid implementation of the Affordable Care Act. If sequestration remains in place, the ACA’s Prevention and Public Health Fund, the best tool the nation has to fight chronic diseases and improve the nation’s health, would be slashed 

by 7.6 % or $76 million—greatly harming community health programs already 

under way. I urge my colleagues to protect this funding for preventive initiatives 

that benefit AAPIs and all Americans. 

TERRITORIES

The Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) carries out the Secretary’s responsibilities for 

U.S.-affiliated insular areas. These include the territories of Guam, American 

Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI), and the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands (CNMI), as well as the three Freely Associated States (FAS): the 

Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), 

and the Republic of Palau. OIA is the primary federal program aimed at combating 

the economic and fiscal problems in the insular areas. 

Any reductions in OIA funding will translate to cuts to vital projects which foster 

development of the insular areas in accountability, financial management, tax systems and procedures, insular management controls, economic development, training/ 

education, energy, public safety, health, immigration, labor, and law enforcement. 

I am requesting that the committee protect funding to the Office of Insular Affairs. 

ENDNOTES

i US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2010 Hate Crime Statistics. 

ii US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2010 Hate Crime Statistics. 

iiiMeeting the Challenge: National Platform for Advancing Justice. Policy Priorities & Recommendations for Achieving Equity, Equality, and Justice in Asian American & Pacific Islander 

Communities.’’ http://www.advancingequality.org/attachments/files/391/Platform—for—Action.pdf ivGreenhouse, Steven. ‘‘Muslims report rising discrimination at work,’’ The New York Times. 

23 September 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/24/business/24muslim.html?— 

r=3&pagewanted=1&ref=business v ‘‘Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders- Facts, not Fiction,’’ The Steinhardt Institute for 

Higher Education Policy, NYU. 2008. vi ‘‘American Community Survey,’’ US Census Bureau. 2009. viihttp://www.urban.org/uploadedPDF/311230—new—demography.pdf viii ‘‘Federal Higher Education Policy Priorities and the Asian American and Pacific Islander 

Community’’ The Asian and Pacific Islander American Scholarship Fund. 2010. ix U.S. Census Bureau Data, 2008, 2009. x Asian Real Estate Association of America. ‘‘AAPIs Experience Significant Loss of Home Equity,’’ AsianWeek. xiPew Research Center, ‘‘Wealth Gap Rises to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks and Hispanics,’’ July 2011. xii American Community Survey, 2009. xiii ‘‘How Health Reform Helps Asian Americans,’’ Families USA, September 2010. xiv How Health Reform Helps Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders,’’ Families USA, 

September 2010 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DANNY K. DAVIS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen and members of the committee, I 

thank you for holding today’s hearing affording Members of Congress an opportunity 

share our principal interests regarding the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for 

Fiscal Year 2014. 
77 

It’s no secret that I have and will continue to advocate for programs that empowers individuals to be self-sufficient. Programs like the: 

• Second Chance Act, a bi-partisan approved reentry process that brings together 

a ‘‘bucket of resources/services’’ vital to removing barriers to successful reintegration. At its current funding level, the program cannot begin to service the roughly 

700 thousand citizens released annually, of whom 400+ are returning parents, seeking a second chance in life. Indeed, for every cut made to the Second Chance Act, 

key provisions like housing, skill development and job placement, mental health and 

substance treatment and prevention and mentoring are being compromised. These 

reductions are hindrances to reducing recidivism and increasing public safety. 

• Health Disparities: Services are needed to address health disparities in the 

United States to provide access to quality health care for African Americans and 

other historically underserved communities, particularly those families living with 

Sickle Cell Disease (SCD). This disease is an inherited blood disorder that is a 

major problem in the United States. There is an estimated 72,000 Americans live 

with the disease. More than 2.5 million Americans have the Sickle Cell Trait, including 1 in 12 African Americans. The average life span of an adult with SCD is 

45 years. Rep. Danny K. Davis will reintroduce the Sickle Cell bill, ‘‘To extend for 

5 years the authorization of appropriations for the sickle cell disease prevention and 

treatment demonstration program,’’ in the 113th Congress. Funding this national 

program will improve the lives of SCD patients through disease management programs to help them live longer, healthier lives while supporting research toward a 

comprehensive cure and providing community education about this disease and its 

treatment options. 

• Education Priorities: To improve the well-being of our citizens and our nation’s 

competitiveness in a global economy, our Budget must invest heavily in the education of our youngest citizens, from preschool to graduate school. This investment 

is necessary to build the early childhood education system, to improve school readiness, to reduce achievement gaps among students from different backgrounds, and 

to improve graduation rates. To this end, we must maintain strong funding for Head 

Start and Early Head Start, K-12 education, Title I, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and for critical college preparation programs such as TRIO and 

GEAR UP. We must increase funding for Pell Grant to help low-income students 

succeed in college. No youth should be denied the opportunity to go to college; the 

federal Pell Grant is the federal program that helps low-income students access and 

succeed in college. Further, we must support under-resourced institutions that educate and support large percentages of low-income students, such as Historically 

Black Colleges and Universities, Minority Serving Institutions, and community colleges. We must invest in education and training, including Transitional Jobs programs, the Workforce Investment Act Adult Program, Employment and Training 

Services, and Trade Adjustment Assistance programs. If we do not invest in education and training, our citizens suffer and our nation suffers. 

• Children Budget: Given that children make up a quarter of our nation’s population and form the foundation of our nation’s future, I ask that the Committee consider examining the federal investment in children and children’s programs within 

the Budget. Accounting for federal dollars in this way will help us understand how 

well we are making the health and well-being of our children a national priority. 

Without this analysis, policymakers and the public are limited in our ability to 

know how children fare in funding proposals. Precedent already exists for examining 

the federal budget based on key areas of interest, including spending on programs 

related to homeland security, meteorology, climate, and drug control. By creating a 

children’s budget at the federal level we can bring a renewed attention to children’s 

issues and programs and guarantee a fair look at our national investment priorities. 

Mr. Chairman, I am always concerned about the amount of money that we spend 

for defense and other military purposes. We never allocate what I feel is appropriate 

and greatly needed for adequately investing in training opportunities for disadvantaged individuals prepare them for today’s global service-oriented society. Let alone 

the core problems associated with poverty and criminal justice issues such as substance abuse and crime. 

In closing, we cannot ignore racial and economic divisions that continue to beset 

our nation’s cities accompanied by rising inequality in social domains such as the 

quality of family and neighborhood life, equal access to education and health care, 

employment opportunities, and political participation. Together, we must embrace 

a comprehensive agenda to that ensures the well-being and safety of our children 

and 

Thank you very much and I yield back the balance of my time. 
78 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. SUZAN K. DELBENE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen, I thank you for the opportunity to testify before the House Budget Committee on the fiscal year 2014 budget 

resolution and its impact on Washington state and the nation. 

Like many families across my district, I have been disappointed by Congress’ inability to address our nation’s fiscal challenges. Moving from one manufactured crisis to the next and budgeting 60 or 90 days at a time is not the way to govern. 

I am deeply troubled by Congress’ failure to stop the indiscriminate budget cuts 

known as sequestration, which must be replaced by a balanced, responsible approach to deficit reduction. It is time for us to craft policy that reduces our deficit 

and encourages job growth, not job losses. 

Businesses and families deserve a responsible, long-term budget that provides 

them with the clarity and visibility needed to plan and invest for the future. Every 

day we fail to provide this certainty is another day we are damaging our economy. 

We must draft a budget that cuts wasteful spending while protecting investments 

that preserve and create jobs. We need to cut the federal programs that we know 

are not working, and strengthen those programs that provide working families with 

the opportunity for success. 

The key priorities I identify here are centered on accelerating our economic recovery. As a businesswoman and entrepreneur, I know that government can build the 

foundation for long-term economic growth with smart policies and targeted investments. I am hopeful that this Congress will be able to do better than it has in the 

past, and I appreciate the opportunity to share a number of my priorities for the 

2014 budget resolution. 

For America to stay competitive in the global market, we must provide high-quality educational opportunities to all our students. I strongly urge this Committee to 

invest in our nation’s education system by providing adequate funding for early 

learning, elementary and secondary schools, public universities and career and technical education programs. Rising tuition costs are making it increasingly difficult for 

low- and middle-income families to afford a college education for their children. The 

erosion of funding for workforce training programs is hurting our efforts to build 

a strong manufacturing base here in the U.S. These are trends we must reverse. 

It is vital that we fully fund the Pell Grant program and other forms of student 

aid to ensure that all students have the opportunity to get a great education and 

acquire the skills needed to compete in a global economy. 

I also urge the Committee to protect our investments in health care, which includes sufficiently funding the agencies charged with implementing the Affordable 

Care Act. We must invest in key programs that keep Washingtonians healthy, including the Prevention and Public Health Fund, mental health services for military 

families, and funding for the Indian Health Service, which helps deliver quality care 

to tribal nations in my district. 

Another priority for this Committee must be funding for our nation’s local infrastructure. All of our states have roads, railways, ports or bridges that are in desperate need of repair. In my district we have heavily-traveled rural roads and a 

major interstate that require significant maintenance and safety upgrades. Investing today in this aging infrastructure, which acts as a lifeline to our local economy, 

will promote economic growth and ultimately save us money in the long run. As the 

most trade-dependent state in the nation, Washington’s local economy is particularly reliant on a safe, working transportation system that efficiently moves people 

and goods. To get our economy back on track, it is essential that we provide adequate federal funding for these important projects. 

It is also imperative that this Committee continue our investments in research 

and development at the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Agriculture, the National Science Foundation and other federal agencies. The research 

and development projects funded by federal agencies will generate significant economic activity and help spur job growth in both the public and private sectors. 

Farmers in my district, for example, depend on the innovative research conducted 

at Washington State University with USDA funding to help improve efficiency, assure food safety and combat pests and diseases. Federally-funded research conducted at the University of Washington has led to innovations that inspired new 

start-up companies in the technology and life sciences industries, which are the 

source of many jobs in the southern part of my district. Without a doubt, basic research is a key component of an innovative and entrepreneurial economy, and is essential for the U.S. to remain a global leader in the medical, technological and agricultural discoveries of tomorrow. 
79 

Finally, I hope that this Committee will demonstrate its commitment to federal 

programs that millions of Americans depend upon for their health care and income 

security. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and veterans’ benefit programs all 

offer federal assistance to some of the nation’s most vulnerable communities. Deficit 

reduction must be achieved in a commonsense way that doesn’t just shift costs to 

our seniors or those with disabilities. 

Chairman and Ranking Member, I thank you again for the opportunity to testify. 

As you begin work on the fiscal year 2014 budget resolution, I urge you make wise 

choices that cut unnecessary spending but preserve the investments that are vital 

to our long-term economic growth. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARCIA L. FUDGE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Thank you Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen for the opportunity 

to submit testimony for the record. My testimony will focus on those programs in 

the budget that are most crucial to ensuring that the needs and concerns of my constituents are a part of the roadmap this committee sets for our future. 

SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Our economy is slowly improving, but not fast enough when it comes to our lowincome families. The essential and life-saving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 

Program (SNAP) is the cornerstone of the nation’s nutrition safety net, helping prevent millions of Americans from going without food. SNAP recipients are some of 

the most vulnerable among us with the average household earning an income of 

only 58.5% of the federal poverty guideline, and 83% of all benefits going to households with a child, an elderly person, or a disabled person. 

In recent years, SNAP has been the bearer of several mischaracterizations. It 

should be acknowledged that the recent increase in SNAP can be attributed to a 

record number of food insecure people in America, which in turn was directly related to the economic downturn and high unemployment. In fact, the number of unemployed people increased by 94% from 2007 to 2011, and SNAP responded with 

a 70% increase in participation during this time period. SNAP participation growth 

has begun to flatten out as unemployment slowly begins to fall. The Congressional 

Budget Office has predicted that SNAP participation will begin to decline in 2015, 

with unemployment and SNAP participation returning to near pre-recession levels 

by 2022. 

Funding SNAP is a critical and sensible investment in hunger prevention and relief. Research has shown that hunger increases health care costs, lowers worker productivity, harms children’s development, and diminishes children’s educational performance. If the SNAP program is reduced, millions of children, people with disabilities, the elderly, and struggling, working families will be severely harmed. As a result, our country will witness more hunger and food insecurity, soaring health costs, 

and poor educational outcomes. Simply put, our citizens cannot afford cuts to a program that has consistently put food on their tables. We must sufficiently fund SNAP 

to ensure the program can carry out its charge of providing food assistance to lowincome households. 

THE EMERGENCY FOOD ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) provides food commodities at 

no cost to low-income Americans in need of short-term hunger relief through organizations like food banks, pantries, soup kitchens, and emergency shelters. TEFAP 

has been viewed as a role model of public-private partnership because food banks 

combine it with private donations to maximize benefits beyond the budgeted amount 

for the program. However, as successful as the program has been, food banks and 

the like are still struggling to provide food to those in need. In 2012, in my home 

state of Ohio, there were 8.6 million visits to emergency food pantries. 

Many of our food banks and pantries rely heavily on the commodities provided 

by TEFAP. Last year, 37 million people, one in eight Americans, received emergency 

food assistance through the nation’s food banks. This figure represented a 46% increase in the number of clients served between 2006 and 2010. Food pantries are 

no longer simply being looked as a means to meet temporary acute food needs; they 

now have become part of many households’ long term strategy to supplement 

monthly shortfalls in food. It is imperative to sustain the program though full funding for mandatory commodities given the steady demand for food assistance. There 

should also be a clarification of the Secretary of Agriculture’s authority to purchase 

bonus commodities in times of high need for emergency food relief. Upholding this 
80 

broadly supported bipartisan program demonstrates our country’s commitment to 

the fight against hunger. 

PELL GRANTS

The Federal Pell Grant Program provides need-based grants to low-income undergraduate and certain post baccalaureate students to promote access to postsecondary education. For Fiscal Year 2011-2012, in my home state of Ohio, there were 

343,822 Pell Grant recipients, receiving a total of $1,124,927,585. With the assistance of Pell Grants, 45,450 students were able to attend colleges and universities 

located in my Congressional district 

Too many students are forced to either forgo a college education or take on enormous sums of debt. The benefits of a college education cannot be overstated. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median weekly income for an individual 

with a bachelor’s degree was $1,038 in 2010 whereas the median weekly income for 

an individual with only a high school diploma was $626 a week. 

No American child should be denied the opportunity to go to college and the Federal Pell Grant is the single largest source of federal grant aid supporting students 

in college. Any reduction to this program would make it difficult for many Americans to afford the cost of a higher education. We must continue to make the investment in our student’s education in order to prepare them for the jobs of tomorrow. 

Pell grants are a major part of the educational investment we make in the lives of 

many low-income students. We must provide sufficient funding to this program to 

ensure the maximum grant amount is available to all eligible students. 

HEAD START

Head Start is a federal program that promotes the school readiness of children 

from low-income families, ages birth to 5, by enhancing their cognitive, social and 

emotional development. Head Start programs ensure that children who are at high 

risk of failure are provided a world class preschool education along with other comprehensive services that give them a better, healthier start in life. These children 

enter school prepared for a formal education, and their parents, who are also in a 

high risk category, are offered interventions in a wide range of life skills. As a result, the parents leave their Head Start experience far better prepared for parenting 

and their own successes. 

In Fiscal Year 2011, 964,430 children nationally were enrolled in Head Start programs. Of these 964,430 children, 4,842 of the children and families reside in my 

Congressional district. The investment our country makes in the Head Start program ensures that many of our nation’s most vulnerable students start school ready 

to succeed. It is crucial to our future that we continue to support Head Start funding. 

PROMISE NEIGHBORHOODS

Promise Neighborhoods significantly improve the educational and developmental 

outcomes of children and youth in our most distressed communities. Promise Neighborhoods carries out this mission by helping create communities where our youth 

can have access to great schools and strong systems of family and community support. In doing so, our children and youth will be prepared to attain an excellent education and successfully transition to college and a career. 

Promise Neighborhood dollars originated through the Obama Administration’s attempt to replicate the success of the Harlem Children’s Zone in Harlem, New York. 

Since Promise Neighborhood’s origination, the Administration has awarded both 

planning and implementation grants to various neighborhoods. While many communities are currently benefiting from these dollars, there are many more applicants 

across the country with strong developing neighborhoods that need federal support. 

Many of these neighborhoods have continued the goals and mission of a Promise 

Neighborhood even though they have not received Federal funding. I strongly encourage the Budget Committee to invest in our high-risk neighborhoods by continuing to support Promise Neighborhoods. 

NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

Nested under the Department of Health and Human Services, NIH is one of eight 

health agencies of the Public Health Service and encompasses 27 separate Institutes 

and Centers. NIH’s mission is to ‘‘seek fundamental knowledge about the nature 

and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to enhance 

health, lengthen life, and reduce the burdens of illness and disability.’’ Guided by 

their mission, NIH is regarded as the most powerful economic engine that annually 
81 

invests more than $31 billion in medical research for the American people. Not only 

does NIH serve as the primary founding source for the research medical community, 

academia, and small business, but it is also the underpinning for the entire U.S. 

biomedical industry. The U.S. biomedical industry annually exports an estimated $90 billion in goods 

and services and employs 1 million U.S. citizens with wages totaling an estimated 

$84 billion. As our workforce continues to diversify and grow, it will be critical to 

create viable employment opportunities that reach all Americans. NIH does just 

that, by endowing research in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. In Fiscal 

Year 2011, NIH-funded research supported an estimated 432,000 jobs in the U.S. 

and generated $62 billion in new economic activity—more than double the taxpayers’ investment. In order to create a sustainable local and national economy, we 

must remain committed to advancing technology, pursuing scientific innovation, and 

promoting cutting edge research. 

In addition to their role as an economic catalyst, NIH’s research greatly impacts 

the lives of everyday citizens. This includes individuals diagnosed with diseases 

such as diabetes, cancer, heart disease, immune-mediated diseases, and Alzheimer’s, 

as they are in dire need of treatment as they pursue healthy and productive lives. 

It would be detrimental to reduce NIH funding given the agency’s substantial contribution to the U.S. economy through job creation and research. NIH creates jobs, 

saves lives, reduces health costs, and strengthens the nation. We must do all we 

can to protect its funding. 

JOB CORPS

Job Corps has and continues to play a pivotal role in the success of our nation’s 

youth. It is the largest career technical training and education program for low-income students ages 16 through 24. For 45 years, Job Corps has been America’s premier drop out recovery program. Over 85% of its graduates find jobs, enroll in higher education, or enlist in the military. It is the most rigorously evaluated and accountable job training program in the Department of Labor’s Employment and 

Training Administration. A program designed to assist our low-income youth learn 

a career, earn a high school diploma or GED, and find and keep a good job must 

be strongly supported. The Job Corps program must be adequately funded to ensure 

our youth have the opportunity to succeed. 

NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE BANK

The current condition of the infrastructure in the U.S. is particularly lackluster. 

Our country spends less than 40% of what it needs to meet its infrastructure needs. 

It has been estimated that more than $250 billion is needed annually for the next 

50 years just to bring transportation infrastructure up to par. Nearly 700,000 

bridges in the U.S. are structurally deficient. One-third of our roads are in poor, mediocre, or fair condition. Repairing the nation’s crumbling infrastructure is not just 

a safety issue: it is an economic issue. It has been established that infrastructure 

projects create immediate jobs. According to the Federal Highway Administration, 

for every $1 billion spent on highway and bridge construction, nearly 25,000 jobs 

are created. The concept of a National Infrastructure Bank has received broad bipartisan support and it is critical it be funded. 

GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION

Direct Graduate Medical Education (GME) payments help fund the teaching costs 

of residency programs, such as resident salaries and benefits, faculty salaries and 

benefits, and administrative overhead expenses. Under GME, the Children’s Hospital Graduate Medical Education (CHGME) program assists freestanding children’s 

hospitals by providing funding to assist residents at these facilities. Since CHGME 

came into existence, many children’s hospitals, including those located in my Congressional district, have been able to train the next generation of pediatricians. 

According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), there are 

over 1,030 teaching hospitals that directly employ over 2.5 million people. Often 

time, these teaching hospitals are among the largest employers in their communities. Additionally, teaching hospitals are major economic engines—generating 

business, employment and tax revenue in the regions they serve. It will be vital to 

maintain the funding for GME payments as we continue to prepare our next generation of doctors who can offer reasonable and accessible health care through the Affordable Care Act. 

Again, thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee. I respectfully request that the budget priorities I have outlined be given full consideration and included in the record. 
82 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. TULSI GABBARD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and members of the committee, I 

appreciate the chance to testify before you today. 

My testimony today is guided by the principle that deficit reduction should not 

increase unemployment and poverty, nor harm the disadvantaged. In Hawaii, we 

understand that we are all in this together and that each of us must be part of the 

solution. We recognize that spending cuts that would disproportionately fall on the 

backs of most vulnerable here and abroad will damage the very fabric of our communities. 

As we all know, we face many fiscal and economic challenges, and as a nation, 

we will have to make some difficult decisions to put our budget on a more sustainable path. Meeting these challenges requires a balanced approach. We cannot cut 

out way to prosperity and we cannot ask the least among us to solve our nation’s 

fiscal crisis. 

I cannot overstate the importance of the defense industry as a driver of our economy in Hawaii. Reductions in defense spending must be responsible and cannot 

come at the expense of our military readiness. We must bring our troops home from 

Afghanistan and continue the transformation of our military into an agile force for 

good that can meet the growing and evolving threats of today, as opposed to the 

conflicts of yesterday. 

Foreign aid also plays an important role in addressing the complicated and numerous issues affecting the United States’ interests abroad. The small investment 

we make—historically, just one percent of our budget—is critical in preventing the 

need for military interventions across the globe. Programs like the National Guard 

State Partnership Program require minimal expense with a great return on investment by building positive relationships and through cultural and military exchanges. 

After waging war for more than a decade overseas, our nation must do more to 

ensure that the brave men and woman who have served receive the support, benefits and opportunities they so richly deserve. By providing the necessary funding, 

and instilling additional efficiency, we can reduce the lengthy backlog at the Department of Veterans Affairs. We should do all that is within our power to make sure 

the transition from servicemember to veteran and civilian is seamless. The social 

cost of failure is too great. 

I support a plan that combines common sense tax reform with pragmatic spending 

cuts don’t disproportionally affect our middle class families or seniors. This balanced 

approach will allow us to make investments now which will promote economic prosperity, growth, and innovation while also strengthening our national defense and 

upholding our responsibilities to our kids, our seniors, and our communities. 

Making smart investments in the short term will not only grow our economy and 

create good jobs for the middle class, it will reduce future costs. Strategic spending 

on infrastructure, defense, and the development of the green energy technologies of 

tomorrow will save the taxpayer billions in energy costs and will cement America’s 

status as the world’s leading innovator. Acting now to strengthen our social safety 

net by focusing on prevention allows us to spend less on the back end for our social 

ills. Finally, investing in the education of tomorrow’s leaders is the best investment 

we can make to ensure a strong and stable economy and future for all people. 

Thank you. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM R. KEATING, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Van Hollen, thank you for the opportunity to 

testify before the Budget Committee. 

My constituents on Cape Cod, the Islands of Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard 

and the South Shore of Massachusetts have strong opinions about how their taxpayer money should be spent. Moreover, many are concerned about the divided atmosphere in Congress and across the board cuts that will impact thousands of families across Massachusetts. Further, the long-term costs of this manufactured crisis 

on healthcare, education, security and US competitiveness in the global arena are 

still yet to be seen, but are worrying many of my constituents. I am here to communicate their views. 

When I testified before the committee last year, I focused on the importance of 

women’s safety and healthcare, community block grants, drug abuse prevention and 

job creation. Since then, there have been many positive developments including the 

passage of the Violence Against Women’s Act just last week and the restoration of 
83 

over 140 critical positions at the Otis Air National Guard Base. Some of my proposals—like tax credits to hire veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan—have 

found consensus and been implemented. Yet, job creation and employment protections for jobs going overseas still remain on the top of my list of priorities. For this 

reason, I urge the Budget Committee to be weary of shortsighted austerity that will 

eliminate job-creating initiatives and compromise our safety for the sake of immediate savings. Further, I would urge a proactive solution to this budgetary crisis. 

Mr. Van Hollen, I wholeheartedly support and have cosponsored your bill to replace 

the sequester with smart, targeted cuts to the oil and gas industry as well as refocusing direct payments to large, corporate farms. 

Most importantly, I would urge the Committee to protect our budget from impeding the growth of the renewable energy sector, marine technologies as well as job 

training and workforce development initiatives. 

My district, particularly the South Coast, is inexorably linked to the ocean. 

Throughout the 19th century, what is now my district was the heart of the global 

whaling and fishing industries. Today, we are in the midst of a disaster as our fishermen wait for supplemental relief. I know that relief is not under this Committee’s 

jurisdiction, but I would urge for funding toward NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries’ 

Service be devoted to cooperative research efforts between scientists and fishermen. 

The cost of monitoring by NOAA should not have to fall on the backs of our fishermen. 

We can create more opportunities by harnessing our Nation’s rich coastal and marine resources. Our region is perfectly suited to cultivate the marine and renewable 

energy industries—and benefit from the multiplier effect of the jobs they will 

produce. My district alone is poised to supply our country with 20% of its offshore 

wind energy needs. 

Last month, I had the pleasure of bringing together various federal agencies and 

local development groups in New Bedford to conduct the first meeting of the New 

Bedford Terminal Working Group. 

The construction of South terminal is estimated to expand business output by $44 

million and generate $19.2 million of additional household income in Bristol County 

over a two year period; General operations are expected to increase business output 

by $15.6 million and generate $5.6 million in additional household income each 

year. 

Further, construction and maintenance of the 130-turbine installation of Cape 

Wind is expected to provide an increase of $457 million in business output and generation of over $160 million in household income across the state over an estimated 

three-year construction period; 

And it doesn’t end there. 

Various transportation options, including SouthCoast rail, and potential job training opportunities will incorporate our academic facilities with the men and women 

from New Bedford’s fishing industry and other industries and serve as a model for 

coastal communities throughout the country. 

I am testifying here today because this budget is intricately linked to the future 

of my district. 

I am concerned that unexempted programs under sequestration, which include 

programs directly linked to South Terminal and related developments in New Bedford like the EPA, SBA and the Army Corps, will suffer. I urge this committee to 

safeguard investments that have already been made to increase innovation and 

grow our economy. I hope that we can communicate and realize the potential of certain projects for our country while admitting to the repetition and waste of others. 

Further, I would urge the Committee to take a second look at the importance of 

conservation programs like the Prescott Grant Program and others that protect our 

marine resources. 

These programs not only safeguard a very unique National resource but also attract tourism and create jobs in areas that are only seasonally productive. In this 

regard, I would also like to take a moment to ask to maintain funding for program 

like the Small Business Innovation and Research Program and the Navy’s Defense 

University Research Instrumentation Program, which will help promote undersea 

technologies as well as others both domestically and abroad. 

Finally, I would like to talk about something that is at the heart of my public 

service career: combating substance abuse. It is a sad fact that 1.7 people die a day 

in Massachusetts from opiate-based drug overdoses. And, the effects of addiction can 

be seen throughout our country. 

As a former DA, I am a strong proponent of drug courts and SAMHSA funding 

to assist those working to prevent abuse and overdose. The Drug Court Discretionary Grant program helps to develop treatment drug courts that integrate sub-
84 

stance abuse treatment, mandatory drug testing, and transitional services for nonviolent, substance abuse suspects. 

The American people understand: this is the year of budget constraints. My testimony not only reflects the priorities of the Ninth Congressional District of Massachusetts, but echoes the messages I have heard from across the country. 

We must ensure that this budget incorporates effective funding decisions that encourage efficiency but do not overlook the critical needs of Americans of all backgrounds. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

Washington, DC, March 11, 2013. 

Hon. PAUL RYAN, Chairman; Hon. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Ranking Member, 

Committee on the Budget, 207 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC 

20515. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN RYAN AND RANKING MEMBER VAN HOLLEN: Thank you for your 

invitation to submit comments regarding the budget for fiscal year 2014. For the 

first time since I have taken office in 2009, this Congress has an opportunity to 

draft its budget without being in the midst of the financial crisis of 2008. Slowly 

but surely, a recovery shows signs of taking hold across the country. For the third 

consecutive year, real GDP rose in 2012 by 1.5 percent. Housing prices have finally 

stopped their free fall and actually rose 9.7% year-over-year in January, the largest 

gain since 2006. Just last week, the Department of Labor announced that our economy added 236,000 jobs as the unemployment rate dropped to 7.7%. 

As the recovery strengthens, much work remains to maintain its momentum and 

protect our gains. My state of New Mexico continues to suffer from 6.7% unemployment, a rate that exceeds the state unemployment rate for the decade before the 

crisis. New Mexicans have given back much to our country, through the search for 

scientific knowledge at our national labs to the proud tradition of service in our nation’s armed forces. When our county has needed us, New Mexicans have been 

there. The people that I have talked to in my travels around the state do not want 

and do not expect to be handed something for nothing. They want to work, to have 

a sense of purpose, to be able to provide for their families. But too often of late those 

opportunities have not been there for them. That is why I urge the members of this 

committee to come together with a focus on the concerns that are most pressing in 

the lives of the people we are honored to represent. With many issues needing our 

attention, let us not lose focus on the need to spur job creation and get our economy 

moving. 

For the past two years, the House has devoted much attention towards the cause 

of deficit reduction, but at the expense of our current need to create new jobs and 

our long-term need to invest in education and innovation. House Republicans have 

conditioned the full faith and credit of the United States government upon the sequester’s imposition of arbitrary budget cuts to even the most critical programs. Despite reports that the sequester could lead to the loss of 750,000 jobs and cut our 

economic growth by a third, the House has yet to pass a plan to prevent it this Congress and has not even publicly announced an intention to negotiate with the Senate or President Obama on a more balanced plan. Most alarmingly, the past two 

House budgets have asked seniors and the less fortunate to shoulder the largest 

burdens of deficit reduction, and House Republican leadership has asked that this 

be a prerequisite for ending the sequester as well. 

As we all know, the nation’s long-term budget deficit remains to be a concern. 

After a decade of raising inadequate tax revenue, fighting two of the longest wars 

in our history, and suffering the greatest financial crisis in almost 80 years, the nation’s fiscal surplus rapidly deteriorated and the debt increased once again. As we 

look towards the future, there are troubling signs on the horizon—an aging population having to make do with an inefficient and expensive health care system, an 

economy struggling to provide opportunities for the long-term unemployed, and a resistance to making the investments we need to spur innovation and growth. For the 

past two years, this committee has attempted to respond to these issues with budget 

resolutions that avoid confronting them in favor of shifting responsibility onto seniors and low-income Americans. Instead of addressing the root causes that threaten 

to increase our health costs at an exponential rate, this committee has proposed 

benefit cuts to Medicare recipients that would make our system more expensive for 

everyone and weakened the support of Medicaid for low-income and disabled Americans. Instead of working to stabilize the economy and increase opportunities for unemployed workers and struggling businesses, this committee has proposed extreme 

and rapid cuts that sap our economy of its vitality and force the uncertainties of 

an unending series of ‘‘cliffs.’’ Instead of taking advantage of historically low interest 
85 

rates to rebuild America with new infrastructure and education resources, this committee has sought indiscriminate cuts to even our most vital programs in the name 

of deficit reduction. 

As this committee prepares a budget resolution for the next fiscal year, I urge you 

to come together to reduce our current budget deficits in a balanced way that rejects 

benefit cuts to our crucial entitlement programs or budget cuts for programs that 

benefit the country in ways that far outweigh their deficit impact. A number of our 

colleagues in the House, including Ranking Member Van Hollen, have made proposals to do this, and I urge the committee to heed their advice to attain balanced 

deficit reductions and avoid the harmful job losses of the sequester. We must work 

towards a sustainable path for our federal budget, but we cannot force our seniors, 

veterans, military families, and least fortunate Americans to shoulder the largest 

share of the burdens of deficit reduction. 

With the growing number of troops coming back from Afghanistan and those who 

have served in Iraq and past conflicts, it’s important to deliver care and services 

to the individuals and families who have earned it. It is irresponsible to allow the 

sequester to threaten the quality of life for our military families while their spouses 

or parents are away from home to fight for our country. While much of the VA is 

exempt from the sequester, we must ensure that moving forward we fund the VA 

at adequate levels so that we can address the increasing number of troops coming 

home, while providing adequate care to veterans currently in the system. 

The United States also must abide by its treaty responsibilities to the sovereign 

people of tribal nations. Under the sequester, tribes could lose almost $130 million, 

impacting areas such as human services, law enforcement, BIE schools, economic 

development and natural resources. Specifically, for the Indian Health Service, sequestration could result in about 3,000 fewer inpatient admissions and 804,000 

fewer outpatient visits provided by IHS and Tribal hospitals and clinics. In addition, 

some key education programs could feel the impact of sequestration immediately. 

Many school districts qualifying for Impact Aid receive a high percentage of their 

overall funding from federal sources and use the money during the current school 

year. Sequestration would eliminate about $60 million for this program, which 

serves approximately 113,000 Native students. Many of these schools are counting 

on federal funds to meet the basic needs of students and to pay teacher salaries this 

spring, potentially forcing districts to make wrenching, mid-year adjustments. There 

are smarter and more balanced ways to achieve deficit reduction without placing 

this burden on the backs of those who need help, and tribal communities should not 

be disproportionally affected by budget cuts. 

We must also look forward and invest in our nation’s education system, which can 

mean a stronger America for generations to come. If our goal is a better economy— 

education is how we get there. As global competition in the development of advanced technologies increases, our country risks losing its preeminence in the global 

community for innovation in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. As a Congressman from a minority-majority state, I well aware of the severe shortage of Hispanic and Native American students in science, mathematics and engineering fields. 

The continuing under-representation of Hispanic and Native American STEM students and the growing shortage of scientists, mathematicians and engineers require 

serious investment in the development of STEM education pipelines for minority 

communities. The higher education needs of our Native American and Hispanic students can be unique, and Tribal Colleges and Universities and Hispanic Serving Institutions provide vital educational opportunities for these under-represented communities. As you draft the next budget, I urge you to reverse the painful cuts to 

education programs that make it even more likely that New Mexicans from Tribal 

or minority communities or those who are living in poverty will drop out of school. 

These cuts to education funding are cuts to our nation’s long-term future, and I urge 

you to hold them harmless from the sequester and future cuts. 

We must protect research and development as these drive our long-term security 

and prosperity. In particular, our national laboratories possess unique and valuable 

capabilities and perform some of the most important research for the nation. The 

two national laboratories in my home state of New Mexico, Los Alamos and Sandia, 

also provide crucial national security expertise, including advanced technologies for 

cyber security. By directing investments towards the research and development 

projects done by the labs at Los Alamos and Sandia, we will reap enormous benefits 

down the line. The labs are working on new technologies that will make America 

safer, more energy-efficient, and environmentally sustainable We must invest in 

their research capabilities as a source of jobs today and of innovation for the future. 

In order to reap the full rewards of these research investments, we should fund 

technology maturation programs that encourage promising new technologies, often 
86 

in partnership with private entities. Without this important step many promising 

technologies are left undeveloped. 

Investments in clean energy are important to the future of our economy and the 

energy security of our nation. Over the past four years, the renewable energy sector 

has begun to expand and the cost of energy produced from renewable and clean 

sources has become more affordable. Despite what some critics say, the DoE’s guaranteed loan program and other Federal governments programs have been successful 

in helping develop clean energy. In fact, the government has had a long and successful history of investing in research and development projects that spur new technologies—the Internet being a prime example. We must continue investing in our 

energy future and investments in clean energy are no exception. 

It is my hope that Congress passes a new Farm Bill with long term budget priorities. While we continue to operate under the 2008 Farm Bill, funding for Rural Development programs and drought insurance programs is crucial. Rural Development 

provides direct investments to help agricultural producers, small businesses, tribes 

and rural areas build local economies. In addition, many of our traditional agricultural producers in New Mexico, including acequia communities, have been impacted 

by drought and we must ensure that assistance is available for those who need it. 

During the past two years New Mexico’s dairy industry has been hit hard by the 

flawed Dairy Product Price Support Program’s pricing system. We can fix these 

issues by finally passing a Farm Bill similar to those passed by the U.S. Senate and 

the House Agriculture Committees during the 112th Congress and must not lose 

sight of the needs of our agricultural producers during the current budget process. 

Finally, substance abuse is one of the most pressing public health concerns facing 

our nation. According to the 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, an estimated 22.6 million Americans aged 12 and older had abused illegal drugs over the 

past month. In New Mexico, our communities in particular know the impact of illicit 

drugs and overdose. For many years New Mexico has been among the states with 

the highest rates of substance abuse. A strategy to combat substance abuse must 

include a range of approaches including prevention, treatment, and law enforcement 

elements, and it cannot be done in a purely top-down approach. It will require all 

of us to work together to coordinate federal, state, county, and local government responses and this Committee must ensure that we have the resources for this important work. The impact of the sequester will already severely limit resources to families, communities, and organizations committed to tackling substance abuse through 

prevention and treatment—and additionally impacting the fight by hampering law 

enforcement’s ability to pursue criminals who would illegally market prescription or 

illicit drugs. Our budget priorities must reflect our priorities for safe and healthy 

communities, which requires the resources to combat and treat substance abuse. 

Thank you for your attention to these important issues as you craft the Fiscal 

Year 2014 budget. Investing in priorities that will create jobs and strengthen the 

middle class are critical to our efforts to build a sustainable economy and federal 

budget. I urge you to work to make these investments while seeking a balanced approach to deficit reduction. 

Respectfully submitted, 

BEN RAY LUJA ́ N, 

Member of Congress. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. GLORIA NEGRETE MCLEOD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Thank you Mr. Chairman, ranking member and members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to provide written testimony on the budget and the related 

programs that will be impacted as a result of cuts to vital services. 

The budget should reflect the ideals of compassion, fairness and equality that 

Americans proudly share. When the budget proposals are set forth by this committee, I would ask that it reconsider any further cuts that would negatively affect 

our children, seniors, veterans, and small businesses. 

As a member of the Agriculture’s Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, and Nutrition, I want to ensure our children and students receive the best 

nutritional options available through programs such as SNAP. More than half of 

children in my district receive free or reduced lunch. Further cuts to federally funded programs such as those put forward would threaten the ability to adequately feed 

our nation’s children. 

I want to highlight the Women, Infants, and Children program, known as WIC, 

which provides nutritious foods, nutritional education and referrals to health and 

other social services to participants at no charge. WIC serves low-income mothers 

and young children who are at nutrition risk. 
87 

My district comprises one of the highest WIC participation populations in California with more than 56,000 case loads in October of 2012 alone. Participation in 

WIC results in positive health outcomes for women, infants, and children while saving tax payer money. For every dollar spent on pregnant women in WIC there is 

a significant return in Medicaid savings for newborns and their mothers. 

My district is reflective of the country’s fastest-growing population of people aged 

65 and over. With the increase of seniors, the need for in home-and communitybased services also grows. Yet the programs that finance these services have received no increased funding for the past several years. I urge you to consider the 

long term impacts budget reductions will have to our nation’s senior population. 

Through the reductions of the Medicaid program, states could be forced to substantially reduce or eliminate Medicaid home care, home health, and adult day services. These cuts would result in seniors using more expensive services, such as hospitals and nursing homes. 

Programs that are meant to sustain a senior’s independence such as the Older 

Americans Act programs have been underfunded for many years. In view of the 

growing numbers of seniors who need these services and their cost-effectiveness, I 

urge this committee to increase funding for supportive senior services such as the 

National Family Caregiver Support Program and Meals on Wheels which help older 

individuals with care needs to receive services that enable seniors to remain in their 

own homes. 

Lastly, we should continue to support the Small Business Administration and find 

ways to make it easier for small businesses to create jobs while not generating fiscal 

uncertainty in our economy through adverse policy making. The success of our overall economic recovery depends on how well small businesses fare because more than 

2/3 of the jobs created in the United States come from small businesses. 

There are economic indicators suggesting that the local economy in my district 

and the surrounding area is improving. This is particularly important for my district cities that faced some of the highest unemployment rates in the nation during 

the past recession. Small businesses are beginning to hire again and the Inland Empire is experiencing an increase in the high-tech job sector. Many of these high-tech 

jobs are also high-paying, making it essential that this industry continues to stimulate further economic growth in the Inland Empire. 

In closing, I ask that my recommendations be considered in the coming weeks as 

the federal budget is negotiated. The American people want us to solve our differences and create a balanced budget however it should not be at the expense of 

seniors, children, and small businesses. 

Thank you. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARKWAYNE MULLIN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

CHAIRMAN RYAN, RANKING MEMBER VAN HOLLEN, AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE: Following the enactment of President Obama’s sequester, and the failure 

of Congress to come together to resolve our budget crisis, it is necessary now more 

than ever for us to find commonsense solutions to our fiscal problems. Members of 

Congress on both sides of the aisle have agreed that some cuts are necessary in 

order to reduce our national deficit, although the lack of consensus on how much 

and where to cut have led to the painful, across-the-board cuts that we are now experiencing. These widespread, untargeted cuts hurt good programs and cause unintended consequences, affecting our troops, federal employees, contractors, and everyday Americans. 

It is the responsibility of Congress to do everything in our power to find the most 

effective, least painful cuts in order to put our country back on the path of fiscal 

stability. In a federal government that has grown in size as much as ours, surely 

we can find many areas of duplication, waste, and abuse to cut first. 

I would like to draw to your attention one particular area where savings can be 

found. Each year, the Federal Government makes roughly $115 billion in improper 

payments to individuals, contractors, and organizations annually. These payments 

are made in excess of what should have been paid and are often made to ineligible 

Medicare, Medicaid, Disability Insurance recipients just to name a few. Astoundingly, our government has made improper payments in excess of $100 billion in each 

of the past four fiscal years. Reported improper payments for FY2012 reached $108 

billion, although a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that not 

all agencies have developed improper payment estimates for all of their programs, 

likely pushing the real total of improper payments even higher. 

Before cutting funding for things like our military’s operations and maintenance 

accounts that ensure our troops are well trained and supplied, I would urge you to 
88 

first reduce the amount of waste in government, including the billions lost in improper payments. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT PITTENGER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

Thank you Mr Chairman for allowing me the time to testify today before the 

House Budget Committee. 

Peter Orszag, former budget director for President Obama, recently told a gathering of freshman Representatives that ‘‘unless you deal with the debt, you’re playing games with the country. Unless you deal with entitlements, you’re playing 

games with the debt. You better go fix it.’’ 

For too many years, our leaders have irresponsibly put off the tough decisions 

necessary to place our country on sound financial footing. Even President Obama 

seems to be ignoring the problem, as he never even mentioned our $17 trillion debt 

during his inaugural address and State of the Union speech. 

American taxpayers deserve and expect an accountable government, not a bloated 

bureaucracy in need of credit counseling. Each passing year makes the decision 

more difficult and the changes more painful. Medicare will be insolvent by 2024, 

which means we are rapidly squandering any chance to fix the problem. Our $17 trillion debt, which currently results in $220 billion in annual interest 

payments, is a drag on our economy, deterring our ability to create jobs for American families. Reforming entitlements must be done to help our economy grow today 

and provide for the future 

Any plan to reform entitlements must preserve the current benefits promised to 

this generation, while providing ample opportunity for the next generation to prepare. However, we must be strong and take action. We can enact a responsible plan 

to preserve these important safety nets for future generations, or we can do nothing 

and watch as American families suffer even more after Medicare and Social Security 

collapse. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARTHA ROBY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA

I want to thank the esteemed Chairman and the members of this Committee for 

the opportunity to share my thoughts on the budget situation. Thank you for your 

continued hard work on this most important issue. 

As Thomas Jefferson wrote, ‘‘The whole art of government consists in the art of 

being honest.’’ I fear that too often our government fails to meet that basic standard. 

We’ve seen it from past Congresses, from past Administrations, and, indeed, from 

the current Administration. I believe I speak for the majority of the people in my 

district who are, frankly, tired of the misleading statements, scare tactics, and intellectual dishonesty that is so common in this Administration’s words and deeds. 

We’ve witnessed this strategy most recently during the ongoing dialogue about the 

Budget Control Act’s automatic cuts known as sequestration. 

Let me point out three basic observations about sequestration. First, sequestration will have a range of very important consequences for our government and our 

national defense. Second, the federal budget generally, and sequestration specifically, are complicated issues foreign to the overwhelming majority of Americans. 

Third, even if unfamiliar with the specifics, everyday Americans care deeply about 

the fiscal and national security of our country. 

Together, these basic facts emphasize why it is so important that we, the elected 

leaders of this country, take every reasonable step to accurately inform the public 

about the policies and procedure of its government. It’s hard enough for the elderly 

or hardworking parents or young people getting started in their careers to follow 

the actions of the federal government. Injecting misleading information in the public 

debate only makes matters worse. 

This Administration should be ashamed of its response to sequestration. Spreading unsubstantiated rumors, making threats and withholding critical information in 

order to scare the American people is not leadership. Perhaps the pettiness of this 

Administration’s behavior was best symbolized last week when they announced the 

White House would be closed to the public for tours due to sequestration. The stuff 

of Lincoln and Churchill, this is not. 

Regarding the larger budget situation, it is obvious that we need to continue our 

effort to rein in spending and reduce the size of the federal government. 

Thanks to the leadership of many in this chamber, we have made significant 

progress under rather difficult circumstances. The House has stemmed the tide of 

reckless spending that washed across the federal government in 2009 and 2010. Our 
89 

efforts continue to right-size government effectively, which is why I come before you 

today. 

There is a smarter way to cut federal spending than the automatic across-theboard cuts of sequestration. I am specifically worried about the disproportionate cuts 

that the military is being forced to endure: roughly one half of the cuts will affect 

defense accounts that make up less than 20 percent of the federal budget. That is 

a fact people across the country need to understand. As I mentioned, people in my 

district are truly concerned about the consequences of this policy—especially in 

areas near Ft. Rucker and Maxwell Air Force Base. 

I am convinced that we can do better. This week, the House passed legislation 

to keep the government operating through the end of the fiscal year and to allow 

the Pentagon some flexibility to allocate the required cuts to areas that will have 

less impact on national defense and operational capabilities. That is a good first 

step. 

I sincerely hope that this Committee will take the next budget resolution as another opportunity to alter the disproportionate cuts of sequestration. It is time to 

reprioritize these cuts and stop balancing our fiscal future on the back of our military. These men and women and their families who have dedicated their lives to 

this country deserve better than to be treated as pawns in a game of political 

brinksmanship. 

In doing so, I hope the Committee will continue to recognize that our country 

must address the true driver of future debt a serious problem that we must tackle: 

mandatory spending. 

Let me offer one other note about honesty. I remain committed to finally ending 

the practice of using budget gimmicks to distort the truth about federal spending. 

Next week, I plan to re-introduce the Honest Budget Act, an important piece of legislation that would address some of the most common accounting tricks used by politicians to hide the truth, confuse the public, and run up the national debt. This approach is endorsed by numerous conservative groups, including the Heritage Foundation, Citizens against Government Waste, and Americans for Tax Reform. 

I strongly support approval of the Honest Budget Act in its entirety, and I welcome any future hearings this Committee may hold to examine its various provisions. That said, I believe a great deal of good would result from the Budget Committee adopting the underlying principles of this legislation while it considers the 

House budget resolution. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I hope you know that I am proud of your stated intent 

to balance our nation’s budget. As we all know, it will not be easy to fight those 

long addicted to spending, taxing, and borrowing. They are well entrenched in 

Washington, and they will not cede easily. But, I hope you will count me as a partner in your efforts to restore fiscal sanity and commonsense to our federal government. 

Again, thank you for this opportunity to testify. I look forward to working with 

each of you in the future. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Thank you, Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen, for giving me the 

opportunity to testify on your committee’s consideration of the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2014. 

It’s been said before many times—and it remains true—that budgets are moral 

documents. How we choose to allocate our resources is a direct reflection of the values we hold and the goals we hope to achieve to advance our nation and its people. 

As you begin work on this year’s budget resolution, I encourage you to look with 

a clear eye towards the state of our economy, American workers, and the nation as 

a whole. 

Yesterday, the Dow Jones Industrial average hit an all-time high, completing a 

full-scale comeback since the depths of the Great Recession—more than doubling 

since hitting a low in March 2009. 

Major corporations are seeing record profits, and the extremely rich are seeing 

their incomes and wealth grow. 

But those successes are not universally shared. Inequality is at its highest point 

since the Great Depression, unemployment is stuck hovering around 8 percent and 

wages are stagnant—as they have been for decades—for most American workers. 

I’d like to quote a New York Times article from earlier this week: 
90 

1http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/04/business/economy/corporate-profits-soar-as-workerincome-limps.html?hp&_r=0&pagewanted=all 

‘‘So far in this recovery, corporations have captured an unusually high share of 

the income gains. The U.S. corporate sector is in a lot better health than the overall 

economy. And until we get a full recovery in the labor market, this will persist.’’ 1

That quote is not from some liberal commentator—it’s from Ethan Harris, the cohead of global economics at Bank of America Merrill Lynch. 

In early 2009, the President and Democrats took action to put a trampoline under 

the falling economy and boost it back up. The American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act was a success, creating up to 3.6 million jobs, stopping the economic freefall, 

and bringing us out of a recession. But when Republicans took the House majority 

in 2011, they halted any further action to create jobs and immediately put in place 

efforts to cut spending, without regard to the potential economic effects. Their resistance to raising a single dime more from the wealthiest Americans lasted for two 

full years—and prompted multiple fiscal crises along the way, including holding the 

debt ceiling hostage in order to force through cuts. Finally, two months ago, we were 

able to come to an agreement to address the so-called ‘‘fiscal cliff’’ with a combination of spending cuts and revenue increases. 

But the damage has been done—too many Americans remain out of work, too 

many are working part-time jobs when they want to work full-time, and too many 

have seen their wages stay the same or even drop in recent years. And if we don’t 

act responsibly to repeal or replace the sequester, another 750,000 jobs will be lost, 

according to the Congressional Budget Office. 

We are at a critical moment here. Not just whether we will replace the sequester, 

but what it will be replaced with? Not just whether we address our fiscal challenges, 

but how? 

When crafting a budget that meets the true needs of our nation, we need to ask 

the following questions: Does it create jobs? Does it address inequality? Does it raise 

revenues in a fair way? Does it protect the vital benefits of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid? Does it preserve and boost investments that build the middle 

class, including education, job training, infrastructure, scientific and medical research, and renewable energy? Does it make smart cuts that target true waste, not 

opportunity? 

At the most basic level, we should not craft a federal budget that makes everyone 

else’s budgets—workers, seniors, state and local governments, small businesses— 

worse. We should pass a budget that meets those tests and never pass one that doesn’t. 

I hope as you work to craft your budget you will look at proposals that I have 

offered, including the Emergency Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act, the Fairness in Taxation Act, the Public Option Deficit Reduction Act, and the Corporate 

Tax Fairness Act. I also encourage you to look at the Balancing Act, which I offered 

with other members of the Progressive Caucus, as an alternative to the dangerous 

sequester cuts. The principles these bills are based on are what the American people 

say they want—job creation, more revenues from those who can afford to pay—including millionaires and wealthy corporations shipping jobs overseas, and smart 

spending cuts, including cuts in military spending that eliminate out-dated weapons 

systems and refocus our resources on 21st-century threats. Those are the principles 

that should be reflected in this year’s budget. 

Thank you for your consideration and your time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CAROL SHEA–PORTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and Members of the Committee, 

thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on the fiscal year (FY) 2014 

budget resolution and to share my concerns and priorities. 

As of March 1st, sequestration has taken effect across the nation, and with it, the $85 billion budget decrease required by the Budget Control Act of 2011. These sudden enormous and untargeted cuts across all government and military programs 

and departments will shock our recovering economy, both in New Hampshire and 

throughout the nation. Sequestration will cut essential services and investments, 

impacting everything from law enforcement and defense to education, medical research, infrastructure improvements, and nutrition programs. These government 

programs and departments ‘‘promote the general welfare’’ (U.S. Constitution, preamble) and are critical to ensure public safety, economic growth and prosperity, and 

national security. Sequestration cuts are bad policy and bad for the American people. Any cuts made to vital programs, departments, and infrastructure must be 
91 

made in a targeted and gradual manner in order not to inflict severe harm on the 

American citizens they serve. As you consider the FY 2014 budget resolution, I hope 

you will work to replace these arbitrary cuts with a balanced plan that responsibly 

cuts spending and removes unnecessary tax breaks for special interests. 

The cuts to the Department of Defense budget are destructive and indiscriminate, 

and when added to the cuts of the last several years, will weaken our national defense by making our active duty military and reserve components less able to accomplish their mission. 

Located at the eastern edge of the First Congressional District, the Portsmouth 

Naval Shipyard (PNSY), with a workforce of over 5,000, has both an essential defense mission and an enormous impact on the region’s economy. Both military readiness and the regional economy are threatened by these drastic sequestration cuts. 

The readiness of the U.S. Navy and the Shipyard will be impacted in a number 

of adverse ways. • The Office of Management and Budget has announced that the Navy’s budget, 

which governs the four remaining U.S. public shipyards, including the PNSY, will 

be reduced by $4.3 billion in 2013, with a terrible impact on naval readiness. • The PSNY budget for 2012 was approximately $667 million, which means a pro- jected $52,693,000 in cuts from the 2013 fund allotment for both payroll and operations. • According to a statement released by the Secretary of the Navy, the $450 million in repairs required by the U.S.S. Miami will be delayed due to sequestration. • PNSY performs critical repair, refit, and nuclear refueling work on Virginiaclass submarines. Timelines for the work are scheduled years in advance and 

planned carefully to ensure maximum efficiency. Sequestration makes it extremely 

challenging to meet submarine availability schedules and deadlines. These sequester cuts will ultimately impact the ability of the U.S. submarine force to carry out 

its national defense mission. I’d like to note that the People’s Republic of China 

built 4 submarines in 2011 and 6 in 2012, while we are only managing 2 per year. 

In order to maintain our naval security, we must ensure that every submarine we 

have undergoes, and completes necessary refits on schedule, which will be a nearimpossible goal under the capricious delays caused by sequestration. 

There are also threats to the long-term effectiveness and performance of the Shipyard’s civilian workforce. • According to the Public Affairs Department at PNSY, all civilian employees will 

be furloughed. PSNY will limit administrative furloughs for Shipyard workers to 

176 hours (approximately 22 workdays). Furloughs will commence on April 25, 2013 

and will continue for 22 weeks, ending on or after September 21, 2013. • In accordance with the Chief of Naval Operations’ directives, there is currently 

a civilian hard hiring freeze (including both internal and external hiring) in effect 

for the Shipyard. 

• The hard hiring freeze means that workers who retire, move away, or leave for 

any reason, cannot be replaced. Yet with tight work schedules and highly skilled 

workers required to get the job done, any reductions in workforce will soon have detrimental impacts on readiness, on the ability to get the job done on schedule, and 

the ability to deploy the submarine. 

• The civilian workers will have to endure a sudden, unbudgeted 20% pay cut. 

In addition to the demoralizing and unsettling impact of the uncertainty caused by 

sequestration, they may be unable to meet mortgage payments, their children’s college tuition or other financial commitments. It is absolutely unfair to target these 

skilled and essential national defense workers in this way. It is also counterproductive. The newer, younger members of the workforce may just leave for a more 

certain job—an especially damaging possibility to readiness given the hiring freeze. 

In addition, the cascading economic impact of the cuts to PNSY will seriously 

damage the economy of the First Congressional District of New Hampshire. Over 

2,000 of my constituents work there, and in 2011 (latest figures available), the civilian payroll was $408.4 million, the military payroll was $40.5 million, and $8.5 million in PSNY purchased goods and services benefitted the New England economy. 

In New Hampshire the 2,137 civilian employees were paid a total of about $151 million. The vast majority of those employees live in the First Congressional District. 

In order to keep our national defense strong, I ask you to restore the budget of 

the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard to the funding level that existed prior to implementation of the defense sequester. 

Sequestration cuts will adversely affect the readiness and personnel of New 

Hampshire’s highly active, highly successful Air National Guard (ANG). The cuts 

would take a significant toll on Pease Air Guard Base, home of New Hampshire’s 

only Air National Guard Unit, the 157th Air Refueling Wing. 

These cuts will have an adverse effect on the personnel and the regional economy. 
92 

• The New Hampshire National Guard’s 212 permanent ANG Military Technicians (MILTECHs) and 202 permanent Army National Guard (ARNG) MILTECHs, 

many of whom are based at the First District’s Pease Air Guard Base, will face 22- 

day furloughs with a resultant 22% salary cut. 

• The National Guard expects these pay cuts to negatively impact the economies 

of communities where MILTECHs are based, such as the greater Portsmouth area. 

• These reductions may also result in highly trained MILTECHs leaving the 

force, leaving behind a less experienced and less capable unit. 

These cuts also pose a threat to the readiness of the Guard and its ability to respond quickly and effectively when called into duty. 

• The National Guard anticipates that furloughs of permanent MILTECHs will 

directly correlate to reduced training and unit readiness. 

• The National Guard has announced a MILTECH hiring freeze, which will also 

directly correlate to reduced training and unit readiness. 

• The National Guard has announced that all temporary MILTECHs, including 

New Hampshire’s 18 temporary ANG MILTECHS and 14 temporary ARNG 

MILTECHs, may face termination. Temporary MILTECHs fill positions left empty 

when permanent MILTECHs deploy. They play an essential role in maintaining 

unit equipment readiness in the absence of permanent MILTECHs. Termination of 

temporary MILTECHs may prevent the National Guard from meeting congressionally-mandated technician end strength floors established in P.L.112-239. 

• The ANG as a whole is expected to cut flying hours and weapon system 

sustainment by as much as 18%, leaving bases like Pease at unacceptable readiness 

standards by the end of FY 2013. 

The New Hampshire National Guard is a key component of our national defense 

and emergency response capability, and I ask you to restore its budget to the funding level that existed prior to implementation of the sequester. 

The First Congressional District’s numerous defense contractors, large and small, 

will also be harmed by the sequester. 

• Prime contractors in NH-01, including BAE Systems and L3 Insight Tech Inc., 

received $529 million in contracts from the Defense Department for FY 2012. 

$4,179,100 could be cut from New Hampshire’s military procurement budget for FY 

2013. 

• According to the Aerospace Industries Association, if a solution to sequestration 

is not found, 2,705 private sector New Hampshire jobs in industries that benefit 

from military procurement will be at risk. 

While the larger of the prime contractors will survive, suppliers and subcontractors are likely to go under, as the primes cut back their orders, resulting in more 

job losses as the impact spreads. The House Committee on Appropriations also reports that 1,004 other New Hampshire civilian employees can also be furloughed, 

taking approximately $6 million in lost wages out of their pockets and out of the 

New Hampshire economy. 

In conclusion, I implore the members of this committee to develop a reasonable, 

responsible budget for FY 2014 that eliminates the indiscriminate and damaging 

cuts found in the Budget Control Act. I thank you for your time and consideration. 

[Whereupon, at 1:32 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

Æ