Skip to main content

tv   House Budget Committee on 2019 Federal Budget - Day 2 Part 4  CSPAN  June 23, 2018 6:26am-7:54am EDT

6:26 am
6:27 am
6:28 am
6:29 am
6:30 am
6:31 am
6:32 am
6:33 am
6:34 am
6:35 am
6:36 am
6:37 am
6:38 am
6:39 am
6:40 am
6:41 am
6:42 am
6:43 am
6:44 am
6:45 am
6:46 am
6:47 am
6:48 am
6:49 am
6:50 am
6:51 am
6:52 am
6:53 am
6:54 am
6:55 am
6:56 am
6:57 am
6:58 am
6:59 am
7:00 am
the american people believe that the mueller investigation is politically biased and motivated by politics and not by facts and easy to see why the american people hold this
7:01 am
view. the inspector general shared his thoughts on the improper conduct. james comey fired for lying to congress for breaking policies of the fbi. andrew mccabe fired and referred to promotional prosecution, peter stzrok, former intelligence head demoted, reassigned and escorted from the building. lisa page gone, the chief of staff of the fbi gone, james baker, weaker, former attorney gone and when asked about this the inspector general said never before in all of these years that he seen a circumstance where the fbi, an institution we must be able to rely on was so infected by politics and bias that there was a mass exodus of senior leadership of the whole agency. i think back to the august 8th
7:02 am
text message fm peter stzrok asking if trump would be president and he said no we won't, we will stop him. just 9 days before he had opened up on papadopoulos and the russia investigation. and only 9 days the fbi was able to fully resolve the facts of the case just six days after peter stzrok said we have an insurance policy against the trump presidency, a day after he opened that he said this one really matters. these were people who judged hillary clinton innocent before interviewing her and judged donald trump guilty before starting the investigation. it is ludicrous, the american people see it is ludicrous and i'm grateful that through the oversight work of congress we have been able to get the documents that show how biased people were that began this investigation. if there ever were an impeachment proceeding or criminal proceeding we would
7:03 am
have to ask peter stzrok as a star witness and that would never hold water. i think we should vote against the amendment because the russia investigation is politics, not law. in this policies we investigate crimes, we don't investigate people, there is no evidence of a crime here, these are just people who hated donald trump, they were insulting and condescending to the american people who voted for donald trump, talking about the smell of trump voters as they went into walmart. i love walmart and think donald trump is doing a good job as president but ifouupport the concept of the mueller probe i suggest you vote against this amendment because this is the improper place and no indication whatsoever of any threat to the investigation so i suspect there should be and i yield. >> for the record i like walmart too. the gentlelady from texas is recognized with one minute to
7:04 am
close. >> i encourage my colleagues to look beyond the question that we are in different parties and really look at the constitution and the responsibility we have for the rule of law. paul manaford is in jail, michael flynn, the pres.'s for his national security adviser indicted and in jail pleading guilty, george papadopoulos and general manager rick gaetz and mueller has not leaked any aspect he is investigating and he is investigating under concept of rule of law and democratic governance, the inspector general confirms the fbi had done nothing wrong with respect to this investigation of the clinton emails and she had done nothing wrong.
7:05 am
there were bad acts by those who were fbi agents but i do not condemn the entire agency that is the highest lawmaking or law body the we rely on the fight against terrorism so i will not undermine our fbi but what i will do is encourage the mueller investigation with full funding to adhere not to policy but of law. shows the involvement in the russian collusion allegations. >> question is on the agreement from the gentlelady from texas, those in favor say i. those opposed know. in the opinion of the chair the nos tablet. gentleman from kentucky requests recorded those that is postponed. it is in order to consider amendment number 28 offered by the gentlelady from illinois,
7:06 am
miss schakowsky. >> gentlelady from illinois recognized for three minutes in support of her amendment. >> my management calls on congress to improve access to affordability of prescription drugs for all americans. every american has been impacted by the rising cost of prescription drugs whether they are struggling to afford their prescription command insurance premiums increase due to rising drug costs or seen more of their tax dollars pay for prescription drug coverage by medicaid and medicare. that is why 60% of americans believe addressing the cost of prescription drugs needs to be, quote, a top priority. 80% of americans believe prescription drug prices i too high-end 25% of americans have had skipped a dose of their medicine due to the cost. recent report from sen. mccaskill found that the price of the 20 most commonly prescribed brand-name drugs for
7:07 am
seniors have risen nearly 10 times more than the annual rate of inflation over the past 5 years. i ask unanimous consent to enter that study into the record. the conversation about i drug prices are happening around the dinner table, the pharmacy counter and all throughout the country. it is time congress has this important discussion and works to end -- toward american real reform. donald trump has repeatedly called the out for price gouging and promised to do something about it but the blueprint on drug prices issued by the administration instead of lowering drug prices contained a set of weak and ineffective proposals that i'm
7:08 am
sure had to sign off on the pharmaceutical industry and thousands of lobbyists. this was made clear when pharmaceutical corporations stock soared after the plan was released. the trump administration shifted around the cost to millions of americans without access to affordable medicine. he also handed pharma it number one priority, raise the price of prescription drugs abroad, blaming other countries for negotiating lower prices will not reduce prices here at home. greedy pharmaceutical companies are the reason drug prices are so high in america but the trump administration does nothing to address that very real problem, the pharmaceutical industry is using a large portion of its windfall profits from republicans corporate tax cuts to boost its stock prices. i certainly urge all my colleagues to support an amendment that will do something that will increase our ability to control the cost of prescription drugs.
7:09 am
if republicans are serious about reducing spending on healthcare, let's work together to lower the cost of prescription drugs and so i urge support for my amendment. >> the chair recognizes the gentlelady from tennessee in opposition. >> i agree with the gentlelady on the premise that drug costs are too high and that is why we should support this budget which fully supports patient access to prescription drugs. this includes supporting reduction in burdensome regulations which drive up the cost of drugs and stymie the innovation and reduce competition. our budget also includes supporting a swifter process of review by the fda as well as necessary funding to invest in biomedical research. additionally it is important to remember the impact of the affordable care act on the rising cost of prescription
7:10 am
drugs. and individuals or family members facing our prescription drug costs under obamacare as part of this is because obamacare reduced the premiums but then raised deductibles as a bait and switch program. for example the average person with an obamacare plan has to pay 46% of his or her total drug costs compared to 20% for someone with an employer-sponsored health care plan. research has found plans on the obamacare prescriptions to avoid out-of-pocket costs, as a result experience more serious medical problems and higher costs over the long run. as a result of obamacare patients with one chronic condition who switched to a marketplace plan would increase out-of-pocket costs by 126% and
7:11 am
access to catastrophic drugs and treatments for diseases like cancer are more expensive due to the narrow designs popularized by the obamacare exchange plan. the reality is the obamacare exchanges are putting our sickest patients at greater risk dealing with untenable prescription drug costs and lost access to life-saving treatments and cures. i now yield whatever time the gentleman may consume, mr. johnson. >> thank you for yielding time. i want to reemphasize a point you made. the average person with an obamacare plan has to pay 46% of the total drug costs compared to 20% for someone with employer sponsored health care. in rural america where a large percentage of the population on
7:12 am
medicaid or the exchanges that is the case for most of the people, they are paying a lion's share of their prescron drug costs, not as a result of anything more than mandated government healthcare and so i agree with everything the gentlewoman said and certainly urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment. >> mr. chairman, i urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment and yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentlelady from illinois recognized a close. >> i ask unanimous consent the americans for tax fairness study that medicine, how gop
7:13 am
tax cuts are enriching companies leaving workers and patients behind into the record. >> americans are literally dying because they can't afford to life-saving prescription drugs they need because pharmaceutical companies raised the price because they can. this is simply a sense of the congress amendment that urges authorizing committees to come up with a plan of how we are going to be able to save money not only for consumers for medicare part d, medicaid so that the united states can be in line with other countries that do something to regulate the cost of drugs that we have seen skyrocketing without any shame to stop it. i urge a yes vote and yield back. >> the amendment offered by the gentlelady from illinois, those in favor say aye, those opposed know. in the opinion of the chair the nos have it. recorded those requested pursuant to the agreement, final action on this amendment
7:14 am
is postponed and it is now in order to consider amendment number 25 offered by the gentlelady from washington, clerk will designate the amendment. >> gentlelady from washington recognized for three minutes in support of her amendment. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this amendment prohibits the 20/20 senses from asking households about citizenship and provides adequate funding for the preparation for the 2020 senses and full and rigorous oversight of the census. in march i wrote an op-ed that was published, with our former secretary of commerce about how critical accuracy is and how disturbed we were that a citizenship question that might be included because of what it might mean to the accuracy of the census was i want my colleagues to understand this doesn't just affect democratic districts but republican districts as well as
7:15 am
specifically the census tells us demographic and economic makeup of the country to know who we are and what we need in these numbers determine representation in the house of representatives but does much more than that. it helps businesses to plan where their sales are going to be. ensures federal funding is distributed based on population. say you are a republican district and you have a lot of people who don't want to answer a citizenship question because they feel it is intrusive because they live in mixed status families with undocumented immigrants, immigrants who are permanent residents, none of that is supposed to matter on the census. that means your population in your district is going to be under counted which means you will get far fewer federal funds for the programs that are
7:16 am
essential. as to the department of questions, the citizenship status of the 2020 senses, our democracy is honestly at risk. the dissenting census it has been an american institution since 1790 and it depends entirely on the willingness of people nationwide to participate. we will not have an accurate idea how many people live in our communities or where to distribute the $700 billion of federal funds for priorities for medicaid to fire departments. the census bureau should be the leading source of quality data and i am deeply concerned that that will not be the case with the citizenship question. with that i would like to yield the remainder of my time to representative sheila jackson lee. >> thank you for this important amendment and i'm disappointed that against the advice of staff, and bipartisan officials across the commerce department and untested and misguided question regarding citizenship, that plays a critical role in
7:17 am
our democracy. created a us house of representatives and declared the portion of seats occurs following account of all persons, not just citizens in the united states because of the importance of census in support of local government and educational resources and i support the gentlelady's amendment, no requirement to count persons by only citizenship and those who are not citizens. i yield back. >> the gentleman from florida to claim time. >> the gentlelady from washington we don't typically agree on immigration issues, it is always well read, she knows her stuff. the spirit to advocacy every day in congress. as to the workability of this
7:18 am
amendment it could undermine the principle of one person and one vote that requires a government to obtain those within congressional districts. for the apportionment to be accurate and have accurate representation of citizens eligible to vote, to determine if someone is a citizen. potential adoption of the amendment could complicate some elements of the voting rights act to ensure how voting age populations among certain minority groups are reflected, and i find the amendment to be unnecessary and i hope our country hasn't reached the deck of political correctness that we can no longer ask people of their citizens of the united states. things are basic question we would want to know. >> gentlelady from washington. >> i very much appreciate the
7:19 am
good words from my friends on the other side was i would like you to vote for me once or twice, that would be really helpful. i would like to ask unanimous consent, this op-ed by the former secretary of commerce which as you know the commerce department oversees the census and would like to enter that into the record. mr. chairman i have to say apportionment is not about being a citizen. i know my good colleagues from florida know this because he too is very smart on these issues and knows very well that the key point of the census, and everyone is counted and was not counted in missouri and florida, less money for the programs your residents need to make sure we get an accurate count, reaching out to communities and in this environment which is so difficult for immigrants, let's
7:20 am
make sure we don't add in more fear about a citizenship question. researchers across the country told us a citizenship question will depress participation. this is a very workable amendment, takes us back to where we were before so we know it works and the census is a critical tool for all of our democracy to function effectively. i urge support of this amendment and beloved see my friends on the other side vote yes with me. >> the gentlelady from washington, all those in favor say i. those opposed know. in the opinion of the chair the nos have it. a recorded vote is requested pursuant to the uc agreement already agreed to. on this amendment is postponed. that completes the democrat amendments on tier 2 in
7:21 am
consultation with ranking member i ask unanimous consent mr. mcclintock of california be permitted to offer a tear to amendment debated for 8 minutes total evenly divided between the sponsor and opposed and when minute reserved for the opponent to close. without objection so ordered. gentleman from california. >> appreciate that. >> amendment at the desk? this is republican amendment number one, the clerk will designate the amendment. >> i'm entitled to. >> mr. mcclintock recognized for 3 minutes in support of his amendment. >> appreciate the opportunity, this takes policy reforms and written budget resolution and rights those savings into the reconciliation, doesn't change a single recommendation we have been debating today, it is simply operationalize is them,
7:22 am
$1.55 trillion to deduct interest costs under the bird rule. that is the way of the budget act is supposed to work, set limits on mandatory spending, offer recommendations, and write those levels into the reconciliation instructions and authorizing committees to change the statutes driving the mandatory spending. they have a deadline debate. if they don't meet the deadline this committee can insert those into the reconciliation bill and get expedited consideration in the senate, it is easier to change mandatory spending than it is discretionary spending because of expedited consideration. the decade i served in congress this committee has never placed its policy recommendations in
7:23 am
the actual reconciliation, we promise them for next year and pretend the budget is going to balance in 10 years was with these instructions, in 10 years, without them it won't. there is nothing we haven't placed in policies and saving, and it is implemented. these policy recommendations for promise into action. the budget is not an aspirational document, but an operational document. it is the most powerful fiscal tool we have 2 control spending. it must be used that way. let's do something worthy of the trust fellow citizens have given us, most members can see the fiscal crisis looming ever larger in our country's path. if we can see the danger and have the tools to avert that danger there is no excuse for
7:24 am
using them. that is what the amendment is about. >> thank the gentleman from california and reiterate the importance of this amendment. a three levels it matters. it matters because things never go quite as we hoped. murphy's law is alive and well. the assumptions on which this is based are viewed as optimistic. this begins to take care of that optimism and move toward pragmatism. if you think about it, the debt and deficit going forward will be on mandatory side and this goes straight to something about it. in the budget problems before
7:25 am
us, for different reasons, and the remainder of the time. >> the chair will claim time in opposition to the amendments. the budget before us, for achievable mandatory savings. and the use of reconciliation. special procedure which allows fast-track and simple majority vote, throughout the process of producing the budget for fiscal 19, this committee has thoughtfully considered and discussed what reconciliation looks like in the budget blueprint including what is achievable through 11 house committees. to make a down payment on the debt, to make it achievable policy based on what is done in the practical sense. as many on the republican side, the size and scope of our debt is a challenge, it is alarming, to a next solutions more quickly but the proposal from the gentleman from california
7:26 am
is not something congress can realistically accomplish. it is better than no step at all and i your adoption of this amendment will disrupt our ability to accomplish the savings before us. in their entirety. and reconciliation in two decades. and to urge colleagues to reject the amendment and i would yield so much time as you may consume to the gentleman from texas. >> meaningful and achievable, i have tremendous respect for mr. mcclintock and mr. sanford and i think we should do more. i would do all eight trillion if we could do it but we can't
7:27 am
do it. i learned more about the budget disaster we face of the country since i have been on this committee then any other single member, his very criticism has been this document shouldn't to be visionary, it should be real. it can't be real if asked for $3 trillion, it can only be real if we work the process, brian from our colleagues, chairman of authorizing committees. and $3 billion mandatory, we double down effectively having 300 plus billion in mandatory, that makes me happy because we can get this thing out of this committee, get this thing in
7:28 am
the conference, and the right thing for this country. >> i respectfully say in relation to my colleagues, to his point, if you don't make it real are we lulling ourselves to sleep? are we setting a mood of complacency that presumes we can get out of the financial pickle we are headed toward if we don't make this real? it is telling that adm. mike mullen, when asked what is the biggest threat to american security answer is the national debt and that reason the gentleman from california's amendment is in order. >> is the biggest threat to the future of my kids and your kids and grandkids and i believe that wholeheartedly, but we have got to turn the ship around and this will assure us if we pass this we won't turn
7:29 am
it around. it won't get out of the house. this is meaningful, then the budget as proposed i do appreciate the spirit but got to pose it. >> let's talk about reality for a moment. if we do not places in the instructions this will not balance in 10 years and will never balance. let me put $300 billion of savings in perspective, and the committee on responsible federal budget, the top managers from jpmorgan, the big take away is treasury yields go from 270 basis points to 400 basis points, that will translate to $260 billion a year of additional entrance costs.
7:30 am
$260 billion more on top of what we already &. i have struggled with this question and $300 billion is better than nothing and $300 billion is not going to save this country. i support the resolution either way. what would have failed to save the titanic from sinking, could have bought it a few more minutes of float, would have been worth it. that is an apt description of this budget that falls short of the responsibility of what people have given us. >> on agreeing to the amendment offered by the gentleman from california, mr. mcclintock. all those in favor say aye, in the opinion of the chair the nos have it. it is in order to consider role
7:31 am
votes, these are votes offered in tiered amendments that have been deferred until the present time and the committee will now vote on the first such amendment, amendment number 18, the clerk will redesignate the amendment. >> worker education training. >> call the roll. [rollcall vote]
7:32 am
[rollcall vote] [rollcall vote] >> any members not recorded that wish to be recorded? anybody wish to change vote?
7:33 am
any other members? the arts are 13 in the nos are 20. >> the amendment is not agreed to. voting amendment 21, the clerk will redesignate the amendments. >> call the roll. [rollcall vote]
7:34 am
>> are all members recorded? how many votes in this series? >> this is the second vote in this series. >> was i recorded no one a previous vote?
7:35 am
>> the unanimous request to reflect a no vote on the amendment number 18 in your recorded as a no vote on amendment 21. any other members? >> on that vote, nos are 21, the is are 13. >> the amendment is not agreed to. the clerk will redesignate. >> related to higher education. [rollcall vote]
7:36 am
>> any members not recorded a wish to change their vote? >> on that vote the is are 13, the nos are 21.
7:37 am
>> the amendment is not agreed to. consider amendment 22 by miss wasserman-schultz of florida. >> related to the environment. >> clerk will call the roll. [rollcall vote]
7:38 am
>> i believe i was speaking in my low, subdued voices wasn't heard. >> mr. grossman votes no. click will tally. >> the is are 13, the nos are 21. >> amendment 24 offered by mr. connor, click will redesignate the amendment. >> on foreign aid. [rollcall vote]
7:39 am
7:40 am
>> any members not recorded. clerk will tally. >> the is are 13, the nos are 21. >> the amendment is not agreed to. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. >> roll call please. [rollcall vote]
7:41 am
>> any members not recorded or wish to change? clerk will tally. >> the eyes are 13, the nos are
7:42 am
21. >> the amendment is not agreed to. amendment 27 offered by miss jackson-lee of texas, clerk will redesignate. >> related to the russia investigation. [rollcall vote]
7:43 am
>> any members not recorded or wish to change their vote? >> the is everything, nos are 21. >> the amendment is not agreed to. the clerk will redesignate. >> offered by representative schakowsky on prescription drugs. [rollcall vote]
7:44 am
>> any members not recorded or
7:45 am
prefer to change? clerk will tally. >> the eyes are 13, nos 21. >> the amendment is not agreed to. it is in order to consider amendment 25, clerk will redesignate. >> on the census. >> rollcall please. [rollcall vote] [rollcall vote]
7:46 am
[rollcall vote] >> any members not recorded? clerk will tally. >> the is i 13, nos are 21. >> the amendment is not agreed to. if there are no further amendments i recognize the gentleman from indiana. gentle lady from texas seeks
7:47 am
recognition. you both do. gentle lady from texas is recognized. >> i ask unanimous consent the record reflect anybody detained from the meeting, and amendment number 9, amendment number 10, amendment number 11 and amendment number 12, amendment number 16, amendment number 17 and ask the recording of the vote be placed into the record as unanimous consent. >> without objection. >> gentle lady from washington. >> i ask unanimous consent to have my yes that reflect amendment same amendments, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16 and 17. >> so ordered. >> the gentleman from indiana. >> functional categories and other appropriate matters. >> functional categories and
7:48 am
other appropriate matters. all those in favor say aye, those opposed know. the is have it. pursuant to committee rule 9, the text of concurrent resolution on the budget, it is identical to what was distributed tuesday with several technical changes, legislative text incorporates but it aggregates functional levels and other items previously agreed to. recognize the gentleman from indiana to report to the house. >> the resolution on the budget report with the recommendation of the resolution be adopted. >> concurrent resolution to be favorably reported to the house, all those in favor say aye. those opposed know. the is have it. request to can -- a vote. call the roll. [rollcall vote]
7:49 am
[rollcall vote] [rollcall vote]
7:50 am
>> any members not recorded? >> mr. grossman. >> mr. grossman votes i. any other members? clerk will tally. >> the is are 21, nos are 13. >> fiscal 19 reported favorably to the house of representatives, a quorum is present and ask members to remain a few more minutes for perfunctory motions. i would like to thank republican members for the time they dedicated to developing the budget over the last few months and weeks, appreciate your enthusiasm for this process and thank the majority staff for their hard work on this budget into the leader of
7:51 am
our staff director, all the republican staff for their outstanding work on the budget. to the ranking member of this committee i appreciate the civil tone we conducted this markup of credit to the gentleman from kentucky and i thank ellen, staff director and her team, and thank the office of legislative counsel, and tom cassidy. >> let me thank you to those kind of remarks and reciprocate as they we handled this session with class and dignity and great comedy and i appreciate that as well. thanks to your staff and the minority staff for the great work they have done in preparation. i ask requisite number of days to file its views. >> appreciate the remarks.
7:52 am
>> rule 22, arise chair to offer such motions to go to conference and fiscal year 2019. >> the gentleman from indiana. >> that staff be authorized to make technical corrections and calculate the remaining elements required in a resolution prior to the filing of it. >> so ordered. you conclude the business of the house budget committee. i want to say how much i appreciate the logistical challenges we have had today. i bid everybody a great evening and with that this committee stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations]
7:53 am
[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
7:54 am
>> the house next week takes up the $75 billion defense department spending bill in 2019. leo shane with military times, what are the main priorities of the house in this bill versus the president's request? >> but he goes to the pres.'s request on a lot of issues, looking at the same issues of military strength which is a boost above 15,000, 2.6% and generally the same level of funding, lower than what the administration asked for. we got


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on