Hearing Turns Testy as Democrat Accuses Trump Admin of Undermining Congress With Budget Cuts

[0:00] present to you a set of facts, a set of data. Right now, according to opinion [0:07] polls, the approval of the economy of the American people is at its lowest [0:14] level since 2008, the Great Recession. 29%. An average of the last three polls [0:22] shows 30% approval. Disapproval over approval of this administration's [0:27] handling of the economy. More than 2 to 1. Disapproval over approval. The Michigan [0:34] consumer data, consumer confidence level, the lowest level ever recorded, even [0:42] lower during COVID, even lower during the Great Recession, or even lower than [0:49] during the Great Recession. If you look at the job creation over the last 15 [0:56] months, there's one thing missing, and that's job creation. We have been in a [1:02] jobless economy over the last 15 months. Inflation, which actually, even though [1:10] there's no question, we had an inflation crisis, not just in the United States, but [1:14] all throughout the world after the COVID pandemic in 2022, after the pandemic had [1:21] ended. Every single month in 2024, inflation dropped over the preceding month. What [1:30] happened around April of last year, Liberation Day, inflation was liberated. You [1:36] saw inflation begin to increase, and every single month we've seen inflation [1:42] increase, and gas prices. Yesterday, I was in Northeast Philly, where I'm from and [1:47] where I live, a working-class part of the city of Philadelphia. I was in front of a gas [1:54] station. The gas at that particular location was 411, which is slightly lower than the [2:01] average nationally and in the United States of about $415 a gallon. Six weeks ago, that [2:10] same gas station was under $3 a gallon. We've seen over the last month the largest [2:16] increase in gas prices in my lifetime, in the lifetime of most people here. What's [2:26] different about this economy, unlike the inflation crisis after the pandemic, unlike [2:32] the Great Recession, unlike the recession of 2001, unlike the recession of 1992, the economic [2:40] downturn that we're experiencing, no jobs, record inflation, gas prices through the roof, consumer [2:47] confidence plummeting. All of this is directly related to the policies of the Trump administration [2:54] that you carry out, Mr. Vogt. None of those previous examples that I cited, none of them [3:02] could be directly attributed to the policies of the president at that time. We can debate about certain [3:10] things that did influence them, particularly going into the 08 recession. But with this president, the [3:18] change is so abrupt. The fact inflation was dropping month over month, the fact that we had an incredible [3:26] jobs economy until it was lost a year and a half ago. You know, I'm from Pennsylvania, the biggest [3:33] battleground state in the nation, also the nation's birthplace, which we're making a big to do about [3:40] this year in 2026 and celebrating our semi-quincentennial. But Pennsylvania is really known over the last [3:46] decade in our politics as the nation's biggest battleground state. So as a result, basically every [3:54] day in 2024 in the fall, we had either Donald Trump or the Democratic nominee Kamala Harris in our state. [4:01] Donald Trump had, I have to say, a brilliant campaign slogan said, your prices are too high. [4:10] I will lower them. And I quote him, I will lower them on day one. Well, here we are about day 450. [4:20] He hasn't lowered anything. The only thing he's lowered is his approval rating on the economy. [4:26] He has lowered that. Donald Trump and this administration have failed miserably on this [4:35] economy. They failed to bring prices down. And in fact, they made the situation worse. [4:42] With that, we have a lot of questions on this side since it's been 15 months. You're the first OMB [4:47] director ever to not appear before this committee last year. I appreciate you at least today taking the [4:53] time. We have a lot of questions. And I certainly hope after today, if we send to you questions in [4:59] writing, that you would respond finally, as you've ignored all of our previous requests. [5:05] It's a matter of basic respect for the Congress of the United States and for this committee. [5:10] And with that, I yield back. Thank you. [5:12] Mr. Chairman, I want to, there are a lot of areas I would like to get to, [5:15] but between me and my colleagues, at least on this side of the dais, I think we'll get to them all. [5:21] Let me start by reminding people back nine months ago, what President Trump called at the time, [5:28] though he wants to rebrand it and never talks about it now, his one big, beautiful bill, [5:33] though it has been known by many other names. That piece of legislation, despite your rhetoric [5:41] about this budget committee succeeding on deficit and debt, according to the Congressional Budget [5:47] Office, as well as other nonpartisan groups, both left of center and right of center, have said that [5:55] single piece of legislation adds more to our deficit and debt than any other piece of legislation passed [6:03] by Congress in American history. In addition to the over $4 trillion it adds to our national debt, [6:13] it eliminates health care coverage. For more than 15 million Americans, according to the CBO, [6:20] the Kaiser Family Foundation says there's actually more than 17 million Americans who will lose their [6:26] health care. Are they really all according to you? Really? You're going to sit here with a straight face [6:31] and say they're all illegals, they're all defrauding the system? That's actually your position? [6:36] Yes. With regard to the people that have lost that- [6:40] I mean, that's laugh, that's laughable. I'm sorry, I'll give you a chance to respond. [6:44] You have a number of issues with regard to your comments there. [6:47] Well, wait, let me just- Number one- Sorry, wait, wait, reclaiming my time, [6:51] I just want to be clear. I'm citing, we acknowledge, the CBO figure, that's where I'm getting the 15 [6:56] million from, and the Kaiser Family Foundation says 17 million. You're saying none of them are [7:03] legitimately on this, even though we had one of them actually testify before us- [7:07] I didn't say all of them are illegals. I said there's also the benefit of people returning to the [7:12] workforce because they are able-bodied individuals or they should not have been on the system regardless [7:17] because of the inability to address fraud in the aftermath of- [7:22] Okay, so they're all either illegals or defrauding the system? [7:25] Well, that's certainly not a provocative statement that we have fraud all over the country, is it, [7:31] Mr. Rankin? Why are- I imagine there are fraud in all sorts of private and public sector areas, [7:37] but the idea that 15 million Americans are about to lose their health care, the single biggest loss [7:43] of health care in American history, mind you, not even during the Great Depression, [7:47] do 15 million Americans lose their health care coverage. The idea that all of those people who [7:53] are about to lose their health care are defrauding the system or are illegal immigrants, that is not [8:01] supported by any facts whatsoever. We're not working and now- are now working and getting the benefit of [8:06] a job with employer-sponsored health care coverage. Look, that- these- these assessments by CBO and others are [8:14] often very static. I mean, it's right-of-center groups as well. It's- well, reclaim my time, [8:19] I only have a few minutes, so excuse me. But it's not just CBO. I mean, right-of-center groups, [8:25] left-of-center groups, nonpartisan groups, you're saying they're- they're all wrong. [8:29] I am saying that the budget community typically relies on static thinking, static scoring, [8:36] current law baselines, and so you don't get an accurate picture of the extent to which the [8:42] reforms that are being made are going to have a dynamic impact with better programs, more health [8:47] care, for instance, 50 billion dollars- All right. Well, let me- before you get to the friends, [8:50] I only have a couple minutes, so let me actually transition to my next subject because I think [8:55] I'll only have time now for this. The president recently said, I mean, he was talking about the [9:01] record increase in gas prices thanks to him and his war of choice in Iran, but he diverted in a [9:08] spontaneous- he's speaking extemporaneously in the White House just a few days ago- he said, and I [9:14] quote, the United States can't take care of daycare that has to be up to a state. He then added Medicaid, [9:23] Medicare, all these individual things, they can do it on a state basis, you can't do it on federal. [9:31] So I'm just curious from your perspective at OMB, [9:35] have you taken any actions to turn Medicare back to the states? [9:39] No, and the president doesn't want to do that with regard to these- [9:42] Well, he said it. I mean, he said it. [9:44] He's referring to- [9:45] So you're disagreeing with what the president said? [9:46] No, I'm saying that the president meant- he's talking about fraud in these programs. [9:50] That's not- he didn't mention- excuse me, reclaim my time. Nowhere- I have the full statement in front of [9:54] me. Nowhere in front of me is the word fraud presented. What he was talking about, he later at a [10:00] different part said, we have to pay more for wars, and instead we can't afford Medicaid, Medicare, [10:07] child care, things like that. And looking at the budget proposal- this is why I raise it- [10:12] $442 billion- correct me if I'm wrong- $442 billion increase in defense. [10:21] That's what you're asking for? About a 42% increase? Is that right? [10:24] Correct. For many paradigm-shifting investments- [10:27] A 42% increase on what was already a record high for defense. And look, I serve as part of our U.S. [10:35] delegation of the NATO parliament. I am no pacifist. I believe in a strong national defense. [10:41] I believe the United States. I believe the world is at its best when the United States has the [10:46] strongest military. The idea that we're going to pay for a 42% increase in this military, in this [10:54] Department of Defense, and at the same time cut Medicaid, Medicare, not pay for child care, all [11:01] of these things that the American people need in the case of Medicare have paid into, that is a [11:07] reflection of priorities that are out of whack. And I see I've gone over my time. I appreciate your [11:14] indulgence. So with that, I yield back. [11:16] Your direction, Mr. Vogt, at the National Institutes of Health. Last year, grants for Alzheimer's and [11:22] aging research were cut almost 50%. Mental health, 47%. New grants for cancer research, 23%. And as I read [11:32] the budget that you're here presenting today, the Trump regime's response is that medical research has [11:37] not yet been cut sufficiently. Doesn't your budget propose another 12% cut at the National Institutes of [11:43] Health? Most of what you said is untrue. NIH was not cut at all last year. We proposed a series of [11:51] reforms to lower the cost. We continue, although not as much, to lower the cost this year. Reclaiming [11:55] my time, my question to you is don't you propose to cut the National Institutes of Health by another 12%? [12:01] We propose to have a cut to the National Institute of Health. Thank you, sir. Reclaiming my time. [12:06] That goes after specific programs. Yes, sir. Thank you. Reclaiming my time. [12:10] Like the Minority Health Disparity Institute. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, if the [12:14] gentleman will please yield. He can filibuster when he's in the Senate. What we do know as far [12:21] as the truth is that there were fewer grants for new cases last year at NIH than at any time in the [12:28] last 30 years. Is it your feeling in proposing further cuts at NIH that there are just not enough [12:36] worthwhile projects out there or that we cannot afford to invest more in doing something about [12:43] Alzheimer's, cancer, Parkinson's, HIV, other dread concerns? There are many worthy health investments [12:50] out there. I think post-COVID for an institution that contributed to the pandemic itself with the [12:54] funding of gain-of-function research to give that institute 42 trillion dollars, which is more than it [13:00] got under the COVID pandemic. The kinds of things is very generous. The kinds of things that we're [13:05] trying to do with the National Institute of Health. Indirect cost rates. We don't think when Bill Gates [13:10] gives 10 percent for parkings and administrative costs and buildings that that should go. [13:15] Reclaiming my time. After giving last year fewer grants at any time in the last 30 years, [13:22] you're proposing further cuts there. And of course, the cuts are not only to medical research, [13:28] but is it correct that in your budget you would cut the National Science Foundation, [13:33] which has in the past provided grants that helped on artificial intelligence, on laser eye surgery, [13:40] on MRI technology, among others, that you propose to cut it by 55 percent? We have a sizable cut to [13:47] National Science Foundation. Over half of the funding. But it will not impact our investments on artificial [13:52] Well, that's good to know because you may be the only person along with President Trump who believe that [13:58] a reading from the director of a consortium of research universities. He says your budget cuts [14:04] are the equivalent of working in a company that feels like it's on the verge of bankruptcy. [14:08] Another one says slow scientific progress threatening the nation's position [14:13] in the world economy. And that's one of my concerns because when you eliminate these research budgets, [14:19] you impact long-term economic growth. Are you aware that one international organization has recently [14:25] said already the United States has fallen behind China when it comes to research? [14:31] We have no doubt in our mind that we are going to still be the leading [14:36] innovator, funder of research, both private and public. [14:41] Our view is that we want to make sure that there's a dollar that's actually well spent on research. [14:45] Thank you very much. I'll accept that as you're disagreeing with the international [14:49] organization that says we've already fallen behind China. [14:52] Do you agree that the impact of federal research dollars helps to stimulate private investment? [14:59] In fact, one estimate is every federal dollar generating eight times as much in private [15:04] investment on research. Mr. Congressman, I don't think the Fogarty International Center, [15:10] which is at the NIH, should spend $224,000 for a survey on how Buddhism creates HIV stigma in Thailand. [15:17] That's what your hard-earned tax dollars is going to fund under the guise of research investment. [15:22] I don't think $20,000 should go to a valuation- Well, that's fine, Mr. [15:25] That's fine, Mr. Vote. Thank you. [15:27] It's fine that you go through and eliminate any project like that, but that doesn't justify [15:32] providing the fewest number of grants for these key dread diseases in 30 years. [15:37] I want to ask you about the comment that was referred to by President Trump about the fact that [15:45] we can't afford daycare at the federal level. And of course, [15:47] your budget provides no increase in funding for child care, does it? [15:51] We flat-fund child care, which you would not get from the question- [15:54] Flat-fund it. And you also eliminate the program, [15:57] do you not, that provides assistance for some people with heating and air conditioning, [16:01] the LIHEAP program. You terminate that entirely. [16:04] It is a historically fraudulent program. [16:07] Do you terminate it entirely or not? [16:09] We do not have funding for LIHEAP because we believe in the moment- [16:14] Unfortunately, of all the many things the president says he wants to cut, [16:18] you have not gotten to Medicare in this budget yet. [16:21] I guess that will be the next one. [16:23] We don't think LIHEAP funds- [16:24] Coming up next is Medicare because as the president said, [16:28] that's a state function. Well, many of us believe it's a vital [16:32] program to protect the health of our people. We don't want to see what happened to it, [16:37] what happened to Medicaid already and to the Affordable Care Act happens to Medicare, [16:42] and that's very much what's at stake here. I yield back. [16:45] Can I address that, Mr. Chairman? [16:48] Uh, 30 seconds. [16:50] We do not believe that LIHEAP should go to incarcerated individuals and dead people. [16:55] It is a notoriously fraudulent program by the same experts that the ranking member [17:00] continues to cite on a number of other issues. [17:02] Well, I'm sure the dead people argument applies just about as much as it did to [17:05] President Trump's claim that people that were 350 years old were getting social security. [17:10] It's all phony. [17:11] My friend from Texas, time has expired. [17:14] Uh, you outlined the Biden administration. I want to reiterate some of the things that the [17:20] ranking member said, including out of 48 months in the Biden administration, 47 of those had job [17:28] growth. The only month that there was a job loss was the month that Trump had come in and actually [17:35] was president for a significant part of that month. [17:38] Um, on average monthly gain in jobs, about 300,000 over, over the Biden administration. [17:46] And that, um, compares to five months of job loss already run up by this administration, [17:52] five months of job loss and an aggregate total. It doesn't even amount to one month's, uh, average [17:58] month of job growth in the Biden administration. I heard the chairman mentioned bailing out pension funds. I think he's referring to the fact that in the American rescue plan, [18:00] uh, we saved a million people's pensions. Uh, they were losing their pensions, not, wasn't their fault, but they were about to lose their pensions. And we saved those pension plans, uh, and pensions, uh, in the American rescue plan act. [18:22] And I think that was a good thing. If you ask those who are about to retire, uh, whether they thought it was a good thing, I think most would, would agree. [18:31] When inflation, the ranking member pointed out that we had global inflation on, on, on, under Biden, [18:36] the American rescue plan act and the other spending, I think most experts said added a little bit of marginal [18:42] inflation, but the spending also included in the American rescue plan act for, um, families of four, [18:50] about $5,000 in stimulus checks, $6,000 in child tax credits. Many received enhanced SNAP benefits and lower Obamacare [18:59] premiums. And the question of whether it worked, if you looked at the end of the year, [19:04] credit card delinquencies were the lowest in 30 years. Child poverty dropped 40%. So I think it worked. [19:12] And inflation under Trump, as the ranking members pointed out, specific policies like tariffs, [19:19] inflation, and the war have added to inflation. As far as 15 million losing their healthcare, [19:26] is a good thing because they might be getting jobs. All of the information that we've received [19:31] from states that have imposed work requirements on Medicaid and SNAP have found virtually no increase in [19:39] jobs. So if you have, um, Mr, Mr. Vote, uh, any evidence that people will get jobs as a result of that, [19:46] other than just people losing their healthcare would like to see it. Now, and the CBO estimates that, [19:53] that big, you said the bill had a lot of different names, big ugly bill is one of the names we like to call it, [19:59] uh, with interest, that's going to add about $4 trillion to the, to the debt. What, uh, what, uh, [20:04] what, uh, what is, what is your estimate of the damage done to the fiscal situation by that bill? [20:11] It will reduce the deficit by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years if you account for the right [20:17] baseline, Congressman. Okay. So everybody thinks it's going to add about $4 trillion to the debt, [20:22] and you think it's going to, um, save money. Uh, Eisenhower was the last, um, um, Republican [20:30] president to leave to Democrats a lower deficit measured by a percentage of GDP, which is a normal [20:36] measurement, uh, a lower deficit than they, they inherited. Uh, does this administration plan to [20:43] leave a lower deficit than the one they, um, inherited? And if so, are tax increases part of that plan? [20:51] The fiscal situation was very steep when we inherited, uh, and what we inherited from the [20:55] Biden administration. We're doing everything we possibly can. I think the things that we did [21:00] this year collectively with the Congress, as I've said, is the end of fiscal futility. For 20, [21:06] 30 years, and you all know that I'm a budget, uh, person, uh, worked on the budget committee as a [21:11] staffer, uh, for members. I know this place well. Uh, there was no success. A lot of people talked [21:16] about the issue. There's a simple question. Do you plan to leave a better, [21:19] do you plan to leave a better deficit than you inherited? This is intentionally a discretionary [21:24] budget proposal. Uh, we don't give you what our deficits long-term are. Um, uh, let me, let me, [21:29] let me ask, let me try to make progress every year. Let me ask another question. Uh, what does the [21:32] budget assume for the future of the Department of Education, especially the Office of Civil Rights, [21:38] if Congress fails to vote to abolish the department? Well, as you know, in this budget, we both reflect, [21:43] uh, the fact that we're trying to close the Department of Education, but that substantial resources [21:49] will continue to flow to communities for education. Uh, there's only a 2 percent reduction, uh, in this [21:54] budget for that particular department. And what's interesting about the bill that thankfully you all [22:00] voted for is that you, uh, voted to endorse many of the restructurings that we did. You voted to [22:08] eliminate USAID. You voted not to have Corporation for Public Broadcasting when you voted for that, [22:13] that omnibus bills, those bills that worked its way through. And so our belief is that we make [22:19] as progress on the ground with these agencies, Department of Education included, with interagency [22:24] agreements to transfer work where we think that can be better done, that we're going to make the [22:29] case to Congress in a way that affirms and, and, and, and enacts those, those reforms long-term. [22:35] The gentleman's time has expired. You, you, you mentioned me, Mr. Scott, the jobs essentially [22:42] and virtually were a hundred percent government jobs. I could create as many government jobs as [22:48] you want if we just spend a bunch of money. The second piece was the Butch Lewis Act essentially. [22:53] Look, we had to do something. You're right for these retirees, but we needed to do it and fix the [22:59] structural problem so that we didn't end up where we, where we were in the first place. And so my [23:04] criticism is it was a bailout because there, there weren't policy reforms to prevent us from being back [23:09] in that same situation. Well, I work with you, I work with you, I work with you on making some policy [23:13] changes to make sure it doesn't happen. You got it. You got it. Thank you. [23:16] The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 says that the executive cannot unilaterally withhold [23:23] congressionally appropriated funds without a rescission or deferral request submitted to Congress. [23:28] Director, has OMB withheld or delayed the obligation of funds appropriated by this Congress [23:33] without submitting rescission or deferral notices? We have fully complied with the Impoundment Control Act. [23:38] As you probably know, we are not fans of the Impoundment Control Act. We think it's unconstitutional. [23:43] The president ran against it. Okay. However, we have complied with it. [23:46] Did you, did you withhold congressionally appropriated funds without a rescission or [23:51] deferral request submitted to Congress? That's yes, right? Not in violation of the Impoundment Control Act. [23:55] We have. Did you ever submit rescission? We've done programmatic reviews of various programs. [23:58] Did you ever submit rescission or deferral requests to Congress? Have you submitted a rescissions [24:03] package last year and actually two? We continue to do programmatic reviews. To Congress? Of programs. [24:11] That is not a withholding under the Impoundment Control Act. Did you submit it to Congress? [24:15] We don't need to submit. If we're, you did not. Congressman, if we're, if we're just assessing a [24:18] program for waste, fire, and abuse. I understand you don't think you have to, [24:21] but I'm just trying to establish you did not, right? You did not. Well, it's, it, we submitted [24:26] rescissions bills to Congress last year. Okay. Two of them. But not, just not deferral notices that you [24:32] were withholding. They're not deferrals under the Impoundment Control Act. Okay. The, the, [24:36] the Government Accountability Office has already found that the administration illegally withheld [24:40] nearly $8 billion in NIH grants, $7 billion for funding to support K-12 public schools nationwide, [24:47] and hundreds of millions of dollars for Head Start programs across the country. Do you dispute GAO's [24:52] findings? Yes. GAO is typically wrong. They're very partisan. They are, are typically on the exact [24:59] opposite of wherever the Trump administration is. Unfortunately, I know you all look to them. [25:04] They are a branch of the legislative body. We have a very different view with regard to their, [25:11] the merit of their opinions. And so it's not surprising me that they have a different view [25:14] on that. Do you have a legal opinion on that? We, we defend to the hilt all of our legal decisions. [25:21] Most of the time with regard to GAO, we, we don't have to do this. Have you gotten a formal legal [25:24] opinion on that? Actually, most of the time we will put out from OMB, a defense in response of [25:30] any of the GAO, not always, but we try to be very forward leaning and articulate because we feel like [25:35] we have the moral and legal high ground every time we make a decision. I'm sure you feel like you have [25:39] the moral and legal high ground. I get that impression. I would just ask Mr. Mr. Chairman for [25:45] the record that we add without objection, if we add the, the decision from GAO of August 5 and July 23 on [25:54] Head Start and NIH impound. Without objection. So we're, you know, I, I understand that the GAO is [26:02] part of the government you don't like. We don't get to decide what parts of the government we, we [26:06] follow and we don't. We have, we have laws that are there for a reason. And I guess we, we should [26:11] expect that, that, that you would abide by those procedures. But you know, whether it's tariffs or the [26:17] war or the way you've manipulated the budget, the administration just does not want to deal with [26:23] Congress. And I have to say to my colleagues in general, that we've reached a point where [26:30] if something's not going well in this administration, the response is not let's do something [26:34] different. The response is, well, Biden did it worse. It is absolutely irrelevant. Joe Biden is [26:41] gone. You, you guys won that election. We don't dispute the results of elections. You won the election. [26:47] Joe Biden's gone. Our job is today. What do we do in 2026 to make things better? And, um, I don't, [26:54] this, this budget will not meet that 3%, um, target that we set without, without aggressive, [27:00] aggressive, um, growth assumptions, which, which I don't think we're going to see. But whether, you [27:07] know, why are we talking about Joe Biden? Joe Biden's been gone for two years. It doesn't matter. [27:10] It doesn't matter. The other thing I'd suggest is, um, you know, one of my colleagues, Mr. Smucker, [27:18] um, said Democrats don't care about fraud. And I, I just want to just call that out a little bit, [27:26] because if you and I, if Mr. Smucker and I sat down together, I think we could have a discussion [27:31] about fraud. I think we do care about fraud. We want to know what's real fraud and what's not real [27:35] fraud. But I ask you not to question my motives. Don't say that. I will pledge to you that I will, [27:41] I will bash your policies. I think, I think you guys are wrong. I think you're wrong. But I don't [27:47] question your motives. I think everyone in this room is a patriot that wants to do the right thing for [27:50] the country. And when we make each other our enemies, the Democrats versus Republicans, this is the, [27:55] this is the weakest that we can create, the weakest situation we can create for this country. When, [28:01] when we are really not thinking of ourselves as colleagues, but as enemies who don't care about [28:06] stuff, I think that's really something we should stay away from. And, you know, I think, um, I'm sort [28:13] of least worried about Mr. Smucker because he's a friend. I know him. Um, and I, but I see, I hear this [28:18] all the time. Let's not question each other's motives. Um, I think you guys are really wrong on the policy. [28:23] I don't think that what you're doing is good for kids, but it doesn't mean I don't think you care [28:28] about kids. I just think you're wrong on the policy. And so, um, maybe if we can get away from [28:33] questioning each other's motives, we can start to get back to a level of collegiality that maybe [28:37] we can focus on policies, but it is, that is 2026 folks. It is not 2023. It's not 2024. Joe Biden [28:44] doesn't matter. Okay. It's what, what matters today is what, what's going on today. What is this budget [28:50] committee's job? We are not getting to the 3% target. We all agreed to a few, a few weeks ago, [28:56] uh, from the gate. And, um, I just want to, I say that we have a lot of work to do, but, um, [29:02] well, the gentleman is making, uh, you know, some fair and fine remarks and I have the utmost, [29:08] sorry, we're over time. I do think that Mr. Smucker's comments were, were intended to be on record, [29:17] contrasting on record, not on motive. What, what, however that came out, I believe it was about [29:23] the record, not the motive, but, but I appreciate your comments. Let's move. Saying we don't care [29:27] about something is, is a personal attack. Ranking member director. It's good to have you here before [29:34] the budget committee. Although I agree with the ranking member, it shouldn't have taken this long. [29:39] And unfortunately though, that we've seen is that that delay to me is one of many examples of the [29:45] broader disregard by this administration for Congress and for our system of checks and balances. [29:51] Now, don't get me wrong. Executive authority exists. We get that, understand that, but it does [29:56] not extend to the administration unilaterally withholding funding that's been appropriated [30:02] by Congress. I'm not just saying that the law mandates it. Impoundments occur when the [30:09] administration refuses to implement federal expenditures authorized and appropriated by [30:13] Congress and enacted in law. In fact, there's been 235 years of constitutional interpretation, [30:20] case law and statute, which have made that clear that once the law is enacted, [30:25] the executive branch is not permitted to refuse to execute that law. An impoundment would basically [30:31] replace the rule of law with the rule of one person. Article one, section nine of the constitution [30:38] clearly gives Congress the power of the person that states that no money shall be drawn from the treasury, [30:44] but in consequences of appropriations made by law. And the constitution mandates that the president [30:50] take care that the laws be faithfully executed. Now, as we heard today, and as you know, in 1973, [30:57] President Nixon attempted to impound billions of dollars of enacted clean water appropriations [31:03] over the objection of Congress. And as you know, in train v. New York City, in train v. the city of New York, [31:09] the Supreme Court unanimously disagreed with President Nixon. That decision was even relied upon as [31:16] precedent in the court's 98 decision striking down President Clinton's use of a line item veto to block [31:22] certain portions of a spending bill. As you know, Nixon's attempt at impoundment was the basis for [31:28] the 74 Impoundment Control Act, which banned impoundments. Despite that law, despite those Supreme Court rulings, [31:35] and as you mentioned today, this president, this administration, and you believe that impoundment [31:40] is within the president's power. Your general counsel argued that nearly all enacted laws are [31:45] merely just suggestions and guidelines that give the president and the executive branch substantial [31:51] discretion to follow, alter, or even disregard. Your administration basically asserts that a [31:57] president has mandate to eliminate spending to balance the budget by any means necessary. The problem with [32:05] that though, Director, is that the Constitution of the United States does not have a presidential mandate [32:11] exception. And when it comes to impoundment, there is no language in the Constitution that makes it [32:16] optional. If this administration continues to impound our appropriated spending, you are basically [32:23] eliminating Congress's power of the purse. You are basically cutting off Congress in the budget [32:29] process. And I think as members of this committee, that is something we should continue to push back on. [32:34] But since this Congress, especially with the leadership in this Congress, has given up that power [32:40] and let this happen, the courts thankfully have been the bulwark against you and your impoundments [32:45] and your elimination of programs. Your attempt to lay off CFPB employees got struck down [32:51] in NTEU this first vote. The preliminary adjunction was granted to stop your attempts to withhold [32:59] congressionally appropriated funds from the National Endowment for Democracy. The Council for Opportunity [33:05] in Education versus the Department of Education, there was a preliminary injunction to stop the [33:10] releasing of federal TRIO funding. In Pasito versus Trump, there was another preliminary examination [33:16] injunction to suspend the U.S. Refugee Assistance Program. And in the City of Chicago versus DHS, [33:22] the administration tried to impound FEMA's Shelter and Services Program, but that was stopped by a court. [33:28] In the National Council of Nonprofits versus OMB, the administration tried to put a government-wide [33:33] funding freeze, and that was stopped by the courts. In the National Fair Housing Alliance [33:37] versus HUD, HUD refused to release fair housing initiatives programs funding, and that was stopped [33:42] by the courts. Director, given these court decisions, given the Constitution of the United States, [33:51] given the law of this land, do you still believe in impoundments? [33:55] 200 years of presidents had the ability to spend less money than Congress provided. [33:59] Once again, Director, do you believe in impoundments? [34:02] Of course I believe in impoundments. The Supreme Court has never spoken on this issue, [34:07] by the way. All of what you said is largely not true and heavily new. [34:11] In regards to train versus City of New York, they struck that down. [34:15] It was a textual issue. And isn't it true that Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution [34:19] clearly gives Congress the power of the purse. Isn't that correct? [34:23] To set the limit on what an appropriation should be. [34:25] And despite all this, you still believe in impoundments, correct? [34:28] We believe vitally in the Constitution's ability to make sure that we can't spend a [34:33] dollar that you haven't appropriated. That is the constitutional provision. [34:35] And once again, Director reclaiming my time, once again, that is why I believe this Congress [34:41] needs to push back. We're not seeing it with this leadership, but come November of this year, [34:46] the American people are going to make sure that you understand what impoundments are. [34:49] Congressman. Thank you. And I yield back. [34:51] The gentleman's times expired. [34:52] Where I work at, I find the needle large enough to burst the bubble that you guys live in, [34:57] because you're not living in reality and you're creating a narrative. And just because you say it, [35:03] you think it's true. And so I've sat up here and I've listened to a whole bunch of [35:07] explanations that don't in any way, shape or form relate to reality. I got a couple of questions to [35:19] ask you, sir. I'm going to start with one that's going to give you a moment to speak, [35:25] and then I'm going to ask you a series of yes and nos. And when I say yes and nos, I want yes and nos. [35:31] What would you say right now to the mothers of the kids who died because of your dismantling, [35:39] of U.S. age? Harvard study says there are more than 100,000 of them. Can you give me a quick [35:46] response to what you would say to those mothers? Just don't talk to me about the study. Talk to me [35:52] about how you, what you would say to the mothers of the children who died. Congressman, with great [35:58] respect, I would just contest that the extent to which institutions that benefit from federal largesse [36:05] put out studies that say that the world has ended, that the world has not in fact ended. [36:10] Well, it's going there. We only cut USAID spending last year to the tune of about eight billion dollars. [36:16] There was far more that we could have done, Congresswoman. Reclaiming my time, if a mother [36:22] came before you who told you that her child died because she didn't have access to health care or [36:30] medicine that usually would be available because of the kindness of the United States of America that [36:39] you and this administration have eliminated, would you have anything of empathy, compassion, [36:47] and humanity to say to her? Would you say to her, I am sorry, that was a mistake? [36:53] I always have empathy for individuals, including those that get improper and false information from the media. [37:00] Yeah. That pumps this, this false and ignorant information out to the American people. [37:05] You know, I am so sorry to hearing false fraud and abuse from any of my colleagues and even from you. [37:14] Because if we wanted to eliminate abuse and fraud, we'd eliminate the president of the United States [37:22] from the office right now and the rest of the sycophants in his administration that are allowing him [37:28] to do so many illegal things. So here's my yes or no's. This is about your budget and this is about [37:37] your priorities. Do you think that it is more important to fight a war of choice with a country [37:46] that represented no threat to us rather than supporting cuts to economic development administration, [37:55] to K through 12 programs, to community service block grants, to National Institute of Health, [38:01] to the TSA. And let me speak something about the TSA. Any time you wanted to spend money to pay DHS, [38:10] you could. Because this president thinks he's a king and can do what he wants to do. And if he wanted [38:16] to pay those DHS workers, he could have because he finds money to do everything else he wants to do. [38:24] What about the money that goes to homeless assistance programs? That's 393 million or 60 million for [38:32] fair housing or eliminating or cutting job poor to the point that it's of no help to getting people on the [38:41] right direction. And even the money for community development financial institutions. Sir, do you [38:51] think that those programs which address the quality of life, the opportunity of life, the healthiness of [39:00] the people in this country, including their access to health care, is less important than fighting a [39:08] freaking war across the world that never, ever, ever had to be started? Yes or no is all I want. It's not [39:17] a war of choice. Just say yes or no. It's not a war of choice. I don't care what you think it is. [39:22] I ask you for the end. Yes or no. That's all I want from you. It is an important national security [39:27] objective that I ran. That is another piece of the bubble that you live in. And that's another part [39:34] of the information that you all share to create a narrative that has nothing to do with reality. [39:41] And the people of this country are showing you location by location, state by state, [39:47] county by county and city by city that they don't believe you all anymore. And let me talk to you a [39:54] little bit with my three minutes or three seconds about the cost of living. You keep talking about [40:01] what you saved here and what you saved there and how you save this one and how you are more diligent [40:07] in your savings. Well, the people in this country, they don't feel it with their health care. They [40:14] don't feel it with the gas they got to put in their cars. They don't feel it when they go to the grocery [40:19] store. They don't feel it when they try to avoid evictions. They don't feel that you all have stood up to [40:28] any of your promises that this is an unfortunately monetizing, lying, corrupt administration. [40:37] The general lady's time has expired. I yield my time. [40:41] Mr. Vogt, it's good to finally see you before the House Budget Committee. [40:44] Mr. Vogt, you lead the Office of Management and Budget. You're one of the architects of Project 2025. [40:51] And OMB is a powerful agency that's at the center of President Trump's illegal refusal to spend [40:58] federal money. Mr. Vogt, I want to go over your political weaponization of this agency against [41:05] the American people and specifically against those states that voted primarily for Democrats. [41:13] Yes or no, Mr. Vogt, a federal judge found that you terminated $7.6 billion in clean energy [41:19] grants based on whether the recipient lived in a blue state. Yes or no? [41:24] I don't recall what that judge said, but we have not made the determinations based on... [41:29] In fact, Mr. Vogt, on January 12, 2026, U.S. Judge Amik Mehta said, quote, [41:36] Defendants, meaning you, Mr. Vogt, freely admit that they made grant determination decisions [41:42] primarily, if not exclusively, based on whether the awardee resided in a state whose citizens voted [41:48] for President Trump in 2024. Mr. Vogt, yes or no? Federal judges said OMB's freeze of $10 billion in [41:57] child care and family assistance funding, quote, appeared designed to punish communities that the [42:03] administration agreed with. Yes or no? Was that something that federal judges said about you and [42:08] your leadership? I think the judge's characterization is getting at the degree to which we are focused on [42:13] states that we think are mismanaged. Okay, that is not in fact the case. In fact, [42:17] U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson found the administration broke the law and froze funds [42:22] as a politically motivated move disguised as fraud prevention. So your characterization [42:30] actually is false. Other courts have said that withholding congressionally approved funding is, [42:35] quote, vindictive and unlawful. Courts have found that freezing funds create, quote, irreparable harm [42:41] against the American people. And the GAO, the Government Accountability Office, the watchdog agency [42:48] that investigates how federal agencies spend taxpayer dollars, has reported that you broke the law [42:55] multiple times. And they have said that you have refused to spend money that was dedicated for [43:02] Americans. The Constitution gives Congress, Congress the power to spend money and not the President. [43:09] Mr. Vogt, your actions clearly show that you want to cut federal funds from anyone who didn't vote for [43:17] Donald Trump. Are you trying to get revenge on states that did not vote for your boss? [43:24] No, of course not. What's interesting about the question is that Joe Biden withheld- [43:28] Oh, for goodness sakes, can we please bring it back to my question? It was a yes or no question. [43:33] Are you trying to get revenge against blue states because they did not support the President? Courts [43:41] have said that, in fact, you did do that. That, in fact, you are being vindictive. In fact, you are [43:49] punishing because of political persuasions. It's not members of Congress who suffer when you do an end [43:55] run around Congress. That's not what I'm angry about. It's not about you taking the power away from us. [44:01] It's that it's their money. It's their power. Of the people, by the people and for the people. The [44:08] House is closest to the people. So when you do an end run around Congress, you're taking Americans' [44:13] power. I want to move on now to wasteful government spending, particularly the $350 billion set aside [44:21] for this, yes, war of choice against Iran included in this President's budget. His budget asked for a [44:27] shocking surge in Pentagon spending, up to $1.5 trillion. We have never in the history of this [44:33] country seen spending like this paid for by splashing health care, education, and housing. [44:39] Donald Trump has said, as my colleagues have said earlier, we're fighting wars here. We can't take [44:44] care of daycare. Mr. Vote, yes or no, is $350 billion for the war in Iran lowering costs for Americans. [44:53] Those Americans who ask us in every single town hall why they can't afford to live in this country. [44:59] Is the war lowering costs for Americans? It is certainly not defunding child care. We fully fund [45:05] child care in this budget. Is it lowering costs for the American people? But doesn't that get at [45:10] the premise of your question? You can find money for illegal wars in Iran. You can find money for all [45:17] the pet projects of this administration, and yet we can't find money to alleviate the costs of food [45:25] and housing and gas on the home front. But according to you, [45:28] Fully funded child care, fully funded Head Start. Mr. Mr. Vote, Mr. Vote, with the money [45:34] that is set aside in this budget, the additional funding for the war in Iran, $350 billion, [45:39] we could fund the ACA tax credits for 10 years, for a decade. And I can tell you what my constituents [45:50] want to know. How is it that we can continue to spend money on foreign wars, and yet we cannot [45:57] find a solution to the fact that people can't afford health care? And again, in closing, I just want to [46:04] say again, we're not so angry because you're taking our power. We're angry because you are taking the [46:10] people's power. I yield back. The gentle lady's time has expired if the gentleman wants to respond. [46:14] I would just say this president has been a person who has campaigned and led for peace and against [46:21] endless wars. So is it peace through war? Is that where we are right now? Peace through war? [46:27] I'm giving our witness time to respond to your question, and then I'm going to yield five minutes to [46:32] Mr. Estes. So finish the response uninterrupted, and then let's go to Mr. Estes. The president has [46:37] also been equally clear that he is not going to allow a nuclear Iran. He is not going to allow them [46:42] to have nuclear weapons. He is not going to allow them to have missiles and a navy that impacts our [46:46] national security. And so he is doing what is necessary to keep us safe while at the same trying [46:51] to pursue diplomacy so that we can get out of wars and lower those costs over time. Welcome Mr. [46:58] Vote. Despite President Trump's promise to lower prices on day one, consumer sentiment plummeted to [47:05] its lowest level on record last week. Gas prices are at a record high in Seattle. Diesel is now over [47:11] seven dollars, and families are feeling this every time they go to the grocery store. Meanwhile, fraud [47:18] reports have only gone up, and efforts to hold big corporations accountable have just disappeared. [47:24] So congratulations Mr. Vote, you and Donald Trump have managed to successfully tank the futures of [47:30] millions of Americans. Now Republicans so-called one big beautiful bill, which I notice our colleagues [47:37] have literally changed the name of because it is so unpopular, it is not beautiful to strip healthcare [47:44] for millions of Americans. That bill costs 4.7 trillion dollars and is expected to make up 20 percent of the [47:52] next decade's deficit. And it's all to pay for tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans and corporations. [47:58] The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy just published a report that shows that Trump's policies [48:04] are a tax increase for all Americans except the wealthiest five percent. So for 95 percent those [48:13] policies are tax increase. Do you know Mr. Vote how many of the largest corporations in America paid [48:20] absolutely nothing in federal income tax in 2025? Not off the top of my head, but our view is that [48:26] the tax policy... Well let me let me just tell you let me just tell you Mr. Vote, reclaiming my time, [48:31] let me just tell you the number of corporations, large corporations that paid absolutely zero in federal tax [48:39] was 88 at least that we know of, including Tesla which paid zero on almost 5.7 billion dollars of income, [48:48] as well as Coinbase, Citigroup, CVS Health and Palantir. And those companies together had over [48:54] 105 billion dollars in profits. Now meanwhile Mr. Vote, what's the average income tax paid by Americans? [49:01] Look Ms. Congresswoman, this this bill that you are opposed to that you voted against... [49:06] Do you know the answer to my question? Because I get to ask the questions here. [49:09] I understand, but you're asking... So I'm asking you what the average income tax rate is, [49:14] is this paid by Americans? And I'm suggesting that you were not a part of keeping tax... [49:20] Okay, so you don't know, it's 14 and a half percent. So while all these corporations paid nothing, [49:26] average Americans are paying 14 and a half percent. Now are you aware that thanks to stripping health [49:32] care from Americans, the middle 60 percent of Americans will pay $900 more on average than before [49:39] Trump came in and created chaos with tariffs and health care and tax law that benefited the wealthiest? [49:45] You can just say yes or no. This administration did not strip health care, [49:47] and in fact we provided 50 billion dollars for health care that you voted against. [49:51] In the president's budget request, you state that quote, it ensures that every taxpayer dollar [49:57] makes Americans safer, stronger, and more prosperous. So please answer yes or no to these questions. [50:02] According to one survey, one in six, that's 17 percent returning ACA marketplace enrollees, [50:09] say they are not confident that they will be able to afford their premiums this year. Does that make [50:14] Americans stronger and more prosperous? It certainly makes it more prosperous to have a health care system [50:20] that ensures that... Okay, so you're okay with all these Americans not being able to afford their [50:25] health care premiums. Now you're trying to eliminate the low-income energy assistance programs while Trump's [50:31] illegal Iran war raises gas prices. Does that make Americans stronger and more prosperous? [50:37] It's important to not have fraudulent programs. Well, I'm so glad you asked about fraud because [50:42] you are coming back to ask for a 1.5 trillion dollar budget for the Department of Defense. How many [50:50] consecutive audits has the Department of Defense failed as of the end of 2025? The department is making [50:58] progress towards the audit? How many audits has the Department of Defense failed? The number is eight. [51:05] And Mr. Vogt, the Department of Defense is the only federal agency that has never passed an audit. And you [51:12] want to talk to me about fraud? There is over at least 10 billion dollars in confirmed fraud within the [51:18] Department of Defense, but you're not going after any of that. Now let me turn to the Consumer Financial [51:23] Protection Bureau since you're also the acting director there. This was an agency that was [51:27] established to protect consumers from financial predation, deception, fraud, and abuse from the [51:34] biggest banks, biggest corporations. And the CFPB has stepped in and really done that work under the [51:40] last administration. CFPB put real money back in consumers' pockets, returned over 21 billion dollars to [51:47] consumers who were cheated or scammed by big banks, giant corporations. It ordered Wells Fargo to pay [51:53] over 2 billion and Bank of America to pay 727 million to consumers who were harmed. But you have a mission [52:02] to eliminate the CFPB. Why are you protecting big corporations instead of consumers, Mr. Vogt? I'm not. CFPB caused [52:10] 350 billion dollars of added costs on consumers. Mr. Vogt, you are asking to reduce the CFPB's [52:17] workforce to just one-third of its 2025 level, which means that the department that oversees the banks [52:24] and other financial companies that hold trillions of dollars in mortgage, auto, credit card, and student [52:30] loan debt would drop from 500 employees to just 77. And the enforcement department would only have 50 [52:38] workers. What do you have to say to the millions of service members, veterans, older adults, and students [52:45] that are seeing costs rise and now, because of your unprecedented rollback of consumer protection staff, [52:52] have nobody at the agency that is actually policing those big corporations that are scamming consumers? [52:59] The general lady's time has expired. We are policing it. And in fact, we do not believe that an agency that [53:03] increased the cost on the American people should not have oversight. That's why we've reined it in. [53:07] It is clear to me that you are just protecting those biggest corporations, Mr. Vogt, and you should [53:14] be ashamed of that. I represent the cities of Altadena and Pasadena and Southern California that [53:20] are still living through the aftermath of the Eton Fire that destroyed 6,000 homes last January. For [53:26] tens of thousands of my constituents, the experience looked like this. It was the early hours of the [53:32] morning and they were sleeping peacefully in their homes. Suddenly, they were awoken by loud sirens [53:38] and the smell of smoke as flames surrounded their properties. Their lives flashed before their eyes. [53:44] They frantically gathered their loved ones, their pets, and escaped with simply the clothes [53:49] on their backs. Nineteen of my constituents could not make it out on time, and they tragically lost their [53:55] lives. The trauma that everybody witnessed was harrowing and unspeakable. They saw the places [54:03] that they called home for decades, the lives they built, all of their most treasured belongings [54:07] engulfed in flames. But here we are today, over one year after the Eton and Palisade fires, [54:14] and more than 70 percent of survivors have not yet returned home. Families are depleting their savings, [54:21] delaying life-saving medical care, and many are homeless. Of the 6,000 homes that burned, [54:28] only half have yet to start the rebuilding process at all. This is a crisis, and my constituents need [54:35] assistance now. Luckily, there's a straightforward solution to stopping this suffering, and that is [54:42] finally granting Governor Newsom's federal disaster supplemental funding request to provide an influx [54:49] of capital and resources to my constituents. And that request includes CDBG disaster recovery, or DR, [54:58] which is essential to my constituents' ability to rebuild their homes and lives. But every single day [55:04] that this funding is delayed, recovery becomes more expensive and painful for survivors in my district and [55:11] across this country. So, Director Vogt, I'd like to hear what your plan is to ensure that natural disaster [55:20] survivors receive this federal disaster supplemental funding, whether it's the wildfires in California, [55:27] the hurricanes in North Carolina, or the floods in Texas. For every major disaster of this scale in recent [55:35] history, the federal government has intervened to help survivors. When can my constituents expect this relief? [55:42] A couple points, Congressman. The federal government is intervening. FEMA is funding the cleanup and disaster [55:49] work in your district. And one of the things that we're fighting, quite frankly, is the degree to which the [55:56] state and locality are impacting the ability of permitting for businesses and homes to build back. [56:02] FEMA is the frontline funder for disasters. It's not alternative supplementals. Supplementals are what's [56:10] on top of a FEMA program that right now is in dire straits because of the fact that the Democrats will not [56:16] So, let me, got director of vote. Actually, there has been supplemental disaster funding for every major [56:24] disaster in this country, whether it's a red state or a blue state. And in fact, the permitting process is [56:33] proceeding forward. Let me just say, though, on FEMA, it is the federal government's responsibility to [56:40] provide both immediate and long-term assistance to survivors. And what you're talking about are the [56:46] immediate assistance to the survivors. Natural disasters know no political affiliation, [56:51] and neither should the federal government's response. Yet I'm deeply concerned about recent [56:56] reporting indicating that your administration has rejected disaster aid requests from Democratic-led [57:03] states at a rate higher than any time in FEMA's history. Republican-led states saw 89 percent of their [57:11] requests approved, while Democratic-led states saw a mere 23 percent of their requests approved. And that's, [57:20] there's never been such a sharp partisan disparity in the approval of federal disaster funds since FEMA was [57:28] created in 1979. And actually, it's a staggering disconnect from Trump's first term, where he approved [57:36] 93 percent of the requests from Democratic states and 89 percent from Republican states. So, a director vote, [57:45] yes or no, will you commit to taking immediate steps to reverse this unconscionable pattern? [57:50] No administration has looked more carefully at FEMA dollars and how they're being spent. [57:56] One of the challenges that we face, as I will repeat, we need Democrats to come alongside and [58:01] continue to help us fund the FEMA disaster relief fund. When you vote against DHS spending and vote [58:07] against a bill that the Democratic appropriators had blessed, what you are doing is making sure that we're [58:13] going to have a crisis. Professor Vought, I have another point, which is the best way to prepare [58:19] communities is through BRIC funding, the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities grant program. That's why I was [58:25] alarmed when the administration canceled billions of dollars of BRIC funding. But a federal judge ordered that this [58:33] funding be restored. I urge you to comply with the federal judge's order to restore this program. [58:38] I think the gentleman agreed with you on the BRIC funding. It was not meant to be canceled and it will [58:43] go out the door. [58:43] You must have done a deep dive in your project 2025. And much of what was in there is obviously being [58:54] executed now. But I think it's important to note that the American people are really unhappy with the [59:03] direction that we're moving in, our economy is moving in. In fact, I just saw a Fox News poll that shows [59:09] a record 64% of voters disapprove of President Trump's handling of taxes. And that's up 11% since last year. [59:20] Project 2025, as we all know, defunds programs that save lives and help Americans, hardworking Americans, [59:30] while enriching billionaires. But I want to begin with a very easy yes or no question, Mr. Vought. Do you [59:39] agree that the federal government has the fiduciary responsibility to be good stewards of the American [59:46] taxpayer's dollar? Yes. Okay. And you and I agree with that. And so I want to, given that it's tax day, [59:55] I want to focus a little bit on the IRS. And the budget lab has a great report that I'd like to, [1:00:03] unanimous consent to enter into the record. Without objection. Thank you, Chairman. And it's entitled, [1:00:08] A weakened IRS has substantial consequences. So spending on the IRS has decreased, obviously, [1:00:18] in this administration. And the what perplexes me is that the IRS actually has a return on investment. [1:00:27] When we invest in the IRS, we're able to invest in fighting tax fraud, and we're able to bring in [1:00:35] revenue. The IRS reductions from funding and layoffs have resulted in that that are a result of project [1:00:43] 2025. And the one big so called one big beautiful bill have resulted in about $861 billion in decreased [1:00:54] revenue. The layoffs from Doge have likely resulted in almost $600 billion reductions in revenue. [1:01:05] And if DHS gets access to IRS data, that will cost an additional $300 billion in revenue. And we know [1:01:19] that the programs that hardworking Americans depend on need revenue. And so I need to ask you, Mr. Vo, [1:01:29] what is the logic behind defunding an agency that actually has a return on investment? [1:01:37] The logic is that the Biden administration had increased the IRS to such a degree that it was [1:01:43] intrusive on small businesses and people across the country. And I don't want to live in a country in [1:01:48] which the IRS is auditing every American in the country because they've filed a tax return. [1:01:53] So so you are okay with tax fraud? Certainly not. Okay, I don't assume that the American people are [1:02:00] doing tax fraud when they file their taxes. Okay, well, you and I agree on that. We all file our taxes. [1:02:06] We pay heavily into the tax system. But billionaires getting massive tax breaks. Really, that's where we [1:02:14] are seeing instances of fraud. But they are being let off the hook. I just don't understand why we [1:02:22] would eliminate employees who are helping us find fraud and recoup our investment. We're just trying [1:02:29] to get back to historic levels of IRS. And in fact, we actually increase taxpayer services. [1:02:34] You know, Mr. Vo, I will tell you, as a member of Congress, one of the biggest complaints I get from [1:02:39] constituents is they can't talk to a person at the IRS anymore. And the wait times are incredible. So [1:02:47] we I I prefer I prefer a system that actually works. And that is a return on the investment. And [1:02:55] and I will tell you the what is alarming about the budget are the cuts to housing, the cuts to education, [1:03:02] the cuts to health care. Can you answer? Can you let us know? There are reports that the [1:03:09] defense appropriation supplemental will cost about $100 billion. What what are you all asking for in [1:03:17] order to fund the war in Iran? How much will you be asking? We're not ready to come to you with a [1:03:23] request. We're still working on it. We're working through to figure out what's needed in this fiscal [1:03:28] year versus next fiscal year. Do you have a ballpark? I don't have a ballpark. Will it be more than 50 [1:03:33] billion? I don't have a ballpark for you. Okay. Well, I appreciate that. I know the American public is eager [1:03:39] to know how much this war is costing them, especially at the expense of programs that [1:03:45] make their lives easier. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank the gentle lady. Thank you, Mr. [1:03:48] Chairman. I've said for a long time that the budget is our ultimate policy document. Yeah, [1:03:53] you can talk about what you value. But the budget is literally when you put your money where your mouth [1:03:58] is. And I'm shocked by Trump's budget proposal by its sheer cruelty by its fiscal irresponsibility. And [1:04:06] you can do the magic math, but the actual math is that there's $4.5 trillion in revenue cuts, the [1:04:13] money we take in, but only $1.1 trillion in spending cuts. That gives you $3.4 trillion right [1:04:21] off the bat and an increase to the debt and deficit of this country. But if you add in the increased [1:04:26] debt servicing, that is estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to go up to $4.7 trillion in debt. [1:04:32] But take away the cruelty and the irresponsibility. I think right now what I'm so offended by is the [1:04:37] indifference to how American families are struggling right now in Donald Trump's economy. [1:04:43] Yesterday, just yesterday, your Department of Labor released its monthly price tracking report. [1:04:47] Energy prices, according to your numbers, are up nearly 11% last month. Gas went up over 21%. Home [1:04:53] energy went up over 30%. We've talked about some of these cuts. Right now, against this backdrop, [1:05:00] there are 6 million Americans, including 150,000 Kentuckians, who rely on the low-income home energy [1:05:06] assistance program to heat and cool their homes during the hottest and coldest months of the year. [1:05:11] You admitted earlier to zeroing out that program, but you said it was because of fraud. [1:05:17] Do you believe that the 150,000 Kentuckians, the seniors who rely on this program to heat their homes [1:05:22] in the winter, are all committing fraud? I believe that there have been numerous government studies and [1:05:28] nonprofit studies have said this is a fraudulent program. I'm going to reclaim my time here, [1:05:32] because what you told me is you said just a second ago, I don't assume the American [1:05:37] people engage in tax fraud, but I guess you assume every senior in Kentucky is engaging fraud because [1:05:42] they want to have a cool home in the summer and a warm home in the winter. But it's not just energy [1:05:46] prices that are up. Everything at the grocery store is more expensive. Come to the Kroger on Bardstown [1:05:50] Road with me in Louisville, Kentucky. You'll see it for yourself. And the Iran war is only going to make [1:05:55] that worse because of the shocks to fertilizer and fuel costs. A lot of our neighbors, they rely on a [1:06:01] little bit of extra help, especially when they can't afford their groceries. Look at the wildly [1:06:06] successful nutrition program for women, infants and children known as WIC. It helps pregnant, [1:06:11] breastfeeding and postpartum women feed themselves and their kids when they need it most. [1:06:15] After Republicans enacted the deepest cuts in our country's history to food benefits and more and more [1:06:21] families are struggling right now to do the president's policy. Your budget cuts breastfeeding [1:06:26] mom's fruit and vegetable benefit from $54 to $13 a month. Is that correct? We fully fund the WIC [1:06:33] program. No, you don't. Here it is right here on page 164 in the second column of your budget. I'm [1:06:37] talking right now. If you want to talk, you can run for Congress. On page 165 in the first column, [1:06:42] it cuts it. It cuts it from $54 to $13 a month. And it looks like you're not stopping there. You're [1:06:47] coming for the roof over people's heads too. Look at HUD's continuum of care program. It keeps [1:06:51] 950 Kentuckians in stable long-term housing. That includes 886 people with disabilities. It includes [1:06:59] 383 survivors of domestic violence. More than half of those housed in Kentucky right now are families [1:07:05] with kids. This budget zeroes out that program, doesn't it? You know what's interesting about... Yes, [1:07:10] it does. I'll just... No, I reclaim my time. I reclaim my time, Mr. Chairman. Right now, [1:07:15] it does. It's right here on table 13. It zeroes it out in your budget. I could go on and on in listing [1:07:20] the moral crimes in this budget, but I only have five minutes. This budget cuts the SBA program for [1:07:25] minority and women-owned business. It cuts programs for health and safety programs for coal miners. It [1:07:30] cuts funding for daycare for working parents. Across the board, it slashes the parts of government [1:07:35] that help working people and replaces them with more war and more ICE abuses. Even with all of these cuts, [1:07:42] just like your budget did last year, when it cuts a trillion from health care to pay for tax cuts for [1:07:46] the rich, it still manages to blow up the debt and the deficit by trillions. But the budget isn't [1:07:52] just a policy document, it's a moral document. Like you, Director Vaught, I'm a Christian. I won't [1:07:57] question your faith. I won't question the President's faith, despite what he did depicting himself as [1:08:00] Jesus and his attacks on the Pope. But I grew up in a family where we read Matthew 25. A couple of Sundays [1:08:06] ago on March 22nd, my twins were confirmed in our Presbyterian church and they chose to be baptized. [1:08:11] We're a Matthew 25 church. Matthew 25, 31, the parable of the sheep and the goats. It says, [1:08:16] when I was thirsty, you gave me drink. When I was hungry, you fed me. When I was without clothes, [1:08:21] you closed me. When I was a stranger, you welcomed me. When I was in prison, you visited me. And of [1:08:25] course, it ends with, for the least of these, you did for me as well. This budget sees the hungry, [1:08:34] it sees the homeless, it sees the vulnerable, and it turns away. That is not what we should be doing. [1:08:42] And it's why I cannot support it. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. [1:08:46] For holding this much needed oversight hearing. Director, I'm sure you know you've got a lot of [1:08:51] nicknames, things like Grim Reaper, but I'm not here to call you names. I am here to call you out [1:08:57] on the pain that you've inflicted on Rhode Islanders and Americans who are fed up. And I want to get to the [1:09:03] point. So I'll keep things simple. I've got a few yes or no questions. Should Americans have access [1:09:10] to medical care? Yes or no? Yes. Well, that's great that we're in agreement. Because if you [1:09:16] cared about the sick, you wouldn't be forcing states to make impossible decisions about who [1:09:22] will feel the pain of Trump and Republicans cruel health care cuts from that big ugly law. So bad that [1:09:28] you keep renaming it. You've rebranded it about three times now. Kids with disabilities, cancer [1:09:35] patients, seniors. Who do you think should feel the pain? You have forced Rhode Island to make [1:09:41] impossible decisions about who should suffer. You want us to believe that we can't afford to help [1:09:47] buy sick constituents. But you claim a smart budgeting to request $1.5 trillion in defense [1:09:53] funding for a department that already has more money than they know what to do with to fight illegal wars. [1:09:59] I've got another question for you. Should hungry children be fed? Yes or no? Yes, and they are. [1:10:05] Look, I would believe you if your shutdown strategy didn't put 144,000 Rhode Islanders at risk of going [1:10:13] hungry. Our shutdown strategy? Yes, your shutdown. Really? Yes, because, sir. Who's the one who voted [1:10:19] against those bills? Sir, you have had a position where you have seen shutdowns as ways to break [1:10:26] our federal workers as ways to hurt the American people. I'm reclaiming my time. I'm reclaiming my [1:10:32] time, sir, with $6 a day too generous for you. Look, from Woonsocket to Providence, in the first [1:10:38] congressional district of Rhode Island, I visited food banks and I've seen the struggle to keep up [1:10:43] with rising demand from hungry Rhode Islanders. And that's thanks to your cruelty. Look, I have seen your [1:10:51] actions and I want you to take time with this particular question because you brought up it [1:10:58] being our shutdown. Do you think a lot of good comes from government shutdowns? Yes or no? No. Well, [1:11:06] do you disagree with President Trump then? Because that's a quote from President Trump. You don't care [1:11:12] about the 1.4 million Americans who missed a paycheck during Trump's shutdown last year. You want public [1:11:18] servants, as you've said, to be viewed as villains from air traffic controllers to naval officers to VA [1:11:25] employees. I heard constituents harmed by your shutdown. There is nothing good about that. It's [1:11:31] damaging to real people, sir. You caused it. You voted for it. Look, you were the you were the person that [1:11:37] with all of your votes. Mr. Vote, just like you did with Doge, you think that good things come from [1:11:41] breaking people. You have said it's fine to break things and pick up the pieces later. I didn't make up [1:11:47] these words. Those are your words. That has no regard to Rhode Islanders who are still trying to [1:11:51] put their lives together. People around this country who are still trying to put their lives together. [1:11:55] If you don't know your own words, how can you show up here to speak? Look, as I'm going to wrap up, [1:12:00] because I don't want to afford you more time to tell more lies to the American people. [1:12:05] You don't get to override Congress because you disagree with how funds are spent. You don't get to [1:12:09] force government shutdowns to break people. Your decisions have done nothing but hurt my constituents. [1:12:16] They don't need Washington bureaucrats like you making funding decisions that upend their lives. [1:12:20] And you've said a lot of things today. I've watched some of your participation from my office. I saw [1:12:25] some of it here. And your actions reveal the truth despite your words. When given the choice, [1:12:31] you have chosen cruelty and chaos over billionaires over and over and over again. Billionaires, cruelty, [1:12:41] chaos. You attacked healthcare. You put food for hungry kids at risk. You ignored Congress. [1:12:47] You jacked up prices. The American people are fed up. Read every poll. And you embrace shutdowns that [1:12:53] hurt working people. So at its core, sir, I don't think you value the American people. Your disregard [1:12:59] for their lives is creating a great amount of pain. And as you're hearing from our side, our constituents [1:13:08] are paying the price. Yet you put forward a budget that grows but cuts again at the things that help [1:13:17] the American people. I hope you have time to reflect on that and the pain that you're inflicting [1:13:23] on constituents around this country. I yield back. [1:13:25] The gentleman yields, I would yield my- [1:13:29] Director Vogt, I'm glad that you are finally here to testify before this committee. [1:13:33] A budget is a statement of our priorities. Throughout your tenure at OMB, [1:13:38] you've made the Trump administration's priorities clear. Terrorizing federal employees, [1:13:43] ripping healthcare away from millions of Americans. We see many of those in the halls of Congress today [1:13:48] lobbying and illegally withholding money allocated by Congress. This is indeed unacceptable. The American [1:13:54] people deserve better from you and from the budget. I'm extremely concerned by this year's budget [1:13:59] treatment of behavioral health infrastructure and resources. Let me begin with a focus on SAMHSA, [1:14:05] a small but mighty agency whose impact is felt in every community. SAMHSA's mission is to lead efforts [1:14:11] to promote mental health, prevent substance misuse, and provide treatments and support to foster recovery [1:14:17] while ensuring access and better outcomes for all. It serves those of us who are most in need. [1:14:22] It is not an exaggeration to say that SAMHSA's public servants prevent overdoses and suicides, [1:14:28] thereby saving lives. This budget and the recent addition actions of the Trump administration [1:14:34] are betraying the Americans who rely on SAMHSA for behavioral health treatment and support. [1:14:39] So Director Vogt, under this budget, as part of an HHS reorganization, would SAMHSA be [1:14:45] relegated under the so-called Administration for a Healthy America AHA? Is that yes or no? [1:14:51] We engage in a number of reorganization. I'd have to check as to where it's residing, but we endorse [1:14:58] the mission of SAMHSA in terms of substance abuse prevention and mental health. We have a block grant [1:15:04] in which we adequately find- I'll clearly claim my time because I don't have much time here to ask [1:15:08] questions. But if you could get back to us, whether that's yes or no, your budget document is [1:15:17] certainly indicating that it would be restructured under AHA. The whole reason Congress created SAMHSA [1:15:24] as an agency that reports directly to the HHS secretary was to ensure that behavioral health [1:15:30] was prioritized despite the long-standing stigma surrounding it. Instead, AHA would take us back [1:15:36] to the time when behavioral health is buried beneath bureaucracy and deprioritized. In January, [1:15:42] the Trump administration abruptly canceled $2 billion of mental health and addiction grants at SAMHSA. [1:15:48] I was proud to lead the groundswell of opposition. Within hours, we gained bipartisan signatures, [1:15:54] over 100 opposing these cuts, and delivered them over to the administration. And their announced [1:16:01] reversal was a victory for anyone who cares about addressing mental health and addiction. So again, [1:16:06] yes or no? Director Vogt, did you sign off on the cancellation of more than $2 billion [1:16:10] dollars with that effort at SAMHSA with their grants? [1:16:14] I can't recall the extent to which what you're referring to. I mean, we are constantly dealing [1:16:20] with an interagency review on how we're making funding. Sometimes things get leaked to the press [1:16:26] before they're final, and I don't know what you're referring to beyond that. [1:16:29] This was not leaked to the press. Grant award recipients were notified. They called our office and [1:16:34] several other offices on the Hill on both sides of the political fence in both houses. So a yes or no, [1:16:40] back to the committee would be appreciated. These cuts should never have been considered in the [1:16:44] first place. And I sincerely hope there are no further attempts to ignore direction from Congress [1:16:49] and deny people access to these critical life-saving services. I'd like to focus on another area where [1:16:54] the administration has failed to deliver for the American people. In 2024, the president claimed that [1:17:00] Americans would see their energy bills cut in half during the first year of his administration. [1:17:04] Director Vogt, do you know what your home energy bills look like over the last month? And if so, [1:17:09] were they cut in half over the past year? Look, I'm not going to get into what my home [1:17:14] energy bills are. I would think that the American people know that this administration is doing [1:17:19] everything we can to lower energy prices. And we are going to continue to do that. Our party, [1:17:24] Congressman, is the party that actually wants energy and not to have renewable energy [1:17:29] subsidies that lead to extremely high energy bills in blue states. Let me reclaim my time, [1:17:34] because I was looking for- That's the kind of thing that comes from bad energy policies in the state. [1:17:43] Well, I disagree with you. I mean, there was a way to provide for the cleanest, most efficient, [1:17:48] and cheapest power in the grid, in the pool. So we failed to do that. My constituents are painfully [1:17:54] aware of their energy costs. And in fact, many of them have seen their bills go up under this [1:17:59] administration. They're not alone. The average American paid $123 more in electricity costs in [1:18:05] 2025 compared to 2024. And that trend is expected to get worse in the years ahead. And as the president [1:18:12] wages in a legal war with Iran, the average price of a gallon of gasoline has increased by over a dollar [1:18:17] in just six weeks. That's more pain at the pump on top of rising electric and heating bills. [1:18:22] Meanwhile, your budget proposed the elimination of $4 billion worth of funding for the low-income home [1:18:28] energy assistance program, or LIHEAP, that puts more than six million households at risk. The budget [1:18:34] says LIHEAP dollars aren't needed because lower energy costs prices are on the way. Well, we've heard [1:18:39] that before from this president, and all the evidence points to this being yet another broken promise [1:18:44] waiting to happen. Americans are already struggling because of the rash of the actions of this [1:18:48] administration. This budget will only make those struggles worse. So I look forward to getting back to [1:18:54] Congress with the answers to my question. [1:18:56] Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Mr. OMB Director. I didn't know how shy you were [1:19:01] until the last 15 months when you weren't before our committee, but do appreciate you taking the time [1:19:06] today. You know how bad this economy is when we hear Joe Biden being invoked, we hear trans people [1:19:14] being invoked. I was waiting for Jimmy Carter to be blamed next, but apparently we didn't get quite there. [1:19:21] Let me just do a reset and present to you a set of facts, a set of data. Right now, according to opinion [1:19:31] polls, the approval of the economy of the American people is at its lowest level since 2008, the Great [1:19:41] Recession 29%. An average of the last three polls shows 30% approval disapproval over approval of this [1:19:51] administration's handling of the economy more than two to one disapproval over approval. The Michigan consumer data, [1:20:01] consumer confidence level, the lowest level ever recorded, even lower during COVID, even lower during [1:20:11] the Great Recession or even lower than during the Great Recession. If you look at the job creation over [1:20:20] the last 15 months, there's one thing missing, and that's job creation. We have been in a jobless economy [1:20:28] over the last 15 months. Inflation, which actually, even though there's no question, we had an inflation [1:20:36] crisis, not just in the United States, but all throughout the world after the COVID pandemic in 2022, [1:20:45] after the pandemic had ended, every single month in 2024, inflation dropped over the preceding month. [1:20:54] What happened around April of last year, Liberation Day? Inflation was liberated. You saw inflation [1:21:02] begin to increase, and every single month, we've seen inflation increase. And gas prices. Yesterday, [1:21:09] I was in Northeast Philly, where I'm from and where I live, a working class part of the city of [1:21:16] Philadelphia was in front of the gas station. The gas at that particular location was 411, which is [1:21:23] slightly lower than the average nationally and in the United States of about 415 a gallon. [1:21:33] Six weeks ago, that same gas station was under $3 a gallon. We've seen over the last month, the largest [1:21:40] increase in gas prices in my lifetime, in the lifetime of most people here. What's different about this [1:21:51] economy? Unlike the inflation crisis after the pandemic, unlike the Great Recession, unlike the [1:21:59] recession of 2001, unlike the recession of 1992, the economic downturn that we're experiencing, [1:22:07] no jobs, record inflation, gas prices through the roof, consumer confidence plummeting, [1:22:13] all of this is directly related to the policies of the Trump administration that you carry out, Mr. [1:22:20] vote. None of those previous examples that I cited, none of them could be directly attributed to the [1:22:30] policies of the president. At that time, we can debate about certain things that did influence them, [1:22:37] particularly going in to the 08 recession. But with this president, the change is so abrupt. [1:22:45] The fact inflation was dropping month over month, the fact that we had an incredible jobs economy [1:22:52] until it was lost a year and a half ago. You know, I'm from Pennsylvania, the biggest battleground [1:22:58] state in the nation, also the nation's birthplace, which we're making a big to do about this year in [1:23:05] 2026 and celebrating our semi-quincentennial. But Pennsylvania is really known over the last decade [1:23:11] in our politics as the nation's biggest battleground state. So as a result, basically every day in 2024, [1:23:19] in the fall, we had either Donald Trump or the Democratic nominee Kamala Harris in our state. [1:23:27] Donald Trump had, I have to say, a brilliant campaign slogan said, your prices are too high. [1:23:34] I will lower them. And I quote him, I will lower them on day one. Well, here we are about day 450. [1:23:44] He hasn't lowered anything. The only thing he's lowered is his approval rating on the economy. [1:23:50] He has lowered that. Donald Trump and this administration have failed miserably on this [1:23:59] economy. They failed to bring prices down. And in fact, they made the situation worse. [1:24:06] With that, we have a lot of questions on this side since it's been 15 months. You're the first OMB [1:24:11] director ever to not appear before this committee last year. I appreciate you at least today taking the [1:24:17] time. We have a lot of questions. And I certainly hope after today, if we send to you questions in [1:24:23] writing, that you would respond finally, as you've ignored all of our previous requests. It's a matter [1:24:30] of basic respect for the Congress of the United States and for this committee. And with that, I yield back. [1:24:36] Mr. Chairman, I want to, there are a lot of areas I would like to get to, but between me and my [1:24:41] colleagues, at least on this side of the dais, I think we'll get to them all. [1:24:44] Let me start by reminding people back nine months ago, what President Trump called at the time, [1:24:52] though he wants to rebrand it and never talks about it now, his one big, beautiful bill, though it has [1:24:58] been known by many other names. That piece of legislation, despite your rhetoric about this [1:25:06] budget committee succeeding on deficit and debt, according to the Congressional Budget Office, [1:25:12] as well as other nonpartisan groups, both left of center and right of center, have said that single [1:25:20] piece of legislation adds more to our deficit and debt than any other piece of legislation passed by [1:25:27] Congress in American history. In addition to the over $4 trillion it adds for our national debt, [1:25:37] it eliminates health care coverage for more than 15 million Americans, according to the CBO. [1:25:45] The Kaiser Family Foundation says it's actually more than 17 million Americans [1:25:50] who will lose their health care. Are they really all according to you? [1:25:53] Really? You're going to sit here with a straight face and say they're all illegals, [1:25:58] they're all defrauding the system? That's actually your position? [1:26:00] Yes, with regard to the the people that have lost that. [1:26:05] I mean, that's laugh, that's laughable. I'm sorry, I'll give you a chance to respond. [1:26:08] You have a number of issues with regard to your comments there. [1:26:12] Wait, wait, wait, let me just. Number one. [1:26:14] Sorry, wait, wait. Reclaiming my time, I just want to be clear. I'm citing, we acknowledge, [1:26:18] the CBO figure, that's where I'm getting the 15 million from, and the Kaiser Family Foundation says 17 million. [1:26:25] You're saying none of them are legitimately on this, even though we had one of them actually [1:26:31] testify before us. I didn't say all of them are illegals. I said there's also the benefit [1:26:35] of people returning to the workforce because they are able-bodied individuals, or they should not [1:26:40] have been on the system regardless because of the inability to address fraud in the aftermath of. [1:26:46] Okay, so they're all either illegals or defrauding the system. [1:26:50] Well, we certainly, that's certainly not a provocative statement that we have fraud all over the country, [1:26:54] is it, Mr. Rankin? Why are, I imagine there are fraud in all sorts of private and public sector [1:27:01] areas, but the idea that 15 million Americans are about to lose their health care, the single biggest [1:27:07] loss of health care in American history, mind you, not even during the Great Depression, [1:27:11] do 15 million Americans lose their health care coverage. The idea that all of those people who are [1:27:18] about to lose their health care are defrauding the system or are illegal immigrants, that is not [1:27:25] supported by any facts whatsoever. We're not working and now, are now working and getting the benefit [1:27:30] of a job with employer-sponsored health care coverage. Look, that, these, these assessments [1:27:36] by CBO and others are often very static. I mean, it's right-of-center groups as well. It's, well, [1:27:43] reclaim my time. I only have a few minutes, so excuse me. But it's not just CBO. I mean, right-of-center groups, [1:27:49] left-of-center groups, non-partisan groups. You're saying they're, they're all wrong. I am saying that the [1:27:55] budget community typically relies on static thinking, static scoring, current law baselines, [1:28:02] and so you don't get an accurate picture of the extent to which the reforms that are being made are [1:28:08] going to have a dynamic impact with better programs, more health care, for instance, 50 billion dollars. [1:28:13] Well, let me, before you get to the friends, I only have a couple minutes, so let me actually [1:28:17] transition to my next, uh, subject because I think I'll only have time now for this. The president [1:28:23] recently said, I mean, he was talking about the record increase in gas prices thanks to him [1:28:28] and his war of choice in Iran, but he, he diverted in a spontaneous, uh, he's speaking extemporaneously [1:28:36] in the White House just a few days ago. He said, and I quote, the United States can't take care of daycare [1:28:42] that has to be up to a state. He then added Medicaid, Medicare, all these individual things. [1:28:51] They can do it on a state basis. You can't do it on federal. So I'm just curious from your perspective [1:28:58] at OMB, have you taken any actions to turn Medicare back to the states? No, and the president doesn't [1:29:05] want to do that with regard to these. Well, he said it. I mean, he said it. So you're disagreeing with [1:29:10] what the president said. No, I'm saying that the president meant is he's talking about fraud in [1:29:14] these programs. He's that's not, he didn't mention, excuse me, reclaim my time. Nowhere, [1:29:18] I have the full statement in front of me. Nowhere in front of me is the word fraud presented. What [1:29:22] he was talking about, he later at a different part said, we have to pay more for wars and instead we [1:29:29] can't afford Medicaid, Medicare, childcare, things like that. And looking at the budget proposal, this is [1:29:35] why I raise it. $442 billion, correct me if I'm wrong, $442 billion increase in defense. That's [1:29:45] what you're asking for? About a 42% increase? Is that right? Correct. For many paradigm shifting [1:29:52] investments that we need this- A 42% increase on what was already a record high for defense. [1:29:58] And look, I serve as part of our U.S. delegation to the NATO parliament. I am no pacifist. I believe in a [1:30:05] strong national defense. I believe the United States. I believe the world is at its best when [1:30:09] the United States is the strongest military. The idea that we're going to pay for a 42% increase [1:30:17] in this military, in this Department of Defense, and at the same time cut Medicaid, Medicare, not pay [1:30:24] for childcare, all of these things that the American people need in the case of Medicare have paid into, [1:30:31] that is a reflection of priorities that are out of whack. And I see I've gone over my time. I [1:30:38] appreciate your indulgence. So with that, I'll bet. Your direction, Mr. Vogt, at the National Institutes of [1:30:43] Health, last year, grants for Alzheimer's and aging research were cut almost 50%. Mental health, 47%. [1:30:52] New grants for cancer research, 23%. And as I read the budget that you're here presenting today, the Trump [1:30:59] regime's response is that medical research has not yet been cut sufficiently. Doesn't your budget [1:31:04] propose another 12% cut at the National Institutes of Health? Most of what you said is untrue. NIH was [1:31:12] not cut at all last year. We proposed a series of reforms to lower the cost. We continue, although not [1:31:19] as much to lower the cost this year. Reclaiming my time, my question to you is don't you propose to cut the [1:31:23] National Institutes of Health by another 12%. We propose to have a cut to the National [1:31:28] Institute of Health. Thank you, sir. Reclaiming my time. That goes after specific programs. Yes, [1:31:33] sir. Thank you. Reclaiming my time. And institutes like the Minority Health Disparity [1:31:36] Institute. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will please yield. He can filibuster when [1:31:42] he's in the Senate. What we do know as far as the truth is that there were fewer grants for new cases last [1:31:49] year at NIH than at any time in the last 30 years. Is it your feeling in proposing further cuts at NIH [1:31:59] that there are just not enough worthwhile projects out there or that we cannot afford to invest more [1:32:06] in doing something about Alzheimer's, cancer, Parkinson's, HIV, other dread concerns? There are [1:32:13] many worthy health investments out there. I think post-COVID for an institution that contributed to the [1:32:17] pandemic itself with the funding of gain-of-function research to give that institute 42 trillion dollars, [1:32:23] which is more than it got under the the COVID pandemic. The kinds of things is very generous. [1:32:28] The kinds of things that we're trying to do with the National Institute of Health. Indirect cost rates. [1:32:33] We don't think when Bill Gates gives 10% for parkings and administrative costs and buildings, [1:32:39] that that should go, the gentleman reclaims his time. After giving last year fewer grants at any [1:32:44] time in the last 30 years, you are proposing further cuts there. And of course, the cuts are not only to [1:32:51] medical research, but is it correct that in your budget you would cut the National Science Foundation, [1:32:57] which has in the past provided grants that helped on artificial intelligence, on laser eye surgery, [1:33:03] on MRI technology, among others, that you propose to cut it by 55 percent? We have a sizable cut to [1:33:12] National Science Foundation. Over half of the funding. But it will not impact our investments on [1:33:16] artificial intelligence, quantum physics. Well, that's good to know because you may be the only person along [1:33:21] with President Trump who believe that. A reading from the director of a consortium of research [1:33:26] universities, he says your budget cuts are the equivalent of working in a company that feels like [1:33:31] it's on the verge of bankruptcy. Another one says slow scientific progress threatening the nation's [1:33:37] position in the world economy. And that's one of my concerns because when you eliminate these research [1:33:43] budgets, you impact long-term economic growth. Are you aware that one international organization [1:33:49] has recently said already the United States has fallen behind China when it comes to research? [1:33:54] We have no doubt in our mind that we are going to still be the leading [1:33:59] innovator funder of research both private and public. Our view is that we want to make sure [1:34:07] that there's a dollar that's actually well spent on research. Thank you very much. I'll accept that [1:34:12] as you're disagreeing with the international organization that says we've already fallen behind China. [1:34:17] Do you agree that the impact of federal research dollars helps to stimulate private investment? In fact, [1:34:24] one estimate is every federal dollar generating eight times as much in private investment on research. [1:34:31] Mr. Congressman, I don't think the Fogarty International Center, which is at the NIH, should spend [1:34:36] $224,000 for a survey on how Buddhism creates HIV stigma in Thailand. That's what your hard-earned tax [1:34:43] dollars is going to fund under the guise of research investment. I don't think $20,000 should go to a [1:34:49] value. Thank you. It's fine that you go through and eliminate any project like that, but that doesn't [1:34:56] justify providing the fewest number of grants for these key dread diseases in 30 years. I want to ask [1:35:02] you about the comment that was referred to by President Trump about the fact that we can't afford [1:35:10] daycare at the federal level. Of course, your budget provides no increase in funding for child care, [1:35:15] does it? We flat fund child care, which you would not get from the question. And you also eliminate the [1:35:20] program, do you not, that provides assistance for some people with heating and air conditioning, [1:35:26] the LIHEAP program. You terminate that entirely. It is a historically fraudulent program. Do you [1:35:32] terminate it entirely or not? We do not have funding for LIHEAP because we believe in the moment where we [1:35:38] are fighting fraud. Unfortunately, of all the many things the president says he wants to cut, you have not [1:35:43] gotten to Medicare in this budget yet. I guess that will be the next one. We don't think LIHEAP funds. [1:35:49] That's coming up next is Medicare because, as the president said, that's a state function. Well, [1:35:54] many of us believe it's a vital program to protect the health of our people. We don't want to see what [1:36:00] happened to it, that what happened to Medicaid already and to the Affordable Care Act happens to [1:36:06] Medicare, and that's very much what's at stake here. I yield back. Can I address that, Mr. Chairman? [1:36:12] Uh, 30 seconds. We do not believe that LIHEAP should go to incarcerated individuals and dead [1:36:19] people. It is a notoriously fraudulent program by the same experts that the ranking member continues [1:36:25] to cite on a number of other issues. Well, I'm sure the dead people argument applies just about as much [1:36:29] as it did to President Trump's claim that people that were 350 years old were getting social security. [1:36:35] It's all phony. Gentlemen, my friend from Texas, time has expired. You outlined the Biden administration. [1:36:43] I want to reiterate some of the things that the ranking members said, including out of 48 months [1:36:49] in the Biden administration, 47 of those had job growth. The only month that there was a job lost [1:36:56] was the month that Trump had come in and actually was president for a significant part of that month. [1:37:02] Um, on average monthly gain in jobs, about 300,000 over, over the Biden administration. And that, um, [1:37:12] compares to five months of job loss already run up by this administration, five months of job loss, [1:37:18] and an aggregate total, it doesn't even amount to one month's, uh, average month of job growth in the [1:37:25] Biden administration. I heard the chairman mention bailing out pension funds. I think he's referring to the [1:37:31] fact that in the American rescue plan, we saved a million people's pensions. Uh, they were losing [1:37:37] their pensions, not, wasn't their fault, but they were about to lose their pensions. And we saved those [1:37:42] pension plans, uh, and pensions, uh, in the American rescue plan act. And I think that was a good thing. [1:37:48] If you ask those who are about to retire, uh, whether they thought it was a good thing, I think most would, [1:37:54] would agree on inflation, the ranking member pointed out that we had global inflation on, on, on, [1:38:00] under Biden, the American rescue plan act and the other spending, I think most experts said, [1:38:05] added a little bit of marginal inflation, but the spending also included in the American rescue plan [1:38:11] act for, um, families of four about $5,000 in stimulus checks, $6,000 in child tax credits, [1:38:20] many received enhanced SNAP benefits and lower Obamacare premiums. And the question of whether [1:38:26] it worked, if you looked at the end of the year, credit card delinquencies were the lowest in 30 years, [1:38:32] child poverty dropped 40%. So I think it worked and inflation under Trump, as the ranking members [1:38:39] pointed out specific policies like tariffs, inflation, and the war have added to inflation. As far as 15 [1:38:48] million losing their health care, uh, is a good thing because they might be getting jobs. All of [1:38:53] the information that we've received from, uh, states that have imposed work requirements on Medicaid and [1:38:59] SNAP have found virtually no increase in jobs. So if you have, um, um, Mr. Vote, uh, any evidence that [1:39:08] people will get jobs as a result of that other than just people losing their health care would like to see it. [1:39:14] Now, and the CBO estimates that that big, you said the bill had a lot of different names, [1:39:20] big ugly bill is one of the names we like to call it, uh, with interest, that's going to add about [1:39:26] $4 trillion to the, to the debt. What, uh, what is, what is your estimate of the damage done to the [1:39:33] fiscal situation by that bill? It will reduce the deficit by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years, [1:39:40] if you account for the right baseline, Congressman. Okay. So everybody thinks it's going to add about [1:39:45] $4 trillion to the debt and you think it's going to, um, save money. Uh, Eisenhower was the last, [1:39:51] um, um, um, Republican president to leave to Democrats a lower deficit measured by a percentage [1:39:58] of GDP, which is a normal measurement, uh, a lower deficit than they, they inherited. Uh, [1:40:05] does this administration plan to leave a lower deficit than the one they, um, inherited? And if so, [1:40:12] are tax increases part of that plan? The fiscal situation was very steep when we inherited, [1:40:18] uh, and what we had inherited from the Biden administration, we're doing everything we [1:40:22] possibly can. I think the things that we did this year collectively with the Congress, [1:40:27] as I've said, is the end of fiscal futility for 20, 30 years. And you all know that I'm a budget, [1:40:32] uh, person, uh, worked on the budget committee as a staffer, uh, for members. I know this place. [1:40:37] Well, uh, there was no success. A lot of people talked about the issue. It's a simple question. [1:40:42] Do you plan to leave a better, do you plan to leave a better deficit than you inherited? [1:40:46] This is intentionally a discretionary budget proposal. Uh, we don't give you what our deficits [1:40:51] long-term are. Um, uh, let me, let me ask, let me ask, let me ask, let me ask, let me ask, [1:40:54] trying to make progress every year. Let me ask another question. Uh, what does the budget assume for [1:40:58] the future of the Department of Education, especially the Office of Civil Rights, if Congress fails to vote [1:41:04] to abolish the Department? Well, as you know, in this budget, we both reflect, uh, the fact that [1:41:09] we're trying to close the Department of Education, but that substantial resources will continue to [1:41:14] flow to communities for education. Uh, there's only a 2% reduction, uh, in this budget for that [1:41:20] particular Department. And what's interesting about the bill that thankfully you all voted for [1:41:25] is that you, uh, voted to endorse many of the restructurings that we did. You voted to [1:41:32] eliminate USAID. You voted not to have Corporation for Public Broadcasting when you voted for that, [1:41:38] that omnibus bill, those bills that worked its way through. And so our belief is that we make [1:41:43] as progress on the ground with these agencies, Department of Education included, with interagency [1:41:49] agreements to transfer work where we think that can be better done, that we're going to make the case [1:41:54] to Congress in a way that affirms and, and, and, and enacts those, those reforms long-term. [1:41:59] The gentleman's time has expired. You mentioned me, Mr. Scott, the jobs essentially and virtually [1:42:07] were 100% government jobs. I could create as many government jobs as you want if we just spend [1:42:13] a bunch of money. The second piece was the Butch Lewis Act essentially. Look, we had to do something, [1:42:19] you're right, for these retirees, but we needed to do it and fix the structural problem so then we didn't [1:42:25] end up where we, where we were in the first place. And so my criticism is it was a bailout because there, [1:42:31] there weren't policy reforms to prevent us from being back in that. Well, I work with you, I work [1:42:35] with you, I work with you on making some policy changes to make sure it doesn't happen. You got it, [1:42:40] you got it. Thank you. Uh, helmet control act of 1974 says that the executive cannot unilaterally [1:42:46] withhold congressionally appropriated funds without a rescission or deferral request submitted to Congress. [1:42:52] Uh, director has OMB withheld or delayed the obligation of funds appropriated by this Congress [1:42:58] without submitting precision or deferral notices? We have fully complied with the impoundment control act. [1:43:03] As you probably know, we are not fans of the impoundment control act. We think it's unconstitutional. [1:43:07] The president ran against it. Okay. However, we have complied with it. Did you, did you withhold [1:43:13] congressionally appropriated funds without a rescission or deferral request submitted to Congress? [1:43:16] That's yes, right? Not in violation of the impoundment control act. We have. Did you ever submit [1:43:20] done programmatic reviews of various programs across the government? Did you ever submit [1:43:24] rescission or deferral requests to Congress? Have you submitted any? We submitted a rescissions [1:43:28] package last year and actually two. Uh, we continue to do programmatic reviews. To Congress? Of [1:43:35] programs. That is not a withholding under the impoundment control act. Did you submit it to Congress? [1:43:39] We don't need to submit. Okay. You did not. Congressman, if we're, if we're just assessing a program [1:43:43] for waste, fire, and abuse. I understand you don't think you have to, but I'm just trying to establish you did not, [1:43:47] right? You did not. Well, it's, we submitted rescissions bills to Congress last year. Okay. [1:43:53] Um, two of them, but not, not deferral notices that you were withholding. They're not deferrals [1:43:57] under the impoundment control act. Okay. Uh, the, the, the government accountability [1:44:01] office has already found that the administration illegally withheld, you know, the $8 billion in [1:44:06] NIH grants, $7 billion for funding to support, uh, K to 12 public schools nationwide and hundreds of [1:44:12] millions of dollars for headstart programs across the country. Do you dispute GAO's findings? [1:44:17] Yes. GAO is typically wrong. They're very partisan. Uh, they are, are typically on the exact opposite of [1:44:24] wherever the Trump administration is. Unfortunately, I know you all look to them. Uh, they are a branch of [1:44:30] the legislative body. Uh, we have a very different view with regard to, uh, their, the merit of their [1:44:36] opinions. And so it's not surprising me that they have a different view on that. Do you have a legal [1:44:40] opinion on that? We, we defend to the hilt all of our legal decisions. Uh, most of the time with [1:44:46] regard to GAO, we, we don't have to do this. Have you gotten a formal legal opinion on that? [1:44:49] Actually, most of the time we will put out from OMB a defense in response of any of the GAO. Not [1:44:56] always, but we try to be very forward leaning and articulate because we feel like we have the moral [1:45:00] and legal high ground every time we make a decision. I'm sure you feel like you have the moral and legal [1:45:04] high ground. I get that impression. I would just ask, uh, Mr. Mr. Chairman for the record, [1:45:10] that we add, uh, without objection, if, uh, we add, uh, the, the decision from GAO of August 5 and [1:45:17] July 23 on Head Start and NIH impound. Without objection, so we're, um, you know, I, I, I understand [1:45:26] that the GAO's part of the government you don't like. We don't get to decide what parts of the [1:45:30] government we, we follow and we don't. We have, we have laws that are there for a reason. And I guess we, [1:45:35] we should expect that, that, um, that you would abide by those procedures. But, you know, whether it's [1:45:40] tariffs or the war or, um, the way you've manipulated the budget, the administration [1:45:46] just does not want to deal with Congress. And I have to say to my colleagues in general that [1:45:52] we've reached a point where if something's not going well in this administration, the response [1:45:57] is not let's do something different. The response is, well, Biden did it worse. It is absolutely [1:46:03] irrelevant. Joe Biden is gone. You, you guys won that election. We don't dispute the results of [1:46:09] elections. You won the election. Joe Biden's gone. Our job is today. What do we do in 2026 to make [1:46:16] things better? And, um, I don't, this, this budget will not meet that 3% target that we set [1:46:22] without, without aggressive, aggressive, um, growth assumptions, which, which I don't think [1:46:29] we're going to see, but whether, you know, why are we talking about Joe Biden? Joe Biden's been gone [1:46:33] for two years. It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. The other thing I'd suggest is, um, you know, [1:46:40] one of my colleagues, Mr. Smucker, um, said Democrats don't care about fraud. And I, I just want to [1:46:49] just call that out a little bit, because if you and I, if Mr. Smucker and I sat down together, [1:46:54] I think we could have a discussion about fraud. I think we do care about fraud. We want to know [1:46:58] what's real fraud and what's not real fraud, but I ask you not to question my motives. Don't say [1:47:04] that. I will pledge to you that I will, I will bash your policies. I think, I think you guys are [1:47:09] wrong. I think you're wrong, but I don't question your motives. I think everyone in this room is a [1:47:13] patriot that wants to do the right thing for the country. And when we make each other our enemies, [1:47:18] the Democrats versus Republicans, this is the, this is the weakest that we can create, [1:47:23] the weakest situation we can create for this, this country when, when we are really not thinking of [1:47:27] ourselves as colleagues, but as enemies who don't care about stuff. I think that's really something [1:47:33] we should stay away from. And, you know, I think, um, I'm sort of least worried about Mr. Smucker, [1:47:39] because he's a friend, I know him. Um, and I, but I see, I hear this all the time. Let's not question [1:47:44] each other's motives. Um, I think you guys are really wrong on the policy. I don't think that what [1:47:49] you're doing is good for kids, but it doesn't mean I don't think you care about kids. I just think [1:47:53] you're wrong on the policy. And so, um, maybe if we can get away from questioning each other's motives, [1:47:59] we can start to get back to a level of collegiality that maybe we can focus on policies, [1:48:03] but it is, that is 2026 folks. It is not 2023. It's not 2024. Joe Biden doesn't matter. Okay. It's [1:48:10] what, what matters today is what, what's going on today. What is this budget committee's job? [1:48:16] We are not getting to the 3% target we all agreed to a few, a few weeks ago, uh, from the gate. And, um, [1:48:23] I just want to, I say that we have a lot of work to do, but, um, well, the gentleman is making, [1:48:28] you know, some fair and fine remarks and I have the utmost, sorry, we're over time. I do think that [1:48:36] Mr. Smucker's comments were, were intended to be on record, contrasting on record, not on motive. [1:48:45] However that came out, I believe it was about the record, not the motive, but, but I appreciate your [1:48:50] comments. Let's move saying we don't care about something is, is a personal attack ranking member [1:48:57] director. It's good to have you here before the budget committee. Although I agree with the ranking [1:49:01] member, it shouldn't have taken this long. And unfortunately though, that we've seen is that [1:49:06] that delay to me is one of many examples of the broader disregard by this administration [1:49:12] for Congress and for our system of checks and balances. Now, don't get me wrong. Executive [1:49:18] authority exists. We get that, understand that, but it does not extend to the administration [1:49:23] unilaterally withholding funding that's been appropriated by Congress. I'm not just saying [1:49:29] that the law mandates it impoundments occur when the administration refuses to implement federal [1:49:35] expenditures authorized and appropriated by Congress and enacted in law. In fact, there's been 235 years [1:49:42] of constitutional interpretation case law and statute, which have made that clear that once a [1:49:48] law is enacted, the executive branch is not permitted to refuse to execute that law. An impoundment would [1:49:55] basically replace the rule of law with the rule of one person. Article one, section nine of the [1:50:01] constitution clearly gives Congress the power of the person that states that no money shall be drawn from [1:50:08] the treasury, but in consequences of appropriations made by law and the constitution mandates that the [1:50:14] president take care that the laws be faithfully executed. Now, as we heard today, and as you know, [1:50:20] in 1973, President Nixon attempted to impound billions of dollars of enacted clean water appropriations [1:50:27] over the objection of Congress. And as you know, in train v. New York City and train v. the city of New [1:50:33] York, the Supreme Court unanimously disagreed with President Nixon. That decision was even relied upon as [1:50:40] precedent in the court's 98 decision striking down President Clinton's use of a line item veto to block [1:50:47] certain portions of a spending bill. As you know, Nixon's attempt at impoundment was the basis for the 74 [1:50:53] Impoundment Control Act, which banned impoundments. Despite that law, despite those Supreme Court rulings, [1:51:00] and as you mentioned today, this president, this administration, and you believe that impoundment is within the [1:51:05] president's power. Your general counsel argued that nearly all enacted laws are merely just suggestions and [1:51:11] guidelines that give the president and the executive branch substantial discretion to follow, alter, [1:51:17] or even disregard. Your administration basically asserts that a president has mandate to eliminate [1:51:24] spending to balance the budget by any means necessary. The problem with that though, director, is that the [1:51:31] Constitution of the United States does not have a presidential mandate exception. And when it comes [1:51:37] to impoundment, there is no language in the Constitution that makes it optional. If this administration [1:51:43] continues to impound our appropriated spending, you are basically eliminating Congress's power of the purse. [1:51:50] You are basically cutting off Congress in the budget process. And I think as members of this committee, [1:51:56] that is something we should continue to push back on. But since this Congress, especially with the [1:52:01] leadership in this Congress, has given up that power and let this happen, the courts, thankfully, [1:52:07] have been the bulwark against you and your impoundments and your elimination of programs. [1:52:11] Your attempt to lay off CFPB employees got struck down in NTEU this first vote. The preliminary [1:52:20] injunction was granted to stop your attempts to withhold congressionally appropriated funds from the [1:52:25] National Endowment for Democracy. The Council for Opportunity in Education versus the Department of [1:52:31] Education, there was a preliminary injunction to stop the releasing of federal TRIO funding. [1:52:36] In Pasito versus Trump, there was another preliminary injunction to suspend the U.S. Refugee Assistance [1:52:43] Program. And in the City of Chicago versus DHS, the administration tried to impound FEMA's Shelter and [1:52:49] Services Program, but that was stopped by a court. In the National Council of Nonprofits versus OMB, [1:52:55] the administration tried to put a government-wide funding freeze, and that was stopped by the courts. [1:53:00] In the National Fair Housing Alliance versus HUD, HUD refused to release Fair Housing Initiatives [1:53:04] Programs funding, and that was stopped by the courts. Director, given these court decisions, [1:53:13] given the Constitution of the United States, given the law of this land, do you still believe in [1:53:18] impoundments? 200 years of Presidents have the ability to spend less money- [1:53:23] Once again, Director, do you believe in impoundments? Of course I believe in impoundments. [1:53:27] Okay, thank you. Thank you. The Supreme Court has never spoken on this issue, by the way. [1:53:32] All of what you said is largely not true and heavily new. In regards to train versus City of [1:53:38] New York, they struck that down. No, that's not true. It was not on impoundments. It was a textual [1:53:40] issue. And isn't it true that Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution clearly gives Congress the power [1:53:45] of the purse? To set the limit? Isn't that correct? To set the limit on what an appropriation should be. [1:53:50] And despite all this, you still believe in impoundments, correct? We believe vitally in the [1:53:54] Constitution's ability to make sure that we can't spend a dollar that you haven't appropriated. [1:53:59] That is the constitutional provision. And once again, Director, reclaiming my time, [1:54:02] once again, that is why I believe this Congress needs to push back. We're not seeing it with this [1:54:07] leadership, but come November of this year, the American people are going to make sure that you [1:54:13] understand what impoundments are about. Congressman- Thank you, and I yield back. [1:54:15] The gentleman's time's expired. Where I work at, I find the needle large enough [1:54:19] to burst the bubble that you guys live in, because you're not living in reality, [1:54:24] and you're creating a narrative, and just because you say it, you think it's true. [1:54:29] And so I've sat up here, and I've listened to a whole bunch of [1:54:33] explanations that don't in any way, shape, or form [1:54:40] relate to reality. I got a couple of questions to ask you, sir. [1:54:46] I'm going to start with one that's going to give you a moment to speak, and then I'm going to ask you [1:54:50] a series of yes and nos. And when I say yes and nos, I want yes and nos. What would you say right [1:54:57] now to the mothers of the kids who died because of your dismantling of U.S. aid? Harvard's study says [1:55:06] there are more than 100,000 of them. Can you give me a quick response to what you would say to those [1:55:12] mothers? Just don't talk to me about the study. Talk to me about how you, what you would say [1:55:18] to the mothers of the children who died. Congressman, with great respect, I would just contest that [1:55:24] the extent to which institutions that benefit from federal largesse put out studies that say that [1:55:31] the world has ended, that the world has not in fact ended. Well, it's going there. We only cut USAID [1:55:37] spending last year to the tune of about eight billion dollars. There was far more that we could [1:55:42] have done, Congressman. Reclaiming my time, if a mother came before you who told you that her child [1:55:50] died because she didn't have access to health care or medicine that usually would be available because [1:55:58] of the kindness of the United States of America that you and this administration have eliminated, [1:56:07] would you have anything of empathy, compassion, and humanity to say to her? Would you say to her, [1:56:15] I am sorry that was a mistake? I always have empathy for individuals, including those [1:56:21] that get improper and false information from the media that pumps this, this false and [1:56:27] ignorant information out to the American people. You know, I am so sorry to hearing false, [1:56:32] false, fraud, and abuse from any of my colleagues and even from you because if we wanted to eliminate [1:56:42] abuse and fraud, we'd eliminate the president of the United States from the office right now [1:56:48] and the rest of the sycophants in his administration that are allowing him to do so many illegal things. [1:56:55] So, here's my yes or no's. This is about your budget and this is about your priorities. Do you think [1:57:05] that it is more important to fight a war of choice with a country that represented no threat to us [1:57:14] rather than supporting cuts to economic development administration, to K-12 programs, to community [1:57:22] service block grants, to national institute of health, to the TSA, to the, and let me speak something [1:57:28] about the TSA. Any time you wanted to spend money to pay DHS, you could because this president thinks [1:57:37] he's a king and can do what he wants to do and if he wanted to pay those DHS workers he could have [1:57:43] because he finds money to do everything else he wants to do. What about the money that goes to [1:57:50] homeless assistance programs? That's 393 million or 60 million for uh fair housing or eliminating or [1:58:00] cutting job poor to the point that it it's of no help to getting people on the right uh direction [1:58:09] and even the money for community development financial institutions. Sir, do you think that those [1:58:17] programs which address the quality of life, the opportunity of life, the healthiness of the people [1:58:25] in this country including their access to uh health care is less important than fighting a freaking war [1:58:34] across the world that never ever ever had to be started? Yes or no is all I want. It's not a war of [1:58:42] choice. Just say yes or no. It's not a war of choice. I don't care what you think it is. I ask you for the end. [1:58:48] Yes or no. That's all I want from you. It is an important national security objective that Iran [1:58:52] not that is another that is another piece of the bubble that you live in and that's another part of [1:58:59] the information that you all share to create a narrative that has nothing to do with reality and the [1:59:06] people of this country are showing you location by location state by state county by county and city [1:59:14] by city that they don't believe you all anymore. And let me talk to you a little bit with my three [1:59:20] minutes or three seconds about the cost of living. You keep talking about what you saved here and what [1:59:26] you saved there and how you saved this one and how you are are are more diligent in your savings. [1:59:34] Well the people in this country they don't feel it with their health care. They don't feel it with [1:59:39] the gas they got to put in their cars. They don't feel it when they go to the grocery store. They don't [1:59:44] feel it when they try to avoid evictions. They don't feel that you all have stood up to any of your promises [1:59:54] that this is uh an unfortunately monetizing lying corrupt administration. The gentlelady's time has expired. [2:00:03] I yield my time. Mr. Vogt it's good to finally see you before the House Budget Committee. [2:00:09] Mr. Vogt you lead the Office of Management and Budget. You're one of the architects of Project 2025 [2:00:15] and OMB is a powerful agency that's at the center of President Trump's illegal refusal to spend federal [2:00:23] money. Mr. Vogt I want to go over your political weaponization of this agency against the American [2:00:30] people and specifically against those states that voted primarily for Democrats. Yes or no Mr. Vogt, [2:00:38] a federal judge found that you terminated 7.6 billion dollars in clean energy grants based on [2:00:45] whether the recipient lived in a blue state. Yes or no? I don't recall what that judge said but we have [2:00:51] not made the determinations based on whether the state is... In fact Mr. Vogt, on January 12, [2:00:56] 2026 U.S. Judge Amik Mehta said quote defendants meaning you Mr. Vogt freely admit that they made [2:01:04] grant determination decisions primarily if not exclusively based on whether the awardee [2:01:10] resided in a state whose citizens voted for President Trump in 2024. Mr. Vogt, yes or no? Federal [2:01:17] judges said OMB's freeze of 10 billion dollars in child care and family assistance funding quote [2:01:24] appeared designed to punish communities that the administration agreed with. Yes or no? Was that [2:01:30] something that federal judges said about you and your leadership? I think the judge's characterization [2:01:35] is getting at the degree to which we are focused on states that we think are mismanaged. Okay that is [2:01:40] not in fact the case. In fact U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson found the administration broke the law [2:01:46] and froze funds as a politically motivated move disguised as fraud prevention. So your characterization [2:01:54] actually is false. Other courts have said that withholding congressionally approved funding is [2:01:59] quote vindictive and unlawful. Courts have found that freezing funds create quote irreparable harm [2:02:06] against the American people. And the GAO, the Government Accountability Office, the watchdog agency [2:02:12] that investigates how federal agencies spend taxpayer dollars has reported that you broke the law [2:02:19] multiple times and they have said that you have refused to spend money that was dedicated for [2:02:27] Americans. The Constitution gives Congress Congress the power to spend money and not the President. [2:02:34] Mr. Vogt, your actions clearly show that you want to cut federal funds from anyone who didn't vote for [2:02:41] Donald Trump. Are you trying to get revenge on states that did not vote for your boss? No, of course not. [2:02:49] What's interesting about the question is that Joe Biden withheld federal funding for the wall. Oh for goodness [2:02:53] sakes, can we please bring it back to my question? It was a yes or no question. Are you trying to get [2:03:00] revenge against blue states because they did not support the President? Courts have said that in fact you did [2:03:09] do that. That in fact you are being vindictive. In fact you are punishing because of political [2:03:15] persuasions. It's not members of Congress who suffer when you do an end run around Congress. That's [2:03:21] not what I'm angry about. It's not about you taking the power away from us. It's that it's their money. [2:03:28] It's their power. Of the people, by the people, and for the people. The House is closest to the people. [2:03:35] So when you do an end run around Congress, you're taking Americans power. I want to move on now to [2:03:40] wasteful government spending. Particularly the $350 billion set aside for this, yes, war of choice [2:03:47] against Iran included in this President's budget. His budget asked for a shocking surge in Pentagon [2:03:53] spending up to $1.5 trillion. We have never in the history of this country seen spending like this [2:03:59] paid for by splashing health care, education, and housing. Donald Trump has said, as my colleagues [2:04:05] have said earlier, we're fighting wars here. We can't take care of daycare. Mr. Vote, yes or no, [2:04:11] is $350 billion for the war in Iran lowering costs for Americans? Those Americans who ask us in every [2:04:19] single town hall why they can't afford to live in this country. Is the war lowering costs for Americans? [2:04:26] It is certainly not defunding child care. We fully fund child care in this budget. [2:04:30] Is it lowering costs for the American people? But doesn't that get at the premise of your question? [2:04:36] You can find money for illegal wars in Iran. You can find money for all the pet projects of this [2:04:43] administration and yet we can't find money to alleviate the costs of food and housing and gas on [2:04:51] the home front. But according to you- Fully funded child care, fully funded Head Start. Mr. Vote, Mr. Vote, [2:04:57] with the money that is set aside in this budget, the additional funding for the war in around $350 [2:05:03] billion, we could fund the ACA tax credits for 10 years, for a decade. And I can tell you what my [2:05:13] constituents want to know. How is it that we can continue to spend money on foreign wars and yet we [2:05:20] cannot find a solution to the fact that people can't afford health care? And again, in closing, [2:05:28] I just want to say again, we're not so angry because you're taking our power. We're angry because [2:05:33] you are taking the people's power. I yield back. The gentlelady's time has expired if the gentleman [2:05:38] wants to respond. I would just say this president has been a person who has campaigned and led for peace [2:05:45] and against endless wars. So is it peace through war? Is that where we are right now? Peace through war? [2:05:51] I'm giving our witness time to respond to your question and then I'm going to yield five minutes to [2:05:56] Mr. Estes. So finish the response uninterrupted and then let's go to Mr. Estes. The president has also [2:06:01] been equally clear that he is not going to allow a nuclear Iran. He is not going to allow them to have [2:06:07] nuclear weapons. He is not going to allow them to have missiles and a navy that impacts our national [2:06:11] security. And so he is doing what is necessary to keep us safe while at the same trying to pursue [2:06:16] diplomacy so that we can get out of wars and lower those those costs over time. Welcome Mr. Vote. [2:06:23] Despite President Trump's promise to lower prices on day one, consumer sentiment plummeted to its lowest [2:06:30] level on record last week. Gas prices are at a record high in Seattle. Diesel is now over seven dollars [2:06:37] and families are feeling this every time they go to the grocery store. Meanwhile fraud reports have [2:06:43] only gone up and efforts to hold big corporations accountable have just disappeared. So congratulations [2:06:49] Mr. Vote, you and Donald Trump have managed to successfully tank the futures of millions of Americans. [2:06:57] Now Republicans so-called one big beautiful bill, which I notice our colleagues have literally changed [2:07:02] the name of because it is so unpopular. It is not beautiful to strip health care for millions of [2:07:09] Americans. That bill costs 4.7 trillion dollars and is expected to make up 20 percent of the next decade's [2:07:17] deficit and it's all to pay for tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans and corporations. The Institute [2:07:23] on Taxation and Economic Policy just published a report that shows that Trump's policies are a tax [2:07:30] increase for all Americans except the wealthiest 5 percent. So for 95 percent those policies are tax [2:07:39] increase. Do you know Mr. Vote how many of the largest corporations in America paid absolutely nothing [2:07:45] in federal income tax in 2025? Not off the top of my head but our view is that the tax policy [2:07:51] Well let me let me just tell you let me just tell you Mr. Vote reclaiming my time let me just tell [2:07:56] you the number of corporations large corporations that paid absolutely zero in federal tax was 88 at [2:08:05] least that we know of including Tesla which paid zero on almost 5.7 billion dollars of income as well [2:08:13] as Coinbase, Citigroup, CVS Health and Palantir and those companies together had over 105 billion dollars [2:08:20] and profits. Now meanwhile Mr. Vote what's the average income tax paid by Americans? Look Ms. Congresswoman this [2:08:27] this bill that you are opposed to that you voted against do you know the answer to my question [2:08:32] because I get to ask the questions here I understand but so I'm asking you what the average income tax [2:08:38] rate is this paid by Americans and I'm suggesting that you were not a part of keeping tax okay so you [2:08:45] don't know it's 14 and a half percent so while all these corporations paid nothing average Americans [2:08:51] are paying 14 and a half percent now are you aware that thanks to stripping health care from Americans [2:08:57] the middle 60 percent of Americans will pay $900 more on average than before Trump came in and created [2:09:05] chaos with tariffs and health care and tax law that benefited the wealthiest you can just say yes or no [2:09:11] did not strip health care and in fact we provided 50 billion dollars for health care that you voted [2:09:15] against in the president's budget request you state that quote it ensures that every taxpayer dollar [2:09:21] makes Americans safer stronger and more prosperous so please answer yes or no to these questions [2:09:27] according to one survey one in six that's 17 percent returning ACA marketplace enrollees say they are [2:09:34] not confident that they will be able to afford their premiums this year does that make Americans stronger and [2:09:40] more prosperous it certainly makes it more prosperous to have a health care system that ensures that [2:09:46] okay so you're okay with all these Americans not being able to afford their health care premiums now [2:09:51] you're trying to eliminate the low-income energy assistance programs while Trump's illegal Iran war raises gas [2:09:57] prices does that make Americans stronger and more prosperous it's important to not have fraudulent programs [2:10:03] well I'm so glad you asked about fraud because you are coming back to ask for a 1.5 trillion dollar [2:10:11] budget for the Department of Defense how many consecutive audits has the Department of Defense failed as of the [2:10:19] end of 2025 the department is making progress towards the audit how many audits has the Department of Defense [2:10:26] failed the number is 8 and Mr. Vogt the Department of Defense is the only federal agency that has never [2:10:34] passed an audit and you want to talk to me about fraud there is over at least 10 billion dollars in [2:10:41] confirmed fraud within the Department of Defense but you're not going after any of that now let me turn [2:10:46] to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau since you're also the acting director there this was an agency [2:10:51] that was established to protect consumers from financial predation deception fraud and abuse from the [2:10:58] biggest banks biggest corporations and the CFPB has stepped in and really done that work under the last [2:11:05] administration CFPB put real money back in consumers pockets returned over 21 billion dollars to [2:11:11] consumers who were cheated or scammed by big banks giant corporations it ordered Wells Fargo to pay over 2 billion [2:11:19] and Bank of America to pay 727 million to consumers who were harmed but you have a mission to eliminate [2:11:27] the CFPB why are you protecting big corporations instead of consumers Mr. Vogt I'm not CFPB caused 350 [2:11:35] billion dollars of added costs on consumers Mr. Vogt you are asking to reduce the CFPB's workforce to just [2:11:43] one-third of its 2025 level which means that the department that oversees the banks and [2:11:49] other financial companies that hold trillions of dollars in mortgage auto credit card and [2:11:54] student loan debt would drop from 500 employees to just 77 and the enforcement department would only have [2:12:02] 50 workers what do you have to say to the millions of service members veterans older adults and students [2:12:09] that are seeing costs rise and now because of your unprecedented rollback of consumer protection staff [2:12:16] have nobody at the agency that is actually policing those big corporations that are scamming consumers [2:12:23] the general ladies time is expired we are policing it and in fact we do not believe that an agency that [2:12:28] increased the cost on the american people should not have oversight that's why we've reined it in [2:12:32] it is clear to me that you are just protecting those biggest corporations thank you and ladies time [2:12:38] you should be ashamed of that vote I represent the cities of Altadena and Pasadena and Southern [2:12:44] California that are still living through the aftermath of the Eton fire that destroyed 6 000 homes last [2:12:50] January for tens of thousands of my constituents the experience looked like this it was the early [2:12:56] hours of the morning and they were sleeping peacefully in their homes suddenly they were awoken by loud sirens [2:13:02] and the smell of smoke as flames surrounded their properties their lives flashed before their eyes they [2:13:09] frantically gathered their loved ones their pets and escaped with simply the clothes on their backs 19 of [2:13:15] my constituents could not make it out on time and they tragically lost their lives the trauma that [2:13:22] everybody witnessed was harrowing and unspeakable they saw the places that they called home for decades the [2:13:29] lives they built all of their most treasured belongings engulfed in flames but here we are today over one year [2:13:36] after the Eton and Palisade fires and more than 70 percent of survivors have not yet returned home [2:13:43] families are depleting their savings delaying life-saving medical care and many are homeless [2:13:50] of the 6 000 homes that burned only half have yet to start the rebuilding process at all this is a crisis [2:13:57] and my constituents need assistance now luckily there's a straightforward solution to stopping [2:14:04] this suffering and that is finally granting Governor Newsom's federal disaster supplemental funding [2:14:10] requests to provide an influx of capital and resources to my constituents and that request includes [2:14:18] cdbgr cdbg disaster recovery or dr which is essential to my constituents ability to rebuild their homes and [2:14:26] lives but every single day that this funding is delayed recovery becomes more expensive and painful [2:14:33] for survivors in my district and across the this country so director vote uh i'd like to hear what [2:14:41] your plan is to ensure that natural disaster survivors receive this federal disaster supplemental funding [2:14:49] whether it's the wildfires in california the hurricanes in north carolina or the floods in texas [2:14:56] for every major disaster of this scale in recent history the federal government [2:15:01] has intervened to help survivors when can my constituents expect this relief a couple points [2:15:07] congressman the federal government is intervening fema is funding the cleanup and disaster work in your [2:15:15] district and one of the things that we're fighting right quite frankly is the degree to which the state [2:15:20] and locality are impacting the ability of permitting for businesses and homes to to build back [2:15:26] uh fema is the front line uh funder for disasters it's not alternative supplemental supplementals [2:15:33] supplementals are what's on top of a fema program that right now is in dire straits because the fact [2:15:40] that the democrats will not let me just dire director vote actually there has been supplemental disaster [2:15:47] funding for every major disaster in this country whether it's a red state or a blue state and in fact [2:15:55] uh the permitting process is proceeding forward let me just say though on fema um it is the federal [2:16:02] government's responsibility to provide both immediate and long-term assistance to survivors and what you're [2:16:09] what you're talking about are the immediate assistance to the survivors natural disasters know no political [2:16:15] affiliation and neither should the federal government's response yet i'm deeply concerned about recent [2:16:20] reporting indicating that your administration has rejected disaster aid requests from democratic-led [2:16:27] states at a rate higher than any time in fema's history republican-led states saw 89 of their requests [2:16:36] approved while democratic-led states saw a mere 23 of their requests approved and that's there's never been [2:16:46] such a sharp partisan disparity in the approval of federal disaster funds since fema was created in 1979 [2:16:55] and actually it's a staggering disconnect from trump's first term where he approved 93 of the requests from [2:17:02] democratic states and 89 from republican states so a director vote yes or no will you commit to taking [2:17:11] immediate steps to reverse this unconscionable pattern no administration has looked more carefully at fema [2:17:18] dollars and how they're being spent one of the challenges that we face as i will repeat we need [2:17:24] democrats to come alongside and continue to help us fund the fema disaster relief fund when you vote [2:17:30] against dhs spending and vote against a bill that the democratic appropriators had blessed so let me just [2:17:36] say is making sure that we're going to have a crisis professor vote i have another point which is the [2:17:41] the best way to prepare communities is through brick funding the building resilient infrastructure and [2:17:47] communities grant program that's why i was alarmed when the administration [2:17:52] canceled billions of dollars of brick funding but a federal judge ordered that this funding [2:17:58] be restored i urge you to comply with the federal judges order to restore this program i think the [2:18:03] gentleman agreed with you on the brick funding it was not meant to be canceled and it will go out the door [2:18:08] of us have done a deep dive in your project 2025 and much of what was in there is obviously being executed [2:18:19] now but i i think it's important to note that the american people are really unhappy with the direction [2:18:28] that we're moving in our economy is moving in in fact i just saw a fox news poll that shows a record 64 [2:18:35] of voters disapprove of president trump's handling of taxes and that's 11 up 11 since last year [2:18:46] project 2025 as we all know defunds programs that save lives and help americans hardworking americans [2:18:55] while enriching billionaires but i want to begin with a very easy yes or no question mr vote do you agree [2:19:04] that the federal government has the fiduciary responsibility to be good stewards of the american [2:19:10] taxpayers dollar yes okay i and you and i agree with that um and so i i want to given that it's tax day [2:19:19] i want to focus a little bit on the irs and the budget lab has a great report that i'd like to unanimous [2:19:28] consent to enter without objection thank you chairman and it's entitled a weakened irs has substantial [2:19:36] consequences so spending on the irs has decreased obviously in this administration and the what [2:19:45] perplexes me is that the irs actually has a return on investment when we invest in the irs we're able to [2:19:55] invest in fighting tax fraud and we're able to bring in revenue the irs reductions from funding and layoffs [2:20:04] have resulted in that that are a result of project 2025 and uh the one big so-called one big beautiful bill [2:20:13] have resulted in about 861 billion dollars in decreased revenue the layoffs from doge have [2:20:23] likely resulted in almost 600 billion dollar reductions in revenue and if if dhs gets access to irs data that [2:20:37] will cost an additional 300 billion dollars in revenue and we know that the programs that hardworking [2:20:45] americans depend on need revenue and so the i need to ask you mr vote what is the logic behind defunding [2:20:57] an agency that actually has a return on investment the logic is that the biden administration had [2:21:04] increased the irs to such a degree that it was intrusive on small businesses and people across the [2:21:10] country and i don't want to live in a country in which the irs is auditing every american in the country [2:21:16] because they filed a tax return so so you are okay with tax fraud certainly not okay i don't assume [2:21:23] that the american people are doing tax fraud when they file their taxes okay well you and i agree on [2:21:28] that we all file our taxes um we we pay heavily into the tax system but billionaires getting massive tax [2:21:36] breaks really that's where we are seeing um instances of fraud but they are being let off the hook i i just [2:21:45] don't understand why we would eliminate employees who are helping us find fraud and recoup our [2:21:53] investment we're just trying to get back to historic levels of iris and in fact we actually yeah you know [2:21:58] that's your vote i will tell you as a member of congress one of the biggest complaints i get from [2:22:03] constituents is they can't talk to a person at the irs anymore and the wait times are um incredible so [2:22:11] we um i i i prefer i prefer a system that actually works and that um is a return on the investment [2:22:19] and and i will tell you the what is alarming about the budget are the cuts to housing the cuts to [2:22:25] education the cuts to health care can you answer can you let us know um there are reports that the [2:22:33] defense appropriation supplemental will cost about a hundred billion dollars what what are you all [2:22:41] asking for in order to fund the war in iran how much will you be asking we're not ready to come [2:22:47] to you with a request we're still working on it uh we're working through to figure out what's needed [2:22:52] in this fiscal year versus next fiscal do you have a ballpark i don't have a ballpark will it be more [2:22:57] than 50 billion i don't have a ballpark for you okay well i appreciate that i know the american public [2:23:03] is eager to know how much this war is costing them especially at the expense of programs that make their [2:23:09] lives easier mr chairman i yield back thank the gentle lady thank you mr chairman i've said for a [2:23:14] long time that the budget is our ultimate policy document yeah you can talk about what you value [2:23:19] but the the budget is literally when you put your money where your mouth is and i'm shocked by trump's [2:23:25] budget proposal by its sheer cruelty by its fiscal irresponsibility and you can do the magic math but the [2:23:33] actual math is that there's 4.5 trillion dollars in revenue cuts the money we take in but only 1.1 [2:23:40] trillion dollars in spending cuts that gives you 3.4 trillion dollars right off the bat and an increase [2:23:46] to the debt and deficit of this country but if you add in the increased debt servicing uh that is estimated [2:23:52] by the congressional budget office to go up to 4.7 trillion dollars in debt but take away the cruelty and [2:23:58] the irresponsibility i think right now what i'm so offended by is the indifference to how american [2:24:04] families are struggling right now in donald trump's economy yesterday just yesterday your department [2:24:09] of labor released its monthly price tracking report energy prices according to your numbers are up nearly [2:24:14] 11 percent last month gas went up over 21 percent home energy went up over 30 percent we've talked about [2:24:21] some of these cuts you know right now against this backdrop there are six million americans including 150 [2:24:27] 000 kentuckians who rely on the low income home energy assistance program to heat and cool their homes [2:24:33] during the hottest and coldest months of the year you admitted earlier to zeroing out that program [2:24:38] but you said it was because of fraud right do you believe that the 150 000 kentuckians the seniors [2:24:45] who rely on this program to heat their homes in the winter are all committing fraud i believe that [2:24:51] there have been numerous government studies and non-profit studies have said this is a fraudulent [2:24:55] i'm gonna reclaim my time here because you know what you told me is you said you said just a [2:24:59] second ago i don't assume the american people engage in tax fraud but i guess you assume every [2:25:04] senior in kentucky is engaging fraud because they want to have a cool home in the summer and a warm home [2:25:08] in the winter but it's not just energy prices that are up everything at the grocery store is more [2:25:13] expensive come to the program bardstown road with me in louisville kentucky you'll see it for yourself [2:25:17] and the iran war is only going to make that worse because of the shocks to fertilizer and fuel costs [2:25:24] a lot of our neighbors they rely on a little bit of extra help especially when they can't afford [2:25:28] their groceries look at the wildly successful nutrition program for women infants and children [2:25:33] known as wick it helps pregnant breastfeeding and postpartum women feed themselves and their [2:25:38] kids when they need it most after republicans enacted the deepest cuts in our country's history [2:25:43] to food benefits and more and more families are struggling right now to do the president's policy [2:25:48] your budget cuts breastfeeding moms fruit and vegetable benefit from 54 to 13 a month is that [2:25:55] correct we fully fund the wick program no you don't here it is right here on page 164 in the [2:26:00] second column of your budget i'm talking right now if you want to talk you can run for congress [2:26:04] on page 165 in the first column it cuts it it cuts it from 54 to 13 a month and it looks like you're [2:26:10] not stopping there you're coming for the roof over people's heads too look at hud's continuum of care [2:26:15] program that keeps 950 kentuckians in stable long-term housing that includes 886 people with [2:26:22] disabilities it includes 383 survivors of semestic domestic violence more than half of those housed [2:26:28] in kentucky right now are families with kids this budget zeros out that program doesn't it you know [2:26:34] what's interesting about yes it does i'll just i'll just no i reclaim my time my time mr chairman right [2:26:39] now it does it's right here on table one three it zeroes it out in your budget i could go on and [2:26:44] on enlisting the moral crimes in this budget but i only have five minutes this budget cuts [2:26:48] the sba program for minority and women-owned business it cuts programs for health and safety [2:26:53] programs for coal miners it cuts funding for daycare for working parents across the board it slashes [2:26:58] the parts of government that help working people and replaces them with more war and more ice abuses [2:27:04] even with all of these cuts just like your budget did last year uh when it cuts a trillion from [2:27:09] health care to pay for tax cuts for the rich rich it still manages to blow up the debt and the [2:27:13] deficit by trillions but the budget isn't just a policy document it's a moral document like you [2:27:19] director vaude i'm a christian i won't question your faith i won't question the president's faith [2:27:23] despite what he did depicting himself as jesus and his attacks on the pope but i grew up in a family [2:27:28] where we read matthew 25 a couple of sundays ago on march 22nd my twins were confirmed in our [2:27:33] presbyterian church and they chose to be baptized we're a matthew 25 church matthew 25 31 the parable of [2:27:39] the sheep and the goats it says when i was thirsty you gave me drink when i was hungry you fed me [2:27:44] when i was without clothes you closed me when i was a stranger you welcomed me when i was in prison [2:27:48] you visited me and of course it ends with for the least of these you did for me as well this budget [2:27:57] sees the hungry it sees the homeless it sees the vulnerable and it turns away that is not what we [2:28:06] should be doing and it's why i cannot support it mr chairman i yield back for holding this much needed [2:28:12] oversight hearing director i'm sure you know you've got a lot of nicknames things like grim reaper but [2:28:18] i'm not here to call your names i am here to call you out on the pain that you've inflicted on road [2:28:23] islanders and americans who are fed up and i want to get to the point so i'll keep things simple i've got [2:28:30] a few yes or no questions should americans have access to medical care yes or no yes well that's [2:28:38] great that we're in agreement because if you chair cared about the sick uh you wouldn't be forcing [2:28:44] states to make impossible decisions about who will feel the pain of trump and republicans cruel health [2:28:50] care cuts from that big ugly law so bad that you keep renaming it you've rebranded it about three times [2:28:57] now kids with disabilities cancer patients seniors who do you think should feel the pain you have [2:29:03] forced rhode island to make impossible decisions about who should suffer you want us to believe that [2:29:10] we can't afford to help my sick constituents but you claim a smart budgeting to request 1.5 trillion [2:29:16] dollars in defense funding for a department that already has more money than they know what to do with [2:29:22] to fight illegal wars i've got another question for you should hungry children be fed yes or no [2:29:28] yes and they are look i would believe you if your struck shutdown strategy didn't put 144 000 [2:29:36] rhode islanders at risk of going hungry our what's our shutdown strategy yes your shutdown really yes [2:29:41] because who who's the one who voted against those bills sir you have had a position where you have [2:29:48] seen shutdowns as ways to break our federal workers as ways to hurt the american people i'm reclaiming my [2:29:55] time cause that i'm reclaiming my time sir with six dollars a day too generous for you look from [2:30:01] one socket to providence in the first congressional district of rhode island i visited food banks [2:30:06] and i've seen the struggle to keep up with rising demand from hungry rhode islanders and that's thanks [2:30:11] to your cruelty look i have seen your actions and i want you to take time with this particular question [2:30:21] because you brought up it being our shutdown do you think a lot of good comes from government shutdowns [2:30:27] yes or no no well do you disagree with president trump then because that's a quote from president [2:30:34] trump you don't care about the 1.4 million americans who missed a paycheck during trump's shutdown last [2:30:41] year you want public servants as you've said to be viewed as villains from air traffic controllers to [2:30:48] naval officers to va employees i heard constituents harmed by your shutdown there is nothing [2:30:54] good about that it's damaging to real people sir you caused it you voted for it look you were the [2:31:00] you were the person that with all of your votes mr vote just like you did with doge you think that [2:31:04] good things come from breaking people you have said it's fine to break things and pick up the pieces [2:31:10] later i didn't make up these words those are your words that's has no regard to rhode islanders who are [2:31:15] still trying to put their lives together people around this country who are still trying to put their [2:31:18] lives together if you don't know your own words how can you show up here to speak look as i'm [2:31:24] going to wrap up because i don't want to afford you more time to tell more lies to the american [2:31:28] people you don't get to override congress because you disagree with how funds are spent you don't [2:31:33] get to force government shutdowns to break people your decisions have done nothing but hurt [2:31:38] my constituents they don't need washington bureaucrats like you making funding decisions that upend [2:31:44] their lives and you've said a lot of things today i've watched some of your your participation from [2:31:49] my office i saw some of it here and your actions reveal the truth despite your words when given [2:31:55] the choice you have chosen cruelty and chaos over billionaires over and over and over again billionaires [2:32:05] cruelty chaos you attacked health care you put food for hungry kids at risk you ignored congress [2:32:11] you jacked up prices the american people are fed up breed every poll and you embrace shutdowns that hurt [2:32:18] working people so at its core sir i don't think you value the american people your disregard for [2:32:24] their lives is creating a great amount of pain and as you're hearing from our side our constituents are [2:32:33] paying the price yet you put forward a budget that grows but cuts again at the things that help the [2:32:42] american people i hope you have time to reflect on that and the pain that you're inflicting on [2:32:47] constituents around this country i yield back uh gentleman yields i would yield my director vote [2:32:54] i'm glad that you are finally here to testify before this committee a budget is a statement of [2:32:59] our priorities throughout your tenure at omb you've made the trump administration's priorities clear [2:33:06] terrorizing federal employees ripping health care away from millions of americans we see many of those in [2:33:10] the halls of congress today blobbing and illegally withholding money allocated by congress this is indeed [2:33:17] unacceptable the american people deserve better from you and from the budget i'm extremely concerned [2:33:22] by this year's budget treatment of behavioral health infrastructure and resources let me begin [2:33:27] with a focus on samsa a small but mighty agency whose impact is felt in every community samsa's [2:33:34] mission is to lead efforts to promote mental health prevent substance misuse and provide treatments [2:33:39] and support to foster recovery while ensuring access and better outcomes for all it serves those of [2:33:45] us who are most in need it is not an exaggeration to say that samsa's public servants prevent overdoses [2:33:51] and suicides thereby saving lives this budget and the recent addition actions of the trump administration [2:33:58] are betraying the americans who rely on samsa for behavioral health treatment and support so director [2:34:04] vote under this budget as part of an hhs reorganization would samsa be relegated under the so-called [2:34:11] administration for a healthy america aha is that yes or no uh we engage in a number of reorganization [2:34:19] i'd have to check as to where it's residing but we we endorse the mission of samsa in terms of [2:34:24] substance abuse prevention and mental health but we have a block grant in which we i'll clearly claim [2:34:29] my time because i don't have much time here to ask questions but if you could get back to us whether [2:34:36] that's yes or no um it your budget document uh is uh certainly indicating that um it would be [2:34:44] restructured under aha the whole reason congress created samsa as an agency that reports directly [2:34:51] to the hhs secretary was to ensure that behavioral health was prioritized despite the long-standing [2:34:56] stigma surrounding it instead aha would take us back to the time when behavioral health is buried [2:35:03] beneath bureaucracy and deprioritized in january the trump administration abruptly canceled two billion [2:35:09] dollars of mental health and addiction grants at samsa i was proud to lead the groundswell of [2:35:14] opposition within hours we gained bipartisan signatures over a hundred uh opposing these cuts [2:35:22] and delivered them over to the administration and their announced reversal was a victory for anyone who [2:35:27] cares about addressing mental health and addiction so again yes or no director vote did you [2:35:32] sign off on the cancellation of more than two billion dollars with that effort at samsa with their [2:35:38] grants i can't recall the extent to which what you're referring to i mean we are constantly dealing [2:35:44] with uh an interagency review on how we're making funding uh sometimes things get leaked to the press [2:35:50] before their final and i don't know what you're referring to this was not leaked to the press grant uh award [2:35:56] recipients were notified they called our office and several other offices on the hill on both sides of the [2:36:01] political fence in both houses so a yes or no back to the committee would be appreciated these cuts [2:36:07] should never have been considered in the first place i sincerely hope there are no further attempts [2:36:11] to ignore direction from congress and deny people access to these critical life-saving services i'd like [2:36:17] to focus on another area where the administration has failed to deliver for the american people in 2024 [2:36:23] the president claimed that americans would see their energy bills cut in half during the first year of his [2:36:28] administration director vote do you know what your home energy bills look like over the last month [2:36:33] and if so were they cut in half over the past year look i'm not going to get into what my home energy [2:36:38] bills are i would think that the american people uh know that this administration is doing everything [2:36:44] we can to lower energy prices and we are going to continue to do that our party congressman is the [2:36:49] party that actually wants energy and not to have renewable energy subsidies that lead to extremely high [2:36:56] energy bills in blue states let me reclaim my time because i was looking for seven percent energy uh [2:37:01] seven percent right that's that that's the kind of thing that comes from bad energy policies in the [2:37:07] state well i disagree with you i mean there was a way to provide for the cleanest most efficient [2:37:12] and uh and cheapest power in the grid in the pool so uh we failed to do that my constituents are painfully [2:37:19] aware of their energy costs and in fact many of them have seen their bills go up under this [2:37:23] administration they're not alone the average american paid 123 more in electricity costs in 2025 [2:37:30] compared to 2024 and that trend is expected to get worse in the years ahead and as the president [2:37:36] wages in a legal war with iran the average price of a gallon of gasoline has increased by over a [2:37:41] dollar in just six weeks that's more pain at the pump on top of rising electric and heating bills [2:37:47] meanwhile your budget proposed the elimination of four billion dollars worth of funding for the low-income [2:37:52] home energy assistance program or LIHEAP that puts more than six million households at risk the [2:37:58] budget says LIHEAP dollars aren't needed because lower energy costs prices are on the way well we've [2:38:03] heard that before from this president and all the evidence points to this being yet another broken [2:38:08] promise waiting to happen americans are already struggling because of the ram and signs of this [2:38:13] administration this budget will only make those struggles worse so you gentlemen look forward to [2:38:17] getting back to this with the answers to my question the chair recognizes well thank you mr chairman and [2:38:22] thank you mr omb director i i didn't know how shy you were until the last uh 15 months when you weren't [2:38:28] before our committee but do appreciate you taking the time today uh you know how bad this economy is when [2:38:34] we hear joe biden being invoked we hear trans people being invoked i was waiting for jimmy carter to be [2:38:41] blamed next but uh apparently we we didn't get quite there um let me just do a reset and present to you [2:38:50] a set of facts a set of data um right now according to opinion polls the approval of the economy of the [2:39:00] american people is at its lowest level since 2008 the great recession 29 percent an average of the last [2:39:10] three polls shows 30 percent approval disapproval over approval of this administration's handling of [2:39:17] the economy more than two to one disapproval over approval the michigan consumer data consumer confidence [2:39:26] level the lowest level ever recorded even lower during covid even lower during the great recession [2:39:36] or even lower than during the great recession if you look at the job creation over the last 15 [2:39:45] months there's one thing missing and that's job creation we have been in a jobless economy over the [2:39:53] last 15 months inflation which actually even though there's no question we had an inflation crisis [2:40:01] not just in the united states but all throughout the world uh after the covid pandemic in 2022 [2:40:09] after the pandemic it ended every single month in 2024 inflation dropped over the preceding month [2:40:18] what happened around april of last year liberation day inflation was liberated you saw inflation begin [2:40:26] to increase in every single month we've seen inflation increase and gas prices yesterday i was in northeast [2:40:34] philly where i'm from and where i live a working class uh part of the city of philadelphia was in [2:40:42] front of the gas station the gas at that uh particular location was 4 11 which is slightly lower than the [2:40:50] average uh nationally and in the united states of about 4 15 a gallon um six weeks ago that same gas [2:40:59] station was under three dollars a gallon we've seen over the last month the largest increase in gas prices [2:41:08] in my lifetime in the lifetime of most people here what's different about this economy unlike the [2:41:17] inflation crisis after the pandemic unlike the great recession unlike the recession of 2001 unlike the [2:41:25] recession of 1992 the economic downturn that we're experiencing no jobs record inflation gas prices [2:41:34] through the roof consumer confidence plummeting all of this is directly related to the policies of the [2:41:41] trump administration that you carry out mr vote none of those previous examples that i cited none of them [2:41:50] could be directly attributed to the policies of the president at that time we can debate about [2:41:58] certain things that did influence them uh particularly going in to the 08 recession but with this [2:42:06] president the change is so abrupt the fact inflation was dropping month over month the fact that we had [2:42:14] an incredible jobs economy until it was lost a year and a half ago you know i'm from pennsylvania the biggest [2:42:22] battleground state in the nation also the nation's birthplace which we're making uh a big to-do about [2:42:28] this year in 2026 and celebrating our semi-quincentennial but pennsylvania is really known over the last uh [2:42:35] decade in our politics as the nation's biggest battleground state so as a result basically every day [2:42:43] in 2024 in the fall we had either donald trump or the democratic nominee kamala harris uh in our state [2:42:52] donald trump had i have to say a brilliant campaign slogan said your prices are too high i will lower [2:43:00] them and i quote him i will lower them on day one well here we are about day 450 he hasn't lowered [2:43:10] anything the only thing he's lowered is his approval rating on the economy he has lowered that donald trump [2:43:19] and this administration have failed miserably on this economy they failed to bring prices down and [2:43:27] in fact they made the situation worse with that we have a lot of questions on this side since it's been [2:43:34] 15 months you're the first omb director ever to not appear before this committee last year i appreciate [2:43:40] you at least today taking the time we have a lot of questions and i certainly hope after today if we [2:43:46] send to you questions in writing that you would respond finally as you've ignored all of our previous [2:43:53] requests it's a matter of basic respect for the congress of the united states and for this committee [2:43:58] and with that i yield back i think uh mr chairman i i want to other a lot of areas i would like to get [2:44:04] to but between me and my my colleagues at least on this side of the dais i think we'll get to them all [2:44:09] um let me start by reminding people back uh nine months ago what uh president trump called at the [2:44:16] time though he wants to rebrand it never talks about it now his one big uh beautiful bill though [2:44:22] it has been known by many other names uh that piece of legislation um despite your rhetoric about this [2:44:30] budget committee succeeding on deficit and debt according to the congressional budget office as well as [2:44:37] other non-partisan groups both left of center and right of center have said that single piece of [2:44:44] legislation adds more to our deficit and debt than any other piece of legislation passed by congress [2:44:53] in american history in addition to the over four trillion dollars it adds to our national debt [2:45:01] it eliminates health care coverage for more than 15 million americans according to the cbo [2:45:10] the kaiser family foundation says there's actually more than 17 million americans [2:45:14] who will lose their health care are they really all according to you really you're going to sit [2:45:19] here with a straight face and say they're all illegals they're all defrauding the system that's [2:45:24] actually your position yes it with regard to the the people that have lost that that's laugh [2:45:30] that's laughable i'm sorry i'll give you a chance to respond a number of issues with regard to [2:45:35] your comments there wait wait let me just number one sorry wait wait reclaiming my time i just want [2:45:40] to be clear i'm citing we acknowledge the cbo figure that's where i'm getting the 15 million [2:45:46] from and the kaiser family foundation says 17 million you're saying none of them are legitimately [2:45:53] on this even though we had one of them actually testify before us i didn't say all of them are [2:45:57] illegals i said there's also the benefit of people returning to the workforce because they are able-bodied [2:46:03] individuals or they should not have been on the system regardless because of the inability to [2:46:08] address fraud in the aftermath of okay so they're all either illegals or defrauding the system well we [2:46:15] certainly that's certainly not a provocative statement that we have fraud all over the country [2:46:19] is it mr why are i imagine there are fraud in all sorts of private and public sector areas but the idea [2:46:27] that 15 million americans are about to lose their health care the single biggest loss of health care [2:46:32] in american history mind you not even during the great depression do 15 million americans lose their [2:46:38] health care coverage the idea that all of those people who are about to lose their health care [2:46:45] are defrauding the system or are illegal immigrants that is not supported by any facts whatsoever [2:46:52] and now are now working and getting the benefit of a job with employer-sponsored health care coverage [2:46:57] look that these these uh assessments by cbo and others are often very static i mean it's right of [2:47:05] center groups as well it's well reclaim my time i only have a few minutes so excuse me but it's not [2:47:11] just cbo i mean right of center groups left of center groups non-partisan groups you're saying they're [2:47:17] they're all wrong i'm saying that the budget community typically relies on static thinking [2:47:23] static scoring current law baselines and so you don't get an accurate picture of the extent to [2:47:31] which the reforms that are being made are going to have a dynamic impact with better programs more [2:47:36] health care for instance 50 billion well let me before you get to the friends i only have a couple [2:47:40] minutes so let me actually transition to my next uh subject because i think i'll only have time now for [2:47:45] this the president recently said i mean he was talking about the record increase in gas prices [2:47:52] thanks to him and his war of choice in iran but he he diverted in a spontaneous uh he's speaking [2:47:59] extemporaneously in the white house just a few days ago he said and i quote the united states can't [2:48:05] take care of daycare that has to be up to a state he then added medicaid medicare all these individual [2:48:14] things they can do it on a state basis you can't do it on federal so i'm just curious from your [2:48:22] perspective at omb have you taken any actions to turn medicare back to the states no and the president [2:48:29] doesn't want to do that with regard to these well he said it i mean he said it referring to so you're [2:48:34] disagreeing with what the president said no i'm saying that the president meant is he's talking about [2:48:37] fraud in these programs he's that's not he didn't mention excuse me reclaim my time nowhere i have the [2:48:42] full statement from me nowhere in front of me is the word fraud presented what he was talking about [2:48:48] he later at a different part said we have to pay more for wars and instead we can't afford medicaid [2:48:55] medicare child care things like that and looking at the budget proposal this is why i raise it [2:49:01] 442 billion correct me if i'm wrong 442 billion increase in defense that's what you're asking for [2:49:11] about a 42 percent increase is that right correct for many paradigm shifting investments that we [2:49:17] need this 42 percent increase on what was already a record high for defense and look i serve as part [2:49:23] of our u.s delegation the nato parliament um i i am no pacifist i believe in a strong national defense [2:49:30] i believe the united states i believe the world is at its best when the united states is the strongest [2:49:35] military the idea that we're going to pay for a 42 percent increase in this military in this [2:49:43] department defense and at the same time cut medicaid medicare not pay for child care all of [2:49:50] these things that the american people need in the case of medicare have paid into that is a reflection [2:49:57] of priorities that are out of whack and i see i've gone over my time i appreciate your indulgence [2:50:04] uh so with that you'll bet your direction mr vote at the national institutes of health uh last [2:50:09] year grants for alzheimer's and aging research were cut almost 50 percent mental health 47 [2:50:17] new grants for cancer research uh 23 and as i read the budget that you're here presenting today the [2:50:23] trump regime's response is that medical research has not yet been cut sufficiently doesn't your budget [2:50:29] propose another 12 percent cut at the national institutes of health most of what you said uh is [2:50:35] untrue nih was not cut at all last year we proposed a series of reforms to lower the cost we continue [2:50:42] although not as much to lower reclaiming my time my question to you is don't you propose to cut the [2:50:47] national institutes of health by another 12 percent we propose to have uh a cut to the national [2:50:53] institute of health thank you sir reclaiming that goes after specific programs yes thank you [2:50:58] reclaiming my time minority health disparity institute reclaiming my time mr chairman if the [2:51:03] general if the gentleman will please yield he can filibuster when he's in the senate uh what we do know [2:51:09] as far as the truth is that there were fewer grants for new uh cases last year at nih than at any time in [2:51:16] the last 30 years is it your feeling in proposing further cuts at nih that there are just not enough [2:51:25] worthwhile projects out there or that we cannot afford to invest more in doing something about [2:51:32] alzheimer's cancer parkinson's hiv other dread concerns there are many worthy health investments [2:51:39] out there i think post-covid for an institution that contributed to the pandemic itself with the [2:51:43] funding of gain-of-function research to give that institute 42 trillion dollars which is more [2:51:49] than it got under the the covet pandemic the kinds of things is very generous the kinds of things that [2:51:53] we're trying to do with the national institute of health indirect cost rates we don't think when [2:51:58] bill gates gives 10 percent for parkings and administrative cleaning my time in buildings that [2:52:03] should go reclaiming my time after giving uh last year fewer grants that at any time in the last 30 years [2:52:11] uh you are proposing further cuts there and of course the cuts are not only to medical research [2:52:17] but is it correct that in your budget you would cut the national science foundation uh which is in the past [2:52:23] provided grants that helped on artificial intelligence on laser eye surgery on mri technology among others [2:52:31] that you propose to cut it by 55 percent we have a sizable cut to national science over half of the [2:52:38] funding but it will not impact our investments on artificial well it's that's good to know because [2:52:43] you may be the only person along with president trump who believed that a reading from the director of a [2:52:49] consortium of research universities he says your budget cuts are the equivalent of working in a [2:52:54] company that feels like it's on the verge of bankruptcy another one says slow scientific [2:52:59] progress threatening the nation's position in the world economy and that's one of my concerns [2:53:05] because when you eliminate these research budgets you impact long-term economic growth are you aware [2:53:12] that one international organization has recently said already the united states has fallen behind china [2:53:17] when it comes to research we have no doubt in our mind that we are going to still be the leading [2:53:23] uh innovator funder of research both private and public uh our view is that we want to make sure [2:53:31] that there's a dollar that's actually well spent on research thank you very much i'll accept that as [2:53:36] you're disagreeing with the international organization that says we've already fallen behind china [2:53:41] do you agree that the impact of federal research dollars helps to stimulate private investment in fact one [2:53:48] estimate is every federal dollar generating eight times as much in private investment on research [2:53:56] mr carlisman i don't think the fogarty international center which is at the nih should spend 224 000 [2:54:02] for a survey on how buddhism creates hiv stigma in thailand that's what your hard-earned tax dollars [2:54:08] is going to fund under the guise of research investment i don't think 20 000 should well that's fine mr [2:54:14] that's fine thank you it's fine that you go through and eliminate any project like that but [2:54:20] that doesn't justify providing the fewest number of grants for these key dread diseases in 30 years [2:54:26] i want to ask you about the comment that uh was referred to by president trump about uh the fact that [2:54:33] we can't afford daycare at the federal level and of course your budget provides no increase in funding for [2:54:39] child care does it we flat fund child care which you would not uh and you also eliminate the program [2:54:45] do you not that provides assistance for some people with heating and air conditioning the lihip program [2:54:51] you terminate that entirely it is a historically fraudulent program you terminate it entirely or not [2:54:58] we we were we do not have funding for lihip because we believe in in the moment we are fighting [2:55:04] fraud of all the many things the president says he wants to cut you have not gotten to medicare in this [2:55:09] budget yet we don't that will be the next one we don't like that's coming up next is medicare [2:55:15] because as the president said uh that's a state function well many of us believe it's a vital [2:55:20] program to protect the health of our people we don't want to see what happened to it [2:55:26] that what happened to medicaid and already and to the affordable care act happens to medicare [2:55:31] and that's very much what's at stake here i yield back can i address that mr chairman uh [2:55:37] uh very 30 seconds we do not believe that lihip should go to incarcerated individuals and dead [2:55:43] people is a notoriously fraudulent program by the same experts that the ranking member continues to [2:55:49] cite on a number of other issues well i'm sure the dead people argument applies just about as much as [2:55:54] it did president trump's claim that people that were three gentlemen's times years old were getting [2:55:58] social security gentlemen all phony my friend from texas time has expired uh you outlined the [2:56:05] biden administration i want to reiterate some of the things that the ranking members said [2:56:11] including out of 48 months in the bad administration 47 of those had job growth the only month that [2:56:19] there was a job loss was the month that trump had come in and actually was president for a significant [2:56:25] part of that month on average monthly gain in jobs about 300 000 over over the biden administration [2:56:35] that compares to five months of job loss already run up by this administration five months of job loss [2:56:43] and an aggregate total it doesn't even amount to one month's average month of job growth in the [2:56:49] biden administration i heard the chairman mention bailing out pension funds i think he's referring to [2:56:55] the fact that in the american rescue plan we saved a million people's pensions uh they were losing their [2:57:02] pensions not wasn't their fault but they were about to lose their pensions and we saved those pension [2:57:07] plans uh and pensions uh in the american rescue plan act and i think that was a good thing if you ask [2:57:14] those who are about to retire uh whether they thought it was a good thing i think most would it would [2:57:19] agree when inflation the ranking member pointed out that we had global inflation on on under baden the [2:57:25] american rescue plan act and the other spending i think most experts said added a little bit of marginal [2:57:31] inflation but the spending also included in the american rescue plan act for families of four [2:57:39] about five thousand dollars in stimulus checks six thousand dollars in child tax credits many [2:57:45] received enhanced snap benefits and lower obamacare premiums and the question of whether it worked [2:57:51] if you looked at the end of the year credit card delinquencies were the lowest in 30 years [2:57:56] cow poverty dropped 40 percent so i think it worked and inflation under trump as the ranking members [2:58:03] pointed out specific policies like tariffs inflation and the war have added to inflation as far as 15 [2:58:12] million losing their health care is a good thing because they might be getting jobs all of the [2:58:18] information that we've received from states that have imposed work requirements on medicaid and snap [2:58:25] and found virtually no increase in jobs so if you have um mr mr vote any evidence that people will [2:58:33] get jobs as a result of that other than just people losing their health care would like to see it [2:58:39] now and the cbo estimates that that big you said the bill had a lot of different names big ugly bill is [2:58:46] one of the names we like to call it uh with interest that's going to add about four trillion dollars to [2:58:52] the to the debt what uh what uh what is what is your estimate of the damage done to the fiscal [2:58:58] situation by that bill it will reduce the deficit by 1.5 trillion dollars over the next 10 years if [2:59:04] you account for the right baseline congressman okay so everybody thinks it's going to add about four [2:59:10] trillion to the debt and you think it's going to um save money uh eisenhower was the last um um republican [2:59:19] president to leave to democrats a lower deficit measured by a percentage of gdp which is a normal [2:59:24] measurement uh a lower deficit than they they inherited uh does this administration plan to leave [2:59:32] a lower deficit than the one they uh inherited and if so are tax increases part of that plan the fiscal [2:59:40] situation was very steep when we inherited and what we inherited from the biden administration [2:59:46] we're doing everything we possibly can i think the things that we did this year collectively with [2:59:50] the congress as i've said is the end of fiscal futility for 20 30 years and you all know that i'm a budget [2:59:57] person uh worked on the budget committee as a staffer for members i know this place well uh there was [3:00:03] no success a lot of people talked about the issue there's a simple question do you plan to leave a better [3:00:08] do you plan to leave a better deficit than you inherited this is intentionally a discretionary budget [3:00:13] proposal uh we don't give you what our deficits long term are uh let me let me ask let me try to [3:00:18] make my time let me ask another question what does the budget assume for the future of the department [3:00:23] of education especially the office of civil rights if congress fails to vote to abolish the department [3:00:30] well as you know in this budget we both reflect uh the fact that we're trying to close the [3:00:34] department of education but that substantial resources will continue to flow to communities for [3:00:39] education uh there's only a two percent reduction uh in this budget for that particular department [3:00:46] and what's interesting about the bill that thankfully you all voted for is that you uh voted to endorse [3:00:53] many of the restructurings that we did you voted to eliminate usa id you voted not to have corporation [3:01:00] for public broadcasting when you voted for that that omnibus bills those bills that worked its way through [3:01:05] and so our belief is that we make is progress on the ground with these agencies department of education [3:01:12] included with interagency agreements to transfer work where we think that can be better done that [3:01:17] we're going to make the case to congress in a way that affirms and and and enacts those those reforms long [3:01:23] term the gentleman's time has expired you mentioned me mr scott the jobs essentially and virtually [3:01:31] were 100 percent government jobs i could create as many government jobs as you want if we just spend [3:01:38] a bunch of money the second piece was the butch lewis act essentially look we had to do something [3:01:44] you're right for these retirees but we needed to do it and fix the structural problem so then we didn't [3:01:49] end up where we where we were in the first place and so my criticism is it was a bailout because there [3:01:55] there weren't policy reforms to prevent us from being back in that well i work with you i work with you [3:02:00] i work with you on making some policy changes to make sure it doesn't happen you got it you got it [3:02:05] thank you uh helmet control act of 1974 says that the executive cannot unilaterally withhold [3:02:12] congressionally appropriated funds without a rescission or deferral request submitted to congress [3:02:17] director has omb withheld or delayed the obligation of funds appropriated by this congress without [3:02:22] submitting precision or deferral notices we have fully complied with the impoundment control act as you [3:02:27] probably know we are not fans of the impoundment control act we think it's unconstitutional the [3:02:32] president ran against it okay however we have replied with it did you did you withhold congressionally [3:02:38] appropriated funds without a rescission or deferral request submitted to congress that's yes right [3:02:42] not in violation of the impoundment control act we have did you ever submit on the system [3:02:45] that did you ever submit various programs you ever submit a decision or deferral request to congress [3:02:50] have you submitted a rescission package last year and actually two uh we continue to do programmatic [3:02:57] reviews to congress of programs that is not a withholding under the impoundment control did you [3:03:02] submit it to congress we don't need to submit if we're did not congressman if we're if we're just [3:03:06] assessing a program for ways for i understand you don't think you have to but i'm just trying to [3:03:10] establish you did not right you did not well it's it we submitted rescissions bills to congress last [3:03:16] year okay um two of them but not just not deferral notices that you were withholding they're not [3:03:21] deferrals under the impoundment control act okay uh the the government accountability office has [3:03:26] already found that the administration illegally withheld nearly eight billion dollars in nih grants [3:03:31] seven billion dollars for funding to support k-12 public schools nationwide and hundreds of millions [3:03:37] of dollars for head start programs across the country do you dispute geo's findings yes gao is typically [3:03:44] wrong they're very partisan uh they are are typically on the exact opposite of wherever the trump [3:03:49] administration is unfortunately i know you all look to them uh they are a branch of the legislative [3:03:55] body uh we have a very different view with regard to uh their the merit of their opinions and so it's not [3:04:02] surprising me that they have a different view on that do you have a legal opinion on that we we defend [3:04:07] to the hilt all of our legal decisions uh most of the time with regard to gao we we don't have a formal [3:04:13] legal opinion on that actually most of the time we will put out from omb a defense in response of [3:04:19] any of the gao not always but we try to be very forward-leaning and articulate because we feel like [3:04:24] we have the moral and legal high ground every time we make a decision i'm sure you feel like you have the [3:04:28] moral and legal high ground i get that impression i would just ask mr mr chairman for the record that we [3:04:35] add uh without objection if uh we add uh the the decision from gao of august 5 and july 23 on head [3:04:43] start and nih impound without objection so um you know i i i understand that the gao is part of the [3:04:51] government you don't like we don't get to decide what parts of the government we we follow and we [3:04:56] don't we have we have laws that are there for a reason and i guess we we should expect that that um [3:05:02] that you would abide by those procedures but you know whether it's tariffs or the war or um the way [3:05:08] you've manipulated the budget the administration just does not want to deal with congress and i have [3:05:14] to say to my colleagues in general that we've reached a point where if something's not going [3:05:20] well in this administration the response is not let's do something different the response is well [3:05:24] biden did it worse it is absolutely irrelevant joe biden is gone you you guys won that election we don't [3:05:32] dispute the results of elections you won the election joe biden's gone our job is today what [3:05:39] do we do in 2026 to make things better and um i don't this this budget will not meet that three [3:05:45] percent um target that we set without without aggressive aggressive um growth assumptions which [3:05:53] which i don't think we're going to see but whether you know why are we talking about joe biden joe biden's [3:05:57] been gone for two years it doesn't matter it doesn't matter the other thing i'd suggest is um [3:06:04] you know one of my colleagues mr smucker um said democrats don't care about fraud and i i just want [3:06:13] to just call that out a little bit because if you and i if mr smucker and i sat down together i think [3:06:19] we could have a discussion about fraud i think we do care about fraud we want to know what's real [3:06:23] fraud and what's not real fraud but i ask you not to question my motives don't say that i i will pledge [3:06:29] to you that i will i will bash your policies i think i think you guys are wrong i think you're wrong [3:06:35] but i don't question your motives i think everyone in this room is a patriot that wants to do the [3:06:38] right thing for the country and when we make each other our enemies the democrats versus republicans [3:06:44] this is the this is the weakest that we can create the weakest situation we can create for this [3:06:49] this country when when we are really not thinking of ourselves as colleagues but as enemies who don't [3:06:54] care about stuff i think that's really something we should stay away from and you know i think um i'm [3:07:01] sort of least worried about mr smucker because he's a friend i know him um and i but i see i hear [3:07:06] this all the time let's not question each other's motives um i think you guys are really wrong on the [3:07:11] policy i don't think that what you're doing is good for kids but it doesn't mean i don't think you care [3:07:17] about kids i just think you're wrong on the policy and so um maybe if we can get away from questioning [3:07:22] each other's motives we can start to get back to a level of collegiality that maybe we can focus on [3:07:26] policies but it is that is 2026 folks it is not 2023 it's not 2024. joe biden doesn't matter okay [3:07:34] it's what what matters today is what what's going on today what is this budget committee's job we are [3:07:40] not getting to the three percent target we all agreed to a few a few weeks ago uh from the gate and um [3:07:47] i just want to i say that we have a lot of work to do but um well the gentleman is making uh you know [3:07:53] some fair and fine remarks and i have the utmost sorry we're over time i do think that mr smucker's [3:08:01] comments were were intended to be on record contrasting on record not on motive what however [3:08:10] that came out i believe it was about the record not the motive but but i appreciate your comments [3:08:15] let's move saying we don't care about something is is a personal attack ranking member director it's good [3:08:22] to have you here before the budget committee although i agree with the ranking member it [3:08:26] shouldn't have taken this long and unfortunately though that we've seen is that that delay to me [3:08:32] is one of many examples of the broader disregard by this administration for congress and for our [3:08:37] system of checks and balances now don't get me wrong executive authority exists we get that [3:08:44] understand that but it does not extend to the administration unilaterally withholding funding [3:08:50] that's been appropriated by congress i'm not just saying that the law mandates it impoundments [3:08:57] occur when the administration refuses to implement federal expenditures authorized and appropriated by [3:09:02] congress and enacted in the law in fact there's been 235 years of constitutional interpretation case [3:09:09] law and statute which have made that clear that once the law is enacted the executive branch is not [3:09:15] permitted to refuse to execute that law an impoundment would basically replace the rule of [3:09:21] law with the rule of one person article 1 section 9 of the constitution clearly gives congress the power [3:09:29] of the person that states that no money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequences of [3:09:34] appropriations made by law and the constitution mandates that the president take care that the [3:09:40] laws be faithfully executed now as we heard today and as you know set in 1973 president nixon attempted to [3:09:47] impound billions of dollars of enacted clean water appropriations over the objection of congress and [3:09:54] as you know and trained the new york city and trained be the city of new york the supreme court unanimously [3:10:00] disagreed with president nixon that decision was even relied upon as precedent in the court's 98 decision [3:10:07] striking down president clinton's use of a line item veto to block certain portions of a spending bill [3:10:13] as you know nixon's attempt at impoundment was the basis for the 74 impoundment control act which banned [3:10:20] impoundments despite that law despite those supreme court rulings and as you mentioned today this [3:10:26] president this administration and you believe that impoundment is within the president's power your [3:10:31] general counsel argued that nearly all enacted laws are merely just suggestions and guidelines that give [3:10:37] the president and the executive branch substantial discretion to follow alter or even disregard your [3:10:43] administration basic basically asserts that a president has mandate to eliminate spending [3:10:49] to balance the budget by any means necessary the problem with that though director is that the [3:10:55] constitution of the united states does not have a presidential mandate exception and when it comes to [3:11:02] impoundment there is no language in the constitution that makes it optional if this administration [3:11:08] continues to impound or are appropriated spending you are basically eliminating congress's power of the purse you [3:11:14] are basically cutting off congress in the budget process and i think as members of this committee that is [3:11:20] something we should continue to push back on but since this congress especially with the leadership in [3:11:26] this congress has given up that power and let this happen the courts thankfully have been the bulwark [3:11:32] against you and your impoundments and your elimination of programs your attempt to lay off cfpb employees [3:11:38] got struck down in nteu this verse vote the preliminary exam a preliminary injunction was granted to stop your [3:11:47] attempts to withhold congressionally appropriated funds from the national endowment for democracy [3:11:52] the council for opportunity in education versus the department of education there was a preliminary [3:11:58] injunction to stop the releasing of federal trio funding in passito verse trump there was another [3:12:03] preliminary examination injunction to suspend the u.s refugee assistance program and in the city of [3:12:10] chicago versus dhs the administration tried to impound fema's shelter and services program but that was [3:12:15] stopped by a court in the national council of non-profits versus omb the administration tried to put a [3:12:20] government-wide funding freeze and that was stopped by the courts in the national fair housing alliance [3:12:26] versus hud hud refused to release fair housing initiatives programs funding and that was stopped by the [3:12:31] courts director given these court decisions given the constitution of the united states given the law [3:12:41] of this land do you still believe in impoundments 200 years of presidents have the ability to set [3:12:47] spend less money once again director do you believe in impoundments of course i believe in impound [3:12:52] okay thank you thank you the supreme court has never spoken on this issue by the way all of what you [3:12:57] said is is largely not true and heavily in regards to train versus city of new york that's not true it was [3:13:03] they struck that down the textual issue and isn't it true that article one section nine of the [3:13:07] constitution clearly gives congress the power of the purse to set the isn't that correct set the [3:13:12] limit on what an appropriation should be and despite all this you still believe in impound [3:13:17] believe right vitally in the constitution's ability to to make sure that we can't spend a dollar that you [3:13:22] haven't appropriated that is and once again a little provision director reclaiming my time once again [3:13:27] that is why i believe this congress needs to push back we're not seeing it with this leadership but [3:13:33] come november of this year the american people are going to make sure that you understand what [3:13:38] impoundments are thank you and i yield that gentleman's times expire where i work and i find [3:13:42] the needle large enough to burst the bubble that you guys live in because you're not living in reality [3:13:48] and you're creating a narrative and just because you say it you think it's true and so i've sat up here [3:13:54] and i've listened to a whole bunch of um explanations that i don't in any way shape or form uh [3:14:05] relate to reality i got a couple of questions to ask you sir um i'm going to start with one that's [3:14:11] going to give you a moment to speak and then i'm going to ask you a series of yes and no's and when i [3:14:17] say yes or no's i want yes or no's what would you say right now to the mothers of the kids who died [3:14:25] because of our your dismantling of us aid harvard's study says there are more than a hundred and [3:14:32] thousand of them can you give me a quick response to what you would say to those mothers just don't [3:14:38] talk to me about the study talk to me about how you what you would say to the mothers of the children [3:14:45] who died congressman with great respect i would just contest that the extent to which uh in institutions [3:14:52] that benefit from federal largesse put out studies that say that the world has ended that the world [3:14:58] has not in fact ended well it's going there we only cut usaid spending last year to the tune about [3:15:04] eight billion dollars there was far more that we could have done congressman reclaiming my time [3:15:10] if a mother came before you who told you that her child died because she didn't have access [3:15:16] to health care or a medicine that usually would be available because of the kindness of the united [3:15:26] states of america that you and this administration have eliminated would you have anything of empathy [3:15:35] compassion and humanity to say to her would you say to her i am sorry that was a mistake i always have [3:15:43] empathy for individuals including those that get improper and false information from the media that [3:15:50] pumps this this false and ignorant information out to the american you know i am so sorry to hearing [3:15:56] false fraud and abuse from any of my colleagues and even from you because if we wanted to eliminate [3:16:06] abuse and fraud we'd eliminate the president of the united states on the office right now [3:16:12] and the rest of the sycophants in his administration that are allowing him to do so many illegal things [3:16:20] so here's my yes or nos this is about your budget and this is about your priorities do you think that [3:16:30] it is more important to fight a war of choice there with a country that represented no threat to us [3:16:38] rather than uh supporting cuts to economic development administration to k-12 programs to community [3:16:46] service block grants to national institute of health to the tsa to the and let me speak something about the [3:16:53] tsa any time you wanted to spend money to pay dhs you could because this president thinks he's a king [3:17:02] and can do what he wants to do and if he wanted to pay those dhs workers he could have because he finds [3:17:09] money to do everything else he wants to do what about the money that goes to homeless assistance [3:17:16] programs that's 393 million or 60 million for uh fair housing or eliminating or cutting job poor to the [3:17:26] point that it it's of no help to getting people on the right uh direction and even the money for [3:17:35] community development financial institutions sir do you think that those programs which address the [3:17:44] quality of life the opportunity of life the healthiness of the people in this country including [3:17:52] their access to uh health care is less important than fighting a freaking war across the world that [3:18:00] never ever ever had to be started yes or no is all i want it's not a war of choice just say yes or no [3:18:08] it's not i don't care what you think it is i asked security objective yes or no that's all i want from [3:18:14] you it is an important national security objective that iran not that is another that is another piece of [3:18:19] the bubble that you live in and that's another part of the information that you all share to create [3:18:26] a narrative that has nothing to do with reality and the people of this country are showing you location [3:18:34] by location state by state county by county and city by city that they don't believe you all anymore [3:18:42] and let me talk to you a little bit with my three minutes or three seconds about the cost of living [3:18:48] you keep talking about what you saved here and what you saved there and how you save this one and [3:18:53] how you are are are more diligent in your savings well the people in this country they don't feel it [3:19:01] with their health care they don't feel it with the gas they got to put in their cars they don't feel it [3:19:06] when they go to the grocery store they don't feel it when they try to avoid evictions they don't feel [3:19:13] that you all have stood up to any of your promises that this is uh an unfortunately monetizing lying [3:19:24] corrupt administration the gentlelady's time has expired i yield my time uh mr vote it's good to [3:19:31] finally see you before the house budget committee mr vote you lead the office of management and budget [3:19:37] you're one of the architects of project 2025 and omb is a powerful agency that's at the center of [3:19:44] president trump's illegal refusal to spend federal money mr vote i want to go over your political [3:19:52] weaponization of this agency against the american people and specifically against those states that [3:19:59] voted primarily for democrats yes or no mr vote a federal judge found that you terminated 7.6 billion [3:20:06] dollars in clean energy grants based on whether the recipient lived in a blue state yes or no i [3:20:13] don't recall what that judge said but we have not made the determinations based on in fact in fact [3:20:19] mr vote on january 12 2026 u.s judge amik meta said quote defendants meaning you mr vote freely admit [3:20:28] that they made grant determination decisions primarily if not exclusively based on whether the awardee [3:20:34] resided in a state whose citizens voted for president trump in 2024. mr vote yes or no federal [3:20:42] judges said omb's freeze of 10 billion dollars in child care and family assistance funding quote [3:20:48] appear designed to punish communities that the administration agreed with yes or no was that [3:20:55] something that federal judges said about you and your leadership i think the judge's characterization is [3:21:00] getting at the degree to which we are focused on states that we think are mismanaged okay that [3:21:04] is not in fact the case in fact u.s district judge trina thompson found the administration broke the law [3:21:10] and froze funds as a politically motivated move disguised as fraud prevention so your characterization [3:21:18] actually is false other courts have said that withholding congressionally approved funding is [3:21:24] quote vindictive and unlawful courts have found that freezing funds create quote irreparable harm [3:21:30] against the american people against the american people and the gao the government accountability [3:21:35] office the watchdog agency that investigates how federal agencies spend taxpayer dollars has reported [3:21:41] that you broke the law multiple times and they have said that you have refused to set spend money [3:21:49] that was dedicated for americans the constitution gives congress congress the power to spend money [3:21:57] and not the president mr vote your actions clearly show that you want to cut federal funds from anyone [3:22:05] who didn't vote for donald trump are you trying to get revenge on states that did not vote for your [3:22:12] boss no of course not what's interesting about the question is that joe biden with hell for goodness [3:22:18] sakes can we please bring it back to my question it was a yes or no question are you trying to get revenge [3:22:25] against blue states because they did not support the president courts have said that in fact you did [3:22:33] do that that in fact you are being vindictive in fact you are punishing because of political persuasions [3:22:40] it's not members of congress who suffer when you do an end run around congress that's not what i'm angry [3:22:47] about it's not about you taking the power from us it's that it's their money it's their power of the [3:22:55] people by the people and for the people the house is closest to the people so when you do an end run [3:23:00] around congress you're taking americans power i want to move on now to wasteful government spending [3:23:06] particularly the 350 billion dollars set aside for this yes war of choice against iran included in [3:23:13] this president's budget his budget asked for a shocking surge in pentagon spending up to 1.5 trillion [3:23:20] dollars we have never in the history of this country seen spending like this paid for by splashing [3:23:25] slashing health care education and housing donald trump has said as my colleagues have said earlier [3:23:31] we're fighting wars here we can't take care of daycare mr vote yes or no is 350 billion dollars for [3:23:38] the war in iran lowering costs for americans those americans who ask us in every single town hall [3:23:45] why they can't afford to live in this country is the war lowering costs for americans it is certainly not [3:23:52] defunding child care we fully fund child care in this is it lowering costs for the american people [3:23:58] but doesn't that get at the premise of your question you can find money for illegal wars in iran you can [3:24:05] find money for all the pet projects of this administration and yet we can't find money to [3:24:11] alleviate the costs of food and housing and gas on the home front but according to you funded child [3:24:16] funded child care fully funded head start mr mr vote mr vote with the money that is set aside in [3:24:24] this budget the additional funding for the war in around 350 billion dollars we could fund the aca tax [3:24:32] credits for 10 years for a decade and i can tell you what my constituents want to know how is it that [3:24:41] we can continue to spend money on foreign wars and yet we cannot find a solution to the fact that people [3:24:49] can't afford health care and again in in closing i just want to say again it's we're not so angry [3:24:56] because you're taking our power we're angry because you are taking the people's power i yield the gentle [3:25:00] lady's time has expired if the gentleman wants to i would just say this president has been [3:25:05] a person who has campaigned and led for peace and against endless wars he is so is it is it gentleman [3:25:12] is that is that we're all right now i'm giving our witness the time to respond to your question and [3:25:19] then i'm going to yield five minutes to mr estes so finish the response uninterrupted and then let's [3:25:24] go to mr the president has also been equally clear that he is not going to allow a nuclear iran [3:25:30] he is not going to allow them to have nuclear weapons he is not going to allow them to have [3:25:33] missiles and a navy that impacts our national security so he is doing what is necessary to [3:25:38] keep us safe while at the same trying to pursue diplomacy so that we can get out of wars and lower [3:25:44] those those costs over time welcome mr vote despite president trump's promise to lower prices on day one [3:25:51] consumer sentiment plummeted to its lowest level on record last week gas prices are at a record high in [3:25:59] seattle diesel is now over seven dollars and families are feeling this every time they go to [3:26:04] the grocery store meanwhile fraud reports have only gone up and efforts to hold big corporations [3:26:10] accountable have just disappeared so congratulations mr vote you and donald trump have managed to [3:26:17] successfully tank the futures of millions of americans now republicans so-called one big beautiful bill which [3:26:25] i notice our colleagues have literally changed the name of because it is so unpopular it is not [3:26:31] beautiful to strip health care for millions of americans that bill costs 4.7 trillion dollars and is [3:26:39] expected to make up 20 percent of the next decade's deficit and it's all to pay for tax breaks for the [3:26:44] wealthiest americans and corporations the institute on taxation and economic policy just published a report [3:26:51] that shows that trump's policies are a tax increase for all americans except the wealthiest five percent [3:27:00] so for 95 those policies are tax increase do you know mr vote how many of the largest corporations in [3:27:08] america paid absolutely nothing in federal income tax in 2025 not off the top of my head but our view is [3:27:15] that the tax policy let me let me just tell you let me just tell you mr vote reclaiming my time let me just [3:27:20] tell you the number of corporations large corporations that paid absolutely zero in [3:27:27] federal tax was 88 at least that we know of including tesla which paid zero on almost 5.7 billion dollars of [3:27:36] income as well as coinbase citigroup cvs health and palantir and those companies together had over 105 [3:27:44] billion dollars in profits now meanwhile mr vote what's the average income tax paid by americans look [3:27:50] miss congresswoman this this bill that you are opposed to that you voted against do you know [3:27:55] the answer to my question because i get to ask the questions here i understand but so i'm asking you [3:28:00] what the average income tax rate is that's paid by americans and i'm suggesting that you were not a part [3:28:08] of keeping tax okay so you don't know it's fourteen and a half percent so while all these corporations [3:28:13] paid nothing average americans are paying fourteen and a half percent now are you aware that thanks to [3:28:20] stripping health care from americans the middle sixty percent of americans will pay nine hundred [3:28:25] dollars more on average than before trump came in and created chaos with tariffs and health care and [3:28:32] tax law that benefited the wealthiest you can just say yes or no did not strip health care and in fact we [3:28:37] provided fifty billion dollars for health care that you voted against in the president's budget request [3:28:42] you state that quote it ensures that every taxpayer dollar makes americans safer stronger and more [3:28:47] prosperous so please answer yes or no to these questions according to one survey one in six that [3:28:54] seventeen percent returning ac marketplace enrollees say they are not confident that they will be able [3:29:00] to afford their premiums this year does that make americans stronger and more prosperous it certainly [3:29:06] makes it more prosperous to have a health care system that ensures that okay so you're okay with all [3:29:12] these americans not being able to afford their health care premiums now you're trying to eliminate the [3:29:17] low-income energy assistance programs while trump's illegal iran war raises gas prices does that make [3:29:23] americans stronger and more prosperous it's important to not have fraudulent programs oh i'm so glad you asked [3:29:29] about fraud because you are coming back to ask for a 1.5 trillion dollar budget for the department of [3:29:37] defense how many consecutive audits has the department of defense failed as of the end of 2025 the department [3:29:46] is making progress towards the audit how many audits has the department of defense failed the number [3:29:53] is eight and mr vote the department of defense is the only federal agency that has never passed an audit [3:30:00] and you want to talk to me about fraud there is over at least 10 billion dollars in confirmed fraud [3:30:07] within the department of defense but you're not going after any of that now let me turn to the consumer [3:30:11] financial protection bureau since you're also the acting director there this was an agency that was [3:30:16] established to protect consumers from financial predation deception fraud and abuse from the [3:30:22] biggest banks biggest corporations and the cfpb has stepped in and really done that work under the last [3:30:29] administration cfpb put real money back in consumers pockets returned over 21 billion dollars to consumers [3:30:36] who were cheated or scammed by big banks giant corporations it ordered wells fargo to pay over 2 billion and [3:30:43] bank of america to pay 727 million to consumers who were harmed but you have a mission to eliminate the [3:30:51] cfpb why are you protecting big corporations instead of consumers mr vote i'm not cfpb caused 350 billion [3:31:00] dollars of added costs on consumers mr vote you are asking to reduce the cfpb's workforce to just one [3:31:07] third of its 2025 level which means that the department that oversees the banks and other [3:31:13] financial companies that hold trillions of dollars in mortgage auto credit card and student loan debt [3:31:20] would drop from 500 employees to just 77 and the enforcement department would only have 50 workers [3:31:28] what do you have to say to the millions of service members veterans older adults and students that are [3:31:34] seeing costs rise and now because of your unprecedented rollback of consumer protection staff have [3:31:41] nobody at the agency that is actually policing those big corporations that are scamming consumers [3:31:47] the general ladies time has expired policing it and in fact we do not believe that an agency that [3:31:52] increased the cost on the american people should not have oversight that's why we've reigned it in [3:31:56] you it is clear to me that you are just protecting those biggest corporations and you should be ashamed [3:32:03] of that vote i represent the cities of altadena and pasadena and southern california that are still [3:32:09] living through the aftermath of the eton fire that destroyed 6 000 homes last january for tens of thousands [3:32:16] of my constituents the experience looked like this it was the early hours of the morning and they were [3:32:21] sleeping peacefully in their homes suddenly they were awoken by loud sirens and the smell of smoke [3:32:28] as flames surrounded their properties their lives flashed before their eyes they frantically gathered [3:32:34] their loved ones their pets and escaped with simply the clothes on their backs 19 of my constituents [3:32:41] could not make it out on time and they tragically lost their lives the trauma that everybody witnessed was [3:32:48] harrowing and unspeakable they saw the places that they called home for decades the lives they built [3:32:54] all of their most treasured belongings engulfed in flames but here we are today over one year after [3:33:01] the eton and palisade fires and more than 70 percent of survivors have not yet returned home families are [3:33:08] depleting their savings delaying life-saving medical care and many are homeless of the 6 000 homes that burned [3:33:17] only half have yet to start the rebuilding process at all this is a crisis and my constituents need [3:33:23] assistance now luckily there's a straightforward solution to stopping this suffering and that is [3:33:31] finally granting governor newsom's federal disaster supplemental funding requests to provide an influx of [3:33:38] capital and resources to my constituents and that request includes cdbgr cdbg disaster recovery or dr which [3:33:47] is essential to my constituents ability to rebuild their homes and lives but every single day that [3:33:53] this funding is delayed recovery becomes more expensive and painful for survivors in my district [3:33:59] and across the this country so director vote uh i'd like to hear what your plan is to ensure that natural [3:34:08] disaster survivors receive this federal disaster supplemental funding whether it's the wildfires in [3:34:14] california the hurricanes in north carolina or the floods in texas for every major disaster of this [3:34:23] scale in recent history the federal government has intervened to help survivors when can my constituents [3:34:30] expect this relief a couple points congressman the federal government is intervening fema is funding the [3:34:37] cleanup and disaster work in your district and one of the things that we're fighting right quite frankly is [3:34:44] the degree to which the state and locality are impacting the ability of permitting for businesses [3:34:49] and homes to to build back fema is the front line uh funder for disasters it's not alternative [3:34:57] supplementals supplementals are what's on top of a fema program that right now is in dire straits [3:35:04] because the fact that the democrats will not let me just dire director vote actually there has been [3:35:10] supplemental disaster funding for every major disaster in this country whether it's a red state or a blue [3:35:18] state and in fact uh the permitting process is proceeding forward let me just say though on fema [3:35:26] it is the federal government's responsibility to provide both immediate and long-term assistance to [3:35:32] survivors and what you're what you're talking about are the immediate assistance to the survivors [3:35:37] natural disasters know no political affiliation and neither should the federal government's response [3:35:43] yet i'm deeply concerned about recent reporting indicating that your administration has rejected [3:35:50] disaster aid requests from democratic-led states at a rate higher than any time in fema's history [3:35:56] republican-led states saw 89 percent of their requests approved while democratic-led states saw a mere [3:36:04] 23 percent of their requests approved and that's there's never been such a sharp partisan disparity in [3:36:14] the approval of federal disaster funds since fema was created in 1979 and actually it's a staggering [3:36:21] disconnect from trump's first term where he approved 93 percent of the requests from democratic states [3:36:28] and 89 percent from republican states so a director vote yes or no will you commit to taking immediate [3:36:36] steps to reverse this unconscionable pattern no administration has looked more carefully at fema [3:36:43] dollars and how they're being spent one of the challenges that we face as i will repeat we need [3:36:48] democrats to come alongside and continue to help us fund the fema disaster relief fund when you vote [3:36:54] against dhs spending and vote against a bill that the democratic appropriators had blessed so let [3:37:00] me just say what you are doing is making sure that we're going to have a crisis professor vote i have [3:37:04] another point which is the best way to prepare communities is through brick funding the building [3:37:11] resilient infrastructure and communities grant program that's why i was alarmed when the administration [3:37:16] canceled billions of dollars of brick funding but a federal judge ordered that this funding [3:37:22] be restored i urge you to comply with the federal judge's order to restore this program i think the [3:37:28] gentleman agreed with you on the brick funding it was not meant to be canceled and it will go out the door [3:37:33] bus have done a deep dive in your project 2025 and much of what was in there is obviously being [3:37:43] executed now but i i think it's important to note that the american people are really unhappy [3:37:51] with the direction that we're moving in our economy is moving in in fact i just saw a fox news poll [3:37:58] that shows a record 64 percent of voters disapprove of president trump's handling of taxes and that's [3:38:07] up 11 percent since last year project 2025 as we all know defunds programs that save lives and help [3:38:16] uh americans hard-working americans while enriching billionaires but i want to begin with a very easy [3:38:25] yes or no question mr vote do you agree that the federal government has the fiduciary responsibility [3:38:32] to be good stewards of the american taxpayers dollar yes okay i and you and i agree with that um and so i i [3:38:41] want to given that it's tax day i want to focus a little bit on the irs and the budget lab has [3:38:50] a great report that i'd like to unanimous consent to enter into the record thank you chairman and it's [3:38:56] entitled a weakened irs has substantial consequences so spending on the irs has decreased obviously in [3:39:07] this administration and the what perplexes me is that the irs actually has a return on investment when [3:39:16] we invest in the irs we're able to invest in fighting tax fraud and we're able to bring in revenue [3:39:25] the irs reductions from funding and layoffs have resulted in that that are a result of project 2025 [3:39:32] and uh the one big so-called one big beautiful bill have resulted in about 861 billion dollars in [3:39:42] decreased revenue the layoffs from doge have likely resulted in almost 600 billion dollar reductions [3:39:53] in revenue and if if dhs gets access to irs data that will cost an additional 300 billion dollars in [3:40:05] revenue and we know that the programs that hard-working americans depend on need revenue and so the i i need to [3:40:16] ask you mr vote what is the logic behind defunding an agency that actually has a return on investment [3:40:26] the logic is that the biden administration had increased the irs to such a degree that it was [3:40:31] intrusive on small businesses and people across the country and i don't want to live in a country in [3:40:37] which the irs is auditing every american in the country because they've filed a tax return so so you [3:40:44] are okay with tax fraud certainly not okay i don't assume that the american people are doing tax fraud [3:40:49] when they file their taxes okay well you and i agree on that we all file our taxes um we we pay heavily [3:40:56] into the tax system but billionaires getting massive tax breaks really that's where we are seeing um [3:41:05] instances of fraud but they are being let off the hook i i just don't understand why we would [3:41:11] eliminate employees who are helping us find fraud and recoup our investment we're just trying to get [3:41:19] back to historic levels of irs and in fact we actually yeah you know mr vote i will tell you as [3:41:25] a member of congress one of the biggest complaints i get from constituents is they can't talk to a person [3:41:30] at the irs anymore and the wait times are um incredible so we um i i prefer i prefer a system that [3:41:39] actually works and that um is a return on the investment and and i will tell you the what is [3:41:46] alarming about the budget are the cuts to housing the cuts to education the cuts to health care [3:41:53] can you answer can you let us know um there are reports that the defense appropriation supplemental [3:42:00] will cost about a hundred billion dollars what what are you all asking for in order to fund [3:42:07] the war in iran how much will you be asking we're not ready to come to you with a request we're still [3:42:13] working on it uh we're working through to figure out what's needed in this fiscal year versus next [3:42:18] fiscal year do you have a ballpark i don't have a ballpark will it be more than 50 billion i don't [3:42:23] have a ballpark for you okay well i appreciate that i know the american public is eager to know how much [3:42:28] this war is costing them especially at the expense of programs that make their lives easier mr chairman i yield [3:42:35] back thank the gentle lady thank you mr chairman i've said for a long time that the budget is our [3:42:40] ultimate policy document yeah you can talk about what you value but the the budget is literally when [3:42:46] you put your money where your mouth is and i'm shocked by trump's budget proposal by its sheer cruelty [3:42:53] by its fiscal irresponsibility and you can do the magic math but the actual math is that there's 4.5 [3:43:01] trillion dollars in revenue cuts the money we take in but only 1.1 trillion dollars in spending cuts [3:43:07] that gives you 3.4 trillion dollars right off the bat and an increase to the debt and deficit of this [3:43:12] country but if you add in the increased debt servicing uh that is estimated by the congressional [3:43:17] budget office to go up to 4.7 trillion dollars in debt but take away the cruelty and the irresponsibility [3:43:24] i think right now what i'm so offended by is the indifference to how american families are struggling [3:43:29] right now in donald trump's economy yesterday just yesterday your department of labor released its [3:43:34] monthly price tracking report energy prices according to your numbers are up nearly 11 [3:43:39] last month gas went up over 21 home energy went up over 30 percent we've talked about some of these [3:43:46] cuts you know right now against this backdrop there's six million americans including 150 000 kentuckians [3:43:53] who rely on the low-income home energy assistance program to heat and cool their homes during the hottest [3:43:58] and coldest months of the year you admitted earlier to zeroing out that program but you said it was [3:44:03] because of fraud right do you believe that the 150 000 kentuckians the seniors who rely on this [3:44:10] program to heat their homes in the winter are all committing fraud i believe that there have been [3:44:16] numerous government studies and non-profit studies have said this is a fraudulent i'm going to reclaim my [3:44:20] time here because you know what you told me is you said you said just a second ago i don't assume [3:44:25] the american people engage in tax fraud but i guess you assume every senior in kentucky is engaging [3:44:30] fraud because they want to have a cool home in the summer and a warm home in the winter but it's not [3:44:34] just energy prices that are up everything at the grocery store is more expensive come to the program [3:44:39] bardstown road with me in louisville kentucky you'll see it for yourself and the iran war is only going [3:44:43] to make that worse because of the shocks to fertilizer and fuel costs a lot of our neighbors they rely [3:44:50] on a little bit of extra help especially when they can't afford their groceries look at the wildly [3:44:55] successful nutrition program for women infants and children known as wick it helps pregnant [3:45:00] breastfeeding and postpartum women feed themselves and their kids when they need it most after [3:45:04] republicans enacted the deepest cuts in our country's history to food benefits and more and more families [3:45:10] are struggling right now to do the president's policy your budget cuts breastfeeding moms fruit and [3:45:15] vegetable benefit from 54 to 13 a month is that correct we fully fund the wick program no you don't [3:45:22] here it is right here on page 164 in the second column of your budget i'm talking right now if [3:45:27] you want to talk you can run for congress uh on page 165 in the first column it cuts it it cuts [3:45:32] it from 54 to 13 a month and it looks like you're not stopping there you're coming for the roof over [3:45:37] people's heads too look at hud's continuum of care program that keeps 950 kentuckians in stable long-term [3:45:43] housing that includes 886 people with disabilities it includes 383 survivors of domestic domestic violence more [3:45:51] than half of those housed in kentucky right now are families with kids this budget zeros out that [3:45:57] program doesn't it you know what's interesting about yes it does i'll just i'll just i know i [3:46:00] reclaim my time my time mr chairman right now it does it's right here on table one three it zeroes [3:46:06] it out in your budget i could go on and on enlisting the moral crimes in this budget but i only have five [3:46:11] minutes this budget cuts the sba program for minority and women-owned business it cuts programs for [3:46:17] health and safety programs for coal miners it cuts funding for daycare for working parents [3:46:21] across the board it slashes the parts of government that help working people and replaces them with [3:46:26] more war and more ice abuses even with all of these cuts just like your budget did last year uh when it [3:46:33] cuts a trillion from health care to pay for tax cuts for the rich rich it still manages to blow up [3:46:37] the debt and the deficit by trillions but the budget isn't just a policy document it's a moral document [3:46:43] like you director vaude i'm a christian i won't question your faith i won't question the president's [3:46:47] faith despite what he did depicting himself as jesus and his attacks on the pope [3:46:51] but i grew up in a family where we read matthew 25 a couple of sundays ago on march 22nd my twins [3:46:57] were confirmed in our presbyterian church and they chose to be baptized we're a matthew 25 church [3:47:02] matthew 25 31 the parable of the sheep and the goats it says when i was thirsty you gave me drink [3:47:07] when i was hungry you fed me when i was without clothes you closed me when i was a stranger you welcomed [3:47:12] me when i was in prison you visited me and of course it ends with for the least of these [3:47:18] you did for me as well this budget sees the hungry it sees the homeless it sees the vulnerable and it [3:47:25] turns away that is not what we should be doing and it's why i cannot support it mr chairman i yield [3:47:34] back for holding this much needed oversight hearing director i'm sure you know you've got a lot of [3:47:40] nicknames things like grim reaper but i'm not here to call you names i am here to call you out on the pain [3:47:47] that you've inflicted on rhode islanders and americans who are fed up and i want to get to [3:47:52] the point so i'll keep things simple i've got a few yes or no questions should americans have access [3:47:58] to medical care yes or no yes well that's great that we're in agreement because if you chair cared [3:48:05] about the sick uh you wouldn't be forcing states to make impossible decisions about who will feel the [3:48:12] pain of trump and republicans cruel health care cuts from that big ugly law so bad that you [3:48:17] keep renaming it you've rebranded it about three times now kids with disabilities cancer patients [3:48:24] seniors who do you think should feel the pain you have forced rhode island to make impossible decisions [3:48:31] about who should suffer you want us to believe that we can't afford to help buy sick constituents [3:48:37] but you claim a smart budgeting to request 1.5 trillion dollars in defense funding for a department [3:48:43] that already has more money than they know what to do with to fight illegal wars i've got another [3:48:49] question for you should hungry children be fed yes or no yes and they are look i would believe you [3:48:56] if your struck shutdown strategy didn't put 144 000 rhode islanders at risk of going hungry our [3:49:02] was it was shut down yes your shut down yes because who's the one who voted against those bills sir [3:49:09] you have had a position where you have seen shutdowns as ways to break our federal workers as ways to [3:49:17] hurt the american people i'm reclaiming my time i'm reclaiming my time sir with six dollars a day too [3:49:24] generous for you look from one socket to providence in the first congressional district of rhode island [3:49:29] i visited food banks and i've seen the struggle to keep up with rising demand from hungary rhode [3:49:34] islanders and that's thanks to your cruelty look i have seen your actions and i want you to take time [3:49:43] with this particular question because you brought up it being our shutdown do you think a lot of good [3:49:50] comes from government shutdowns yes or no no well do you disagree with president trump then because [3:49:57] that's a quote from president trump you don't care about the 1.4 million americans who missed a paycheck [3:50:05] during trump's shutdown last year you want public servants as you've said to be viewed as villains [3:50:11] from air traffic controllers to naval officers to da employees i heard constituents harmed by your [3:50:17] shutdown there is nothing good about that it's damaging to real people sir you caused it you voted [3:50:22] for it look you were the you were the person that with all of your votes mr vote just like you did with [3:50:28] doge you think that good things come from breaking people you have said it's fine to break things and [3:50:33] pick up the pieces later i didn't make up these words those are your words that's has no regard to rhode [3:50:39] islanders who are still trying to put their lives together people around this country who are still [3:50:42] trying to put their lives together if you don't know your own words how can you show up here to speak [3:50:47] look as i'm going to wrap up because i don't want to afford you more time to tell more lies to the [3:50:52] american people you don't get to override congress because you disagree with how funds are spent you [3:50:57] don't get to force government shutdowns to break people your decisions have done nothing but hurt my [3:51:03] constituents they don't need washington bureaucrats like you making funding decisions that upend their lives [3:51:09] and you've said a lot of things today i've watched some of your your participation from my office i [3:51:14] saw some of it here and your actions reveal the truth despite your words when given the choice you [3:51:20] have chosen cruelty and chaos over billionaires over and over and over again billionaires cruelty chaos [3:51:31] attacked health care you put food for hungry kids at risk you ignored congress you jacked up prices [3:51:37] the american people are fed up breed every poll and you embrace shutdowns that hurt working people [3:51:43] so at its core sir i don't think you value the american people your disregard for their lives is [3:51:49] creating a great amount of pain and as you're hearing from our side our constituents are paying [3:51:57] the price yet you put forward a budget that grows but cuts again at the things that help the american [3:52:07] people i hope you have time to reflect on that and the pain that you're inflicting on constituents [3:52:12] around this country i yield back uh gentleman yields i would yield my director vote uh i'm glad that [3:52:19] you are finally here to testify before this committee uh a budget is a statement of our priorities [3:52:25] throughout your tenure at omb you've made the trump administration's priorities clear terrorizing federal [3:52:31] employees ripping health care away from millions of americans we see many of those in the halls of congress [3:52:36] today and illegally withholding money allocated by congress this is indeed unacceptable the american [3:52:43] people deserve better from you and from the budget i'm extremely concerned by this year's budget [3:52:48] treatment of behavioral health infrastructure and resources let me begin with a focus on samsa [3:52:53] a small but mighty agency whose impact is felt in every community samsa's mission is to lead efforts to [3:53:00] promote mental health prevent substance misuse and provide treatments and support to foster recovery [3:53:05] while ensuring access and better outcomes for all it serves those of us who are most in need it is [3:53:11] not an exaggeration to say that samsa's public servants prevent overdoses and suicides thereby [3:53:17] saving lives this budget and the recent addition actions of the trump administration are betraying [3:53:23] the americans who rely on samsa for behavioral health treatment and support so director vote under this [3:53:30] budget as part of an hhs reorganization would samsa be relegated under the so-called administration for a [3:53:37] healthy america aha is that yes or no uh we engage in a number of reorganization i'd have to check as to [3:53:45] where it's residing but we we endorse the mission of samsa in terms of substance abuse prevention and mental [3:53:51] health but we have a block rant in which we i'll clearly claim my time because i don't have much