WASHINGTON – House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt made the following statement at today’s meeting of the conference committee on the Fiscal Year 2008 budget resolution.

The last time I took part in a real budget conference was 1997, when the Congress and the White House, Democrats and Republicans, came together and over four months worked out the Balanced Budget Agreement of 1997. This conference is not likely to be as fruitful, but we cannot let it fail, like last year, and leave us without a concurrent resolution—not if we are to restore fiscal discipline. As I look at the unresolved issues that separate the House and Senate, I cannot help but notice the similarities, and feel that the differences between us are surmountable.

First of all, both budget resolutions have a common aim, and that’s to return the budget to balance by 2012.

Second, both resolutions uphold the principle called “pay-as-you-go.” It’s a simple idea, and that may be the reason it works. “Pay-go” simply holds that all mandatory spending increases and all tax or revenue decreases must be paid for, offset, or in budget-speak, deficit-neutral. Our commitment to PAYGO is steadfast, and we intend to arrive at a conference report that will uphold and strengthen PAYGO, in both the House and the Senate.

Will Rogers is reputed to have said, “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.” Six years ago, when the Bush Administration took office, the debt of the United States was $5.7 trillion. That debt has increased by more than $3 trillion, nearly 60%, in six short years. We cannot reverse in a year the fiscal course of the last six years, but we can stop digging deeper.

Third, a budget is basically a statement of values. “Where your money is, there also is your heart.” A balanced budget means more to us than a balanced bottom-line; it means balanced priorities. H. Con. Res. 99 and S. Con. Res. 21 uphold the promises made to our veterans. Both provide the highest increase ever for veterans’ health care. H. Con. Res. 99 and S. Con. Res. 21 put families first by broadening children’s access to health care under CHIP. To any who say this is not consistent with our fiscal goals, I say, “Look back to 1997.” CHIP was founded in a balanced budget bill. We should not put our children’s health and education on hold, while we seek to balance the budget. We have done both in the past by setting priorities and sticking to them, we can do it again, if we abide by “pay-go” and offset the cost of expanding CHIP or enhancing student loans.

Finally, both resolutions, House and Senate, provide for middle-income tax relief. Each calls for extension of tax cuts passed in ‘01 and ‘03 that benefit middle-income Americans, such as the child tax credit, marriage penalty relief, and the ten percent individual income tax bracket. We support estate tax reform, we have voted for the research and development tax credit, and we are for the deduction of state and local sales taxes. Both budgets also call for a fix to the Alternative Minimum Tax, so that it will not apply to middle-income taxpayers for whom it was never intended. On these issues of tax relief, the differences between us turn mostly on timing and process. I am optimistic that we can square these differences, and do so while standing firm in our commitment to PAYGO.

The resolutions before us represent the art of the possible, but they move us toward a balanced budget, with a fiscally disciplined framework. That’s why it’s vitally important that we agree upon a concurrent resolution with the full effect of budget law.

# # #