House Budget Committee hearing on Trump's 2027 budget (part 1)

[0:00] Okay, this hearing will come to order. [0:04] I want to welcome everybody to the Budget Committee's hearing [0:09] on the President's Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Request. [0:14] And I would like, on behalf of my colleagues, [0:16] to welcome our guest, Director of the Office of Management [0:20] and Budget, the Honorable Russell Vogt, to the committee. [0:25] We appreciate your time and look forward to your remarks. [0:29] It's important, Director, to hear the President's vision [0:33] and priorities for resourcing the people's government [0:37] to provide for the common defense. [0:40] It's important to hear about the President's vision [0:43] and priorities for stewarding the people's treasure [0:47] to promote the general welfare of the public. [0:51] And it's important to hear the President's vision [0:54] and priority for resourcing the government to protect [0:58] and preserve our children's future and to secure the blessings [1:03] of liberty for the next generation. [1:06] That's why I think this is the most important committee [1:09] in the United States Congress, Russ. [1:12] And that's why meetings like today and discussions [1:16] and debates like today, I think, are paramount [1:20] for the governing of our great nation. [1:23] With that, I'm just going to jump into yielding myself such time [1:29] as I may desire. [1:33] Okay. No notes here. [1:36] Just some thoughts. [1:37] We've done well to have some constructive conversation [1:40] and have civil tone. [1:42] Today, I suspect, will be a little more amped up. [1:46] And I'm pretty amped up myself. [1:51] I hope we hear honest, constructive comments [1:55] and good faith debate. [1:58] But I suspect we're going to hear some spin. [2:01] I anticipate we'll hear some false narratives [2:05] and fear-mongering, conjecture, [2:07] and even flat-out misrepresentations of the truth. [2:10] That's what I expect, sadly. [2:12] I hope that didn't happen. [2:14] But what I think is important, director and colleagues, [2:18] and ladies and gentlemen, is that we put out what I believe is factual context [2:25] to this conversation. [2:28] Russ, I don't know of a president in my lifetime, maybe in history, [2:35] but in my lifetime, that has inherited such a complete [2:40] and utter mess as President Trump did in January of last year. [2:48] One self-inflicted disaster after another for four years [2:54] of the Biden-Harris administration. [3:00] Utter lawlessness, incompetence, a border that was wide open. [3:17] Millions of people, criminals, gangs, drugs that killed a plane load [3:23] of Americans effectively every week. [3:28] More people dying of the drugs coming across the border [3:31] than the people dying from the Vietnam War. [3:38] Again, all because of the dereliction of duty to uphold the laws of this land. [3:45] And a failure to do the first and most important job, [3:49] which is to provide for the common defense. [3:51] And the American people suffered. [3:53] Our resources were drained. [3:56] Our safety was jeopardized. [3:59] And there was no rule of law, the cornerstone of any civil society. [4:06] We had feckless foreign policy. [4:10] The withdrawal from Afghanistan was a dumpster fire. [4:13] We didn't do anything to preempt or prevent Vladimir Putin from invading Ukraine. [4:21] We were spending our time at the Pentagon teaching our troops a master class in pronouns [4:29] in the era of transgenderism. [4:32] And we were socializing our troops in radical ideology instead of preparing them to fight [4:41] and win wars and to restrain evil. [4:46] And the result was we had a much more unstable world. [4:50] I think we were made a mockery by our enemies. [4:55] And finally, we saw unbridled spending, about seven to eight trillion dollars record deficit spending. [5:05] If you add in the additional cost of interest that went skyrocketing, it's about 12 trillion overall. [5:15] We had a weaker economy, recessionary economy. [5:19] We had a cost of living crisis that we haven't experienced as a nation in almost a half a century. [5:27] We were paying people not to work. [5:29] The failed policies and the spending that created this unaffordability crisis was that we were paying people not to work. [5:39] Let's remember this. [5:41] We were bailing out union pension funds without fixing it, bailing out schools that didn't open for our children. [5:49] We waived work requirements for able-bodied adults in every welfare program, [5:55] while we allowed tens of billions of dollars to be drained from these important social programs for our citizens [6:05] by illegal immigrants in this country, millions of them. [6:11] The list goes on. [6:12] We taxed and regulated our job creators. [6:16] And again, the most regressive tax in my lifetime was the 20-plus percent increase in prices for working families. [6:28] Trump comes in, you and the team, in one year, secure the border, stop the flow, deport criminal aliens, [6:41] broker a peace deal in the Middle East, provide the greatest investment in national defense in the history of our country, [6:50] pull down the drain and the drive of our deficit and looming debt crisis in mandatory spending, [6:59] by rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse to the tune of about $1.5 trillion, [7:05] constrain spending on the discretionary side, cut taxes, cut spending at historic levels, [7:14] open up domestic energy production. [7:17] We had lower interest, lower inflation, a growing economy, wages are up, [7:24] people putting more money in their pockets before my Democrat colleagues shut the government down. [7:29] Over a COVID-era, fraud-ridden program to expand a failed underlying policy of Obamacare. [7:37] That was the first shutdown before the shutdown that we're in today. [7:41] We would have been at 2.5% plus growth. [7:44] We were made of mockery, derided for putting that assumption in our big, beautiful bill. [7:49] But that's exactly what CBO said where we'd be. [7:52] Over the 10-year budget window, that's $1.5 trillion to reduce the deficit. [7:56] So there is a reason that CBO, in their recent report six months into this fiscal year, [8:02] shows a 10% reduction in our deficit. [8:07] It's been decades since we've said that. [8:10] 10% reduction in our deficit because of growth, because of rooting out waste, [8:16] and bending the curve on mandatory spending, and controlling costs, [8:20] and cutting wasteful and unnecessary spending on the discretionary budget. [8:25] And because President Trump decided to lead on the world stage with respect to trade [8:34] and give our workers, manufacturers, and farmers a head-to-head fighting chance at trade deals. [8:43] And the revenue helped shore up our balance sheet. [8:47] So I'm pleased with what the President has done. [8:52] I'm proud he's our Commander-in-Chief. [8:55] I'm going to hear and think we'll hear a lot about a war of choice. [8:58] Let me tell you something. [8:59] It's a choice to play patty cake and have a policy of appeasement [9:05] with a jihadist, genocidal, radical terrorist regime [9:10] to the point that they are knocking on the door of having a nuclear weapon. [9:16] And that is what we've seen, not just from basic, [9:19] not just from our Democrat colleagues or Democrat presidents, but for almost 50 years. [9:25] So yes, we choose to defend our country's interest and protect our homeland [9:31] and the American people from serious and imminent threats. [9:36] And I've said before, I pray to God that whether it's a Democrat or a Republican in the Oval Office, [9:41] when they get those briefings, they're willing to put politics [9:45] and personal interests aside and do what's right for the country. [9:48] It's not easy. [9:49] It won't be easy. [9:51] But it never is easy to do the right thing in this town, Russ. [9:55] So thanks for being here. [9:57] That's the context. [9:58] I think this budget of yours shows directionally that we're going to continue to do that [10:03] and double down on it, right? [10:05] Reduce wasteful spending, invest in our defense, and continue to promote the growth [10:11] that we so desperately need. [10:14] And all boats will rise on that prosperity. [10:16] With that, I yield time to my colleague and ranking member, Mr. Brendan Boyle. [10:22] Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. [10:23] And thank you, Mr. OMB Director. [10:25] I didn't know how shy you were until the last 15 months when you weren't before our committee, [10:30] but do appreciate you taking the time today. [10:33] You know how bad this economy is when we hear Joe Biden being invoked, [10:38] we hear trans people being invoked. [10:41] I was waiting for Jimmy Carter to be blamed next, but apparently we didn't get quite there. [10:47] Let me just do a reset and present to you a set of facts, a set of data. [10:55] Right now, according to opinion polls, the approval of the economy of the American people [11:03] is at its lowest level since 2008, the Great Recession, 29%. [11:10] An average of the last three polls shows 30% approval, disapproval over approval of this [11:16] administration's handling of the economy more than two to one disapproval over approval. [11:24] The Michigan consumer data, consumer confidence level, the lowest level ever recorded, even [11:32] lower during COVID, even lower during the Great Recession, or even lower than during the [11:40] Great Recession. [11:42] If you look at the job creation over the last 15 months, there's one thing missing, and [11:49] that's job creation. [11:51] We have been in a jobless economy over the last 15 months. [11:58] Inflation, which actually, even though there's no question, we had an inflation crisis, not [12:03] just in the United States, but all throughout the world after the COVID pandemic in 2022, after [12:11] the pandemic had ended. [12:13] Every single month in 2024, inflation dropped over the preceding month. [12:20] What happened around April of last year? [12:22] Liberation day. [12:25] Inflation was liberated. [12:26] You saw inflation begin to increase. [12:28] And every single month, we've seen inflation increase. [12:33] And gas prices. [12:34] Yesterday, I was in Northeast Philly, where I'm from and where I live, a working class part [12:41] of the city of Philadelphia. [12:42] It was in front of the gas station. [12:45] The gas at that particular location was $4.11, which is slightly lower than the average nationally [12:53] and in the United States of about $4.15 a gallon. [12:58] Six weeks ago, that same gas station was under $3 a gallon. [13:04] We've seen over the last month the largest increase in gas prices in my lifetime, in the lifetime [13:11] of most people here. [13:16] What's different about this economy, unlike the inflation crisis after the pandemic, unlike [13:22] the Great Recession, unlike the recession of 2001, unlike the recession of 1992, the economic [13:30] downturn that we're experiencing, no jobs, record inflation, gas prices through the roof, [13:37] consumer confidence plummeting. [13:39] All of this is directly related to the policies of the Trump administration that you carry out, [13:45] Mr. Vote. [13:47] None of those previous examples that I cited, none of them could be directly attributed to [13:55] the policies of the president at that time. [13:59] We can debate about certain things that did influence them, particularly going into the [14:04] 2008 recession. [14:07] But with this president, the change is so abrupt. [14:11] The fact inflation was dropping month over month. [14:14] The fact that we had an incredible jobs economy until it was lost a year and a half ago. [14:20] You know, I'm from Pennsylvania. [14:23] The biggest battleground state in the nation, also the nation's birthplace, which we're making [14:28] a big to-do about this year in 2026 and celebrating our semi-quincentennial. [14:34] But Pennsylvania is really known over the last decade in our politics as the nation's biggest [14:40] battleground state. [14:41] So as a result, basically every day in 2024, in the fall, we had either Donald Trump or the [14:48] Democratic nominee Kamala Harris in our state. [14:51] Donald Trump had, I have to say, a brilliant campaign slogan. [14:57] He said, if your prices are too high, I will lower them, and I quote him, I will lower them [15:04] on day one. [15:05] Well, here we are, about day 450. [15:09] He hasn't lowered anything. [15:12] The only thing he's lowered is his approval rating on the economy. [15:16] He has lowered that. [15:20] Donald Trump and this administration have failed miserably on this economy. [15:26] They failed to bring prices down, and in fact, they made the situation worse. [15:32] With that, we have a lot of questions on this side since it's been 15 months. [15:36] You're the first OMB director ever to not appear before this committee last year. [15:41] I appreciate you at least today taking the time. [15:44] We have a lot of questions, and I certainly hope after today, if we send to you questions [15:49] in writing, that you would respond finally as you've ignored all of our previous requests. [15:55] It's a matter of basic respect for the Congress of the United States and for this committee, [15:59] and with that, I yield back. [16:01] I thank the ranking member. [16:02] In the interest of time, if any other member has an opening statement, I ask you to submit [16:05] it for the record. [16:06] We'll hold the record open to the end of the day to accommodate those members who may not [16:11] have prepared written statements. [16:13] Now, I'd like to recognize Director Vogt. [16:17] I want to again thank him for his time. [16:19] Committee, Mr. Vogt has received your written statements. [16:24] It will be made part of the formal record. [16:26] You now have five minutes for your remarks. [16:32] Thank you, member Boyle. [16:34] Members of the committee, thank you for having me here to testify on the president's budget [16:37] request for fiscal year 27. [16:38] I look forward to a productive conversation on how to continue the fiscal progress we've [16:43] made so far. [16:45] When President Trump took office, the nation was facing financial catastrophe under the [16:49] failed leadership of the Biden administration. [16:51] In decades of status quo spending strangling our nation. [16:55] Those decades produced nothing in the area of fiscal restraint. [16:58] A lot of talk about the program and the problems, but utter futility about doing anything about [17:03] it. [17:04] That fiscal futility has ended with the return of President Trump. [17:08] In just one year, the Trump administration and Congress have made historic progress on [17:12] righting our fiscal ship, the speed and scope of which have not been seen in Washington for [17:17] many years. [17:18] The president drove enactment of the Working Families Tax Cut Act, which is a once-in-a-generation [17:23] legislation to end fiscal futility, invest in critical priorities, and cut taxes for working [17:30] Americans. [17:32] This bill bent... [17:33] Mr. Vogt, just hold on for a second. [17:42] The chair notes a disruption in the hearing and request that the Capitol Police restore [17:47] order immediately. [17:50] The committee will briefly take a recess until we restore order. [19:38] Shut the door, please. [19:39] Mr. Vogt, please resume. [19:57] This bill bent the cost curve for federal spending, achieving nearly $2 trillion in mandatory savings [20:02] while securing historic investments in our nation's defense and the Department of Homeland [20:07] Security without corresponding increases in objectionable non-defense spending. [20:12] The president also shepherded legislation through Congress that rescinded $9 billion in [20:16] wasteful and weaponized spending. [20:18] Mr. Vogt, back up. [20:21] Start again where you left off. [20:22] We're going to wait until these folks move down. [20:24] I can't hear anything, and we're not going to let them disrupt this hearing. [20:29] As the ranking member said, we have some serious business to do. [20:33] I certainly don't think that these guys condone this disruption. [20:40] This is not the way this committee works. [20:42] Never has. [20:44] Since I've been here, I don't think it's going to work that way either side. [20:47] So let's move those guys. [20:48] Let's just, if you don't mind, Joe, to me, you know, in the three years and three months [20:52] since Jody's been chair and I've been a ranking member, I think this is the first we've had [20:57] of this. [20:58] It's a very serious issue, so I understand why they're passionate. [21:01] But we have actually, unlike other congressional committees that really do devolve into the, [21:06] you know, partisan food fight, this committee has conducted its business with seriousness [21:17] and purpose. [21:19] And I hope for the next three hours we can be true to that as we have been for the last [21:27] three years and three months. [21:28] Okay. [22:18] I think we're in a better spot. [22:21] Speak loudly into the mic and let's proceed. [22:26] The president also shepherded legislation through Congress that rescinded $9 billion in wasteful [22:31] and weaponized spending, which was the first standalone rescissions package enacted by Congress [22:35] since 1992. [22:37] He canceled $3 billion in excessive spending that was wrongly designated as an emergency [22:42] by the Congress and executed a historic pocket rescission to eliminate $5 billion in wasteful [22:47] foreign aid. [22:49] Upon signing this year's appropriations bills, President Trump continued to bring discretionary [22:53] spending under control. [22:55] The full 2026 appropriations bills enacted the first real spending cut in over a decade [23:01] to discretionary spending. [23:03] It rooted out wasteful spending that the administration identified across federal agencies. [23:08] The enacted bills reaffirm administration policies to eliminate ineffective federal agencies that [23:13] do not serve a useful purpose. [23:15] For example, the bills eliminated all programming for USAID as the administration works to fully [23:21] shut down the agency after decades of mismanagement and abuse. [23:26] This also included the complete elimination of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which [23:30] funneled billions of taxpayer dollars into biased and woke programs at NPR and PBS. [23:37] We look forward to working with you to achieve even more progress in the next appropriation [23:41] cycle. [23:42] This budget builds on the President's vision by continuing to constrain non-defense spending [23:46] and reform the federal government. [23:48] The budget proposes a 10% cut to non-defense compared to 2026 levels. [23:54] Within this total, the budget maintains investment in border security and immigration enforcement. [24:00] It delivers on the President's commitment to support law enforcement and combat violent crime [24:04] with a 13% increase to the Department of Justice and honors the nation's sacred obligation [24:10] to our military veterans. [24:12] In addition, this 2027 budget eliminates wasteful Green New Deal projects that are dependent [24:17] on foreign supply chains, returns control of education back to American families, and roots [24:23] out waste foreign abuse in programs both at home and abroad, ensuring that every taxpayer [24:29] dollars makes Americans safer, stronger, and more prosperous. [24:33] The budget simultaneously builds upon the historic $1 trillion fiscal year 26 defense [24:39] top line by requesting $1.5 trillion for 2027, a 42% increase as promised by President [24:46] Trump last year. [24:49] The 2027 budget will ensure that the United States continues to maintain the world's most [24:53] powerful and capable military as we grapple with an increasingly dangerous world. [24:58] It is a sizable increase, and I want to explain that. [25:02] It is meant for significant paradigm-shifting investments. [25:05] For instance, the President and his Department of War are exhibiting tremendous leadership to [25:10] build ships, planes, drones, munitions, and satellites faster without the backlog of status quo. [25:18] For the industrial base to double or triple and build more facilities, not just add shifts, [25:24] it requires multi-year agreements to purchase into the future. [25:27] That cost has to be booked in this first year. [25:31] Under President Trump's bold leadership, every tool in the executive fiscal toolbox has been [25:35] used to achieve real savings, and our administration will continue to do so. [25:40] A historic paradigm shift in the budget process is occurring, and it is producing real results [25:45] for the American people. [25:47] Fiscal futility is over. [25:49] Now that our fiscal ship has finally turned and is facing the right direction, I look forward [25:54] to working with you to continue to move it forward. [25:57] We have much work to do. [25:58] Together we will achieve significant savings while implementing the President's bold vision. [26:05] I think the gentleman, Director Vogt, and we'll now move to Q&A, and I will yield myself five minutes. [26:16] So Director Vogt, you heard my ranking member put forward some economic metrics to compare and [26:26] contrast four years of Biden-Harris and the first year of the Trump administration. [26:33] The average inflation rate, it got as high as 9%, but the average was 5%. [26:41] The average inflation rate during President Trump's first year, and it went down, 2.7%. [26:50] The gas prices under Biden-Harris were $5. [26:54] It also went down. [26:56] We expect a bump up in that for a time being, but we expect it to go back down. [27:03] But in terms of comparing and contrasting the measures of economic success and the things [27:11] that would have driven the affordability crisis in this country, speak to that from your perspective. [27:20] Again, what drove those things, where we were then, where we are now one year into this administration? [27:27] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [27:28] I'm honestly astounded that the Democrats would make an issue of inflation when they [27:34] had 9% inflation under the Biden administration. [27:37] We hadn't seen anything in nearly a generation. [27:40] And when we left office, you and I, Mr. Chairman, were having trouble reminding the political [27:46] class, the economic class, the policy community that inflation could be a problem again. [27:53] And when the Biden administration began to pass the COVID packages and the Inflation Reduction [27:58] Act, of course, which weren't anything but, and to spend at a level that we haven't seen [28:05] in a very long time, it was me and Larry Summers, a Democrat, that were saying, we are going [28:11] to see inflation skyrocket. [28:13] And in fact, we did. [28:15] It was not because of supply chains or economic shocks. [28:17] It was because of spending was dramatically increased at a time where there was no need [28:26] for it at that time. [28:27] The important rescue measures had already occurred and ensured that we didn't have any kind [28:32] of deflationary spiral in the midst of COVID. [28:35] It was because of spending. [28:36] And so this administration has come into the economic disaster, which was the Biden administration, [28:43] and gotten costs lower. [28:45] It has ensured that we have fiscal progress so that the era of big spending is over. [28:52] We have, like I've said, we have the end of fiscal futility. [28:56] I look around at many of the pictures of the chairman who have labored to work at getting [29:04] the cost curve down, most of them unsuccessful. [29:08] This particular budget committee has not. [29:12] They have been successful in conjunction with the President of the United States. [29:16] I hope that continues. [29:18] We're in the midst of passing and we passed the extension of the President's tax cuts. [29:24] Many of those were aimed at working class individuals. [29:27] They're now going through their first season of seeing what changes that will make on their [29:33] bottom line. [29:34] And I think that's going to lead to an explosion in affordability for the American people. [29:39] This side of the aisle would have said, we're not going to extend those tax cuts. [29:43] And that would have led to an economic depression. [29:46] The notion that you're going to raise people's taxes by 30 and 40 percent and not impact the [29:52] economy is simply not true. [29:57] And it's a dishonest debate to be able to say that one part that one side didn't want [30:01] to extend tax cuts and cause the inflation is somehow going to be a better steward of [30:06] economic gain and growth in this country than the one that is existing in the White House [30:15] right now under President Trump's effective leadership. [30:17] We stopped the reckless spending. [30:20] We bend the curve on the fraud that is sapping these entitlement programs and safety nets for [30:29] those who need them the most. [30:31] What you will hear and what I've heard now for as long as I've been in this position, [30:36] at least over the years or the last year since the President has been in the Oval Office, [30:42] and certainly during the Big Beautiful Bill debates, was that we were cutting much needed [30:48] programs for vulnerable American citizens. [30:52] But the CBO, the nonpartisan CBO, put out a missive that outlined the people, the millions [31:01] of people who were ineligible or illegal or who were healthy, able-bodied adults refusing [31:08] to work, again, that were draining the social safety nets and the tax dollar and hard-earned [31:18] treasure of the American people. [31:19] Any comment on just the waste and fraud focus? [31:23] And then I'll move on to the ranking member's question. [31:25] I mean, it was historic welfare reform that the Congress passed and the President signed [31:28] into law. [31:30] Just to give people a reminder, historically, you had President Clinton sign into law welfare [31:35] reform with the Republican Congress. [31:39] Those historic reforms which led people to get off of welfare, experienced the dignity [31:43] of work, led to lower case loads with one program, TANF, cash assistance, was then added [31:51] to Medicaid and to food stamps. [31:55] Historic reforms. [31:57] And we're going to see the benefit of that with people getting back to work. [32:01] Remember, this is the able-bodied population within Medicaid. [32:05] This is not those that can't work. [32:08] This is the able-bodied population in Medicaid that can work. [32:13] And it will lead to people that were ineligible for Medicaid previously and subject to fraud [32:22] no longer being on the books. [32:23] There were substantial reforms made to ensure that states tighten their roles and we get [32:29] back in the business of having a social safety net that we can afford and is thriving [32:35] for the American people. [32:36] Thank you, Director Vogt. [32:39] Okay, I'm going to give my ranking member some extra time because I know I went over [32:42] and then I'm going to be unusually disciplined on the clock. [32:47] But you get some extra time, just in fairness, okay? [32:50] So your Q&A for five minutes plus. [32:54] All right, thank you, Mr. Chairman. [32:57] There are a lot of areas I would like to get to, but between me and my colleagues, at least [33:02] on this side of the dais, I think we'll get to them all. [33:05] Let me start by reminding people back nine months ago what President Trump called at the [33:11] time, though he wants to rebrand it and never talks about it now. [33:15] This is one big, beautiful bill, though it has been known by many other names. [33:22] That piece of legislation, despite your rhetoric about this budget committee succeeding on deficit [33:28] and debt, according to the Congressional Budget Office, as well as other nonpartisan groups, [33:35] both left of center and right of center, have said that single piece of legislation adds [33:41] more to our deficit and debt than any other piece of legislation passed by Congress in American history. [33:50] In addition to the over $4 trillion it adds to our national debt, it eliminates healthcare coverage. [33:59] For more than 15 million Americans, according to the CBO, the Kaiser Family Foundation says it's [34:07] actually more than 17 million Americans who will lose their healthcare. [34:11] Are they really all according to you? [34:13] Really? [34:14] You're going to sit here with a straight face and say they're all illegals, they're all defrauding [34:19] the system? [34:20] That's actually your position? [34:21] Yes. [34:22] With regard to the people that have lost that- [34:24] I mean, that's laughable. [34:25] That's laughable. [34:26] I'm sorry. [34:27] I'll give you a chance to respond. [34:28] You have a number of issues with regard to your comments there. [34:31] Well, wait, let me just- [34:32] Number one- [34:33] Sorry. [34:34] Wait, reclaiming my time. [34:35] I just want to be clear. [34:36] I'm citing, we acknowledge, the CBO figure, that's where I'm getting the 15 million from, [34:42] and the Kaiser Family Foundation says 17 million. [34:45] You're saying none of them are legitimately on this, even though we had one of them actually [34:50] testify before us- [34:51] I didn't say all of them are illegals. [34:53] I said there's also the benefit of people returning to the workforce because they are [34:57] able-bodied individuals, or they should not have been on the system regardless because [35:01] of the inability to address fraud in the aftermath of the- [35:06] Okay. [35:07] So they're all either illegals or defrauding the system? [35:09] Well, we certainly- that's certainly not a provocative statement that we have fraud [35:13] all over the country, is it, Mr. Rankin? [35:15] Why are- I imagine there are fraud in all sorts of private and public sector areas, but [35:21] the idea that 15 million Americans are about to lose their healthcare- the single biggest [35:27] loss of healthcare in American history, mind you. [35:29] Not even during the Great Depression did 15 million Americans lose their healthcare coverage. [35:34] The idea that all of those people who are about to lose their healthcare are defrauding [35:41] the system or are illegal immigrants, that is not supported by any facts whatsoever. [35:47] They're not working and are now working and getting the benefit of a job with employer-sponsored [35:51] healthcare coverage. [35:52] Look, these assessments by CBO and others are often very static. [35:58] It's one of the reasons- I mean, it's right-of-center groups as well. [36:01] Well, reclaim my time. [36:02] I only have a few minutes, so excuse me. [36:06] But it's not just CBO. [36:07] I mean, right-of-center groups, left-of-center groups, nonpartisan groups, you're saying they're [36:12] all wrong. [36:13] I am saying that the budget community typically relies on static thinking, static scoring, current [36:21] law baselines, and so you don't get an accurate picture of the extent to which the reforms [36:27] that are being made are going to have a dynamic impact with better programs, more healthcare, [36:32] for instance. [36:33] All right. [36:34] $50 billion. [36:35] Well, let me, before we get to the friends, I only have a couple minutes, so let me actually [36:37] transition to my next subject because I think I'll only have time now for this. [36:42] The president recently said, I mean, he was talking about the record increase in gas prices [36:47] thanks to him and his war of choice in Iran, but he diverted in a spontaneous, he's speaking [36:54] extemporaneously in the White House just a few days ago. [36:58] He said, and I quote, the United States can't take care of daycare. [37:02] That has to be up to a state. [37:05] He then added Medicaid, Medicare, all these individual things. [37:10] They can do it on a state basis. [37:13] You can't do it on federal, so I'm just curious from your perspective at OMB, have you taken [37:20] any actions to turn Medicare back to the states? [37:23] No. [37:24] And the president doesn't want to do that with regard to these- [37:26] Well, he said it. [37:27] I mean, he said it. [37:28] He's referring to- [37:29] So you're disagreeing with what the president said? [37:30] No. [37:31] I'm saying that the president meant is he's talking about fraud in these programs. [37:34] He's talking about- [37:35] He didn't mention, excuse me, reclaim my time. [37:37] Nowhere, I have the full statement in front of me. [37:39] Nowhere in front of me is the word fraud presented. [37:42] What he was talking about, he later at a different part said, we have to pay more for wars and [37:48] instead we can't afford Medicaid, Medicare, childcare, things like that. [37:53] And looking at the budget proposal, this is why I raise it, $442 billion, correct me if [37:59] I'm wrong, $442 billion increase in defense. [38:05] That's what you're asking for? [38:06] About a 42% increase, is that right? [38:09] Correct. [38:10] How many paradigm shifting investments that we need- [38:13] A 42% increase on what was already a record high for defense. [38:18] And look, I serve as part of our U.S. delegation, the NATO parliament. [38:21] I am no pacifist, I believe in a strong national defense, I believe the United States. [38:27] I believe the world is at its best when the United States has the strongest military. [38:31] The idea that we're going to pay for a 42% increase in this military, in this Department of Defense, [38:40] and at the same time cut Medicaid, Medicare, not pay for childcare, all of these things that the American people need in the case of Medicare have paid into, [38:50] that is a reflection of priorities that are out of whack. [38:55] And I see I've gone over my time. [38:58] I appreciate your indulgence. [38:59] So with that, I yield back. [39:01] Thank you, Mr. Ranking Member. [39:03] Without objection, I'd like to submit for the record this letter from CBO that confirms, in fact, [39:10] that the one big, beautiful bill and the coverage impacts that have been discussed here, that those millions of people that were mentioned [39:21] were either ineligible for the program, illegal immigrants, or they were able-bodied adults who refused to work. [39:30] And then I'm going to submit this, which is CBO's final analysis, that confirmed the same thing. [39:37] So without objection- [39:40] I mean, I don't, I'm not going to object to the submission of the letter. [39:43] I do object, though, to your characterization of the letter. [39:46] Everyone should read the letter. [39:48] Absolutely. [39:50] But nowhere has it been found by anybody that the 15 million Americans about to lose their health care are all illegal immigrants or defrauding the system. [39:58] We'll bring it up when we have the next CBO oversight hearing, and we'll go through that letter in great detail, along with the facts it supported. [40:06] With that, I'm going to yield to the rank, to the vice chairman of the committee, Lloyd Smucker, for five minutes, then Lloyd Doggett, Tom McClintock, Bobby Scott. [40:14] Thank you, Chairman. [40:17] Thank you, Director, for being here with us. [40:19] You know, I, the ranking member mentioned, is from Pennsylvania. [40:23] I'm from Pennsylvania as well. [40:25] And I've talked to my constituents about how they feel or what they're experiencing under the policies of the big, beautiful bill, under the policies of your office and of the president, compared to what they were experiencing under the Biden administration. [40:43] I can tell you that I am willing any day to put our record up against what they experienced during the Biden years. [40:52] And I just want to remind listeners of what happened, 9% inflation, an average of 5% meant that, and wages not keeping up, meant that working families literally lost about a month's worth of the entire year of spending power. [41:12] And so they really felt it when they went to the grocery store. [41:16] They filled their tanks with gas. [41:20] It just simply had become unaffordable for them. [41:24] And what I'm really proud of under the policies that we've advanced with your help is that we are now in a period of time when wage growth is outpacing the increase in cost of goods. [41:40] And so this started, I think, back in June. [41:43] Maybe you could clarify that for me. [41:45] But so, you know, over time, people are feeling like they're in a better position due to the policies of this administration. [41:55] And I want to, you know, I want to remind where it's, it's April 15th. [42:00] People are seeing the impact of the tax bill that we had done. [42:07] And so it's maybe appropriate that you're here on this day, because I think we can be very proud of the assistance and the help that we've given to working families all across America. [42:19] I want to remind members here that 20 million Americans took advantage of the no tax on overtime, a very important policy to folks in my district and the districts of everybody here. [42:32] And I want to remind folks that Democrats voted against that policy. [42:38] Millions of Americans took advantage of the no tax on tip. [42:41] I can talk to a lot of them who are very grateful that they're able to keep more of their hard earned dollars. [42:48] Every Democrat here voted against that policy. [42:52] We effectively eliminated taxes on 88 percent of those who are receiving Social Security. [43:00] Every Democrat here voted against that policy. [43:04] And in fact, we prevented what would have been the largest increase on middle income Americans when we passed the one big, beautiful bill. [43:14] And every Democrat here voted against that policy. [43:17] The Republican Party, through that bill and other things that we've done under this administration, [43:23] is the party that is working to improve the lives of working Americans all across the country. [43:30] They're feeling better because of that. [43:32] And I'm very proud of the work that we've done. [43:35] You know, to the questions that the ranking member had asked regarding the individuals on Medicaid [43:45] or health care who he alleges will lose their health care coverage, [43:50] we put in place provisions that prevented illegal immigrants from accessing taxpayer dollars. [43:58] Democrats voted against that. [44:00] They don't care that some of those, and I don't know the number, [44:04] literally are individuals who are here illegally in the U.S. [44:11] and taking hard-earned taxpayer dollars for their benefit. [44:15] Democrats don't care about that. [44:16] They voted against that. [44:18] They don't seem to care that our policies have moved people from relying on government policies, [44:26] and they've entered the workforce and have probably better health care through their employees, [44:31] which is a significant portion of their job. [44:33] They don't care about that. [44:34] They literally don't care about that. [44:36] They voted against every one of these policies that are helping working Americans. [44:41] And then, and I'm taking a lot of my time, but in regards to adding to the debt, [44:47] because I know you care about the debt. [44:49] I care a lot about the debt. [44:50] We've talked about moving to 3% deficit to GDP within the hopefully not too distant future. [44:59] We've made progress on that, and this is the point I just wanted you to address briefly. [45:04] Our deficit this year, last year, was lower than the year before for the first time in a long time, [45:09] due to the policies of the bill that we passed, and we're having increased federal revenue. [45:15] I wonder if you would just very briefly talk about that. [45:18] How could we pass a bill that literally keeps taxes low for Americans, but yet we're seeing increased federal revenue? [45:24] The gentleman's time has expired. [45:25] Brief response, and then we're going to go to Mr. Dawkins. [45:27] This is a phenomenon that our side tends to make often, that when you continue to have good tax policy, [45:33] revenues are going to go up, and revenues we expect to be higher than their historical average [45:38] with the extension of the tax cuts that was done with the one big beautiful bill. [45:43] We used multiple names for them. [45:44] The president, as recently as two days ago, referred to as the one big beautiful bill. [45:49] We are trying to get the word out to the American people. [45:52] Congress did so much in that bill, so much that helps the American people. [45:57] We want to explain that working family tax cut at every opportunity that we possibly can, [46:02] so that they're aware of what they're going to see in their tax returns. [46:04] I yield five minutes to my friend from Texas, Mr. Lloyd Dawkins. [46:08] Thank you. [46:09] Under your direction, Mr. Vogt, at the National Institutes of Health, [46:12] last year grants for Alzheimer's and aging research were cut almost 50 percent. [46:18] Mental health, 47 percent. [46:20] New grants for cancer research, 23 percent. [46:23] And as I read the budget that you're here presenting today, the Trump regime's response is that medical research has not yet been cut sufficiently. [46:31] Doesn't your budget propose another 12 percent cut at the National Institutes of Health? [46:36] Most of what you said is untrue. [46:39] NIH was not cut at all last year. [46:42] We proposed a series of reforms to lower the cost. [46:45] We continue, although not as much to lower the cost this year. [46:48] Reclaiming my time, my question to you is don't you propose to cut the National Institutes of Health by another 12 percent? [46:53] We propose to have a cut to the National Institute of Health. [46:57] Thank you, sir. [46:58] Reclaiming my time. [46:59] That goes after specific programs. [47:00] Yes, sir. [47:01] Thank you. [47:02] Reclaiming my time. [47:03] Like the Minority Health Disparity Institute. [47:05] Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will please yield, he can filibuster when he's in the Senate. [47:11] What we do know as far as the truth is that there were fewer grants for new cases last year at NIH than at any time in the last 30 years. [47:21] Is it your feeling in proposing further cuts at NIH that there are just not enough worthwhile projects out there, [47:30] or that we cannot afford to invest more in doing something about Alzheimer's, cancer, Parkinson's, HIV, other dread concerns? [47:40] There are many worthy health investments out there. [47:43] I think post-COVID for an institution that contributed to the pandemic itself with the funding of gain-of-function research, [47:49] to give that institute $42 trillion, which is more than it got under the COVID pandemic, is very generous. [47:57] The kinds of things that we're trying to do with the National Institute of Health. [48:00] Indirect cost rates. [48:01] We don't think when Bill Gates gives 10 percent for parkings and administrative costs and buildings, that should go. [48:08] Reclaiming my time. [48:09] My time, after giving last year fewer grants at any time in the last 30 years, you are proposing further cuts there. [48:17] And, of course, the cuts are not only to medical research. [48:20] But, is it correct that in your budget you would cut the National Science Foundation, which has in the past provided grants that helped on artificial intelligence, [48:29] intelligence on laser eye surgery on MRI technology among others that you propose [48:36] to cut it by 55% we have a sizable cut to National Science Foundation over half [48:41] of the funding but it will not impact our investments on artificial well it's [48:45] that's good no because you may be the only person along with President Trump [48:50] who believe that a reading from the director of a consortium of research [48:54] universities he says your budget cuts are the equivalent of working in a [48:58] company that feels like it's on the verge of bankruptcy another one says slow [49:03] scientific progress threatening the nation's position in the world economy [49:07] and that's one of my concerns because when you eliminate these research budgets [49:12] you impact long-term economic growth are you aware that one international [49:17] organization has recently said already the United States has fallen behind China [49:21] when it comes to research we have no doubt in our mind that we are going to [49:26] still be the leading innovator funder of research both private and public our [49:34] view is that we want to make sure that there's a dollar that's actually well [49:37] spent on research thank you very much I'll accept that as you're disagreeing [49:41] with the international organization that says we've already fallen behind China do [49:45] you agree that the impact of federal research dollars helps to stimulate private [49:51] investment in fact one estimate is every federal dollar generating eight times as [49:56] much in private investment on research mr. congressman I don't think the Fogarty [50:02] International Center which is at the NIH spend 224,000 for a survey on how [50:07] Buddhism creates HIV stigma in Thailand that's what your hard-earned tax dollars [50:12] is going to fund under the guise of research investment I don't think 20,000 should [50:17] go that's fine mr. that's fine thank you it's fine that you go through and [50:21] eliminate any project like that but that doesn't justify providing the fewest [50:26] number of grants for these key dread diseases in 30 years I want to ask you [50:31] about the comment that was referred to by a president Trump about the fact that [50:37] we can't afford daycare at the federal level of course your budget provides no [50:41] increase in funding for childcare does it we flat fund childcare we're not [50:47] again you also eliminate the program do you not that provides assistance for [50:52] some people with heating and air conditioning the LIHEAP program you [50:55] terminate that entirely it is a historically fraudulent program you [51:00] terminate it entirely or not we we were we do not have funding for LIHEAP yes [51:05] believe in in the moment we are fighting fraud of all the many things the [51:10] president says he wants to cut you have not gotten to Medicare in this budget yet [51:14] we don't that will be the next one we don't like coming up next is Medicare [51:19] because as the president said that's a state function well many of us believe [51:23] it's a vital program to protect the health of our people we don't want to [51:28] see what happened to it have that what happened to Medicaid and already and to [51:33] the Affordable Care Act happens to Medicare and that's very much what's at stake [51:37] here I yield back can I address that mr. chairman [51:41] very 30 seconds we do not believe that LIHEAP should go to incarcerated [51:46] individuals and dead people is a notoriously fraudulent program by the [51:51] same experts that the ranking member continues to cite on a number of other [51:54] issues well I'm sure the dead people argument applies just about as much as [51:58] it did President Trump's claim that people that were three gentlemen's times [52:01] years old we're getting social security gentlemen all phony my friend from Texas [52:05] time is expired gave the gentleman an opportunity to answer your question or [52:10] respond mr. Tom McClintock you have five minutes thank you mr. [52:15] chairman if I were the ranking member I'd be very careful about reproaching this [52:18] administration on inflation we need to remember every dollar that you had the [52:22] day that Biden and the Democrats took power was worth only 79 cents the day they [52:29] left office compare that to Trump's first term every dollar when he took office [52:33] was still worth 92 and a half cents when he left office and since he's [52:38] returned to office a dollar on inauguration day still worth 97 cents [52:42] today that's still too much inflation but it's a fraction of what we suffered [52:46] because of the spending spree that the Democrats unleashed and that produced the [52:51] worst inflation that Americans have suffered in 40 years he's correct that gas [52:56] prices have increased to more than four dollars a gallon nationally as a result of [53:00] the international supply disruption but that's brief and temporary if the [53:05] ranking members concerned about long-term gas prices I invite him to come to [53:09] California where the Democrats war on fossil fuels has caused the highest gas [53:14] prices in the United States it was six dollars and 19 cents a gallon yesterday in [53:19] Sacramento and and that's a long-term problem caused by the very policies that [53:25] his colleagues advocate nationally mr. vote I don't need to lecture you about the [53:30] precarious condition of our nation's finances and I believe the domestic [53:34] reforms that you're proposing are an essential element in restoring fiscal [53:38] responsibility but I take a very different view of grants and subsidies [53:43] than mr. dog at my view grants and subsidies are the root of all fiscal evil [53:48] specifically grants to politically connected organizations where there's [53:52] little oversight or accountability grants to pay for local projects that [53:56] benefit one community at the expense of another if the federal government needs a [54:01] good or service it can't produce itself it ought to send out an RFP award a [54:06] contract of lowest responsible bidder and then hold that bidder accountable to [54:10] the terms of the contract subsidies cost us hundreds of billions of dollars they [54:15] substitute the consumer judgment with the judgment of politicians which both [54:21] reduces the quality of life of Americans and the overall prosperity of our [54:25] country and again goes to well-connected business interests how do you see [54:29] things and how does your budget rein in this waste thank you congressman this is [54:34] one of the areas where we really tried to tighten how federal dollars are spent [54:39] looking at NGOs that are the ones that are sending this money out the door many of [54:45] our concerns on the foreign aid it was because they were going through NGOs that [54:49] don't share this administration's perspective on a host of issues and we [54:54] are very concerned with regard to nonprofits that are in receipt of these [55:02] grant programs and and have a counter a very different governing philosophy than [55:09] this administration so we're going to do everything we can this is a seventy [55:12] billion dollar cut to non-defense discretionary many of these are at the [55:15] grant programs that you're specifically talking about when you're nine thirty thirty [55:20] trillion dollars in debt you can't begin to deal with the non-defense side if [55:25] you're not willing to pull back on these grant programs that unfortunately even [55:30] if you were to assume that they're a dollar spent is a dollar advertised when [55:35] you when you dig into it you find that that's quite frankly not the case the [55:39] Manhattan Institute's economists estimated that just in California a hundred and [55:44] eighty billion dollars has been lost to fraud just during the [55:48] administration of governor Gavin Newsom federal taxpayer dollars that were [55:53] entrusted to him to manage that's a hundred and eighty billion dollars that's [55:57] roughly forty five hundred dollars for every man woman and child living in [56:01] California we've seen whistleblower testimony of billions of dollars lost to [56:06] Somali fraud in Minnesota while governor Tim Waltz went after the [56:10] whistleblowers we've heard an audio tape of Minnesota Attorney General meeting with [56:15] Somali fraudsters as they assured themselves that they had each other's [56:19] backs their words how much do you estimate is lost or fraud in these [56:23] programs and what are you proposing to do about it our administration cares [56:27] deeply about the fraud problem that we have in this country particularly in many [56:32] blue states across the country as we've seen in Minnesota that you identified in [56:37] California we've established a fraud task force with the vice president in the [56:42] lead and part of that is to remove government barriers that may be working to be [56:46] able to ensure that people are prosecuted for fraud or that they don't have the [56:49] resources to investigate it in these programs we want to make sure the [56:53] Department of Justice is going after fraudulent claims we want to make sure [56:57] that the agencies have that resource and we want to get after this we believe [57:01] that fraud destroys the American people's view of government quite [57:06] frankly if you're on the other side of the aisle I think it it destroys people's [57:11] view of what the social safety net should be and so it's vital on a bipartisan basis that [57:16] yes but after the fraud in our country and this administration is going to do it [57:21] like never but as we learned from the Ellison audio tape it does enrich their [57:26] supporters yield back mr. Bobby Scott from Virginia for five minutes thank you mr. [57:35] chairman mr. chairman you outlined the Biden administration I want to reiterate some of [57:42] the things that the ranking members said including out of 48 months in the bad [57:47] administration 47 of those had job growth the only month that there was a job loss [57:54] was the month that Trump had come in and actually was president for a significant [57:59] part of that month on average monthly gain in jobs about 300,000 over over the bad [58:08] administration that compares to five months of job loss already run up by this [58:14] administration five months of job loss and an aggregate total it doesn't even [58:18] amount to one month's average month of job growth in the Biden administration I [58:25] heard the chairman mentioned bailing out pension funds I think he's referring to [58:29] the fact that in the American Rescue Plan we saved a million people's pensions they [58:35] were losing their pensions not wasn't their fault but they were about to lose [58:39] their pensions and we saved those pension plans and pensions in the American [58:44] Rescue Plan Act and I think that was a good thing if you ask those who are about [58:48] to retire whether they thought it was a good thing I think most would it would [58:53] agree when inflation the ranking member pointed out that we had global [58:56] inflation on under Biden the American Rescue Plan Act and the other spending I [59:01] think most experts said added a little bit of marginal inflation but the spending [59:07] also included in the American Rescue Plan Act for families of four about five [59:14] thousand dollars in stimulus checks six thousand dollars in child tax credits [59:18] many received enhanced SNAP benefits and lower Obamacare premiums and the [59:23] question of whether it worked if you looked at the end of the year credit card [59:28] delinquencies were the lowest in 30 years child poverty dropped 40 percent so I think it worked [59:34] and inflation under Trump as the ranking members pointed out specific policies like [59:41] tariffs inflation and the war have added to inflation as far as 15 million losing their [59:47] health care it is a good thing because they might be getting jobs all of the information that [59:52] we've received from states that have imposed work requirements on Medicaid and SNAP have [59:59] found virtually no increase in jobs so if you have this was to vote any evidence that people will get [1:00:07] jobs as a result of that other than just people losing their health care would like to see it now [1:00:13] and the CBO estimates that that big you said the bill had a lot of different names big ugly bill is one [1:00:20] of the names we like to call it with interest that's going to add about four trillion dollars to [1:00:26] the debt what what is what is your estimate of the damage done to the fiscal situation by that bill [1:00:33] it will reduce the deficit by 1.5 trillion dollars over the next 10 years if you account for the right [1:00:39] baseline congressman okay so everybody thinks it's going to add about four trillion to the debt and [1:00:45] you think it's going to save money Eisenhower was the last Republican president to leave to [1:00:53] Democrats a lower deficit measured by a percentage of GDP which is a normal measurement a lower deficit [1:01:01] than they they inherited does this administration plan to leave a lower deficit than the one they [1:01:08] inherited and if so are tax increases part of that plan the fiscal situation was very steep [1:01:15] when we inherited and what we had inherited from the Biden administration we're doing everything [1:01:20] we possibly can I think the things that we did this year collectively with the Congress as I've [1:01:26] said is the end of fiscal futility for 20 30 years and you all know that I'm a budget person worked on [1:01:32] the budget committee as a staffer for members I know this place well there was no success a lot of [1:01:38] people talked about it it was a simple question do you plan to leave a better do you plan to leave a [1:01:42] better deficit than you inherited this is intentionally a discretionary budget proposal we don't give [1:01:48] you what our deficits long term are let me let me ask let me try to make my time let me ask another [1:01:54] question what does the budget assume for the future of the Department of Education especially the Office [1:01:59] of Civil Rights if Congress fails to vote to abolish the Department well as you know in this budget we [1:02:05] both reflect the fact that we're trying to close the Department of Education but that substantial resources will [1:02:11] continue to flow to communities for education there's only a 2% reduction in this budget for that [1:02:18] particular department and what's interesting about the bill that thankfully you all voted for is that [1:02:24] you voted to endorse many of the restructurings that we did you voted to eliminate USAID you voted [1:02:32] not to have corporation for public broadcasting when you voted for that that omnibus bills those bills that [1:02:38] worked its way through and so our belief is that we make his progress on the ground with these agencies [1:02:44] Department of Education included with interagency agreements to transfer work where we think that [1:02:49] can be better done that we're going to make the case to Congress in a way that affirms and and enacts [1:02:56] those those reforms long term the gentleman's time has expired you mentioned me mr. Scott the jobs [1:03:03] essentially in virtually were 100% government jobs I could create a as many government jobs as you want [1:03:10] if we just spend a bunch of money the second piece was the Butch Lewis Act essentially look we had to [1:03:16] do something you're right for these retirees but we needed to do it and fix the structural problem so [1:03:22] then we didn't end up where we where we were in the first place and so my criticism is it was a bailout [1:03:28] because there weren't policy reforms to prevent us from being back in that I work with you I work [1:03:33] with you I work with you on making some policy changes to make sure it doesn't happen you got [1:03:37] it you got it thank you yielding five minutes now to my colleague from the Hoosier State mr. [1:03:44] Stutzman thank you mr. chairman and director thank you for for being here today I want to touch on a [1:03:49] couple things I want to give you plenty of time to give us some answers specifically to something that [1:03:54] you said that you know the era of you know big spending is over hopefully that's for good but [1:04:00] I appreciate what this administration has done and then also tariff policies but since it is tax day [1:04:06] today I do want to point out that the big beautiful bill has made a huge impact for Hoosiers this year [1:04:12] the average Hoosier is seeing a tax cut of three thousand thirty seven dollars and that is real money in their [1:04:19] pockets eliminating the death tax it's huge for farmers it protects over two million families from [1:04:25] a tax penalty for for passing their farm to the next generation the auto the no tax on auto loan [1:04:32] interest is huge for Indiana and the auto belt those are all that's just a couple of things of course no [1:04:38] tax on tips which we talk a lot about no tax on overtime it is an incentive for over 80 million hourly [1:04:45] workers to keep more of their their hard-earned money in their own pocket and so thank you for your [1:04:52] leadership and what you're doing on that I do want to just point out real quick the folks that were in [1:04:57] here earlier that were talking about PEPFAR only about 40 percent of PEPFAR funds supported actual [1:05:06] service delivery including medications testing commodities and on but the remaining six percent wasted on [1:05:13] duplicative administrative costs unwieldy supply chains and layers of endless bureaucracy in the [1:05:18] last administration under the Biden administration PEPFAR funded health workers who performed over 21 [1:05:24] abortions in Mozambique they are promoting reproductive health education and access to birth control and [1:05:31] other harmful programs couched under family planning in Ghana so thank you for what you've been doing in [1:05:37] eliminating wasteful spending so talking about wasteful spending you know people at home are trying [1:05:46] to make ends meet and with the big beautiful bill and the cuts in spending we're putting more money back [1:05:52] in their pocket but it's the policies of the past that have driven insurance costs up it has driven utility [1:05:59] prices up inflation has been a a tax on the American people and what the big beautiful bill and what you [1:06:08] you're you're doing with the administration is bringing those costs down can you talk a little bit [1:06:14] about tariff policy broadly and and what how we should look at that and then also you talked of the end of [1:06:22] big spending and where we're saving dollars for the American taxpayer sure thank you congressman I mean tariff policy [1:06:28] is a part of how we believe we need to address the fiscal situation of the country along with spending [1:06:33] reductions along with savings and reforms and I don't want to suggest that the work is over with [1:06:38] regard to spending we have a lot to do I'm a balanced budget guy this administration is typically always [1:06:44] putting forward budgets that are getting to balance over some period of time that is important work and my [1:06:52] point is though to to draw attention to the fact that you can talk about the problem for a long time [1:06:56] but if you don't actually make progress in that direction you haven't done anything and I think [1:07:03] that is what we've tried to really emphasize tariffs are a part of that fiscal picture so you know we [1:07:10] believe there will be trillions that come in from tariffs we've seen that in the first year we don't [1:07:16] believe the supreme court's decision will impact that much at all we had a backup plan to allow us to [1:07:23] keep in those those trillions of dollars from tariffs that are contributing to our fiscal picture [1:07:29] somewhere in the neighborhood about 4.7 trillion of new America first tariffs that this fiscal picture [1:07:37] is is now able to assume and as a result along with the spending reductions in the one big beautiful bill [1:07:43] the trajectory from the non-defense side of what you all were able to vote on to end or hopefully soon [1:07:50] end this fiscal year um we're we came into office with 32 trillion dollars staring us in deficits [1:07:57] we've got that down in one year to 18 trillion dollars i think i probably hear a theme which is [1:08:03] we have a lot of work to go but we've gotten a lot of work done uh and we will continue to do that [1:08:08] work as evidenced by this this budget with with savings and reforms wherever we can find them yeah [1:08:14] thank you i you know in the long run i would love to see us move away from income taxes especially [1:08:19] since today's april 15th um you know i know there's a lot of discussion around tariffs on our side on [1:08:25] how they affect the american people but i think that it balances it levels a playing field especially [1:08:32] with with china and competition i'm gonna come from a manufacturing district and how they can you know [1:08:38] pay low labor costs they their utilities are subsidized they can produce much cheaper because [1:08:45] that's the way they play compared to us and i think tariffs is a way to level the playing field [1:08:50] with a country especially like china so thank you again uh for your leadership on these moments time [1:08:55] has expired i know you have five minutes to my colleague mr scott peters from california thank you [1:09:01] director thank you for being here today uh the impoundment control act of 1974 says that the executive [1:09:07] cannot unilaterally withhold congressionally appropriated funds without a rescission or deferral request [1:09:12] submitted to congress uh director has omb withheld or delayed the obligation of funds appropriated by [1:09:18] this congress without submitting precision or deferral notices we have fully complied with the [1:09:23] impoundment control act as you probably know we are not fans of the impoundment control act we think [1:09:27] it's unconstitutional the president ran against it okay however we applied with it did you did you [1:09:33] withhold congressionally appropriated funds without a rescission or deferral request submitted to [1:09:38] congress that's yes right not in violation of the impoundment control act we have did you ever [1:09:41] submit a decision we've done programmatic reviews did you ever submit various programs [1:09:44] did you ever submit a decision or deferral request to congress have you submitted a rescission package [1:09:49] last year and actually two uh we continue to do programmatic reviews to congress of programs that [1:09:57] is not a withholding under the impoundment control did you submit it to congress we don't need to [1:10:01] submit if we're you did not congressman if we're if we're just assessing a program for ways for [1:10:05] i understand you don't think you have to but i'm just trying to establish you did not [1:10:09] right you did not well it's it we submitted rescission bills to congress last year okay [1:10:14] um two of them but not just not deferral notices that you were withholding they're not deferrals [1:10:19] under the impoundment control act okay uh the the government accountability office has already found [1:10:23] that the administration illegally withheld nearly eight billion dollars in nih grants seven billion [1:10:29] dollars for funding to support k-12 public schools nationwide and hundreds of millions of dollars for [1:10:34] head start programs across the country do you dispute geo's findings yes gao is typically wrong [1:10:41] they're very partisan uh they are are typically on the exact opposite of wherever the trump administration [1:10:47] is unfortunately i know you all look to them uh they are a branch of the legislative body uh we have [1:10:54] a very different view with regard to uh their the merit of their opinions and so it's not surprising me [1:10:59] that they have a different view on that do you have a legal opinion on that we we defend to the hill [1:11:04] to all of our legal decisions uh most of the time with regard to gao we we have a formal legal opinion [1:11:10] on that actually most of the time we will put out from omb a defense in response of any of the gao [1:11:17] not always but we try to be very forward-leaning and articulate because we feel like we have the moral [1:11:22] and legal high ground every time we make a decision i'm sure you feel like you have the moral and legal [1:11:26] high ground i get that impression i would just ask mr mr chairman for the record that we add without [1:11:33] objection if uh we had uh the the decision from gao of august 5 and july 23 on head start and nih [1:11:41] and penalty without objection so we're um you know i i understand that the gao's part of the government [1:11:49] you don't like we don't get to decide what parts of the government we we follow and we don't we have [1:11:54] we have laws that are there for a reason and i guess we we should expect that that um that you would [1:11:59] abide by those procedures but you know whether it's tariffs or the war or um the way you've [1:12:05] manipulated the budget the administration just does not want to deal with congress and i have to say [1:12:12] to my colleagues in general that we've reached a point where if something's not going well in this [1:12:17] administration the response is not let's do something different the response is well biden did it worse [1:12:23] it is absolutely irrelevant joe biden is gone you you guys won that election we don't dispute the [1:12:30] results of elections you won the election joe biden's gone our job is today what do we do in [1:12:36] 2026 to make things better and um i don't this this budget will not meet that three percent um target [1:12:43] that we set without without aggressive aggressive um growth assumptions which which i don't think [1:12:50] we're going to see but whether you know why are we talking about joe biden joe biden's been gone for [1:12:55] two years it doesn't matter it doesn't matter the other thing i'd suggest is um you know one of my [1:13:02] colleagues mr smucker um said democrats don't care about fraud and i i just want to just call that [1:13:11] out a little bit because if you and i if mr smucker and i sat down together i think we could have a [1:13:17] discussion about fraud i think we do care about fraud we want to know what's real fraud and what's [1:13:21] not real fraud but i ask you not to question my motives don't say that i i will pledge to you that i [1:13:27] will i will bash your policies i think i think you guys are wrong i think you're wrong but i don't [1:13:32] question your motives i think everyone in this room is a patriot that wants to do the right thing [1:13:36] for the country and when we make each other our enemies the democrats versus republicans this is [1:13:41] the this is the weakest that we can create the weakest situation we can create for this this country [1:13:47] when when we are really not thinking of ourselves as colleagues but as enemies who don't care about [1:13:52] stuff i think that's really something we should stay away from and you know i think um i'm sort of [1:13:59] least worried about mr smucker because he's a friend i know him um and i but i see i hear this all the [1:14:04] time let's not question each other's motives um i think you guys are really wrong on the policy i [1:14:09] don't think that what you're doing is good for kids but it doesn't mean i don't think you care [1:14:14] about kids i just think you're wrong on the policy and so um maybe if we can get away from questioning [1:14:19] each other's motives we can start to get back to a level of collegiality that maybe we can focus on [1:14:23] policies but it is that is 2026 folks it is not 2023 it's not 2024 joe biden doesn't matter [1:14:30] okay it's what that what matters today is what what's going on today what is this budget committee's [1:14:36] job we are not getting to the three percent target we all agreed to a few a few weeks ago uh from the [1:14:42] gate and um i just want to i say that we have a lot of work to do but um well the gentleman is making [1:14:49] uh you know some fair and fine remarks and i have the utmost sorry we're over time i do think that [1:14:56] that mr smucker's comments were were intended to be on record contrasting on record not on motive [1:15:06] however that came out i believe it was about the record not the motive but but i appreciate your [1:15:11] comments let's move saying we don't care about something is is a personal attack uh let's go to chuck [1:15:19] edwards now for five minutes our colleague from north carolina all right thank you thank you mr [1:15:24] chair director vote thanks for being here before i get to my questions i've uh i've got to make a [1:15:31] number of the committee members here aware and i want to express my appreciation to you a number of [1:15:36] us had a meeting a few weeks ago and i expressed my concerns about the uh velocity of which uh funding [1:15:43] was coming out of fema going to western north carolina in that meeting you invited me to the white house [1:15:51] that very afternoon uh and i'm really proud and appreciative and i want the committee members [1:15:56] that were there to know that within a number of hours 173 million dollars was distributed to western [1:16:03] north carolina so thank you thank you very much for that um i've got more questions and i'm going to have [1:16:10] time so i'm just i'm just going to jump right in uh the president's budget currently uh reduces cbgd [1:16:20] funding by 3.3 billion dollars that type of funding is critical to western north carolina and it's my job [1:16:28] representing western north carolina to make sure that we've got the resources that we need to rebuild [1:16:35] about 2 billion in cdbgdr funding has already been allocated to north carolina we had a storm [1:16:45] uh of epic proportion september 27 2024 that we estimate costs about 60 billion dollars and yet [1:16:56] we've only received about 2 billion in cbgdr funding admittedly uh the drawdown of that is operating [1:17:06] somewhat slowly but the fact that we're reducing that the president's budget reduces the cbgd funding by [1:17:14] 3.3 billion dollars and sites and this is probably accurate that that program fails to target [1:17:22] communities in need and that it's somewhat of a slush fund i would just appeal to you and say [1:17:29] that any of that funding that comes to western north carolina right now is not being used as a slush fund [1:17:35] we've got 60 billion dollars in damage to recover from and only a fraction in cbgdr and so my my question [1:17:44] for you is rather than just just cutting that under the pretense that it's uh that fund is failing to [1:17:51] to target communities in need would you be open would the president be open to talking about some [1:17:57] ways that we can better target communities in need always hope open to that kind of conversation and [1:18:04] as you know there's some bills moving through regarding the authorization of cdbgr cdbgdr [1:18:11] of which the disaster recovery part of it is not authorized so when we talk about the cbdg program [1:18:19] we're talking about that typical uh formula program that goes to paying sidewalks in greenwich connecticut [1:18:26] which i think is an improper use of federal taxpayer funds when we're in 39 trillion dollars in debt i [1:18:31] think we need to look very closely at those types of of of funding programs and to make sure that somewhere [1:18:38] in the federal government people are communities are getting the funds that they need uh but we we [1:18:42] do have issues with that program particularly the non-disaster part and if there's an issue with regard [1:18:47] to north carolina not getting its dr i'm happy to go back and try to figure out where that is all right [1:18:53] thank you for that that's more conversation i think that we need to have because we have a number of [1:18:57] businesses that have been wiped out a number of homes uh schools local governments that have not been made [1:19:05] hold yet i think i think we could find a way to direct those funds and uh target the specific needs [1:19:13] one other question real quick um and this is regard to capital magnet fund uh those dollars funded outside [1:19:24] the appropriations process through fannie mae and freddie mac fee revenue have been transferred to treasury [1:19:30] but reportedly haven't been apportioned by omb cdfis are one of the most effective tools that we have [1:19:38] for increasing affordable housing especially in rural and hard to serve communities like i represent [1:19:47] can you tell us what is the status of the fiscal year 2026 apportionment for the capital magnet fund and [1:19:53] when can cdfis expect those resources to be released so they can move forward on affordable housing projects [1:20:00] thanks congressman we have released the 2526 cdb cdfi funds but i will tell you this is a program that [1:20:09] i think needs oversight from congress if you look at what these cdfis were funding many of them continue [1:20:16] to be woke they continue to be pushing an ideology that is very harmful i'll just give you a 4.9 for [1:20:24] local initiative support corporation that publishes blogs condemning the level of whiteness in community [1:20:30] development in addition when a cdfi does a loan it is exempt from ability to repay requirements so you're [1:20:38] getting a loan on the books that is not necessarily as sound and secure as one that would come from a [1:20:45] typical bank so we have issues with this program the president proposed to eliminate uh this program in [1:20:52] in an eo uh it's why you see a reduction in our budget we eliminate the main program and then we have a [1:20:58] new 100 million dollar program for what we would think of as new rural cdfis that uh i think can [1:21:04] be more targeted so i get the question and that but that's where we're coming from the gentleman's [1:21:09] time has expired thank you very much i'll yield i yield uh five minutes to my friend from california [1:21:15] mr panetta thank you mr chairman ranking member director it's good to have you here before the budget [1:21:20] committee although i agree with the ranking member it shouldn't have taken this long and unfortunately [1:21:25] though that we've seen is that that delay to me is one of many examples of the broader disregard by [1:21:31] this administration for congress and for a system of checks and balances now don't get me wrong executive [1:21:39] authority exists we get that understand that but it does not extend to the administration unilaterally [1:21:46] withholding funding that's been appropriated by congress i'm not just saying that the law mandates it [1:21:52] impoundments occur when the administration refuses to implement federal expenditures authorized and [1:21:58] appropriated by congress and enacted in the law in fact there's been 235 years of constitutional [1:22:04] interpretation case law and statute which have made that clear that once the law is enacted the [1:22:11] executive branch is not permitted to refuse to execute that law an impoundment would basically replace [1:22:17] the rule of law with the rule of one person article 1 section 9 of the constitution clearly gives con [1:22:24] congress the power of the person that states that no money shall be drawn from the treasury but in [1:22:30] consequences of appropriations made by law and the constitution mandates that the president take care [1:22:37] that the laws be faithfully executed now as we heard today and as you know set in 1973 president nixon [1:22:44] attempted to impound billions of dollars of enacted clean water appropriations over the objection of [1:22:50] congress and as you know in train v new york city in train v the city of new york the supreme court [1:22:56] unanimously disagreed with president nixon that decision was even relied upon as precedent in the [1:23:02] court's 98 decision striking down president clinton's use of a line item veto to block certain portions of a [1:23:09] spending bill as you know nixon's attempt at impoundment was the basis for the 74 impoundment control act [1:23:16] which banned impoundments despite that law despite those supreme court rulings and as you mentioned [1:23:22] today this president this administration and you believe that impoundment is within the president's [1:23:27] power your general counsel argued that nearly all enacted laws are merely just suggestions and guidelines [1:23:34] that give the president and the executive branch substantial discretion to follow alter or even [1:23:39] disregard your administration basic basically asserts that a president has mandate to eliminate spending [1:23:46] to balance the budget by any means necessary the problem with that though director is that the [1:23:52] constitution of the united states does not have a presidential mandate exception and when it comes to [1:23:58] impoundment there is no language in the constitution that makes it optional if this administration continues [1:24:05] to impound or our appropriated spending you are basically eliminating congress's power of the purse you [1:24:11] are basically cutting off congress in the budget process and i think as members of this committee that [1:24:17] is something we should continue to push back on but since this con congress especially with the leadership [1:24:23] in this congress has given up that power and let this happen the courts thankfully have been the [1:24:28] bulwark against you and your impoundments and your elimination of programs your attempt to lay off cfpb [1:24:34] employees got struck down in nteu this verse vote the preliminary exam a preliminary [1:24:41] injunction was granted to stop your attempts to withhold congressionally appropriated funds from [1:24:46] the national endowment for democracy the council for opportunity in education versus the department of [1:24:52] education there was a preliminary injunction to stop the releasing of federal trio funding [1:24:57] in passito versus trump there was another preliminary examination injunction to suspend the u.s refugee [1:25:04] assistance program and in the city of chicago versus dhs the administration tried to impound fema's [1:25:10] shelter and services program but that was stopped by a court in the national council of non-profits [1:25:15] versus omb the administration tried to put a government-wide funding freeze and that was stopped [1:25:20] by the courts in the national fair housing alliance versus hud hud refused to release fair housing [1:25:25] initiatives programs funding and that was stopped by the courts director given these court decisions [1:25:34] given the constitution of the united states given the law of this land do you still believe in [1:25:39] impoundments 200 years of presidents have the ability to set spend less money once again and [1:25:45] congress provide do you believe in impoundments of course i believe in impound okay thank you thank [1:25:50] you the supreme court has never spoken on this issue by the way all of what you said is is largely [1:25:55] not true that's and heavily new in regards to train versus city of new york that's not true it was a [1:26:00] struck that down it was a textual issue and isn't it true that article one section nine of the [1:26:04] constitution clearly gives congress the power of the purse to set the limit isn't that correct set [1:26:08] the limit on what an appropriation should be and despite all this you still believe in impound [1:26:13] we believe vitally in the constitution's ability to to make sure that we can't spend a dollar that [1:26:19] you haven't appropriated that is and once again a little provision director reclaiming my time once again [1:26:24] that is why i believe this congress needs to push back we're not seeing it with this leadership but [1:26:29] come november of this year the american people are going to make sure that you understand what [1:26:34] impoundments are congressman thank you and i yield the gentleman's time's expired i yield five minutes [1:26:38] to my friend from texas mr roy i thank the chairman uh i thank you director vote for your appearance [1:26:44] here today i thank you for what you've been doing for the country and on impoundment let me just ask you [1:26:48] questions so the average american can understand what we're talking about you're talking about the power of [1:26:53] the president to reduce spending where appropriate in certain areas but not to actually spend [1:26:59] additional money correct absolutely so we're talking about a ceiling and congress says we're [1:27:03] going to spend x and the president says you know what maybe just maybe somebody ought to be [1:27:08] responsibly looking at how we spend money and say that we're not going to spend every single dollar [1:27:12] that has been put in that account is that roughly what we're saying if congress has given us [1:27:16] the charge and says we're going to x billion dollars on nursing facilities across the country [1:27:20] and you give us a number and we can do it less than you have given us why on earth wouldn't we not [1:27:25] spend less and the american people benefited this for 200 years and as a result in 1974 now we have a [1:27:32] system where agencies and bureaucracies push the money out the door at the end of the fiscal year so [1:27:37] we have big screen tvs and copy machines and every agency across the federal government trying to make [1:27:43] sure that congress knows that they have spent every last dollar up to that ceiling and in fact has [1:27:49] congress given you any indication or belief that they are willing to constrain spending as a body [1:27:55] well until this last year where we had the end of fiscal futility the we sent up hundreds of [1:28:01] billions of dollars in cuts and reforms in the first trump administration all of which were ignored [1:28:06] but now we've changed course to some degree and i want to talk to you about trajectory [1:28:11] because trajectory matters and i think that's what you're getting at in your testimony i don't want to [1:28:15] put words in your mouth but that shifting the direction in order to try to get some sort of [1:28:20] fiscal sanity in this country is it true or false that the vast majority of the deficit increases out [1:28:26] into the say even just over the 10-year budget window are coming from medicare and social security [1:28:32] there are structural entitlements and mandatory programs that are a big mathematical driver of the [1:28:40] deficits that we're seeing but for social security medicare we're talking 2.2 trillion to 4.4 trillion [1:28:45] we're talking about a significant growth in deficits as a result of those programs is that [1:28:50] a fair statement right my point of bringing that up is is none of that is a part of your budget for [1:28:56] the most part correct there are no mandatory reforms unless there is a tie to a discretionary [1:29:01] proposal and in what we tried to accomplish in the big beautiful bill last summer where we're able [1:29:04] to get reforms to medicaid we're able to actually transform policies get people off of welfare to work [1:29:09] try to stop all of the wasteful spending in the green new scam subsidies and create economic growth [1:29:13] through tax policy and none of that were we addressing social security or medicare is that [1:29:17] correct nothing in this budget addresses or over the next year social security or medicare is it [1:29:21] not important that what the president has been doing and what this congress under republican [1:29:25] leadership has been doing to hold discretionary spending roughly flat is that roughly true over [1:29:30] the last three years that we've managed to hold this over the last three fiscal years discretionary [1:29:35] spending roughly flat yes but we've actually gone beneath uh current law spending in both 25 and 26 we've [1:29:42] reduced between 17 billion and then 18 billion dollars in spending in significant part because [1:29:47] of our work to hold it flat both in the working congress and the executive branch but also with [1:29:51] respect to rescissions is that correct yes sir because of the work and the efforts of the administration [1:29:55] to try to constrain that spending if we're talking about a trajectory shift in this country is holding [1:30:00] discretionary spending flat or at a at a very low amount of growth important while we also have to go [1:30:06] deal with those other issues driving the budget deficits it is absolutely critical and i would argue that's [1:30:11] where you have to to begin because that's what congress has a vote on every single year and for a long [1:30:17] time i would argue 20 years congress did not really focus on in the in each and every appropriations [1:30:23] process on what they could do we've seen a sea change in that over the last several years [1:30:28] is it not an important message for the for the country that congress in dealing with its annual budget [1:30:34] that it can actually control that we show the fiscal discipline of holding that spending flat and then to [1:30:40] that question we've got a budget before us that has a significant increase in defense spending for [1:30:45] the purposes that i think the the director has laid out i don't need to repeat them that we need to [1:30:49] defend our country as a core constitutional duty that you've then constrained the vast majority of the [1:30:54] other uh departments and agencies and funding in order to try to keep that spending relatively flat as [1:30:59] we work out a mix of mandatory and discretionary and defense is that correct that's correct and the [1:31:04] goal here is to keep that on a a low uh growth trajectory while we see if congress in its infinite [1:31:10] wisdom will ever step up to the plate to address medicare and social security knowing social security [1:31:16] is scheduled to go bankrupt in 2032 is that roughly correct well i think it's important to focus on [1:31:21] where this congress has focused on and as you know the president believes it's important to protect [1:31:25] those two programs social security and medicare this congress has gone at it from the right [1:31:31] perspective which is going after fraud waste and abuse welfare reforms that we get people back to [1:31:37] work i believe that is the way that we go after and get to a better fiscal situation is to have [1:31:44] those types of reform efforts of which you were able to do with a very slim congress i think i'm past [1:31:49] my time just one last quick point i would just appreciate being able to work with the director and [1:31:53] i know my friend the chairman also a texan to work i know secretary gnome was working with us now [1:31:58] secretary mellon no doubt will to achieve the 10 billion dollars of of a refund to the state of [1:32:04] texas and other states because of what we had to endure under the previous administration with open [1:32:08] borders and expenditures to our budget i assume that the director will work with us to achieve that [1:32:12] objective happy to we're working on that fund we want to make sure all of the dhs funds are flowing [1:32:17] uh one i will just say it's very critical that we get dhs funded uh we're in this vital moment it's [1:32:24] precarious where we are trying to pay all dhs employees for a period of time when that has not [1:32:30] occurred and i know that we're moving reconciliation to be able to pay for what the senate democrats have [1:32:35] not been willing to fund but we have to get those funds um funded so that we can ensure that the the [1:32:42] allotments that you provided in the one big beautiful bill are able to go out i associate myself [1:32:48] with the gentleman's uh comment appreciate the response uh mr vote now yield five minutes [1:32:54] to miss watson coleman of new jersey thank you so i was just trying to figure out where could i find [1:33:02] a needle large enough to burst the bubble that you guys live in because you're not living in reality [1:33:09] and you're creating a narrative and just because you say it you think it's true and so i've sat up here [1:33:15] and i've listened to a whole bunch of um explanations that i don't in any way shape or form uh [1:33:25] relate to reality i got a couple of questions to ask you sir um i'm going to start with one that's [1:33:32] going to give you a moment to speak and then i'm going to ask you a series of yes and nos and when i [1:33:37] say yes or nos i want yes or nos what would you say right now to the mothers of the kids who died [1:33:45] because of our your dismantling of us aid harvard's study says there are more than a hundred and [1:33:53] thousand of them can you give me a quick response to what you would say to those mothers just don't [1:33:58] talk to me about the study talk to me about how you what you would say to the mothers of the children [1:34:05] who've died congressman with great respect i would just contest that the extent to which [1:34:10] uh in institutions that benefit from federal largesse put out studies that say that the world has [1:34:17] ended that the world has not in fact ended well it's going there cut usaid spending last year to [1:34:23] the tune about eight billion dollars there was far more that we could have done congress reclaiming [1:34:28] my time if a mother came before you who told you that her child died because she didn't have access [1:34:37] to health care or a medicine that usually would be available because of the kindness of the united [1:34:46] states of america that you and this administration have eliminated would you have anything of empathy [1:34:55] compassion and humanity to say to her would you say to her i am sorry that was a mistake i always have [1:35:03] empathy for individuals including those that get improper and false information from the media that [1:35:10] pumps this this false and ignorant information out to the american you know i am so sorry to hearing [1:35:16] false fraud and abuse from any of my colleagues and even from you because if we wanted to eliminate [1:35:26] abuse and fraud we eliminate the president of the united states on the office right now [1:35:33] and the rest of the sycophants in his administration that are allowing him to do so many illegal things [1:35:40] so here's my yes or nos this is about your budget and this is about your priorities [1:35:48] do you think that it is more important to fight a war of choice there with a country that represented no [1:35:57] threat to us rather than uh supporting cuts to economic development administration to k-12 programs [1:36:06] to community service block grants to national institute of health to the tsa to the and let me [1:36:13] speak something about the tsa any time you wanted to spend money to pay dhs you could because this [1:36:21] president thinks he's a king and can do what he wants to do and if he wanted to pay those dhs [1:36:26] workers he could have because he finds money to do everything else he wants to do what about the [1:36:34] money that goes to homeless assistance programs that's 393 million or 60 million for uh fair housing [1:36:43] or eliminating or cutting job poor to the point that it it's of no help to getting people on the right [1:36:51] uh direction and even the money for community development financial institutions sir do you [1:37:00] think that those programs which address the quality of life the opportunity of life the healthiness of [1:37:09] the people in this country including their access to to uh health care is less important than fighting a [1:37:17] freaking war across the world that never ever ever had to be started yes or no is all i want it's not [1:37:26] a war of choice just say yes or no it's not i don't care what you think it is i asked security objective [1:37:33] yes or no that's all i want from you it is an important national security objective that iran [1:37:37] not that is another that is another piece of the bubble that you live in and that's another part [1:37:43] of the information that you all share to create a narrative that has nothing to do with reality [1:37:50] and the people of this country are showing you location by location state by state [1:37:57] county by county and city by city that they don't believe you all anymore and let me talk to you a [1:38:03] little bit with my three minutes or three seconds about the cost of living you keep talking about what [1:38:10] you saved here and what you saved there and how you saved this one and how you are are more diligent [1:38:17] in your savings well the people in this country they don't feel it with their health care they don't [1:38:23] feel it with the gas they got to put in their cars they don't feel it when they go to the grocery store [1:38:28] they don't feel it when they try to avoid evictions they don't feel that you all have stood up to [1:38:37] any of your promises that this is uh an unfortunately monetizing lying corrupt administration the gentle [1:38:47] lady's time has expired i yield my time uh we're now going to yield five minutes with mr andrew clyde from [1:38:52] georgia thank you mr chairman and thank you director vote for testifying before us today um apologize for [1:39:03] the abuse you've had to take from the other side now president trump's fiscal year 2027 budget builds on [1:39:10] last year's progress to cut wasteful spending promote economic growth and invest in our armed forces [1:39:15] to advance his peace through strength agenda which i fully support in fiscal year 26 congressional [1:39:21] republicans delivered 12 more fiscally responsible appropriation bills avoiding a bloated omnibus while [1:39:28] reducing overall discretionary spending by approximately a billion dollars and non-defense discretionary spending [1:39:34] by about 18 billion director vote with your help and the hard work and hard work we also [1:39:39] enacted the first successful rescissions package since really 1999 cutting nearly 9 billion in wasteful [1:39:46] spending including cutting nearly 4 million that was scheduled to be used to promote lgbt democracy [1:39:52] initiatives in the western balkans cutting nearly 40 million for low emission development in west [1:39:59] africa and cutting nearly 25 billion scheduled for climate resilience programs in honduras think about [1:40:06] all those millions of taxpayer dollars that have been saved by in large part due to the incredible work [1:40:12] of you director vote and of your staff that some of them are here and so thank you very much for your [1:40:18] hard work as well building on that progress president trump's fy 27 budget continues to reduce wasteful spending [1:40:25] right-sized bloated bureaucracies and put the federal government on a more sustainable fiscal path [1:40:30] it cuts non-defense spending by 72 billion roughly 10 percent while continuing to invest in veterans [1:40:36] seniors law enforcement and farmers these savings are achieved by continuing president trump's promise [1:40:42] to rid the government of woke and wasteful spending and weaponization of the federal government and [1:40:48] terminate the green new scam so director vote first with the federal debt exceeding 39 trillion dollars [1:40:55] how does the rising cost of debt cost of debt service threaten the long-term viability of federal [1:41:01] health programs veterans benefits and other critical benefits for seniors farmers and other vulnerable [1:41:07] populations thank you congressman thank you for your leadership not just within this congress but [1:41:12] also within the appropriations committee on this um when you spend one trillion dollars in interest costs [1:41:19] every year uh that for the first time has exceeded uh the national defense of this country that should be a [1:41:25] great warning light that we can't afford the government that we had and just to give you a perspective [1:41:30] when i left office the first time we were somewhere in the neighborhood about 350 billion dollars [1:41:35] in interest cost and so you saw that just escalate in just four short years so that is something we [1:41:42] can't afford and it will eventually crowd out other priorities and it means that you know i got asked [1:41:48] uh about whether we could adjust our spending proposal to meet this need or that our margin [1:41:55] is reduced when we have interest costs at that level and that's why it's so important to get a handle [1:42:01] on it uh and i appreciate the work that this congress has done in particular in that in that in that vein [1:42:07] well we will continue uh trying to make us as fiscally responsible as possible uh within the president's [1:42:15] budget i noticed something new a new initiative uh focused on the second amendment uh 1.4 million dollars to [1:42:22] a new office within the department of justice civil rights division dedicated to protecting the second [1:42:27] amendment from unlawful infringement i say finally and thank you we are beginning to comply with our [1:42:35] declaration of independence regarding the protection of unalienable rights endowed by our creator and it [1:42:42] goes on to say to secure these rights governments are instituted and instituted among men that means our [1:42:48] government is supposed to secure the rights endowed by the creator and this finally we have an office [1:42:53] to secure one of the most incredible rights that we have and that is the right to keep and bear arms [1:42:58] the second amendment of the united of our united states constitution so my question to you is how do we [1:43:04] best ensure that this office is aggressive in protecting the second amendment and will never allow [1:43:10] it to become an office of gun control infringing on this critical constitutional right well thanks for the [1:43:17] question i think part of that is uh to trust the the team that the president has that envisioned this [1:43:23] office uh and then to continue to make sure that uh you know we give progress reports the appropriations [1:43:29] committee uh for those who have a great interest in this uh area and to make sure that over the long [1:43:35] haul that culture does not become uh completely reversed to that which what it was set up to do would it help [1:43:41] if we codified some of that i think that would be a great idea yeah okay all right i'll work on it thank you [1:43:46] yep and i yield back thank the gentleman and now yield to miss ballant from vermont five minutes thank [1:43:54] you mr chair mr vote it's good to finally see you before the house budget committee mr vote you lead [1:44:00] the office of management and budget you're one of the architects of project 2025 and omb is a powerful [1:44:07] agency that's at the center of president trump's illegal refusal to spend federal money mr vote i want to [1:44:15] go over your political weaponization of this agency against the american people and specifically [1:44:22] against those states that voted primarily for democrats yes or no mr vote a federal judge found [1:44:29] that you terminated 7.6 billion dollars in clean energy grants based on whether the recipient lived [1:44:36] in a blue state yes or no i don't recall what that judge said but we have not made the determinations [1:44:42] based on in fact in fact mr vote on january 12 2026 u.s judge amit meta said quote defendants meaning [1:44:51] you mr vote freely admit that they made grant determination decisions primarily if not exclusively [1:44:58] based on whether the awardee resided in a state whose citizens voted for president trump in 2024. mr vote [1:45:06] yes or no federal judges said omb's freeze of 10 billion dollars in child care and family assistance [1:45:12] funding quote appear designed to punish communities that the administration agreed with yes or no was [1:45:19] that something that federal judges said about you and your leadership i think the judge's characterization [1:45:25] is getting at the degree to which we are focused on states that we think are mismanaged okay that is [1:45:30] not in fact the case in fact u.s district judge trina thompson found the administration broke the law [1:45:35] and froze funds as a politically motivated move disguised as fraud prevention so your characterization [1:45:44] actually is false other courts have said that withholding congressionally approved funding is [1:45:49] quote vindictive and unlawful courts have found that freezing funds create quote irreparable harm [1:45:55] against the american people and the gao the government accountability office the watchdog agency [1:46:02] that investigates how federal agencies spend taxpayer dollars has reported that you broke the law [1:46:09] multiple times and they have said that you have refused to spend money that was dedicated for [1:46:16] americans the constitution gives congress congress the power to spend money and not the president mr vote [1:46:25] your actions clearly show that you want to cut federal funds from anyone who didn't vote for donald trump [1:46:32] are you trying to get revenge on states that did not vote for your boss no of course not what's [1:46:38] interesting about the question is that joe biden with hell for goodness sakes can we please bring [1:46:44] it back to my question it was a yes or no question are you trying to get revenge against blue states [1:46:52] because they did not support the president courts have said that in fact you did do that that in fact you [1:47:01] are being vindictive in fact you are punishing because of political persuasions it's not members [1:47:07] of congress who suffer when you do an end run around congress that's not what i'm angry about it's not [1:47:13] about you taking the power away from us it's that it's their money it's their power of the people by the [1:47:21] people and for the people the house is closest to the people so when you do an end run around congress [1:47:26] you're taking americans power i want to move on now to wasteful government spending particularly [1:47:32] the 350 billion dollars set aside for this yes war of choice against iran included in this president's [1:47:39] budget his budget asked for a shocking surge in pentagon spending up to 1.5 trillion dollars we have [1:47:46] never in the history of this country seen spending like this paid for by splashing slashing health care [1:47:52] education and housing donald trump has said as my colleagues have said earlier we're fighting wars [1:47:57] here we can't take care of daycare mr vote yes or no is 350 billion dollars for the war in iran [1:48:04] lowering costs for americans those americans who ask us in every single town hall why they can't [1:48:11] afford to live in this country is the war lowering costs for americans it is certainly not defunding [1:48:17] child care we fully fund child care in this is it lowering costs for the american people but doesn't [1:48:24] that get at the premise of your question you can find money for illegal wars in iran you can find money [1:48:31] for all the pet projects of this administration and yet we can't find money to alleviate the costs of [1:48:38] food and housing and gas on the home front but according to you funded child care fully funded head [1:48:43] start mr mr mr vote mr vote with the money that is set aside in this budget the additional funding for [1:48:51] the war in around 350 billion dollars we could fund the aca tax credits for 10 years for a decade and i [1:49:02] can tell you what my constituents want to know how is it that we can continue to spend money on foreign [1:49:09] wars and yet we cannot find a solution to the fact that people can't afford health care and again [1:49:17] in in closing i just want to say again it's we're not so angry because you're taking our power we're [1:49:22] angry because you are taking the people's power i yield the gentlelady's time has expired if the [1:49:27] gentleman wants to i would just say this president has been a a person who has campaigned and led [1:49:33] for peace and against endless wars so is it is it gentlemen the gentleman's war is that is that [1:49:40] we're all right now i'm giving the i'm giving our witness the time to respond to your question and [1:49:44] then i'm going to yield five minutes to mr estes so finish the response uninterrupted and then let's [1:49:50] go to mr the president has also been equally clear that he is not going to allow a nuclear iran [1:49:55] he is not going to allow them to have nuclear weapons he is not going to allow them to have missiles and [1:49:59] the navy that impacts our national security and so he is doing what is necessary to keep us safe [1:50:04] while at the same trying to pursue diplomacy so that we can get out of wars and lower those those [1:50:10] costs over time i think the gentleman yield five minutes to mr estes from kansas well thank you mr [1:50:16] chairman and thank you director vote for being here at the budget committee to talk about the [1:50:20] administration's priority and fiscal roadmap for the coming year and and i'll just start a deviate a [1:50:26] little bit from my original remarks in terms of saying thank you for working to make the world [1:50:30] safer uh against the nuclear iran i mean they've spent 47 years chanting death to america and and [1:50:37] threatening nuclear reaction against uh uh so much of the world not just the united states and and uh we [1:50:43] need to make sure that uh bad actors in the world are contained you know we're at a critical moment in our [1:50:49] nation's history you know as we look forward to celebrating the 250th anniversary of america [1:50:54] we need to ensure that the economic founder foundation that we leave for the next generation [1:50:59] is one of stability and not crushing debt for families nationwide and for hard-working people [1:51:04] in my district i'm encouraged to see that this budget request prioritizes cutting wasteful spending [1:51:09] and rooting out the kind of fraud that has plagued federal spending for so long earlier this year i [1:51:15] joined a group of bipartisan members to introduce house resolution 981 the three percent resolution our [1:51:22] objective is simple to reduce the federal deficit to three percent of the gdp or lower within five [1:51:27] years currently our deficit is double that remark that benchmark i'm interested as we talk through [1:51:32] this and talking about how some of your thoughts on your your fiscal 27 budget request where helps to [1:51:39] get us towards that point just a quick overview of my district in kansas the fourth congressional district [1:51:45] i mean we're proudly known in wichita's their capital of the world we currently make 35 of all general [1:51:50] aviation aircraft in the united states and are home to more than 450 aerospace suppliers working family [1:51:58] tax cuts has been great jet fuel to help support and and grow our economy in terms of making sure that [1:52:05] we restore immediate r d expensing and capital expenditures to help invest in the future when we [1:52:11] keep taxes low for workers and provide full expensing for factories we're ensuring that high tech high paying [1:52:17] high tech jobs uh help maintain america's gold standard for for gave it for global aviation beyond [1:52:24] uh aerospace the tax savings have amounted to uh kansas family saving but we're uh acquiring about between [1:52:32] thirty four hundred and sixty one hundred dollars in inflation adjusted wages over the next four years [1:52:39] and and focusing on so many good policies and helping make sure businesses like the 190 uh small businesses [1:52:45] that'll take advantage of the 199 a a deduction uh you know as we focus on on how do we make sure main [1:52:51] street uh succeeds in america whether it's in wichita or newton or winfield or so many other communities [1:52:57] across across my district and then uh just in a general comment you know the federal government uh lost [1:53:03] 162 billion in proper payments in fiscal year 2024 and we can't ask kansas to pay more uh to government [1:53:12] that's going to lose billions of dollars just in talking a little bit about uh you've talked about [1:53:17] so many things already the working family tax cut uh contain many health care provisions to eliminate [1:53:22] some of that waste fraud and abuse in medicare and obamacare um ensuring that federal subsidies for [1:53:29] health care go to those who are intended are there further reforms that congress should consider to help [1:53:33] reduce fraud throughout the health care system potentially we're we're working on that right now one of the [1:53:39] activities of the task force that we have for fraud is not just to surge resources to make sure people [1:53:44] are prosecuted but to really do a review of whether agencies have enough resources to do the fraud [1:53:51] hunting but also are there things that make it impossible for you to get at fraud for instance [1:53:58] you know a lot of times when we ask states for their roles we can't get it and so what are your tools [1:54:05] to withhold funding under the law mandatory programs until they give you those roles those are the [1:54:11] kinds of things that we are likely to come to you uh after we get through this next reconciliation [1:54:16] package as it pertains to ways to combat fraud yeah which is a good point because uh the democrat [1:54:22] governor of my state actually has not been forthright in in helping uh the federal government make sure [1:54:27] that there's not waste fraud and abuse in some of those programs for that um you know as mentioned [1:54:33] earlier the u.s debt exceeds 39 trillion dollars and you you talked earlier about the cost of serving [1:54:39] that debt or servicing that debt paying over the trillion dollars in interest um and and are there [1:54:44] some specific examples or other areas as healthcare programs that are uh maybe crowded out because we do [1:54:51] not have the money because of the interest cost well i think the extent to which the crowd out will occur [1:54:58] with interest uh payments and servicing the debt is is ultimately the crisis in front of us i mean [1:55:04] we've been able to um absorb those interest the cost from our from our interest payments but we we have [1:55:11] to we actually have to treat this as the the crisis that it is and that's one of the reasons that this [1:55:16] administration has been so dogged to to support and champion reforms to make changes to how we do things to [1:55:23] at times think differently about our executive tools to control spending for the last 50 years [1:55:29] because we have a problem and it we can't just continue to point at the problem point at the [1:55:34] interest cost point at the deficit and and just acknowledge that it's never gonna it's never gonna [1:55:39] be fixed that's just not the way the president operates with regard to wanting to be in charge [1:55:44] of solutions on these on these big problems facing the country yeah well thank you thank you for [1:55:48] your effort to cut out the bloated spending and the waste thank you i think the gentleman and i've [1:55:55] lost my list to yield to uh miss jaypal my classmate from the great state of washington for five minutes [1:56:04] thank you so much mr chairman welcome mr vote despite president trump's promise to lower prices on day one [1:56:11] consumer sentiment plummeted to its lowest level on record last week gas prices are at a record high in [1:56:18] seattle diesel is now over seven dollars and families are feeling this every time they go to the grocery [1:56:25] store meanwhile fraud reports have only gone up and efforts to hold big corporate