I stand united with the President and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in our commitment to defeat terrorism and to do what is necessary to preserve national security both at home and abroad.  However, despite the many new security and economic challenges confronting us, our homeland protection efforts and fiscal policies should not shortchange Social Security and other national priorities.  We can win the war against terrorism without raiding the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds and without increasing the national debt.  

Earlier this year, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) confirmed that in less than a year the 10-year projected surplus declined by $4 trillion.  While portions of this decline are a result of the war and the economic downturn, the depletion of the surplus to date was largely caused by last year’s massive and fiscally irresponsible tax cut package.  The additional billions in tax cuts proposed in this year’s budget would only worsen our current situation and lead us further down the path of mounting deficits and escalating public debt.  To pay for the additional tax cuts, this budget would raid more than $1.5 trillion from the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds over the next ten years to cover deficits in the rest of the federal budget.  We need a wartime freeze on tax cuts to avoid deficit spending.

When I was elected to Congress, I promised my constituents that I would protect the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds.  And I was not alone.  Over one hundred of my colleagues have co-sponsored legislation to prevent Congress from spending the Social Security and Medicare surpluses, and the House of Representatives has voted four times in the past three years to establish lockboxes for these funds.  

The Administration and the Republican Leadership made the very same pledge to not touch these vital trust funds.  This budget breaks that promise.  It is time to honor our commitments by acknowledging our current situation and working together to craft a budget that is fair and fiscally responsible.  

Moreover, this resolution uses overly optimistic Administration budget estimates rather than the usual non-partisan estimates from the Congressional Budget Office.  Furthermore, it assumes unacceptable cuts in key domestic priorities such as education, housing, health care, job training and environmental protection, even though Congress will likely restore the needed funding.  While this resolution provides $350 billion in additional Medicare spending, it would place a Medicare prescription drug benefit in competition with Medicare “modernization,” as well as provider givebacks that the Republican Leadership has estimated will costs as much as $174 billion.  The projections also leave out an assessment of the lost revenue from extending expiring tax credits and modifying the individual alternative minimum tax that will impact 39 million middle-income taxpayers over the next 10 years.  And these five-year projections fail to disclose the cost of making last year’s tax cuts permanent, as the Administration’s budget proposes.  Over the customary ten-year budgetary window, extending these tax cuts would cost $400 billion.  A more realistic set of assumptions would show that the 10-year budget surplus has already vanished. 

The disappearance of the 10-year surplus compels us to consider not just a one-year but also a long-term budget plan.  The American people have the right to know how the Congress proposes to restore fiscal discipline while enacting additional tax cuts, boosting spending for the military, and meeting commitments to a growing number of retirees.  The Administration and Congress should devise budgetary rules that make tax cuts and spending contingent on the realization of specified targets for the budget surplus and the federal debt.  Unfortunately, this budget fails on all those counts.  

I am also deeply concerned about the draconian cuts to the Small Business Administration.  The budget proposes cutting funding for the 7(a) loan program in half.  Last year, this loan program provided over $94 million in assistance to Rhode Island's small business community.  Additionally, the Administration proposes cutting funding for employment and training programs by $686 million.  With more than 1.4 million workers laid off over the last year, we need this funding now more than ever.  The budget would also slash the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) by $300 million.  This program is crucial for all New England states and particularly for our seniors, who might otherwise be forced to choose food over heat.  Finally, the budget would cut $417 million from the Public Housing Capital Fund, which helps provide 1.2 million families nationwide -- 40 percent of whom are elderly or disabled -- with affordable housing.  Housing needs are especially acute in Rhode Island, where 38 percent of renter households pay more than 30 percent of their income for rent. 

I urge my colleagues to reject this misguided budget and to develop one that will ensure security at home and abroad, without dramatically increasing our debt, borrowing against Social Security and Medicare, or abandoning our commitments to children, workers, senior citizens and all Americans.