I think that 2 weeks is not enough time to reach an agreement on H.R. 1 with the other body, and I'm afraid we're going to be back here doing this again. We opposed H.R. 1 because we believe it would have the effect of slamming on the fiscal brakes too abruptly, resulting in higher unemployment and threatening our Nation's economic recovery. There is no dispute that cutting Federal spending too deeply and too quickly before the economy has fully recovered risks slowing growth and losing jobs. Moody's estimates that H.R. 1 would reduce real growth in 2011 by 0.5 percent, meaning 400,000 fewer jobs in 2011 and 700,000 fewer jobs by the end of 2012. The Economic Policy Institute projected job losses near 800,000.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker addresses concerns about a short-term continuing resolution and its implications for government spending and employment.
Share
More from Norman D. Dicks
You don't need thousands of these weapons. A couple hundred, frankly, could take out Iran and almost any country you can imagine. So, again, we can't afford to do everything. We are in an era where we're dealing with terrorists, and we…
As you know, the New START, or strategic arms reduction, is a nuclear arms reduction treaty between the United States and Russia. On December 22, 2010, the Senate increased our national security by providing its advice and consent to…
I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding on this vital matter, and I completely concur with his stated clarification on this CR's funding and language regarding cybersecurity. I strongly supported the inclusion of this anomaly, and…
The New START Treaty limits the total number of weapon delivery vehicles by 2017. According to the Air Force, they are funded for New START implementation, but are awaiting final force structure decisions to determine numbers of weapon…