Transcripts For CSPAN2 House Budget Committee Marks Up Budge

Clerk will designate the amendment and the staff will distribute copies. Preserving me seniors and persons with disabilities. Mr. Jeffreys ies is recogniz thank you, madame chair. This will help ensure does not secure tax breaks for trumps wealthy friends and special interests by cutting medicare. Congress should protect medicare for seniors and people with disabilities, not undermine it. The republican budget will eliminate guaranteed longestablished Health Insurance benefits for seniors and the elderly as well as people with disabilities under the Medicare Program. The republican budget will increase costs for the elderly and disabled by establishing a medicare Voucher Scheme that provides insufficient payments to Medicare Beneficiaries in order to purchase needed health care. And the republican budget will destroy the traditional Medicare Program by diverting the healthiest enrollees into private plans which would undermine traditional medicares ability to control cost. Once again, this budget omits the policy details that would that would allow us to engage in a full analysis of the plan, so one thing is clear. The budget utterly fails to address the root causes of growing healthcare cost. It is price gouging by that pharmaceutical companies. Instead aims to cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires while telling seniors to take a hike, take on more of the cost and financial risk of their healthcare. I now yielding minutes to representative susan. Thank you. Im pleased to support mr. Jeffries amendment preserving the medicare guaranteed for our seniors. House republican budget spell disaster for the more than 58 million americans who rely medicare. Rely including 90000 in my district. Privatizing medicare, replacing comprehensive Health Coverage with a dangerous dodger system is yet another assault on the middle class and its unacceptable or cannot even President Trump supports this t plan. Every day 10000 americans turn 65 and they expect medicare to be there for them just as it was for generations before. We should not be bound balancing the budget on the backs of seniors. Instead we should tackle rising cost of Prescription Drugs and helping more seniors get the care they need. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment and i yield back. I now yielding minutes to representative michele grisham. I went to thank my friend and colleague from new york for yielding and i also want to add my support to his amendment to protect medicare. Now, im starting to detect a pattern in the kind of healthcare policies republicans are putting forward, cut federal Health Programs and make states and consumers pay more. Of this time its a seniors andd disabled adults who will bear the cost. Seniors who are living on fixed income and probably the least able to absorb increases in premiums or outofpocket costpt will be expected to pay 25 more at in traditional medicare to the plan and the notion they are positioned to negotiate individually when Insurance Companies dont negotiate with pharmaceutical companies frankly to me is ludicrous. This comes as you have heard after President Trump promised repeatedly during the campaign that he could save medicare and medicaid and Social Security i without cuts. I happen to agree with him. By the continuing to work towards repayment reform and reining in Prescription Drug prices we these costs events more and further extend the life of the Medicare Trust fund. I encourage my colleagues to abandon this approach into instead work to strengthen the Medicare Program for american seniors and disabled. Tingui i yield back. I now yield one minute to representative jan kotowski from the great state of illinois. Thank you. I support congressman jeffries amendments then candidate trump said he was quote the first and only potential gop candidate to state there will be no cuts to Social Security, medicare and medicaid. That promise will be broken ifni the policies in this budget are coactive. Despite what my republican colleagues will claim this budget would end medicare as we know it by essentially privatizing the program. However, the republican budget is short on details. Will seniors be given a voucher to pay their private insurance premiums . The will cosco love for the seniors if there vouchers dont cover their entire premium . Will they be subject to higher cost sharing . Seniors are paying close attention and have every reason to worry, so i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and preserve medicare for generations to come and with that i yield back. The republican budget once again ceased to ballot itself on the backs of the most adorable amongst us, working families, middleclass folk, the poor, the sick, the afflicted, rule america and now by targeting medicare seniors who are simply trying to live out their golden years with the dignity and respect that they not only deserve, but have earned by paying in to the system and thats why i urge support for this amendment to protect medicare in this country. Member who would like to claim time in opposition to the amendment . Mr. Smucker, you are recognized. Thank you, madame chair. Its important that we strengthen, we secure and we save medicare for current seniors and for future generations of americans. And our budget does just that. The math on this is absolutely clear. Because of Rising Health costs and demographic changes, the 2017 Medicare Trustees report projected that the Medicare Program will be bankrupt in cbo similar projects medicare insolvency in 2025. This means as soon as eight years from now the Medicare Program as we know it will likely be insolvent if we do not act now to protect and preserve the program. Specifically, Medicare Hospital Insurance trust fund will be unable to pay 100 of patient care costs which would reduce beneficiary access to health care services. Such an outcome is completely, simply unacceptable for the millions of seniors who rely on this program. To clarify any misconceptionsio about our plan, lets debunk some of the political attacks on her efforts to save and strengthen medicare for the American People. Number one, our budget protects the current medicare system as it is. For those at or near retirement will be unaffected and experienced no changes come while protecting the medicare system for younger generations as well. This resolution fully supports a patient centered Medicare Program that increases quality and choice for beneficiaries. Medicare improvement envisioned in this budget would adopt a popular simplified coverage structure structure of Medicare Advantage that would allowio seniors greater plan choicesuc while reducing cost. And for the more the government payment would be adjusted so the sick would receive more Financial Assistance if thereeda conditions worsened, and lower income seniors would receive Additional Support to help cover premiums and outofpocket costs. Under this input program, traditional medicare is saved and it would always, i repeat, always be an option traditional medicare available to seniors. And finally cbo determined that he Medicare Program following the model proposed by this budget would result in cost savings are both seniors and for the program. Under our plan 50 million seniors are empowered to use choice and competition to bring down else care costs. The real threat to the medicare guarantee is the status quo. Costs continue to skyrocket. Today seniors continue to lose access to quality care and the Program Remains on a quick path pre bankruptcy. Inaction and ignorance will not protect medicare. It will only hasten the programs demise leading our nation of seniors in despair. Our budget planetary solvency for the Medicare Program and safeguards this Little Program for our nations current seniors and future generations of beneficiaries to come. Therefore, i urge a no vote on this amendment. And i yield the balance of my time to mr. Woodall. Thank i thank my friend for yielding here ive always believed there more that unites us than divides us. T thinking about ms. Delbene comments, i think we can all ths agree that our seniors in this country expect medicare to before them, be there for them. They paid into medical part eight entire life ended expected to be there for them, just that Something Interesting and it was just as it has always been. Certainly the confidence we want to be just as always been at that confidence is not there any longer. As Trustees Report after Trustees Report tells us in cropsey is imminent. But morga more important just at has been as mr. Booker said lock us the status quo, i remember the debates an have had in this body over medicare. Member after member light up and said i dont want to see the Medicare Program changed. As he lived to Medicare Advantage is the single most popular aspect of the Medicare Program today and yet we see budget after budget, often from the other side come trying to restrict the Medicare Advantaget program if you want the program to continue just as it always has with no improvements andpt changes, the trustees tell us that option is not available. I couldnt use them to. But more would you . Why wouldnt you want to add more choices to the system . We have done that in the past. We done it successfully and way down it to the delight of those members on medicare. But i will say this to all of my colleagues in great candor. We need to end the ruse that folks like me in my 40s are going to have the same Medicare Program that my mom and dad had it we have never had enough money coming into the program chivers of the Medicare Program for folks in the 30s andpr 40s, and we still dont today. The time to act, the time to make those changes is today while folk still have enough time looking forward into the future to plan. And i want to be clear. This budget protects everyry single senior on medicare today. It anticipates making sure those promises are capped, expanded but kept. Madam chair, this has been called the third rail of politics folks have allowed the degradation of the solvency of the trust on to come to the place that it is today because they were afraid to tackle it. Through your leadership on this committee, folks about the courage to stand up and say we can protect medicare today. We can approve medicare tomorrow and the status quo is not an acceptable alternative. I urge my colleagues knowing that theres more on which we agree than we disagree to reject this amendment took lets agree to fight for medicare but lets let that fighting begins the status quo and in favor of longterm solvency. I and with that i yield back. The gentleman gets back. Mr. Jeffries is like a nice one minute to close. The republican budget plan for unfettered Market Competition is a recipe for disaster. Prior to the creation of medicare in 1965, almost half of american seniors had no Health Insurance whatsoever. As Health Care Costs steadily rose, the socalled market failed to respond. Tha medicare changed that dynamic. Democrats are committed to keeping and strengtheninggt medicare for seniors andnd disabled workers by reducing cost of growth within the Health System while protecting and providing a central benefit, ane central benefit the Affordable Care act includes numerous Cost Containment tools and has recor contributed to record low rates of healthcare spending growth since 2010. It has begun medicares transformation toward rewarding quality and value and keeping it sustainable. We need to build upon that progress, not undermine it. I yield back. The gentlemans time is expired. The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by mr. Jeffries. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed . [inaudible] in opinion of the chair the nos have it. Ote is [inaudible] a recorded vote is requested. Pursuant to the men this consent agreement we will postpone the recorded vote until we finish debate on the batch of seven amendments. Are there other amendments . Yes, mada, madam chair, i hae anonymity at the desk. This is amendment number seven. The clerk will designate the amendment. The staff will distribute copies to the amendment. Amendment number seven authored by representative schakowsky to ensure the policy statement on Womens Health care. Ms. Schakowsky is recognized for six minutes. Thank you, madam chair. I offer an amendment to protect Womens Health by ending the war on planned parenthood and allowing women to pick their own medical provider. I would find it ironic that they republicans claim that they want to increase choices for people and allow them to make their own health decisions, but apparently got right does not extend to women. Planned parenthood is a trusted source of healthcare for 2. 5 million americans everyyea single year. One in five women with visit a planned parenthood clinic in her lifetime. It offers preventive care, vaccines, screenings, contraception and its for men as well as women by the way, i can go to planned parenthood. And yet republicans continue to do everything they can to restrict women from getting thicker from planned parenthood. The republican budget proposes not only removing planned parenthood from the Medicaid Program but also makes it ineligible to participate in ant federal program. And lets not pretend that this war on planned parenthood is anything other than a direct attack on Womens Health. Over half of planned Parenthood Health centers are in Health Professionals shortage areas, rural are medically underserved areas. Es these are places that desperately need more healthcare providers, and that yet republicans are trying to make it hard for women in these areas to access care. Democratic women, republican women, independence. In fact, the cbo projects about 50 of People Living in those areas would lose access to care. 75 of patients of planned parenthood have incomes at or below 150 of the federal poverty level. L this attack on planned parenthood will hurt low income families and communities of color, and most communities that already faced dangers health tht disparities. Teen pregnancy and abortion rates are at historic lows. Defunding planned parenthood and other Reproductive Health providers would take away the si very services that have lowered those rates. Tht me be clear. The republican plot to defund planned parenthood is nothing more than a direct attack on women, and women are simply not going to stand for it. Let me say that republicans have long contended that the federal qualified health program, the clinics, community Health Centers can take up the slack. If planned parenthood is eliminated. Actually those very clinics have said that is not true. Il this will cost about 15 of People Living in these underserved areas to lose access to care. E. And now i would like to yield one minute to congresswoman. Thank you for this important amendment. By pushing the agenda to defund planned parenthood, i feel that my colleagues on the republican side are using this budget resolution to punish millions of women around the country. In a single year planned parenthood provides care for 2. 4 Million People at over 600 affiliate healthcare centersen around the country. 80 of patients visit the clinic to prevent pregnancy, pregnancies and to get contraceptive pills which prevent 560,000 unintended pregnancies. With more than half of Health Centers in underserved areas, planned parenthood provides crucial care to women and men who otherwise would not have access at all. Defunding these clients would be a loss of Healthcare Access to over 40 of the women who use them as primary care facilities. And community Health Centers which by the way are all across the country and rural areas cannot absorb millions of new patients. No absorb so i hope that our colleagues on both sides of the aisle with actually support this amendmenta because padding funny does not save us money. It is so beautiful to control womens choices and bodies. Ld i yield back the balance of my time. And now id like to yield one minute to congresswoman dell mini. Thank you youre actually support the amendment to protect womens access to care to planned parenthood. The House Republican budget would be devastating to Womens Health. That only does it undermine health comes from Health Insurance<\/a> benefits for seniors and the elderly as well as people with disabilities under the Medicare Program<\/a>. The republican budget will increase costs for the elderly and disabled by establishing a medicare Voucher Scheme<\/a> that provides insufficient payments to Medicare Beneficiaries<\/a> in order to purchase needed health care. And the republican budget will destroy the traditional Medicare Program<\/a> by diverting the healthiest enrollees into private plans which would undermine traditional medicares ability to control cost. Once again, this budget omits the policy details that would that would allow us to engage in a full analysis of the plan, so one thing is clear. The budget utterly fails to address the root causes of growing healthcare cost. It is price gouging by that pharmaceutical companies. Instead aims to cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires while telling seniors to take a hike, take on more of the cost and financial risk of their healthcare. I now yielding minutes to representative susan. Thank you. Im pleased to support mr. Jeffries amendment preserving the medicare guaranteed for our seniors. House republican budget spell disaster for the more than 58 million americans who rely medicare. Rely including 90000 in my district. Privatizing medicare, replacing comprehensive Health Coverage<\/a> with a dangerous dodger system is yet another assault on the middle class and its unacceptable or cannot even President Trump<\/a> supports this t plan. Every day 10000 americans turn 65 and they expect medicare to be there for them just as it was for generations before. We should not be bound balancing the budget on the backs of seniors. Instead we should tackle rising cost of Prescription Drug<\/a>s and helping more seniors get the care they need. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment and i yield back. I now yielding minutes to representative michele grisham. I went to thank my friend and colleague from new york for yielding and i also want to add my support to his amendment to protect medicare. Now, im starting to detect a pattern in the kind of healthcare policies republicans are putting forward, cut federal Health Programs<\/a> and make states and consumers pay more. Of this time its a seniors andd disabled adults who will bear the cost. Seniors who are living on fixed income and probably the least able to absorb increases in premiums or outofpocket costpt will be expected to pay 25 more at in traditional medicare to the plan and the notion they are positioned to negotiate individually when Insurance Companies<\/a> dont negotiate with pharmaceutical companies frankly to me is ludicrous. This comes as you have heard after President Trump<\/a> promised repeatedly during the campaign that he could save medicare and medicaid and Social Security<\/a> i without cuts. I happen to agree with him. By the continuing to work towards repayment reform and reining in Prescription Drug<\/a> prices we these costs events more and further extend the life of the Medicare Trust<\/a> fund. I encourage my colleagues to abandon this approach into instead work to strengthen the Medicare Program<\/a> for american seniors and disabled. Tingui i yield back. I now yield one minute to representative jan kotowski from the great state of illinois. Thank you. I support congressman jeffries amendments then candidate trump said he was quote the first and only potential gop candidate to state there will be no cuts to Social Security<\/a>, medicare and medicaid. That promise will be broken ifni the policies in this budget are coactive. Despite what my republican colleagues will claim this budget would end medicare as we know it by essentially privatizing the program. However, the republican budget is short on details. Will seniors be given a voucher to pay their private insurance premiums . The will cosco love for the seniors if there vouchers dont cover their entire premium . Will they be subject to higher cost sharing . Seniors are paying close attention and have every reason to worry, so i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and preserve medicare for generations to come and with that i yield back. The republican budget once again ceased to ballot itself on the backs of the most adorable amongst us, working families, middleclass folk, the poor, the sick, the afflicted, rule america and now by targeting medicare seniors who are simply trying to live out their golden years with the dignity and respect that they not only deserve, but have earned by paying in to the system and thats why i urge support for this amendment to protect medicare in this country. Member who would like to claim time in opposition to the amendment . Mr. Smucker, you are recognized. Thank you, madame chair. Its important that we strengthen, we secure and we save medicare for current seniors and for future generations of americans. And our budget does just that. The math on this is absolutely clear. Because of Rising Health<\/a> costs and demographic changes, the 2017 Medicare Trust<\/a>ees report projected that the Medicare Program<\/a> will be bankrupt in cbo similar projects medicare insolvency in 2025. This means as soon as eight years from now the Medicare Program<\/a> as we know it will likely be insolvent if we do not act now to protect and preserve the program. Specifically, Medicare Hospital Insurance<\/a> trust fund will be unable to pay 100 of patient care costs which would reduce beneficiary access to health care services. Such an outcome is completely, simply unacceptable for the millions of seniors who rely on this program. To clarify any misconceptionsio about our plan, lets debunk some of the political attacks on her efforts to save and strengthen medicare for the American People<\/a>. Number one, our budget protects the current medicare system as it is. For those at or near retirement will be unaffected and experienced no changes come while protecting the medicare system for younger generations as well. This resolution fully supports a patient centered Medicare Program<\/a> that increases quality and choice for beneficiaries. Medicare improvement envisioned in this budget would adopt a popular simplified coverage structure structure of Medicare Advantage<\/a> that would allowio seniors greater plan choicesuc while reducing cost. And for the more the government payment would be adjusted so the sick would receive more Financial Assistance<\/a> if thereeda conditions worsened, and lower income seniors would receive Additional Support<\/a> to help cover premiums and outofpocket costs. Under this input program, traditional medicare is saved and it would always, i repeat, always be an option traditional medicare available to seniors. And finally cbo determined that he Medicare Program<\/a> following the model proposed by this budget would result in cost savings are both seniors and for the program. Under our plan 50 million seniors are empowered to use choice and competition to bring down else care costs. The real threat to the medicare guarantee is the status quo. Costs continue to skyrocket. Today seniors continue to lose access to quality care and the Program Remains<\/a> on a quick path pre bankruptcy. Inaction and ignorance will not protect medicare. It will only hasten the programs demise leading our nation of seniors in despair. Our budget planetary solvency for the Medicare Program<\/a> and safeguards this Little Program<\/a> for our nations current seniors and future generations of beneficiaries to come. Therefore, i urge a no vote on this amendment. And i yield the balance of my time to mr. Woodall. Thank i thank my friend for yielding here ive always believed there more that unites us than divides us. T thinking about ms. Delbene comments, i think we can all ths agree that our seniors in this country expect medicare to before them, be there for them. They paid into medical part eight entire life ended expected to be there for them, just that Something Interesting<\/a> and it was just as it has always been. Certainly the confidence we want to be just as always been at that confidence is not there any longer. As Trustees Report<\/a> after Trustees Report<\/a> tells us in cropsey is imminent. But morga more important just at has been as mr. Booker said lock us the status quo, i remember the debates an have had in this body over medicare. Member after member light up and said i dont want to see the Medicare Program<\/a> changed. As he lived to Medicare Advantage<\/a> is the single most popular aspect of the Medicare Program<\/a> today and yet we see budget after budget, often from the other side come trying to restrict the Medicare Advantage<\/a>t program if you want the program to continue just as it always has with no improvements andpt changes, the trustees tell us that option is not available. I couldnt use them to. But more would you . Why wouldnt you want to add more choices to the system . We have done that in the past. We done it successfully and way down it to the delight of those members on medicare. But i will say this to all of my colleagues in great candor. We need to end the ruse that folks like me in my 40s are going to have the same Medicare Program<\/a> that my mom and dad had it we have never had enough money coming into the program chivers of the Medicare Program<\/a> for folks in the 30s andpr 40s, and we still dont today. The time to act, the time to make those changes is today while folk still have enough time looking forward into the future to plan. And i want to be clear. This budget protects everyry single senior on medicare today. It anticipates making sure those promises are capped, expanded but kept. Madam chair, this has been called the third rail of politics folks have allowed the degradation of the solvency of the trust on to come to the place that it is today because they were afraid to tackle it. Through your leadership on this committee, folks about the courage to stand up and say we can protect medicare today. We can approve medicare tomorrow and the status quo is not an acceptable alternative. I urge my colleagues knowing that theres more on which we agree than we disagree to reject this amendment took lets agree to fight for medicare but lets let that fighting begins the status quo and in favor of longterm solvency. I and with that i yield back. The gentleman gets back. Mr. Jeffries is like a nice one minute to close. The republican budget plan for unfettered Market Competition<\/a> is a recipe for disaster. Prior to the creation of medicare in 1965, almost half of american seniors had no Health Insurance<\/a> whatsoever. As Health Care Costs<\/a> steadily rose, the socalled market failed to respond. Tha medicare changed that dynamic. Democrats are committed to keeping and strengtheninggt medicare for seniors andnd disabled workers by reducing cost of growth within the Health System<\/a> while protecting and providing a central benefit, ane central benefit the Affordable Care<\/a> act includes numerous Cost Containment<\/a> tools and has recor contributed to record low rates of healthcare spending growth since 2010. It has begun medicares transformation toward rewarding quality and value and keeping it sustainable. We need to build upon that progress, not undermine it. I yield back. The gentlemans time is expired. The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by mr. Jeffries. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed . [inaudible] in opinion of the chair the nos have it. Ote is [inaudible] a recorded vote is requested. Pursuant to the men this consent agreement we will postpone the recorded vote until we finish debate on the batch of seven amendments. Are there other amendments . Yes, mada, madam chair, i hae anonymity at the desk. This is amendment number seven. The clerk will designate the amendment. The staff will distribute copies to the amendment. Amendment number seven authored by representative schakowsky to ensure the policy statement on Womens Health<\/a> care. Ms. Schakowsky is recognized for six minutes. Thank you, madam chair. I offer an amendment to protect Womens Health<\/a> by ending the war on planned parenthood and allowing women to pick their own medical provider. I would find it ironic that they republicans claim that they want to increase choices for people and allow them to make their own health decisions, but apparently got right does not extend to women. Planned parenthood is a trusted source of healthcare for 2. 5 million americans everyyea single year. One in five women with visit a planned parenthood clinic in her lifetime. It offers preventive care, vaccines, screenings, contraception and its for men as well as women by the way, i can go to planned parenthood. And yet republicans continue to do everything they can to restrict women from getting thicker from planned parenthood. The republican budget proposes not only removing planned parenthood from the Medicaid Program<\/a> but also makes it ineligible to participate in ant federal program. And lets not pretend that this war on planned parenthood is anything other than a direct attack on Womens Health<\/a>. Over half of planned Parenthood Health<\/a> centers are in Health Professionals<\/a> shortage areas, rural are medically underserved areas. Es these are places that desperately need more healthcare providers, and that yet republicans are trying to make it hard for women in these areas to access care. Democratic women, republican women, independence. In fact, the cbo projects about 50 of People Living<\/a> in those areas would lose access to care. 75 of patients of planned parenthood have incomes at or below 150 of the federal poverty level. L this attack on planned parenthood will hurt low income families and communities of color, and most communities that already faced dangers health tht disparities. Teen pregnancy and abortion rates are at historic lows. Defunding planned parenthood and other Reproductive Health<\/a> providers would take away the si very services that have lowered those rates. Tht me be clear. The republican plot to defund planned parenthood is nothing more than a direct attack on women, and women are simply not going to stand for it. Let me say that republicans have long contended that the federal qualified health program, the clinics, community Health Centers<\/a> can take up the slack. If planned parenthood is eliminated. Actually those very clinics have said that is not true. Il this will cost about 15 of People Living<\/a> in these underserved areas to lose access to care. E. And now i would like to yield one minute to congresswoman. Thank you for this important amendment. By pushing the agenda to defund planned parenthood, i feel that my colleagues on the republican side are using this budget resolution to punish millions of women around the country. In a single year planned parenthood provides care for 2. 4 Million People<\/a> at over 600 affiliate healthcare centersen around the country. 80 of patients visit the clinic to prevent pregnancy, pregnancies and to get contraceptive pills which prevent 560,000 unintended pregnancies. With more than half of Health Centers<\/a> in underserved areas, planned parenthood provides crucial care to women and men who otherwise would not have access at all. Defunding these clients would be a loss of Healthcare Access<\/a> to over 40 of the women who use them as primary care facilities. And community Health Centers<\/a> which by the way are all across the country and rural areas cannot absorb millions of new patients. No absorb so i hope that our colleagues on both sides of the aisle with actually support this amendmenta because padding funny does not save us money. It is so beautiful to control womens choices and bodies. Ld i yield back the balance of my time. And now id like to yield one minute to congresswoman dell mini. Thank you youre actually support the amendment to protect womens access to care to planned parenthood. The House Republican<\/a> budget would be devastating to Womens Health<\/a>. That only does it undermine health comes from Maternity Care<\/a> and Birth Control<\/a> but it also takes the extreme step of defunding planned parenthood, a trusted medical provider to 2. 5 million americans that something they rely on. Politicians have no right to interfere in a womans personal medical decisions, that includes when and where she gets healthcare. Last year planned parenthood perform more than 600,000 Cancer Screening<\/a>s and help detect abnormalities in more than 72,000 women. This is lifesaving care. Its time for republicans to stop the relentless crusade against planned parenthood and give women the dignity of makinh their own health care decisions. I urge all my colleagues respect Womens Health<\/a> to vote yes on this amendment and i yield back. Thank you and i yield remaining time to congresswoman jackson lee. Thithis is a story about the devastating impact of the distraction of plannedth parenthood. 75 of planned parenthood patients have incomes at or t below 150 of the federal poverty level, and only 60 of patients access care through medicaid or title x family planning. More than onethird of patients of people of color. Heres a healthy mother wanted to have a healthy baby. Her preventative healthcare comes from planned parenthood. Do you want to stop this kind of lifesaving health care . Thats what the trumpcare, democratic the gentleladys time has expired. Is all about. I yield back. I claimed the time and yield myself seven minutes. So as paul harvey says, heres the rest of the story. Lets talk about the additional Womens Health<\/a> funding that in this budget. A budget supports enhanced access to Womens Health<\/a>care services. This budget also assumes that the American Healthcare<\/a> act which provides additional funding, specifically for Maternal Health<\/a> care patient and state ability fund. This budget fully funds discretion programs at the department of health and Human Services<\/a> that focus on Womens Health<\/a>, including the nih office of Womens Health<\/a>, the nih pregnancy and perinatal branch, the cdc office of Womens Health<\/a>, the cdcs efforts to prevent the spread of zika virus which impacts pregnant women. So here are some of the responses of the rest of the story. R our budget does not eliminate federal funding, excuse me, does a limited federal funding for planned parenthood. However, it promotes redirected needed funds for to its Health Centers<\/a>. The budget promotes investment Community Health<\/a> center to promote greater access to care for women. The community Health Centers<\/a> are nonprofit, communitybased clinics that provide comprehensive care including mammograms which by the way planned parenthood claims to have provided and we now know that they do not provide mammograms. In fact, they do not have a single location that provide a mammogram. Now, heres some other littlethe fax. There are 9000 community Health Centers<\/a> which unlike planned parenthood clinics are required, yes, they are required by law to be located in medically underserved areas with high levels of poverty and infant mortality. So with others talk about theres not going to be services, they are actually required to be military women nd communities where women need these Healthcare Services<\/a> the very most. In fact, in 2015 community Health Centers<\/a> provide Health Services<\/a> for more than 20 million americans, nearly 60 of those that they provided services for were females. In contrast planned parenthood served less than 3 million. So lets look at that. Nearly 20 million or more than 20 million in community Health Centers<\/a> and fewer than 3 million th planned parenthood facilities. This budget also makes efforts to ensure that taxpayer dollars to not go to the nationst largest provider of abortion. But rather support health considers that truly providede comprehensive care to women. More than just mammograms, both in just prenatal care. There are other services theyvi provide that are not provided in planned parenthood centers. The federal government shoulds t not force states to provide funding to clinics such as planned parenthood that perform elective abortions. Similarly the government should not force taxpayers to fund clinics where they are against their own values. This budget continues this protection by proposing to eliminate all federal funding for planned parenthood and similar organizations. Now, additionally, lets look at the cbo score those mentioned in the opening remarks. So the Congressional Budget Office<\/a> does anticipate some small costs associated with the complete elimination of funding planned parenthood. The Budget Committee<\/a> can test the score that they put out because its based on cbos faulty assumption that reducing planned parenthood funding would result in more pregnancies fromt a lack of access to contraception. As a 40 talked about there are 20 million women that are taking care of in this community Health Centers<\/a>, only 3 million come less than 3 million in planned parenthood. But this is unreasonable, and you talk about, being against women. This is a sexist assumption that womens ability to seek out care depends upon having a planned parenthood facility across the street. As with providing additional funding for community Health Centers<\/a> as part of our markup its unreasonable for cbs2 soon that women are incapable of finding another provider. Women are smarter than this. They are able to find other providers. Planned parenthood is not, if it is an option theyre smart i enough to find other providers and im insulted to say that women are not going to be able to make the choice to find another provider. We assume that we and our budget is in the women are capable, they are smart, independent enough to seek contraception elsewhere. Instead of giving up and going straight home to get pregnant at cbo assumes. It is an insult to women. Women dont need some paternalistic government to provide for them. Our budget is prowomen, its progirl, and its prounborn baby girl. You talk about the prowomen come if were taking a little girls live, the doesnt seem to me to be very prowoman. So i urge a no vote on this amendment and i yield back theam balance of my time. Now ms. Schakowsky is recognized for one minute to close. A couple of things planned parenthood does screenings for breast cancer. Yes, then it will refer women where theres a mammogram whenhe there is something abnormal wound. He screenings are very important. As far as insult to women, are you kidding me . Star women have to travel hundreds of miles in order to get to a clinic they dont have a planned parenthood clinict i nearby. And so it is not for a lack of smarts and intelligence that rei women seek and guinness democratic and republican women alike that seek planned parenthood clinics. In fact, 19 National Polls<\/a> have shown that American People<\/a> do not support the funding planned parenthood, but the republic, if the republicans have their way millions of patients will, in fact, lose access to Cancer Screening<\/a> and contraception and testing and well women visits and more. And is very community Health Centers<\/a> you cite suggested it would be a problem for they would not be able to make of the get. So i urge my colleagues to support this prowoma prowoman amendment. And i yield back. The gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. The question is on agreeing to the amendment by ms. Schakowsky. All those in favor say i could. Those opposed . In the opinion of the chair the nos have it. A recorded vote is requested and pursuant to unanimous consent agreement we will postpone the recorded vote until we finish debate on the batch of this seven. [inaudible] so do we have number eight here . So mr. Higgins is here. So are the other amendments . Mr. Higgins . Me thank you, madam chair. You have an amendment at the desk. I do. So this is amendment number eight and the clerk will designate the amendment if the staff will distribute copies of the amendment. Amendment number eight offered by mr. Higgins related to americas transportation infrastructure. Mr. Higgins is recognized for six minutes. Thank you, madam chair. Fundamental to the growth of in advance and daschle society is the investment jamaican infrastructure or a couple of reasons. One is its a massive investment that you finance publicly at very, very low rates to create jobs in the Construction Trade<\/a> and the split and Materials Industry<\/a> immediately, and as you make that investment it unleashes creativity and the resources of the private sectorn we see it happening in places like buffalo, new york. Everyplace where weve weve made federal investments in new roads, we see new investment in businesses along those new roads that we built. The state of the american infrastructure is pathetic, and this is a pathetically weak response to an urgent need to brbuild our nations roads and bridges. The 2018 budget proposes to spend less than 92 billion in outlays for americanucture. Transportation infrastructure. When you compare that to the 118 billion that u. S. Taxpayers paid to rebuild the roads and bridges of afghanistan, it pales in comparison. When you consider the 96 billion u. S. Taxpayers paid to rebuild the roads and bridges of iraq, i 92 billion investment in 2018 in rebuilding the infrastructure of america, is again i think i national and international embarrassment. Now keep in mind that both iraq and afghanistan, they are nations with a population of approximately 30 Million People<\/a>. America is 325 Million People<\/a> the American Society<\/a> of Civil Engineers<\/a> consistently rates the quality of american infrastructure at a derating. The World Economic<\/a> forum wherenu american infrastructure in terms of quality was number one, ten years ago its in our number 24. Recently Jpmorgan Chase<\/a> president and ceo jamie diamond has said that the United States<\/a> hasnt built a major airport in 20 years. China built 75 new airports in the past ten years. As i mentioned previously china announced a major Infrastructure Investment<\/a> to open up their markets to 27 new Asian Countries<\/a> to advance the products that they make in china are only investment is about of 92 billion for next year and ao nebulous request for funding toi build infrastructure along the southern border. We can obviously do much better. The United States<\/a> chamber of l commerce also says that we losec 200 billion in lost productivity because the poor quality of our infrastructure. So thats, i asked respectfully that one area where republicans and democrats clearly should be able to come together is on a robust Public Investment<\/a> in infrastructure, because of the Economic Activity<\/a> that would result. A lot of people talk about tax t cuts around here, and tax cuts dont pay for themselves. The most accurate and credible analysis is that you could return about a third of the money that you lay out for taxax cuts. Infrastructure is very, very different. Its a proven job creator, and its a proven businessvestment investment maker after youve made an investment. So i would ask that you please consider not cutting infrastructure and adding to itd considerably if, in fact, we hope to get anywhere near where your budget projects that the economy has to grow over the next ten years to create a surplus. And with that, madam chair, i would yield one minute to mr. Carbajal. Thank you, representative higgins. I do like to address the inadequate funding for infrastructure in this budget resolution. This republican budget would reduce funding for amtrak, eliminate funding for highspeed rail, phaseout capital grant for mass transit projects and eliminate tiger grants. Communities across our nation are struggling with crumbling infrastructure as a result of use of deferred maintenance, neglect, and a lack of strategic investment. Ve as a former county supervisor, i saw firsthand to invest Additional Resources<\/a> toward infrastructure at the local level. The federal government must also do its part and partner to support state and local Infrastructure Investment<\/a>s, but dividing additional federal resources. Investing in infrastructure will not only create more jobs at a a time when so Many Americans<\/a> are hurting for work, but will also stimulate our economy. I urge my colleagues to support the higgins amendment. I yield back. Thank you. I would yield one minute to ms. Delbene. You have 20 seconds. Thank you. I would use and places aboard the amendment. The two m short tzaddik at the failed deliver investments in safety improvements that are desperately needed across the country and definitely my home state i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and idm yield back. Perfect. Is there a member would like to claim time in opposition to thin amendment . Madam chair . You are recognized for seven minutes. I madam chair, i reckon i for seven minutes but i dont think will take that long because as a much as appreciate my friend mr. Higgins proposal and the sentiments behind them, and i certainly agree with the sentiments behind the need for infrastructure funding, unfortunately they pulled outnd the same kind of sad tale of what they believe are tax benefits, et cetera to finance these expenditure increases when, in fact, what we should be doing is focusing on progrowthh tax reform, not trying to just incrementally pick one littleust item here or there in order top finance the expenditures that the gentleman suggests. I would also point out to my friends in california that he references the president s initial budget submission, and yet the nondefense discretionary portion of the budget that the budget resolution contemplates at a level of 511 restores and sustains virtually all of the programs that the gentleman elaborated upon, and our colleague is not here come hes a chairman of the appropriations subcommittee on transportationbe which would be, he would be able to confirm that the efforts of the transportation appropriations subcommittee are restoring the programs to sufficient funding levels. Pe are we spending enough in our country today on infrastructure . I would argue and i think my friend mr. Higgins would agree certainly he does that we are w not. But the approach that is being taken rounding up the usual suspects that our friends on the other side like to point to asas the Funding Source<\/a> is simply inappropriate and ill advised at this time. What we need to be doing is looking seriously aboutbo longterm funding for infrastructure, ones that rely upon people that use much of the infrastructure to pay for it, and if the gentleman had been offering a proposal that would suggest that we should have a transportation focus infrastructure financing approach, i might be inclined to agree with you. Nk i think we could find a person agreement on much of that. But this approach that is suggested in the proposal is simply one that is not going to pass the smell test. It shouldnt be adopted and i would urge a no vote on it, and with that of you happy to yield to my friend mr. Lewis from minnesota. I thank the gentleman. The w the whole point about Government Spending<\/a> as a better way of allocating resources and willingness to be addressed. My friend across the aisle and i agree and a strong level Transportation System<\/a> something synthetic of it has to do with regard to infrastructure. As i believe the last congress devoted about 305 billion to improve transit systems, bridges, highways. This amendment unfortunately would be more of the same. More the same from the last the administration, brought from previous programs it would increase taxes on american businesses an an order to pay fr more spending. When i say to talk aboutsts w spending, economists would say whats the best way to allocate resources . The best way is weak advisedre economic return. O i have to admit i have a bias. I think market discipline allows private sector resources to have an economic return. We call those profits in order to service the debt. Government far too often devotea their resources or a political return, hence, we spent 836 billion honest in this package and only got 1. 6 Economic Growth<\/a> out of it. How many times will we go down this road . And ordered to pay for this and by the way whether you tax, if w late or borrow, all Government Spending<\/a> comes out of there private sector. Diverting those resources thatat could be used for productive investment into a productive investment all too often. Right now to want to pay for it with higher taxes but, unfortunately, we have the highest Corporate Income<\/a> tax rate in the industrialized world, and we have the most and help my friend across the aisle are listening to this, we have the most progressive income tax code of all oecd nations. We cant get much more progressive than we are, and yet they want to raise taxes. Look, the only way to get Economic Growth<\/a> are the best two ways to get in fact, the best way to get is productivity increased or we can do with thea growing population as well. Prod how do you go productivity . By making transportation and Infrastructure Investment<\/a>s thatu have an economic return. Rn. But adding more does not growow the economy and thats why this amendment is misguided and is a limited amount of federal spending over 4 trillion now is a drag on Economic Growth<\/a>. Therefore i urge a no vote on this particular amendment in yield back. Madam chair become indigent of moving things along, i yield back as well. The gentleman yield back. The sponsor of the minute mr. Jeffries is recognized for onegg minute. Excuse me, mr. Higgins. I apologize, mr. Higgins. Thats okay. I appreciate the thoughts of my colleagues, but when you look at Infrastructure Investment<\/a>, every city, town and village issues debt to finance infrastructure. And right now you could borrow money at very, very favorable rates to rebuild the roads and bridges of america. Half of the alley would be a limited altogether by the by Economic Growth<\/a> that would result. The fact of the matter is, as i mentioned before, Corporate Leaders<\/a> all over the nation including mr. Diamond our talk about the lack of Infrastructure Investment<\/a> growth, the lack of new airports in america when other countries that were competing with for Global Economic<\/a> dominance are making the kinds of investment that are producing 7 annual Economic Growth<\/a>. Im simply telling you a mix of Market Forces<\/a> and Government Support<\/a> can produce an economy that grows jobs and creates Economic Opportunity<\/a> for future generations. Thank you. The gentleman yield back. The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by mr. Higgins. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed, no. Independent of the chair then does have it. I request the recorded vote. Of record about is requested or pursuant to the unanimous consent agreement we will postpone the recorded vote until we finished the debate on this batch of seven. And, therefore, were going to take a very brief recess. T i will just five minister and members have been called that are currently here. There on the way and we willly resume at five minutes to take votes on the first seven amendments. The committee stand in recess. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] house Budget Committee<\/a> gaveled in this morning at 10 00 eastern. They are deliberations over the 2018 budget markup expected to continue up to about midnight tonight. Taking a short five minute or so recess. We expect them to come back and vote on a number of amendments that they have debated. Live coverage will continue here on cspan2. A reminder the senate this afternoon in recess senators are getting everything on the defense secretarygeneral mattis. A number of republican senators were at the white house earlier today talking about health care with President Trump<\/a>. Vote expected early next week in the senate on the repeal. The house is also in session today voting are debating rather a couple of bills related to energy infrastructure. You can follow that over on cspan. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] here on cspan3 allday coverage of the deliberations of the house Budget Committee<\/a>. They are murky of the 2018 budget resolution, and announced earlier today the chairman diane black said they would likely go up to admit that are subject there taking a break and coming back for several amendment votes we expect. We will continue our live coverage throughout the day here on cspan3. Is this is the use house itself is in session debating a couple of bills dealing with energy infrastructure. Votes later this afternoon on that so you can expect another recess in the Budget Committee<\/a> later this afternoon. [inaudible conversations] the committee will come to order. Since we decide to rowboats today the committee will resume with postpone vote on the following amendments. Ms. Wasserman schultz, ms. Jackson lee, mr. Ball, mr. Yarmuth, mr. Jeffries, ms. Schakowsky and mr. Higgins. The clerk will designate. Amendment number one offered by representative wasserman schultz. The clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call]gris [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] are there members who wish to vote for change their vote . T i apologize. He i didnt on that vote the ayes are 12h and the nos are 21. The nos have it and the amendment is agreed to. The committee will not vote on the amendment offered byam ms. Jackson lee. The clerk will redesignate then. Amendment. Amendment number two offered by representative jackson lee. Madam chair . I apologize, the amendment is not agreed to. The amendment is not agreed to. The committee will now vote on o the amendment offered by ms. Jackson lee. Amendment number two offered by representative jackson lee the clerk will call the roll [roll call] [roll call] mr. Ll call] [roll call] [roll call]ay [roll call] the clerk will call the roll. Excuse me, are there any members who wish to vote for change their vote . If not [inaudible] mr. Jeffries . The clerk shall report. Madam chairman come on the boat the isa 13 and the no, sir 21. The nos have it and the amendment is not agreed to hear. The committee will now vote on the amendment offered by mr. Boyle. The clerk will redesignate the amendment. Number three offered by representative boyle. The clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call] mroll call] [roll call] [roll call] are there any members who wish to vote or change the vote . Hearing none, the clerk shall report. Mr. Chairman, the isa 13 and the no, sir 21. The nos have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Next we will vote on amendment offered by mr. Yarmuth. The clerk shall redesignate the amendment. Amendment number four offered by representative yarmuth. The clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call]ries, [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call]are ther are there any members that wish to vote or change their vote . If not the clerk shall report. Mr. Chairman, on that vote the isa 13 and the no, sir 21. I say the nos have it. The mint is not agreed to. Next the committee will now vote on the amendment offered by ms. Jackson lee. The clerk shall redesignate the amendment. Amendment number six offered by representative jeffries. Ll we will go with number six. I had number five. Thats the one we skipped come excuse me. Mr. Chairman, i believe it i roll called vote number five but it is amendment number six. Correct. The clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] are there any members who wish to vote or change the vote . If i will have the gentlelad. Recorder. She is not recorded. Ms. Lee, aye. Are there any members who wish to vote for change their hote . [inaudible] how is the chairman recorded shes not voted. Madam chairman, no. Are there any members whoo wish to vote or change their votes . S . Ming none the clerk shall report. Mr. Chairman, the icons are 14 and the nos 21. The nos have it. The man is not agreed to. Next amendment offered byowsky. Ms. Schakowsky if the clerk will redesignate the amendment. Amendment number seven offered by representative schakowsky. The clerk will call the roll. [roll call]. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] are there any of the members who wish to vote or change their vote . Hearing none of the clerk shall report. Mr. Chairman, on that vote the icons are 13 and the no, sir 21. The amendment is not agreed to. Next we will hear come will vote on amendment offered by mr. Higgins. S. The clerk will redesignate the amendment. Amendment number eight offered by representative higgins. The clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call]mr. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] the i koser 14 and the nos are 21. The nos have it and the amendment is not agreed to. Recon madam chairman. Was the gentle it is recognized. I believe i was in the room as the boat was being called on Womens Health<\/a>. Id like to be registered atre least in the record for voting aye amendment number seven and ask unanimous consent. The clerk will report. Way she recorded . No, madam chairman. She was not recorded on the boat. If we can recorder for the record as noting no. a we will come yes, then. Xray much i yield back. Youre welcome. Are there any other amendments. Madam chair i have an amendment at the desk, number five. This is amendment number five. The clerk will designate the amendment and the staff will distribute the copies of the amendment. Amendment number five offered by representative lee release le stephanie for antipoverty programs. Thank you very much. Madam chair, this amendment would restore funding for several mandatory funding programs that are very critical to reducing poverty and providing opportunity for all. These programs include Social Security<\/a>, medicare, snap and many more. My amendment would come if necessary ensure we continue to invest in our communities and provide a basic standard of living for everyone. Once again we set budge a budget seems to ignore the fact that there are still more than 46 million americans living in poverty both in rural and urban areas. In fact, in Rural America<\/a> it continues to face levels of poverty for close to 3 higher n than rates in urban and metro areas. This budget is balanced by slashing critical earned benefit like Social Security<\/a> and medicare come programs vital to reducing poverty and providing a decent standard of living for all. Now let me say that again. Earned benefits. We know that these programs work. According to a study from pewn charitable trust, an additional 8 Million People<\/a> would be living in poverty without our nations food stamp program. And our poverty rate for Senior Citizens<\/a> would jump from 14. 6 to 52. 67 without Social Security<\/a>, again earned benefits. This is almost four times higher. Yet once again we see our republican colleagues wanting to cut and turned his programs into block grants despite evidenceit that clearly shows that that would make them much less effective. How many times ive to remind us . Cutting poverty programs is notv the same as cutting poverty. Cu is that how we want to budget . By doling out the pain to those with the least resources while rewarding the wealthiest was tax breaks and Huge Companies<\/a> with corporate welfare. Madam chair, this is really shocking that once again we are seeing a budget that really does not recognize that too Many Americans<\/a> are still being left behind and struggling to find jobs that pay a living wage. They are forced to choose between paying the bills and putting food on the table. No one in the richest nation on earth should have to make that choice. I know from personal experience that people want to work. I know people want to be able to feed their children they dont want to be on government assistance but the bridge over troubled waters should be thereo when they need it. I guess im a form of public assistance recipient and also snap beneficiary. It was a bridge over troubled water and i did and my o government helped me to get to where i am today and i thank them for that. And so this is a moral document and should make lifting americas out of poverty a priority rather than cutut programs that will ensure they continue to struggle just to make ends meet. Id like to yield two minutes to my colleague congresswoman Sheila Jackson<\/a> lee. I think i want to take just a moment to thank congresswoman lee for continued decades and certainly a time in the United States<\/a> congress for enlightening us on what really happens whenen you provide individuals not a handout but a hand up. I started by acknowledging the fact that this is a draconian budget, a trump budget that cus 200 billion and, frankly, it a goes into the forest. It takes gasoline and pours it on a campfire and brings the whole forest down. Thats what will happen to those who need a lifeline. It is well known that programs like tanf, snap, the Affordable Housing<\/a> and the Child Tax Credit<\/a> helps americans are facing hard times so they can access food and shelter. It is also well documented thatd an nonmetro areas, 2. 6 Percentage Points<\/a> of poverty are higher come were higher in the 1990 than 2. 7 Percentage Points<\/a> higher from 20002009 compared to metro areas. This was nonmetro areas, so poverty particularly impacts the rule areas. I would make the argument of supporting the only amendment for the fact that she gives a lifeline to individuals who seek a better life and you are prepared to serve their nation, some in uniform, to be able to make this country to get country that it is. I thank the gentlelady for yield and i yield back. Thank you very much. Is there a member who would like to in opposition to the amendment . I apologize. You start time, ms. Lee. Yes come you still have time. Any other members . If there are no other members on our site i will close. Let me thank the gentlelady for her comments and for her tremendous leadership, trying to make sure that everyone has an opportunity to lift himself out of poverty. I will close by saying this amendment is really about equity. Ves its about equity of for all americans, and we know that there are tremendous disparities in poverty rates among africanamerican and latinondous communities, with 24 of africanamericans and 21 of latinos living in poverty compared to 9 9 of whites and even though the majority of those living below the poverty line of course are white. And so we have to come together to try to figure out how for all of us to let everyone out of poverty. In terms of wealth, these numbers are even more stark. The institute of policy studies nuid it would take the average black family 228 years to a mass the same amount of wealth that white families have today if race remained the same. Thats in the year 2241. Thats a long its going to take to make up these years in terms of a mounting wealth. And so its really a disgrace that we continue to cut our safety net and programs that will help everyone, all americans, to lift themselves out of poverty into the middle class. So i hope you support this amendment so we can make sure that more people are not pusheds into poverty, so we can begin to close some of these inequities in our country. Thank you again. Is there a neighborhood like a claim time in opposition to the amendment . Th you are recognized for seven minutes. Thank you, madam chair. L since 1964, we tried it the democrats way. According to the Heritage Foundation<\/a> we have spent 22 22 trillion fighting the war on poverty as a result. Adjusted for inflation this is three times more than all of the military wars we have ever povey fought combined. Put another way, its 176,000 e taken from a lifetime earnings of every family in america over those 50 years. We created 82 different federal antipoverty programs in this effort. I think after 5 50 years of experience with these programs we are entitled to ask hows the war on poverty coming . 1966 the poverty rate stood at 14. 7 . Today it is 13. 5 . 22,000,000,000,000. 50 years later poverty has barely budged. Republicans have warned for years of the poverty trap. The practical effect of these programs is to trap generationsy in poverty by robbing them of incentive to succeed and denying them the dignity, the indescribable feeling of selfworth that comes with a paycheck. As the old adage says given an official before day. T teach a man at a fish and hell eat for a lifetime. This bag is predicated on the simple principle. If you are ablebodied with no dependents in return for your welfare benefits, we ask that you look for a job or train for a job, and if a job as author who expect you to take it. According to forbes when made up like this condition, 90 of this population found work and withif a year their incomes rose 100 14 . Let me repeat that. The income for these welfare recipients rose 114 in the first year. Once the work requirement took effect. Alabama had similar results of this year when 13 counts implemented work requirements for snap. The reforms in this budget are specifically designed to change incentives to get people back into the workforce so that they, too, can see their incomes soar along with her selfrespect and dignity. They also showed we can focus more resources on those who cant fend for themselves. Not only did the democrats propose keeping people trapped in poverty with their programs, but they also proposed to hide the economy robbing people ofty the opportunity to succeed. Taxing the top 1 might make a good Bumper Sticker<\/a> but a search of the people they say they are trying to help. The vast majority of american businesses are individuals filing under subchapter s and most of that income is already tax in the top bracket. Businesses dont pay business taxes. The only three ways that a business tax and possibly bes paid is by us as consumers through higher prices, by us as employees through lower wages, and by us as investors through lower earnings on our retirement savings. As arthur often wonder what else it of california, again discovering, there is nothing more affordable in this world than money and rich people. High taxes have already sents morereds of billions of dollars of capital offshore. So let me repeat this to my democratic colleagues. The only way a business tax can be paid is by consumers through higher prices come close to t lower wages, and by investors t through lower earnings as those taxes are passed along and thats by the way on the earning lote is mainly the retirement plans. Our tax plan produces morethe affordable products for consumers, i wages and more jobs for employees and high returns for peoples retirement funds. There was a time when democrats support of these policies. Thats what f. Kennedy accomplished through the taxtedt cuts in the early 1960s. Reminding us a rising tide lifts all boats. Because of these failed policies of the last 50 years our nation is now more than 20 trillion il debt. The only way that were going to escape a fiscal and economic collapse is to restore the growth rates we had after reagan cut the top tax rate from 70 down to 28 . We needed that the economy grew at twice the rate it is now, anh tax revenues skyrocketed from 599 billion, the 991 billion. Put more simply, reagan cut tax rates by more than half, and tax revenues nearly doubled. F history teaches us that lesson very clearly. And the last 60 years the top income tax rates has been as high as 91 . Its been as low as 28 at Income Tax Revenues<\/a> has stayed remarkably steady between 1320 of gdp. Some of the lowest Income Tax Revenues<\/a> came when the top tax rate was at its highest and some of the highest revenues came when the top rate was quite lows but although the tax rate wouldt end of this envelope has remarkably little effect on revenues, it has a huge impact on Economic Growth<\/a>. Hae success of our antipoverty programs is not how much we spend on them, its how many people are lifted out of poverty. The democratic antipoverty programs has spent 22 trillion fighting poverty in the poverty rate has barely budged. It seems more we invest in our mistakes for less when we are to admit him. B i think its time we connected the dots between poverty and the democratic policies. Has it escaped anyones p attention that the cities with the most entrenched democratic machines of the cities where democrats have had their way for generations are the very same cities where poverty and unemployment are often charts and were kids were trapped in failing schools with no way out . This is the unbroken legacy of the democrats policies, and you see differently in any government theyve controlled unopposed for more than a decade. An i dont think theres a single exception to this rule. This budget chart a new course for our nation using policies that are proven time and again to dramatically improve the lives of those who have been tie victimized i the democrats poverty trap. The policies called for by this budget have time and again produced Economic Growth<\/a> and prosperity for our country. Ie it is time that we had a rebirth of freedom and its time for another morning to don an american. Its time to make this country great again. With that i just back. The gentleman yields back. Ms. Lee is recognized for one minute to close. Thank you very much. Let me say first of all we are talking about earned benefits in this amendment. Secondly, believe you me that would be millions more who would have fallen beneath the poverty line had it not been for thene d 1964, 1965 bills that allowed for medicare and some of these other programs to the established. B and so i think when you look at how our country and the values of our country, hopefully are enshrined in our constitution, people should have a right to dignity, to decent standard of living, the right to work and this budget cuts workforce training picnic at all of the Apprenticeship Training<\/a> programs. Cuts the very lifeline out of what it takes to be able to move from poverty into a good paying job. F so we cant have it both ways. We cant cut the safety net and cut earned benefits, cut workforce training, cut education and not at the new job creation efforts in the budget, and yet, you know, put forth a budget that really harms many, many millions of americans both rural and urban. Thank you. The question is a green on the amendment offered by ms. Lee. All those in favor say aye. Expired. The amendment offered by miss lee. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, no. No. In the vote, the nos have it. We will postpone the Border Security<\/a> and immigration modernization act. The 2018 budget market is expected to last until late, watch it live on cspan3 or cspan. Org. Leaving it here for the senate which is in recess for a briefing on isis by defense secretary jamesmattis","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia600605.us.archive.org\/15\/items\/CSPAN2_20170719_183800_House_Budget_Committee_Marks_Up_Budget_Resolution\/CSPAN2_20170719_183800_House_Budget_Committee_Marks_Up_Budget_Resolution.thumbs\/CSPAN2_20170719_183800_House_Budget_Committee_Marks_Up_Budget_Resolution_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240628T12:35:10+00:00"}