mr. chairman , i yield myself 7 minutes . 
mr. chairman , 5 years ago , the budget was in surplus . 
hard to believe , but it was in surplus by $ 236 billion . 
we are here today grappling with a deficit of $ 427 billion , the deficit expected this year , basically because of policy choices that were made since 2001 , made since president bush came to office . 
the bush administration bet the budget on a blue sky estimate and went for huge tax cuts that left no margin for error . 
i stood here in the well of this house in 2001 and warned that those projections of $ 5.6 trillion surplus could disappear in a blink of an economist 's eye . 
when the surpluses of $ 5.6 trillion failed to materialize , the budget sank into deficit : $ 375 billion in 2003 , $ 412 billion in 2004 , and an expected $ 427 billion this year and on and on and on . 
i know there have been random events that no one foresaw , terrorism , and recession , but that is part of budgeting , reserving for such contingencies . 
the bush republican budgets of the last 4 years not only failed to provide for such contingencies , by budgeting right to the margin , but when deficits replaced surpluses , nevertheless they kept coming with tax cuts , tax cuts after tax cuts . 
this budget has $ 106 billion in additional tax cuts included in it , knowing full well that all of those tax cuts will go straight to the bottom line and will add dollar for dollar to the deficit . 
that is one reason that the cbo says , in yesterday 's production of the president 's budget , that the president 's budget makes this deficit worse , not better , by $ 1.6 trillion . 
in other words , if we left it on autopilot , at current services , it would be $ 1.6 trillion more in implementing the president 's budget . 
so let us be clear . 
we are here because of policy choices that republicans have made , the white house and the congress , over the last 4 years , and you were forewarned and took the risk . 
given the thrust of this budget that is before us , we will be back grappling again for years to come with deficits as far as the eye can see . 
sitting here for the last 2 days i have heard their budget praised warmly by members on the other side , and there are features of it , frankly , that i would praise too . 
for example , it includes $ 50 billion , as a rough cost , for our forces in iraq and afghanistan for another year , which is more than one can say for the president 's budget , which does not include a dime . 
but this budget excludes the likely cost , according to cbo , in 2007 , 2008 , 2009 , 2010 , which cbo estimates to be $ 384 billion . 
this budget stops abruptly in 2010 , running out 5 years of numbers instead of 10 years of numbers . 
that is a convenient place to stop because it avoids recognizing the cost of social security privatization , which the administration acknowledges will be $ 754 billion between 2009 and 2015 , but which it omits from the budget altogether . 
and while it calls for renewal of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts , with the revenue impact of $ 1.6 trillion , not a dime of that revenue loss is included because it falls after 2010 , but sitting here for the last 2 days , i have also heard the claim that this budget takes on entitlements . 
in fact , the gentleman who was in the well just before me emphasized this as one of the sterling features of this amendment . 
but let us be clear . 
it does not take on social security . 
i do not think it should , but it does not . 
it does not take on medicare . 
it does not do anything to the farm program . 
the chairman here has made it clear that these are not to be the objects of reconciliation savings . 
reconciliation will mainly fall on medicaid and on other programs like medicaid , medicaid being the health care program of last resort for the least among us . 
the president has proposed cutting medicaid over 10 years by $ 60 billion , but when the congressional budget office scored his savings and said we can not find $ 20 billion of savings here , maybe 13 , maybe 14 , but not $ 20 billion in these proposals , nevertheless , the committee has said to the committee on energy and commerce to cut $ 20 billion anyway . 
three governors were here to speak with the gentleman from iowa ( mr. nussle ) xz4002980 and me and to plead with us , `` please do not subject us to an arbitrary budget savings number . 
this program needs to be reformed . 
it needs to be restructured , but do not let reform be driven by an arbitrary number. '' that is exactly what this budget resolution does . 
it lets reform be driven by an arbitrary savings number . 
it can not tell us what , where , or how those savings will be achieved . 
when what is off limits in the $ 68 billion of reconciliation is made clear , we can see where the cuts are likely to fall . 
medicaid for sure , big-time cuts , but also the earned income tax credit , the child care and development block grant , food stamps , tanf , veterans benefits . 
in other words , the safety net . 
these cuts will shred the safety net . 
they are not intended for the major entitlement programs but for the smaller ones that are for the least of these who need the help , the most vulnerable among us . 
it will be argued , i know , that this is necessary to balance the budget , but , in truth , none of the $ 68 billion in reconciliation savings goes to balance the budget . 
that is because it is more than offset by the $ 106 billion in additional tax cuts . 
when we net these out , there is no spending reduction to put on the bottom line . 
there is no net reduction to the bottom line . 
the bottom line actually gets worse . 
instead of using these mandatory spending cuts in medicaid to reduce the deficit , as they would have us assume , these cuts actually are used to offset tax cuts . 
for whom we do not know , but , nevertheless , we do know they do not go to the bottom line and they do not mitigate the deficit . 
so there are major problems in this budget , particularly when it comes to the key objective , and that is reduction of the deficit . 
and i will return to that in a minute . 
mr. chairman , i yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from maryland ( mr. hoyer ) xz4001890 , the distinguished whip on the house democratic side . 
