[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
MEMBERS' DAY
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MARCH 2, 2017
__________
Serial No. 115-03
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Budget
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available on the Internet:
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/
committee.action?chamber=house&committee=budget
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
25-917 WASHINGTON : 2017
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
DIANE BLACK, Tennessee, Chairman
TODD ROKITA, Indiana, Vice Chairman JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky,
MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida Ranking Minority Member
TOM COLE, Oklahoma BARBARA LEE, California
TOM McCLINTOCK, California MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico
ROB WOODALL, Georgia SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
MARK SANFORD, South Carolina HAKEEM S. JEFFRIES, New York
STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
DAVE BRAT, Virginia SUZAN K. DelBENE, Washington
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas RO KHANNA, California
JAMES B. RENACCI, Ohio PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio Vice Ranking Minority Member
JASON SMITH, Missouri SALUD CARBAJAL, California
JASON LEWIS, Minnesota SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
JACK BERGMAN, Michigan JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
JOHN J. FASO, New York
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania
MATT GAETZ, Florida
JODEY C. ARRINGTON, Texas
A. DREW FERGUSON IV, Georgia
Professional Staff
Richard E. May, Staff Director
Ellen Balis, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held in Washington, D.C., March 2, 2017.................. 1
Hon. Diane Black, Chairman, Committee on the Budget.............. 1
Prepared statement of........................................ 2
Hon. John A. Yarmuth, Ranking Member, Committee on the Budget.... 3
Prepared statement of........................................ 4
Hon. Joyce Beatty, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Ohio........................................................... 5
Prepared statement of........................................ 7
Hon. Peter J. Visclosky, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Indiana............................................... 11
Prepared statement of........................................ 12
Hon. Vicky Hartzler, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Missouri.................................................... 15
Prepared statement of........................................ 17
Hon. Bill Posey, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Florida........................................................ 20
Prepared statement of........................................ 22
Hon. Jim McGovern, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Massachusetts.................................................. 26
Prepared statement of........................................ 28
Hon. David N. Cicilline, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Rhode Island.......................................... 31
Prepared statement of........................................ 34
Hon. Mark Walker, a Representative in Congress from the State of
North Carolina................................................. 39
Prepared statement of........................................ 41
Hon. Joe Wilson, a Representative in Congress from the State of
South Carolina................................................. 44
Prepared statement of........................................ 46
Hon. Trent Franks, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Arizona........................................................ 49
Prepared statement of........................................ 51
Statements submitted for the record.............................. 55
Hon. Daniel T. Kildee, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Michigan, prepared statement of....................... 55
Hon. Gerald E. Connolly, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Virginia, prepared statement of....................... 56
Hon. Ken Calvert, a Representative in Congress from the State of
California, prepared statement of.............................. 57
Hon. Michael K. Simpson, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Idaho, prepared statement of.......................... 58
Hon. Michael R. Turner, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Ohio, prepared statement of........................... 59
MEMBERS' DAY
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 2017
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Budget,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m. in Room
1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Diane Black
[chairman of the committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Black, Arrington, Yarmuth,
Jayapal, DelBene, and Jackson Lee.
Chairman Black. This hearing will come to order. And good
morning and welcome to the Budget Committee Members' Day
hearing.
Before we begin, it looks like we are going to be scheduled
to have votes before 10:30, maybe within the next 10 minutes or
so. So I ask for unanimous consent that, consistent with clause
4 of House rule XVI, the chair will be authorized to declare a
recess at any time.
Without objection, the request is agreed to.
We hold these Member Day hearings to hear firsthand from
our colleagues about their ideas for the Federal budget, and we
welcome those who come to the committee. This hearing is
required by section 301(e)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act,
and its intent is to provide a forum in which Members can relay
their priorities for their district, their State, and, indeed,
for our country. Nevertheless, recommendations on how to place
the government on a sustainable fiscal path will especially be
useful.
This hearing is an important part of building the budget
that actually addresses our Nation's tremendous challenges.
Moving forward, a balanced budget will require a strong
commitment to spending restraint, and promoting more robust
economic growth will be critical. Because budgeting is
governing, it is important that every Member has the
opportunity to participate in the conversation and be part of
the process. We welcome the unique, diverse perspectives from
Members on both sides of the aisle, and we look forward to
receiving their testimony.
Before we begin, I am pleased to yield to the ranking
member of Kentucky, Mr. Yarmuth, for his opening statements.
[The prepared statement of Diane Black follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Yarmuth. Thank you, Chairman Black.
I am pleased to join you in welcoming our witnesses for
Members' Day.
As we all know, budgets are much more than numbers on a
page. They reflect our values as a Nation. So this is a great
opportunity for Members to talk about their priorities for the
country and their constituents. As we move into budget season,
I am deeply concerned about Republican plans for the budget.
Just this week, we learned that the President will propose
increasing defense spending by $54 billion and cutting
nondefense investments by the same amount to pay for it.
Nondefense investments are already near their lowest levels
relative to the economy than at any time since at least the
Eisenhower administration. We can't meet our responsibilities
to the people we are elected to serve or grow our economy with
massive cut after massive cut to investment after investment.
We are talking about potentially devastating cuts to
education, infrastructure, job training, community safety,
clean water, clean air, safe food, safe medicines, a safe
workplace, medical research on everything from Alzheimer's to
Zika and much more.
The American people need more from us. They deserve more
from us. They deserve a government that builds on the economic
progress made over the past 8 years of the Obama
administration, that makes investments to create new
opportunities for their families and for our Nation.
We all know the Republican leadership can pass a budget
without bipartisan support, but bipartisanship will be required
to fund discretionary programs during the appropriations
process. So we, as a committee, can help craft that compromise
with a budget that reflects this reality, or we can abdicate
our responsibilities and pass a budget that does not.
I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to keep
this in mind as we begin debating the budget over the next few
weeks. I look forward to hearing what our colleagues have to
add to this conversation with their testimony today.
So thank you, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of John Yarmuth follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Black. Thank you, Mr. Yarmuth.
And as a reminder, Members will have 5 minutes to give
their oral testimony, and their written statements will be
submitted for the record.
Additionally, members of the committee, which would be you
and I at this point in time, will be permitted to question the
witness following their statements. And I ask that you please
keep your comments brief to expedite today's proceedings.
I would now like to recognize our first witness, the
gentlelady from Ohio, Ms. Joyce Beatty.
Thank you for taking your time to share your views with the
Budget Committee. The committee has received your written
statement, and it will be part of the formal hearing record.
You have 5 minutes to deliver your remarks, and you may now
begin.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JOYCE BEATTY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO
Mrs. Beatty. First of all, let me say thank you, Chairman
Black and to Ranking Member Yarmuth. I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before the Budget Committee today.
Certainly, as you know, the Federal budget is a blueprint
for our Nation, and it is a statement of our national
priorities.
Unfortunately, President Trump's proposal to increase
defense spending by $54 billion while decreasing nondefense
programs by the same level I believe will hamper our Nation's
ability to meet the needs of the American people. I implore
this committee to view such drastic cuts to nondefense
discretionary spending with extreme caution and urge investment
in maintaining and increasing healthy living, affordable
education, and a strong infrastructure so that all Americans,
not just a select few, have the opportunity to achieve the
American Dream.
Let's talk about education. Our budget should reflect a
serious sustained investment in our Nation's ability to compete
in the 21st century. If we want to position ourselves to propel
our Nation forward, we must recognize the importance of
education in our workforce's ability to compete in an ever-
growing, ever-changing economy.
Providing children with access to high-quality early
childhood development is a cornerstone of human development and
puts them on an early path to success and at the same time
dismantles the too-often-traveled school-to-prison pipeline in
communities of color.
Moreover, the door to higher education should not be
slammed simply because of skyrocketing tuition costs. We must
make greater progress toward improving costs for higher
education. We must robustly invest in education in order to
create an economy that works for everyone, not just those at
the top. We must maintain and continue Pell grants, the TRIO
programs, to make higher education affordable and accessible to
students.
Affordable housing. Serving on the Financial Services
Committee's Subcommittee of Housing and Insurance and as a
lifelong leader in developing affordable housing solutions in
Ohio, I believe it is critically important for our budget
resolution to include allocations that sustain current rental
assistance for low-income families and fully restore the number
of housing choice vouchers that have been arbitrarily cut under
sequestration. This would help curb homelessness, the
homelessness epidemic in our country, especially in our
veterans communities, and to assist more than the 11 million
people who pay more than 50 percent of their income on rent.
Safe, affordable housing, Section 8 voucher programs,
opportunities for home ownership, support for community
development are priorities that I believe our Nation would be
proud to see in the fiscal year 2018 budget resolution.
Lastly, infrastructure. According to the American Society
of Civil Engineers, the United States has a significant backlog
of overdue maintenance across our infrastructure systems and
pressing need for modernization. However, we also have an
opportunity in this budget resolution to improve the current
conditions of our Nation's infrastructure in a smart way.
As we look to rebuild our crumbling bridges, roads, dams,
we should consider implementing policies that allow technology
to help our constituents move safely and easily to provide
access to jobs. In my Ohio Third Congressional District in the
city of Columbus, we were able to do just that, with
implementation of the Department of Transportation's Smart City
Grant. The Central Ohio Transportation Partnership is one of
the Nation's epicenters for intelligent transportation systems
to improve safety, enhance mobility, create ladders of
opportunities for those who have been left behind, and to
address climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
As Members of Congress, let's create a budget resolution
that creates jobs, economic growth, fosters innovation,
creativity, and increases the quality of life for working
families while solving the Nation's most pressing challenges.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Joyce Beatty follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Black. Perfect. Oh my goodness. We ought to give
you a big round of applause.
Thank you, Representative Beatty, for your comments.
Does any member wish to request time to question Ms.
Beatty?
Mr. Yarmuth. Yes, I would.
Chairman Black. You are recognized.
Mr. Yarmuth. I appreciate it, Chairman Black.
It seems to me that when we are talking about the kinds of
investment you talked about, we are talking about, of course,
the nondefense discretionary portion of the budget, which the
administration has proposed cutting by $54 billion. Ultimately,
that puts more and more pressure on State and local governments
to pick up the slack if we cut this vital funding.
How would you describe Ohio's capability of making up the
difference if we had these kind of draconian cuts in the budget
here? Would we see Ohio be able to pick up the slack in
education and housing and some of these other vital programs?
Mrs. Beatty. Thank you so much, Ranking Member Yarmuth. You
would see great difficulties for the State of Ohio to do that.
Ohio is the seventh largest State in this Nation. And just this
week, we had county commissioners from across the Nation doing
a fly-in. And in meeting with the county commissioners, who
provide and oversee many of these services, they came in asking
us to make sure that we testified so we could educate and make
members of this committee and members of the administration
more aware that you can do both.
I am certainly not against providing funds and equipment
for those who go fight for us and our country, but I think it
is equally a disservice to not provide for those who are the
least of us, to not provide for us to provide safety on the
roads that we travel. I think that it would be a mistake for us
to make the drastic cuts to those services. And those are the
individuals that we represent.
So part of my being here today was to talk about those
things that shelter. You know, think about if someone took away
the shelter over your head where you live in Washington and
where you live in your districts. Think about those people that
are waiting in line for their Section 8 voucher that for the
first time that they are on their road to self-sufficiency,
that we take that away.
And, certainly, education is the economic engine of
economic growth. And on both sides of the aisle, when we are in
our district, we talk about the same thing. We talk about
economic development. We talk about having a strong educational
system and infrastructure. So I am hoping that maybe you give
me one out of the three, at least, so we can help our
constituents.
Thank you for the question. And a short answer to that: no,
we could not survive.
Mr. Yarmuth. Thank you very much for your response.
And I yield back.
Chairman Black. Thank you, Mr. Yarmuth.
And thank you again, Mrs. Beatty, for coming to testify.
Mrs. Beatty. Thank you.
Chairman Black. Even though votes have been called, we are
going to try to get you in, Mr. Visclosky. And you are now--if
you are prepared, you may begin your testimony.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. PETER VISCLOSKY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA
Mr. Visclosky. Chairwoman, Mr. Yarmuth, members of the
committee, I appreciate the opportunity----
Chairman Black. I don't think your microphone is on. Is
your microphone on?
Mr. Visclosky. Yes.
Chairman Black. There you go. Maybe pull it a little
closer. Thank you.
Mr. Visclosky. As a member of the House Appropriations
Committee, I am very aware of the challenges involved in
developing a budget that balances fiscal responsibility with
the need to make investments to support a strong economy and
strengthen our national security. This task was made no less
difficult by the announcement this week that the President will
be submitting a budget request that proposes a $54 billion cut
to domestic programs.
I am here today on behalf of my constituents of northwest
Indiana and our Nation to advocate for a fiscal year 2018
budget that does not allow for significant reductions in
Federal funding for investments in infrastructure and
particularly public transit projects. Any such reductions would
ultimately be counterproductive. According to the American
Public Transportation Association, in 2014, Americans took 10.8
billion trips on public transportation, representing a 58-year
high.
The perceived value of the benefits is reflected in the
increased property values near transit stations. A study
prepared in coordination with the National Realtor Association
concluded that home values performed 42 percent better on
average if they were located near public transportation. The
APTA also estimates that, for every $1 invested in public
transportation, $4 of economic returns are also generated.
Recognizing these benefits, my district has adamantly
supported the expansion and recapitalization of commuter rail
service from Chicago to northwest Indiana. Investing in what is
called the South Shore Rail Line will connect my constituents
to Chicago's $500 billion economy and nearly 4 million jobs. It
will allow us to begin to draw Chicago's economy to our region.
Understanding these opportunities, 16 communities in my
district have come together to dedicate a portion of their
local economic development tax revenue for an improved rail
commuter service.
I would point out that Vice President Pence, in his role as
Governor of Indiana, signed legislation into law in 2015
providing State funding to support this endeavor. These non-
Federal dollars will match every Federal dollar provided,
multiplying the positive effects of the Federal investment
before we even begin to enumerate the economic development
benefits. But the successful extension and recapitalization and
associated economic benefits, along with other projects, not
only in northwest Indiana but throughout our country, depend
upon the availability of strong Federal funding to support
transit projects. I would encourage you to keep this in mind as
you develop your document.
[The prepared statement of Peter Visclosky follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Black. Does any member seek time for questions?
Thank you, Mr. Visclosky, for coming and testifying before
the committee.
We are now going to take a brief recess so that Members can
go to the floor and vote, but we will reconvene immediately
after votes. The committee stands in recess.
[Recess.]
Mr. Arrington [presiding]. This hearing will come to order.
We will now continue with our next witness panel.
I would like to recognize Representative Vicky Hartzler
from Missouri. Thank you for your time today. The committee has
received your written statement. It will be a part of the
formal hearing record. You have 5 minutes. Please leave room
for questions in that 5 minutes to deliver your oral remarks.
You may begin, Mrs. Hartzler, when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. VICKY HARTZLER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI
Mrs. Hartzler. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and members
of the Budget Committee.
I sit before you today as a fellow Member who sat in those
chairs just the last two Congresses. Four years ago, I asked
for a waiver to sit on the Budget Committee in addition to the
Armed Services and Agriculture Committees because I believe so
deeply what I am here to share with you today. So thank you for
allowing me to be here.
Recent reports have indicated that the Trump administration
intends to submit a budget with a defense top line of $603
billion for fiscal year 2018. And while I applaud the
President's intention to increase our military funding with a,
quote, ``$54 billion increase,'' this assertion does not tell
the whole story.
The $603 billion number is actually only an increase from
the sequestration levels that have wreaked havoc on our
military for the past 7 years. It is only a 3-percent increase
from the President Obama administration's proposal in the
Future Years Defense Program, or FYDP, and $58 billion less
than Secretary Gates' budget for what we really need. We need
more.
And I did bring some slides too for you to look at. So you
can see where on here the Trump budget proposal is compared to
the green line, which was the Gates budget before we had the
Budget Control Act that had passed. So you can see it is behind
what was projected to be needed years ago.
Our military today is facing a severe crisis. We expect our
men and women in uniform and the equipment they deploy to be
able to decisively win a current conflict and posture our
forces so another enemy doesn't even think that they can
challenge the United States if they tried. Yet this ability is
in jeopardy. According to the vice chief of staff of the Air
Force, less than 50 percent of the Air Force's fighter and
bomber force are able to fight and decisively win a highly
contested fight against a near peer, such as Russia or China.
In fact, an engine literally fell off a B-52 bomber while
training in North Dakota recently. And here is a picture of
President Eisenhower with a B-52, which is when it was first
built. So you can see it is a very old aircraft.
According to the vice chief of staff of the Army, of the 58
brigade combat teams that our Nation depends on to deploy
overseas and defend our freedoms we comfortably enjoy here,
only three could be called upon to fight tonight. Based on
current readiness levels, the Army can only accomplish defense
requirements at a high military risk.
As General Allyn stated in his testimony last month before
the Armed Services Committee, if we continue down this path,
the end result, quote, ``is excessive casualties, both to
innocent civilians and to our forces.'' We cannot allow this to
happen.
According to the vice chief of naval operations, two-
thirds, 67 percent, of our Navy's strike fighters, the planes
that are launching the entirety of the Navy's attacks against
ISIS, cannot fly--67 percent. And, sadly, in 2015, the Marine
Corps aviation deaths hit a 5-year high, as aircraft failed or
pilots lacked adequate training hours. This is unacceptable.
Regardless of your budgetary priorities, I call on each of
you to recognize that it is our responsibility in Congress to
provide support for our men and women in uniform while they
selflessly serve our Nation.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Thornberry and
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman McCain have both laid
out what the Department of Defense needs to begin buying back
the readiness that has left our force hollow. Our military
needs $640 billion to begin the restoration of its forces that
the American people expect and need in today's world. If we do
not meet the budget of $640 billion for the Department of
Defense, we will be shortchanging our military in capabilities
they need to fulfill their mission. We will impose too great a
risk in air dominance, naval presence, ship recovery,
facilities maintenance, ground forces, medical readiness,
nuclear deterrent requirements, national security, space
defense, ballistic missile defense, and cyber capabilities.
Each of these requirements is crucial to our national security,
and it would not be met.
Our men and women in the military must stand ready to and
actively fight a resurgent Russia, an emergent China, an
unstable North Korea, an unpredictable Iran, and widespread
violent extremism. The demand for our forces has never been so
high, and our readiness has never been so low. It is within our
power to reverse this.
I ask you to work with me and others on the Armed Services
Committee to give our servicemen and -women the resources they
need to build our military and keep our Nation safe. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Vicky Hartzler follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Representative Hartzler.
I would like to now just move on to the next 5-minute
presentation. So I appreciate your remarks.
I want to recognize our next presenter, and that is
Representative Bill Posey, Bill Posey from Florida.
Mr. Posey, you have 5 minutes, and any questions would have
to be reserved in that 5-minute timeframe. Please.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. BILL POSEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Mr. Posey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members for the
opportunity to appear before you today. I thank you for the
very difficult but important task that this committee does for
our Nation.
As you set budget priorities for fiscal year 2018 and
beyond, I ask for your continued support for our Nation's space
program. And please know I also support your commitment to
preserve Social Security and Medicare and to safeguard our
coastal estuaries. These issues do not just impact my district;
they touch us all. They are fundamentally a question of
leadership. Hopefully, the United States will continue to lead
the world in space and protect our environment for the next
generation.
American dominance in space is no longer a given. The
Russians and the Chinese both have increasing capabilities and
ambitions in space, and ceding this ultimate military high
ground to any other Nation is unacceptable.
In addition to public investments, the immense size and
power of the American private sector is increasingly emerging
as the vanguard of U.S. space leadership. We need to continue
to empower and unleash the awesome potential of the U.S.
economy with a regulatory framework that will take the
bureaucratic shackles off our innovative private sector space
industry partners.
Public investments in the ever-expanding space economy are
paid back many times over as new technology and engineering
breakthroughs are made here on Earth. These technologies and
capabilities are being created by American companies, employing
an American high-tech workforce, and driving the American
economy into the 21st century.
We are told Social Security Board of Trustees estimates
that, under current law, Social Security is projected to be
unable to fulfill paying benefits beginning in 2034. It is
imperative that we address this looming crisis now so that this
safety net of earned benefits is available to fulfill the
promises we have made to our seniors.
Likewise, we are advised that the Medicare trust fund will
be completely exhausted and unavailable to seniors within a
decade. This vital program needs to be safeguarded and
protected to preserve the quality and availability of health
services for our seniors, as you know.
Thank you for understanding we must also be good stewards
of the ecology and economic well-being of our coastal areas.
Many estuaries of national significance are in immediate need
of attention, including the Indian River Lagoon. We are making
progress in this area, but more needs to be done. Last year's
bipartisan reauthorization of the National Estuary Program
implemented a new competitive grant competition to get much-
needed funding to those estuaries with the most urgent needs.
Hopefully, this new opportunity can be fully funded so its
benefits can be immediately realized.
I thank you for your consideration as the committee crafts
its fiscal year 2018 budget resolution and thank you for your
time and the opportunity to appear before you today. I would be
delighted to answer any questions with my remaining time.
[The prepared statement of Bill Posey follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Mr. Posey.
We have some time remaining. So I would just ask my
colleagues if they have any questions.
No questions.
We appreciate your time and your remarks.
Mr. Posey. Thank you.
Mr. Arrington. So now let's move on to our next witness,
and that is Representative McGovern.
I will turn it over to you now for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JIM MCGOVERN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS
Mr. McGovern. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I will summarize
my statement here.
Mr. Chairman, hunger and food insecurity is still a problem
in the United States of America. Despite the fact that we are
the richest country in the history of the world, 42.2 million
Americans lived in food-insecure households, including more
than 13 million children and 5 million seniors.
Hunger is a political condition. We can solve this problem
if we had the political will. Unfortunately, up to this point,
we haven't demonstrated that. The Supplemental Nutrition
Program, known as SNAP, is our Nation's best chance to
alleviate hunger across our country in both urban and rural
areas. In fact, food insecurity rates among rural households
are generally higher than urban households. About two-thirds of
those who receive SNAP are children, seniors, or the disabled.
Of those who can work, a majority do work, especially families
with children. And the SNAP benefit is already meager at $1.40
per person per meal.
Now, during the 114th Congress, the House Agriculture
Committee undertook a thorough review of SNAP. Eighteen
hearings, 60 experts. And what we learned from experts, both
conservative and liberal, is that SNAP benefits should not be
cut and that the current benefit is inadequate. We learned that
SNAP does not discourage work and that case management and job
training programs can be successful in helping to move people
out of poverty, but those efforts require a well-funded
multiyear commitment.
The bottom line is, we learned that SNAP works. What we did
not hear from experts, as some have suggested, is the need to
completely overhaul SNAP. In particular, efforts to convert
SNAP into a block grant program would be catastrophic. Quite
simply, block-granting SNAP would wreck our hunger safety net.
It would result in billions of dollars in cuts, would force
States to reduce benefits or kick hungry people out of the
program because of a hard cap on funding. The fact is that
block grants are simply budget cuts in disguise.
I would also like to highlight that the most recent
projections from the Congressional Budget Office estimate that
the 2014 farm bill will save about $104 billion over 10 years,
with over $92 billion in projected savings coming from SNAP.
Now, these savings have been achieved as enrollment in SNAP
continues to decline from its post-recession peak.
But let me caution the committee, however, that some of the
caseload decline is attributable to the return of the 3-month
time limit in 20 States for nondisabled childless adults who
are working less than 20 hours a week. This time limit has
resulted in over a million people losing their benefits in 2016
alone, including many veterans, by the way. And they are losing
these benefits, not because they are not hungry, but because of
the arbitrary time limits.
Lastly, we have heard a lot about national security here. I
would argue to this committee that we need to expand the
definition of national security to mean more than just the
number of weapons we have in our arsenal. National security
should mean the quality of life for our citizens. It should
mean jobs. It should mean shelter, and it should mean access to
food. And slashing nondefense discretionary funding, I worry
that the focus will be on programs that benefit the most
vulnerable. That does not serve our national security.
In closing, my message to the committee is the same as it
was last year, and it is simple: Do not balance the budget on
the backs of America's poor and struggling working families.
SNAP is a program that works as intended. We shouldn't change
its entitlement structure. We shouldn't cut it. And we
shouldn't make it more difficult for our constituents to access
food assistance when they need it. If we want to strengthen the
program, we should consider ways, quite frankly, to increase
the SNAP benefit to an update in its formula. Recent research
confirms that just a $30 increase in monthly SNAP benefits for
households leads to healthier eating and lower rates of food
insecurity. That, I think we can agree, is a worthy goal.
And, with that, I thank you for the time. And if anyone has
any questions, I am happy to answer them.
[The prepared statement of Jim McGovern follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Representative McGovern.
And now I am going to defer to our ranking member, Ms.
Jayapal.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And thank you so much for your testimony. Incredibly
important program that lifts up people across the country.
I know you had a lot of experts at your committee. You have
mentioned a couple of things that they said they wanted to
improve. Can you talk about some of the improvements to the
program. Multiyear records you say, 3-month time limit,
increase in the benefit. But do you have others?
Mr. McGovern. Yes. I mean, some of us have argued about
increasing the benefit so that people would have the ability to
make healthier options and not have to rely on food banks as
much. We have talked about the success of many incentive
programs that have allowed people with SNAP dollars to go into
farmers markets or supermarkets and be able to purchase more in
terms of healthy, nutritious food because of an incentive
program.
We talked about, you know, how we manage the individuals'
cases more comprehensively. So it is not just about how we
provide people access to food but how we get them counseling
and job training and kind of the wraparound services that will
help them kind of transition off the program. It is a great
idea. The problem is, you know, that requires expanding
government and expanding programs, which I am not sure this
Congress has the stomach to do.
But the bottom line is that there is something wrong when
there are 42 million people in this country who are hungry and
food insecure. As a Member of Congress, I am ashamed of that
fact, and I think it has to become a bigger priority. Nobody in
this country should go hungry.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Representative.
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Mr. McGovern. We appreciate your
remarks.
Let's now move on to our next witness. I want to recognize
Mr. David Cicilline from Rhode Island.
Representative Cicilline, you have 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. DAVID CICILLINE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and distinguished
members of the Budget Committee for convening this hearing
today and for providing me with the opportunity to testify.
As this committee continues to consider the current
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018, I would like to
use this time to highlight areas in which robust Federal
funding will help create jobs and ensure that our Nation's
workforce is competitive in the 21st century economy.
But first I want to address reports that President Trump
plans to cut $10.5 trillion over the next 10 years from the
Federal budget. These proposed cuts are extremely troubling and
would likely have devastating effects on the American economy.
And we have seen the adverse effects of implementing deep cuts
in hiring freezes on Federal agencies in the past.
The head of the Government Accountability Office has said
that, when GAO reviewed the efficacy of past hiring freezes,
they found that there was little savings or added efficiency
and that many unintended consequences can arise. The proposed
draconian cuts to nonmilitary spending are a step in the wrong
direction. I urge the committee to reject these cuts so that
the agencies and programs have the necessary and adequate
funding to continue to serve the American people.
We have to invest in American jobs and the American people.
As you know, in July 2014, Congress passed the Workforce
Innovation and Opportunity Act, which authorized critical
workforce development programs, such as Job Corps and
YouthBuild, that provide a combination of educational and
training services to prepare individuals to enter the workforce
and help them improve their prospects through job search
assistance, career counseling, occupational skill training,
classroom training, and on-the-job training. I hope that the
committee will recognize that these proven high-impact programs
deserve to be funded at a level that allows them to expand
their reach and put more Americans back to work.
It is also critical that our Federal budget prioritize ways
to ensure that all children have access to a high-quality
education. By ensuring that students have access to critical
education programs at every level, we help ensure that they
obtain the skills that they need to compete in the 21st century
economy. In addition to providing students with skills in
reading and mathematics, we should also ensure that we are
helping students obtain critical training skills as well as
social and career-ready skills. This can be accomplished, in
part, through quality after-school programming. The 21st
Century Community Learning Centers Program represents a
dedicated funding stream for these types of afterschool
programs. 21st Century Community Learning Centers were
reauthorized under the Every Student Succeeds Act, and they
help provide valuable skills, while also ensuring that low-
income students have a place to go after school where they
remain engaged, build stronger relationships with their peers,
expand on what they have learned during the school day.
Students who participate in these programs also exhibit fewer
instances of drug use, violence, and teen pregnancy. These
centers help promote family stability by giving working
families the security of knowing that their children are in
good hands after school ends. This is an issue that has
bipartisan support. Last year, I was proud to work with my
colleague, Congressman Lou Barletta, in urging the
Appropriations Committee to ensure critical funding for the
21st Century Community Learning Centers.
We also must ensure that students who want to are able to
obtain a higher education. However, in the last three decades,
the cost of higher education has risen by nearly 400 percent,
resulting in more than a trillion dollars in outstanding
student loan debt. It is unconscionable that taking on an
insurmountable amount of debt is often a prerequisite for
obtaining a college degree. We need to make sure that the cost
never serves as an impediment to higher education.
The Federal Pell Grant Program is one program that has
helped to ensure that cost is not a roadblock to education for
nearly 45 years. Senator Claiborne Pell from my home state of
Rhode Island, who led the effort in Congress to expand
financial aid for at-need college students through the Higher
Education Act, and his efforts have helped ensure that more
than 8 million low-income students receive financial aid to pay
for tuition, books, and room and board each year. For many
students, Pell grants are the only avenue available for them to
pay for a college degree. And we need to ensure that this
avenue remains open and, in fact, open for more young people.
I thank my colleagues for your ongoing commitment to
supporting working families and students and look forward to
continuing to work with you to ensure that these programs that
continue to deliver results for our constituents will be
reflected in the budget you will ultimately present to the
Congress.
And, with that, I yield.
[The prepared statement of David Cicilline follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Representative Cicilline.
I will ask my colleagues if they have any questions.
Please.
Ms. DelBene. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline. You talked about
Pell grants, and I know one of the issues that has come up is
availability year round. Can you speak to the need to make sure
that is available?
Mr. Cicilline. Yes. I mean, I think there have been a
number of proposals to ensure that Pell grants are available
year round for summer learning but also that they be more
generous so they can actually begin to meet the current needs
of the cost of higher education.
And so I think there is no better investment that we make
as a country than investing in the education of our young
people. It is the single best way to ensure future prosperity
for the individual and for our economy and for our country. And
I think that whatever this committee can do to make sure that
that is available year round and in a more robust number will
come back manyfold to benefit the American people.
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline, for your remarks
and your time.
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Arrington. Now I would like to introduce our next
guest, Representative Mark Walker from the great State of North
Carolina.
Mr. Walker, 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. MARK WALKER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Mr. Walker. Thank you, Chairman Arrington and Vice Ranking
Member Jayapal.
I appreciate the opportunity to testify today. Recent
reports from the Congressional Budget Office and the Government
Accountability Office paint a dismal future. Without changes to
the Federal budget, we are on a path to fiscal crisis with
spending, deficits, and debt continuing to balloon out of
control. I don't believe that we can in good conscience neglect
the stunning reality and pass on these burdens to our children,
our grandchildren, and, of course, future generations.
It is with these realities in mind that the Republican
Study Committee's Steering Committee adopted the following
official position on January 24, 2017, of course, of this year:
The fiscal year 2018 budget resolution must reach balance
within the 10-year window by reducing the size and scope of
government and without tax increases and remain in balance
thereafter in order to save important programs like Social
Security and Medicare. Further, House Committees should take
steps to produce legislation to implement a budget within the
115th Congress.
I understand that balancing the budget is a significant
challenge. I think we all do here in Washington. But it is a
challenge that we as Congress must tackle head-on and without
reservation. To put it simply, the Federal Government has a
spending problem that must be addressed. That is not a talking
point; that is reality.
According to the CBO's most recent Budget and Economic
Outlook, annual outlays are projected to top $4 trillion for
this time for the first time in fiscal year 2018. Over the next
decade, both spending and revenues will continue increasing
above their historical norms, with the growth in spending
outpacing the growth in revenues. This growth in spending will
drive today's $20 trillion national debt to more than $30
trillion by fiscal year 2027.
A budget is more than just a spreadsheet of numbers. It is
important to understand that the choices we will make in this
budget and the consequences that follow from it have real,
tangible effects on the people that we all represent. Trillion
dollar deficits here in Washington and broken entitlement
programs mean lower wages, less opportunity, and crippling
uncertainty for all Americans and especially for those most in
need of a handout. The Congressional Budget Office says that
continuing the status quo will reduce economic growth, further
shrink the labor force, and risk a fiscal crisis that would
result in fewer jobs and lower wages for the American people.
Under the current path, the major safety net programs will
be insolvent, causing indiscriminate cuts to our most
vulnerable citizens. The Disability Insurance trust fund will
be depleted in 2023. The Medicare hospital insurance fund will
be depleted by 2025. And Social Security trust fund will be
depleted by 2035.
So we have a choice: we can kick the can down the road yet
again or act to stave off a pending fiscal crisis and protect
the American people. That is why we have to act now. Some will
ignore the writing on the wall and pretend the problem doesn't
exist. Still others will propose ideas that would exacerbate
the problem. Instead, we need to act boldly and return to the
principles of limited government and free markets that made us
the most prosperous and free people in the history of the
world.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates
that balancing the budget by fiscal year 2027 will require $8.2
trillion in deficit reduction. Last year, the RSC's proposed
fiscal year 2017 budget would have reduced spending by $8.6
trillion over that 10-year budget window while including
policies that improve fiscal health on both Social Security and
Medicare. I hope today the Budget Committee will continue to
look to RSC's budget proposals for policy ideas as you begin
drafting the fiscal year 2018 budget.
In closing, the RSC will once again this year produce a
budget alternative, thanks to our task force led by
Representative Tom McClintock, a senior member of this
committee. While the RSC budget will be offered as an amendment
in the nature of a substitute to the Budget Committee's budget,
please know that we review it as a complementary, not
competing, proposal.
The purpose of the RSC budget is to detail the solutions
championed by our members with the expectation that the ideas
first espoused in RSC's budgets will over time be incorporated
into the House budgets and passed into law. Please know that I
and the members of the Republican Study Committee stand ready
to work with you to pass a responsible, balanced budget
resolution this year.
Thank you. I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mark Walker follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Representative Walker.
We have got some time. Does anybody have any questions?
I just want to say thank you. I am in agreement. So many
things, challenges we face as a country. We have got a lot of
ideas. What our country needs and what our people expect is
courage. There is no greater opportunity to show that courage
than in fiscal reform. Thank you for presenting that, Mr.
Walker.
And now we are going to go on to our next panelist. And I
would like to recognize the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr.
Joe Wilson, for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JOE WILSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Mr. Wilson. Mr. Chairman and committee members, I want to
thank you for the opportunity to meet with you today.
First of all, I would like to congratulate Chairwoman Diane
Black for being named chairman of the Budget Committee and
thank her for her leadership on this committee.
As we face difficult economic times, I appreciate the
dedicated efforts of the chairwoman, ranking members, and
members of the committee.
I am grateful to represent the Second Congressional
District of South Carolina, a diverse and thriving district on
the I-20 corridor that is home to a few of our Nation's most
critical national security and environmental cleanup missions:
Fort Jackson in the Midlands and the Department of Energy's
Savannah River Site in the Aiken-Barnwell area. These unique
missions contribute to our State and Nation in countless
tangible ways. Each of these installations provides unique
services to our country and requires our support.
Fort Jackson is a critical part of our national security
and military readiness. As the largest Initial Entry Training
Center for the U.S. Army, Fort Jackson's primary mission is to
train thousands of disciplined, motivated servicemembers,
training 53 percent of the Army's basic training personnel and
56 percent of the women entering the Army each year. At a time
when our Nation faces critical threats around the world, from
ISIL, from North Korea to Iran, the mission at Fort Jackson has
never been more vital to achieving peace through strength.
Additionally, Fort Jackson supports other critical
missions, including the U.S. Army Soldier Support Institute,
the Army Chaplain Center, the National Center for Credibility
Assessment, and the Army's Drill Sergeant School. The impact of
the base positively impacts the surrounding community as well
as employing nearly 3,500 civilians and providing services for
46,000 retirees and military family members.
A little more than an hour down the I-20 corridor from Fort
Jackson is the Department of Energy's Savannah River Site in
the Aiken-Barnwell community. This site is a national asset,
responsible for supporting our nuclear weapons, missions, and
conducting cutting-edge research.
The Savannah River Site is home to the Mixed Oxide Fuel
Fabrication Facility, MOX, a critical component of our national
security and environmental cleanup mission. Currently 70
percent completed, when finished, the MOX facility will be able
to take weapons-grade plutonium and reprocess it into green
fuel, a more secure and sustainable option than potentially
placing South Carolina and Georgia as a plutonium dumping
ground. It is imperative that we continue funding this vital
mission for our Nation's nuclear security mission.
In addition to MOX, the Savannah River Site is home to many
other vital Department of Energy nuclear security environmental
cleanup missions. Last year, the site celebrated a milestone,
completing construction of the Salt Waste Processing Facility,
which, along with the Defense Waste Processing Facility, will
greatly enhance the speed and efficiency of the remediation of
high-level waste.
Other critical facilities include H-Canyon, the Nation's
only production-scale nuclear separations plant, and both K and
L areas, which safely store nuclear materials.
Additionally, the Savannah River Site conducts critical
research through the Savannah River National Laboratory. The
laboratory supports our Nation's ability to produce tritium, to
monitor and detect capabilities for nuclear nonproliferation
and nuclear forensics. It also enhances technologies for a
nuclear cleanup mission at SRS and around the country.
I urge you to continue your support to the unique missions
at Fort Jackson and the Savannah River Site that keep American
families safe.
Finally, as chairman of the House Armed Services
Subcommittee on Readiness, I urge the chairwoman and committee
to support a level of funding that will adequately provide for
the military and provide for our national defense. The first
priority of the Federal Government is to provide for the common
defense, and I echo the calls of House Armed Services Chairman
Mac Thornberry and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman
John McCain in calling for the $640 billion to ensure that our
servicemembers are trained, equipped, and resourced to complete
their mission.
Thank you, and I can't believe I ended this quickly. Are
there any questions?
[The prepared statement of Joe Wilson follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Mr. Wilson.
I ask the ranking member, Ms. DelBene, if she has any
questions or comments.
Thank you, Mr. Wilson.
Mr. Wilson. I am grateful for your service, and I am
honored to be here. Thank you very much.
Mr. Arrington. Thank you for your time and remarks. Now I
would now like to recognize our next panelist, Mr. Trent Franks
from the great State of Arizona. Mr. Franks.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. TRENT FRANKS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Mr. Franks. Well, first, may I thank you, Chairman
Arrington and Ranking Member DelBene, for the opportunity to
add my voice to those of many others concerned about the crisis
facing our military.
Mr. Chairman, our guardian class has consistently set
before us the devastation that sequestration has wrought upon
our military and the doubt that it has cast upon our ability to
defeat existing and emerging threats, let alone deter them.
For my part, I am here today to alert you to the dangerous
state of our Nation's strategic capabilities and what the Obama
years have done to our ability to deter and defeat the
deadliest weapons known to humanity.
Under President Obama, the Kim dynasty in North Korea
evolved from an eccentric regional problem with nuclear weapons
into an extremely dangerous nuclear threat to the United
States. And we are now very close to seeing them master the
physics required to range the entire continental United States
with their missile technology.
Barrack Obama's defense policies also placed Iran, the
world's largest financier and enabler of terrorism, on track to
gain a nuclear weapons capability. And unlike the Soviet
threat, nuclear Jihad, Mr. Chairman, cannot be deterred by fear
of retaliation. It is an existential threat to the peace and
security of the entire human family.
And while the Obama administration debated whether or not
we should develop and maintain a missile defense capability
against such threats, our near-peer adversaries, who never had
such qualms, were working tirelessly to exploit weaknesses in
our missile defense architecture.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, effective
missile defense is not only the last line of defense against a
launched nuclear missile, it is our first line of defense
against proliferation because it devalues such weapons as
offensive military assets in the hands of our adversaries.
However, the shameful reality is that, under President
Obama, our near-peer adversaries developed their capabilities
while ours atrophied. And while we drastically cut funding to
the Missile Defense Agency, as is illustrated in the handouts
that you have, China and Russia were rapidly developing and
testing high-speed maneuvering weapons, including hypersonic
glide vehicles recently, which are specifically designed to
exploit the gaps and seams in our missile defense architecture
existing at the moment and currently defeating the systems we
have in place.
These new weapons are capable of traveling more than a mile
per second and fly at flat trajectory to prevent our missile
defense systems from tracking them. The threat has outpaced us,
and we must invest the appropriate resources to defend against
the new threats or lose our ability to deter potential
adversaries.
Moreover, as our near-peers find ways to defeat our current
defensive capabilities, our strategic nuclear deterrent has
fallen into desperate need of modernization. We currently spend
about $25 billion a year on our nuclear arsenal. Well, that is
about 5 percent of the DOD budget, which itself is only about
17 percent of our total budget. And what that means is, for
less than one-tenth of 1 percent of our gross domestic product
that is spent on nuclear deterrent, we have prevented World War
III for 70 years.
So, to be successful, Mr. Chairman, a deterrent must be
effective, reliable, and credible. And I would just say, in
order to revitalize our military, to maintain a nuclear
deterrent which is effective, reliable and credible, and to
build a missile defense architecture capable of meeting
identified emerging threats, we require a defense budget top
line of $640 billion. The $603 billion top line visits a modest
3-percent increase over Mr. Obama's projected fiscal year 2018
defense budget of $584 billion. And if we intend to solve our
readiness crisis, a budget of this size, it will force us to
underfund our key capabilities, such as nuclear arsenal and
deterrent, defending national security space assets and
ballistic missile defense, just to name a few. If we are to
make America safe again, a 3-percent increase will not suffice.
So, in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, may I just say to all of
us here that the first purpose of any government or its leaders
is to protect the lives and security of its people, and the
failure of this responsibility renders all others meaningless.
Ronald Reagan once said to us that you and I have a
rendezvous with destiny. We can preserve this the last best
hope of mankind on Earth for our children, or we can sentence
them to take that very last step into 1,000 years of darkness.
If we do fail, at least let our children and our children's
children say of us that we justified our brief moment here. We
did all that could be done. May history judge that this
Congress was one that did all that could be done to protect the
innocent in our own generation and to further ensure that
American generations yet unborn will continue to walk in the
sun light of freedom.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Trent Franks follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Representative Franks, for your
remarks.
And I don't see any other panelists.
I would ask my colleagues if they have any final remarks
before we conclude our committee hearing.
Okay.
This completes the committee's business for today. I would
like to thank all Members who shared their views before the
Budget Committee. This committee stands adjourned.
[The information follows:]
The following statements were submitted for the Record.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kildee follows:]
Rep. Kildee Testimony for House Budget Committee
Good morning, Madame Chairwoman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of
the Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify here today on
what I believe should be our nation's priorities in our budget.
A budget is a statement of our nation's values. I believe we should
be making investments in policies that grow our economy and create
good-paying jobs, protect public health, and provide more opportunity
and economic security for working families.
Yet earlier this week, we saw the President push for huge increases
to military spending by $54 billion in the next fiscal year. This is on
top of the approximately $600 billion that we already spend on defense.
And sadly, this additional military spending comes on the back of
drastic cuts to domestic programs and agencies like the Environmental
Protection Agency and the National Institutes of Health.
According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, our
current non-defense discretionary spending for next year is already
projected to hit the lowest point since 1962. The proposal by the White
House would push that number even lower, below 3 percent of our gross
domestic product.
Spending less than 3 percent of GDP on our domestic programs that
provide support for public education, job training, medical research,
nutritional assistance and so much more, frankly is unacceptable.
Congress already passed the harmful, across-the-board sequestration
cuts that imposed deep cuts in our discretionary programs. But the
President, in putting forth a budget proposal that requires additional
deep cuts to discretionary spending, is being reckless.
Medical research could be especially in jeopardy. While I am
thankful that Congress passed the 21st Century Cures Act last year,
medical research is vital for all of us as a nation to continue pushing
scientific knowledge and technology. It is also incredibly personal to
many Americans, including my family, who have medical conditions that
could be potentially cured by research.
Like an estimated 400,000 other Americans, my wife has multiple
sclerosis, a neurological disease currently with no cure. Like millions
of other Americans, my daughter, Katy, has Type 1 Diabetes. While we
have research that allows for the management of the disease, we still
do not have a cure.
Imagine if we were to invest in medical research to find cures for
diseases like MS, or diabetes, or cancer. Cutting domestic programs
like the NIH and other medical research is reckless, wrong and would
set us back as a country. Under President Trump, the NIH may face a cut
of $4 billion dollars, more than 10 percent of its annual budget.
With our nation's budget, there are other impacts to public health
outside of medical research. The President has proposed severe cuts
planned for the agency charged with protecting our air and water--the
EPA. Cutting billions of dollars from the EPA is dangerous and would
gut the agency focused on preventing the next Flint water crisis.
Make no mistake, while the people of my hometown of Flint are
strong and resilient, the community is still recovering from this
crisis. It has been almost three years and people are still unable to
drink water from their tap, an incredibly frustrating statistic in the
richest country on earth. The impacts from what this community has
suffered will be felt for a long time, with an entire generation
exposed to high levels of lead. We can't leave these kids behind--or
other communities that rely on the EPA to ensure clean air and water.
We can--and should--make smart investments as a nation, including
investments in infrastructure, education, public health and nutritional
programs.
The budget proposal issued by the President is not the responsible
federal budget that my constituents expect and deserve.
Thank you again for the chance to testify here today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Connolly follows:]
Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2018, Committee on
the Budget, Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-VA)
Chairman Black and Ranking Member Yarmuth, I previously served on
the Budget Committee, and I want to thank you for the opportunity to
return to the Committee to testify on Fiscal Year 2018 budget
priorities.
I come from local government where we passed bipartisan, balanced
budgets each of the 14 years I served on the Fairfax County Board of
Supervisors. While budgets are certainly values-based documents, they
do not have to represent just one set of values. They can be inclusive,
and should represent the diversity of the people they will ultimately
affect. I regret to note that the Republican budget resolution that
came before the House was neither balanced nor bipartisan. Despite
leveling relentless criticism against President Obama for fiscal
mismanagement while he was actually decreasing the deficit, the first
budget of the new Republican unified government would increase the
national debt by $9.5 trillion over the next ten years. Life comes at
you fast, as does the reality of governing. It is my hope that in the
spirit of pragmatic governing--the kind demanded at the local level of
government--we can coalesce around a set of shared priorities that keep
this country both safe and strong.
I opposed the Republican budget resolution because it was not a
serious document, it targeted American families and their healthcare,
and it did not even feign the pretense of responsible budgeting or
policymaking. Likewise, President Trump's forthcoming budget has been
reported to have such mindless and draconian cuts that many Republicans
have already declared it dead.
That being said, I would like to use my time before the Committee,
as I have in the past, to lay out a few priorities I believe should be
included in the FY2018 budget.
Our first shared priority should be ending the deep and
indiscriminate cuts of sequestration for both defense and domestic
spending. Don't just take my word for it. Listen to the representatives
of the Veterans of Foreign Wars who have spent the week visiting
Members' Capitol Hill offices to deliver the message that sequestration
``is the most significant readiness and national security threat of the
21st century.''
I would note that the VFW--in outlining its number one priority--
does not differentiate between domestic and defense spending. Domestic
and defense investments are complementary, and there are myriad
examples of the relationship between the two creating a return on
investment for the American taxpayer. A strong education system
provides our military with its next generation of leaders. My district
routinely sends more students to the U.S. military academies than any
other Congressional district, in part, because Northern Virginia has a
superb public education system. It was President Dwight D. Eisenhower,
the former Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe during WWII,
whose vision of a National System of Interstate and Defense Highways
gave us what we know today as the Interstate Highway System. The
internet and GPS began as military research projects that now have
nearly ubiquitous commercial applications. We must invest in both
defense and domestic priorities and reject the Faustian bargain that
would fund one and not the other to the ultimate detriment of both.
The alternative we seek is one that appreciates the power of
government investments to both spur growth and guard from costly triage
spending when the bills come due for our neglected funding priorities.
We can start by investing in the federal workforce that will carry
out this mission. In recent years, no other group in our country has
been demonized, demoralized, and asked to sacrifice more for the sake
of deficit reduction than our federal workforce. All told, federal
employees have contributed $182 billion to deficit reduction over the
last six years. The reinstatement of the Armageddon Rule, the hiring
freeze, and gag orders that inhibit whistleblowers constitute a
downright hostile agenda towards federal workers. When my colleagues
use federal employees as both a piggybank and a punching bag, they are
undermining the very thing they purport to champion; efficient and
effective government.
That is why I have reintroduced the FAIR Act (H.R. 757), which
would provide federal employees with a 3.2 percent wage adjustment,
restore years of lost wage increases, and which represents the
difference between last year's 5.3 percent request and the Obama
Administration's 2.1 percent increase.
We must remember that the hard working men and women of the federal
workforce--85 percent of whom are based outside of Washington D.C.--are
our friends and neighbors. They are providing essential government
services in every community across America, whether it is on the front
lines of national security, caring for our nation's seniors and
veterans, or guiding families through our national parks.
I would also ask that the Budget Committee be mindful of the
obligation the federal government has to the providing funding for and
ensuring the functionality of the Washington D.C. Metrorail system.
This includes the federal government's annual $150 million commitment
to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (Metrorail). The
federal government must pay its fair share. Since 40% of rush-hour
riders are federal employees and the 16 million annual visitors to the
nation's capital rely on Metrorail, the federal government has a unique
responsibility to help fund the operation of this vital transportation
system.
There are in fact investments we can make now that will save money,
and potentially lives, in the long run. I recently joined every
Democratic Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee in writing to
the Budget Committee arguing on behalf of a robust International
Affairs budget. And once again, you do not have to take my word for it.
More than 120 retired generals and admirals recently wrote a letter to
Congress on this matter. They wrote, ``the State Department, USAID,
Millennium Challenge Corporation, Peace Corps and other development
agencies are critical to preventing conflict and reducing the need to
put our men and women in uniform in harm's way.'' We cannot starve our
foreign aid and diplomacy missions and expect that increased defense
spending alone will keep America safe.
I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for hosting
Members' Day. Budgets can be values-based documents without being
ideological manifestos, and I would hope that the burden of governing
fosters a sense of pragmatism about the value of government investment.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Calvert follows:]
Committee on the Budget: Member's Day Hearing, Statement by Rep. Ken
Calvert
Chairman Black: As we have seen, the United States is facing an
extraordinarily difficult fiscal situation driven by soaring government
expenditures, continued weakness of the economy and years of unchecked
government spending that has left us facing a national debt of almost
$20 trillion. Republicans must do whatever we can to reduce unchecked
and inappropriate spending and I believe we have an exciting
opportunity ahead of us to submit a fiscally responsible federal budget
to the American people.
If we are to maintain the budget caps, then my primary concern is
how to be a defense hawk and a deficit hawk. While I support ending the
defense sequester, I also realize that we must operate according to
current law. In a proactive attempt to address these difficult
budgetary challenges, I introduced the Rebalance for an Effective
Defense Uniformed and Civilian Employees (REDUCE) Act, H.R. 295. The
current ratio of active duty military personnel vs. civilian personnel
is out of balance. From 2001 to 2014, the active duty military has
shrunk by four percent while the number of civilian defense employees
grew by 15 percent. Under the Obama Administration, the Department of
Defense followed through on plans to drastically cut active duty end
strength--cuts that compromised readiness and assumed more risk.
Meanwhile the Department of Defense civilian workforce remained
virtually untouched. It is time for the Pentagon to make permanent
reductions in a thoughtful manner that will result in a more efficient
civilian workforce.
H.R. 295 would reduce our defense civilian workforce by 15% by FY
2028 through the flexibility of attrition as well as giving more weight
to performance in a Reduction in Force. The legislation also mandates
that the reductions occur over a five year period and gives the
Secretary of Defense authority to incentivize early retirements.
Ultimately, H.R. 295 would generate an estimated $125 billion in
savings over five years that would be redirected back into the
Department for modernization, readiness, and acquisition. To that end,
I request that the Fiscal Year 2018 (FY18) Budget reflect these reforms
and the need to rebalance the DOD civilian workforce.
Furthermore, as Chairman of the Interior and Environment
Appropriations Subcommittee, I have seen firsthand the result of the
current and unsustainable state of emergency wildfire funding. In the
face of disaster, agencies such as the United States Forest Service are
forced to divert funding from critical accounts such as fire prevention
and non fire accounts to pay for fire suppression.
For this reason, I support the principles outlined in
Representative Michael Simpson's legislation H.R. 167, the Wildfire
Disaster Funding Act, of the 114th Congress. The version to be
reintroduced in the 115th Congress is cost-neutral legislation that
would fund wildfire suppression so catastrophic wildfires would be
eligible for the disaster spending cap adjustment, just like
hurricanes, floods, and similar natural disasters. As a former small
business owner, I can attest that reliable budget numbers are essential
in accurately and effectively planning for emergencies. The current
state of wildfire funding and detrimental fire borrowing simply does
not allow for this, leaving unhealthy forests that are more susceptible
to expensive catastrophic wildfires. I support science-based funding
for wildfires and the FY18 Budget should include a wildfire funding
fix.
Chairman Black, I am confident that the Republican majority in
Congress can take these bolder approaches to achieve the ultimate goal
of balancing our budget over time while finding ways to reform
government spending in order to help America's global competitiveness
and lay the foundation for economic growth.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Simpson follows:]
Testimony for Member Day Hearing, Rep. Mike Simpson
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk with you today
about an extremely important issue.
Like many of my Western colleagues, I have seen the impacts of
catastrophic wildfires first hand as they rage across my district each
summer, threatening the lives and property of my constituents. I have
seen where catastrophic fires have scorched the land so badly that
nothing will grow. I have also seen where preventative measures--like
hazardous fuels removal, timber harvesting, and grazing in areas
susceptible to fire--have protected resources, property, and lives from
fires that would have been much worse without them. Effective forest
management can prevent a routine fire that is manageable and easy to
control from becoming a catastrophic one that costs millions to contain
and years to recover from.
Hazardous fuels, like dry undergrowth and foliage that is extremely
susceptible to fire, can cause fires to burn hotter, spread more
quickly, and climb up to the top of the trees, making it much more
difficult to control. Removing these fuels is a key tool for preventing
catastrophic wildfires. I have seen areas where a fire destroyed
everything in its path only to stop short at an area where brush and
undergrowth had been removed.
Containing catastrophic fires costs us millions, even billions of
dollars each year. Typically, only 1-2% of the fires we fight each year
are considered catastrophic. Yet we spend a disproportionate amount of
money trying to get them under control. For example, last year just 10
fires cost more than $300 million. So it makes good budget sense to
spend some money preventing catastrophic wildfires before they escalate
rather than spending millions to fight them once they are out of
control.
Unfortunately, the way we currently budget for wildfire doesn't
make sense. Today most of the funding we provide for hazardous fuels
removal never makes it to the ground. When wildfire suppression costs
exceed the agencies' fire budget, the agencies are forced to borrow
from other accounts, like hazardous fuels reduction, to pay for fire
suppression. There is no guarantee that Congress will make those
accounts whole by the end of the fiscal year. Even if we do, that
funding comes to the agencies far too late for it to do any good.
Robbing non-fire accounts to pay for fire suppression means that
the Forest Service has fewer resources available for forest management,
so fires get worse and suppression costs end up devouring the agency's
budget. The way we currently budget for fire has created a devastating
cycle of fire borrowing that is costing taxpayers and destroying our
forests.
Fire borrowing was intended to be an extraordinary measure, but
agencies routinely have had to rob other budgets to pay for fire
suppression.
Recent fire seasons have cost taxpayers upwards of one billion
dollars. Those costs will only go up unless we take action to end this
destructive cycle of fire borrowing. That is why Representative
Schrader and I plan to reintroduce the Wildfire Disaster Funding Act.
This legislation enjoyed broad bipartisan support in the 113th and
114th Congress. It was cosponsored by 150 Members of Congress and
supported by a broad coalition of over 300 organizations, ranging from
the Wilderness Society to the NRA.
This bill recognizes that catastrophic wildfires are major natural
disasters, like hurricanes and floods, and would budget for them
accordingly. Routine wildland firefighting costs would continue to be
funded through the normal appropriations process, while catastrophic
fires would be eligible for disaster funding when the fiscal year
suppression accounts are exhausted. This approach would allow the
Forest Service and DOI to avoid borrowing money from prevention
accounts which only exacerbates the wildfire problem for future years.
It's important to note that we are already spending this money--we
already fully fund wildfire suppression each year. But fire borrowing
is such an inefficient practice that we are only spending more money
each year to fight bigger fires. We are doing nothing to manage forests
in such a way to prevent fires that rage out of control and cost
millions to contain.
There are a number of steps that we need to take to address forest
health and management issues, but fixing the wildfire suppression
budget must be the first one. Until we address this issue, anything we
do to increase management activities in our forests, like hazardous
fuels removal, timber harvest, conservation, or trail maintenance, will
continue to get lost in fire transfers. Fixing the wildfire budget is
the critical first step in making our forests healthier and,
ultimately, reducing the cost of wildfires in the future.
We must do something to end fire borrowing. It is destroying our
forests, it is costing taxpayers billions of dollars, and, quite
frankly, as funding intended for one purpose is siphoned off for
another, it is taking away Congress's ability to determine how
appropriated dollars are spent. I look forward to working with you to
find the best way to address this issue, and I appreciate you giving me
the opportunity to testify today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Turner follows:]
Congressman Michael R. Turner (OH-10), Written Statement
Chairman Black, Ranking Member Yarmuth, and distinguished members
of the House Committee on Budget, thank you for allowing me to offer my
statements today.
The Administration has indicated plans to submit a budget request
of $603 billion for national defense base requirements. While I commend
President Trump's initial efforts to rebuild our military, this
proposal will not address the critical needs of our military and as a
consequence will not allow the successful execution of its strategic
objectives. The proposed $603 billion only represents a mere 3.2
percent increase compared to the Fiscal Year 2018 funding levels
projected in President Obama's last budget request.
The Budget Control Act (BCA) placed a tremendous burden on our
national defense and military capabilities.The BCA's devastating budget
cuts have allowed our military's capabilities to atrophy, our force
size to shrink, and as a result we are assuming too much risk in our
military preparedness to fight and win against near-peer and peer
competitors. In its review of the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review
(QDR), the bipartisan National Defense Panel strongly advocated for a
funding baseline consistent with then-Secretary of Defense Robert
Gates' budget request for FY2012. In FY2018 Secretary Gates' projected
a topline amount of $661 billion for national defense. President
Trump's request would be $58 billion short of that number.
With the onset of sequestration, 2011 is the last time the
Department was able to engage in an honest and strategic assessment of
global threats and the necessary capabilities to effectively deter
those threats.
The Armed Services Committee, under the leadership of Chairman
Thomberry, was tasked with identifying critical capability gaps as well
as the resources needed to to fund national defense and begin
addressing these critical shortfalls. The committee assessed that $640
billion was the bare minimum necessary to even begin the process of
rebuilding our military and reversing the damaging cuts that have led
to serious readiness challenges throughout the military services.
The Department of Defense defines readiness as ``the ability of
military forces to fight and meet the demands of assigned missions.''
The Armed Services Committee has heard numerous testimonies from senior
military leadership on readiness shortfalls and how they are assuming
too much risk in training and operations.. Recently, General Daniel
Allyn, Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, stated ``our Army requires
modernized equipment to win decisively, but today we are outranged,
outgunned and outdated''. His statements, disconcertingly similar to
other service Chiefs and Vice Chiefs, point out that we are ``assuming
risk and mortgaging our future readiness.'' General Joseph Dunford,
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, when speaking on critical
munition shortfalls stated that ``our current global inventories are
insufficient for theater missile defense, standoff, and air-to-air
munitions needs''.
The U.S. currently faces one of the most complex security
environments in recent history and our military is continually being
asked to do more with less. The restoration of our national defense
must be our top priority. Continuing down the path of budget driven
defense strategies rather than capability driven defense strategies
places too great a burden on our men and women in uniform and severely
impacts our ability to defend our interests at home and abroad.
Reversing this damaging trend in national security and military
readiness will not be accomplished in one year, but as you form your
budget submission I urge you to support a national defense base of $640
billion which is what's required to begin the process of rebuilding our
military.
[Whereupon, at 12:03 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]