to listen to the rhetoric from some of my good Democratic friends and colleagues this morning, one would think that they were prepared to vote for less spending and lower deficits, when nothing could be further from the truth. We are going to get a budget agreement, and let me tell my colleagues why. The budget agreement that we have reached between House and Senate Republicans achieves a $5 billion Federal budget surplus in the year 2002. It calls for reforming Medicaid and welfare, saving Medicare from bankruptcy and providing middle-class families much needed tax relief. It reforms Medicaid and welfare by giving more power and more revenue to the States in line with the recommendations, the bipartisan recommendations, of the Nation's Governors. It preserves and protects Medicare for our Nation's elderly, a goal which is even more important because of the report last week from the Medicare trustees which says Medicare is going broke earlier than expected; in fact, their worst-case scenario is that Medicare could be broke in 1999, just 3 years from now. And it calls for permanent tax relief for American families through a $500-per-child tax credit that is $1,000 for a family of four. Mr. Speaker, it is a good budget, and it balances the budget for the sake of our children's future.
Frank Riggs: “to listen to the rhetoric from some of my good Democratic friends and colleagues this morning, one would think that they…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the budget agreement and its implications for spending, Medicare, and tax relief.
Share
More from Frank Riggs
So the amendment in its current form is intended to do one thing and one thing only, and that is to prevent the City and County of San Francisco government... from being able to use Federal taxpayer funding... to require that private…
Now, what did the United States 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decide in the Hopwood case? Hopwood v. The University of Texas, I quote: ``The 5th circuit ruled that diversity does not justify preferential admissions based on race.''
Our concern is that we do not want Federal law to necessarily override State law with respect to the day-to-day administration of bilingual education programs. I think the gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez) would acknowledge that…
fundamentally this debate is about the refusal of my colleagues on the other side to give up their Band-Aid-- their fig leaf--their placebo for the failure of their great society social programs and the failure of the public education…





