Committee on Energy and Commerce, Democrats Home Page
Who We Are Schedule What's New
View Printable Version

Text only of letters sent from the Commerce Committee Democrats.

 

March 1, 2000

 

The Honorable John R. Kasich
Chairman
Committee on the Budget
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515

The Honorable John M. Spratt, Jr.
Ranking Member
Committee on the Budget
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Chairman Kasich and Ranking Member Spratt:

The Chairman of the Committee recently wrote to the Committee on Budget expressing the views of the Republicans on our Committee, noting that Minority would send its views under separate cover. Our views follow.

I will be brief. First, it is important that the budget resolution not spend projected surpluses on explosive tax cuts, as previously proposed by House Republicans. We must reserve those surpluses to protect Social Security and Medicare and pay down the debt. Of particular concern and a high budget priority to this Committee is the establishment of a universal and comprehensive prescription drug benefit program as a part of Medicare.

Second, we remain concerned that user fees, collected to offset costs of government services, continue to be hijacked by budgeteers and appropriators for unrelated purposes. Our Committee has already reported legislation designed to ensure that fees collected for the Nuclear Waste Fund are actually appropriated solely for nuclear waste activities. Similarly, our Committee is currently considering legislation to reduce fees paid by corporations to the Securities and Exchange Commission for registration and transactions. There is a bipartisan consensus that collections, which now far exceed the costs of the SEC, can be reduced. However, there must be assurance that the budget of the SEC not be imperiled by any reduction. Any fee reduction should reduce the surplus funds dedicated to general revenues, and not to reduce offsets for the SEC’s budget.

Third, we strongly oppose the ordering of spectrum auctions by the Budget Committee as part of a budget resolution. Our Committee on a bipartisan basis established initial legislation to permit the auctioning of spectrum so that taxpayers would receive the benefit of the grant of licenses, while ensuring that the public interest was served in the operation of auctions. Unfortunately, in past years, both the Budget Committee and appropriators have used spectrum auctions to balance the budget or pay for appropriations bills. This has resulted in disastrous auctions in which the government was grossly underpaid for the spectrum and the public interest was ignored.

Fourth, we were pleased that last year the Appropriations Committee ended its practice of authorizing sales of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to fund other expenses. The recent tight supplies of heating oil and gasoline, along with a significant rise in prices, remind us all that we must maintain our Strategic Petroleum Reserve for when it is needed, and not squander it to fund other programs. On a similar subject, high energy prices are taking their toll on consumers, particularly in the Northeast and Midwest. Ensuring adequate budget authority for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, often a target of Republican budget cutters, must be given a high priority.

Finally, we obviously do not share much of Chairman Bliley’s views on programs in the President’s budget. For example, we generally support the President’s health care initiatives, finding them to be a balanced and responsible effort to address critical needs of the American people. Similarly, the Chairman’s views on agency funding seem overly hostile to the agencies without providing any analysis. For example, the Chairman objects to modest increases in the SEC’s budget, while making no reference to the reasons for the increases, such as the spectacular growth in new public offerings, trading volume, and new forms of trading. We also remain frustrated with the Majority’s failure to reauthorize key environmental programs in the President’s budget, such as Superfund and Brownfields, except in legislation that would threaten the environment and release polluters from their obligations.

Our lack of comment on each of the remarks in the Chairman’s February 25 submission to your Committee should not be taken to indicate agreement with them. Please feel free to contact me, or have your staff contact our staff, if they have any questions about specific programs.

Sincerely,

 

JOHN D. DINGELL
RANKING MEMBER

 

cc: The Honorable Tom Bliley, Chairman
Committee on Commerce

 

 

 

Prepared by the Committee on Energy and Commerce
2125 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515