Chris Van Hollen: “I thank my colleague, Mr. Schrader, and his colleagues for offering this amendment. I support the overall framework of…”

“I thank my colleague, Mr. Schrader, and his colleagues for offering this amendment. I support the overall framework of Simpson-Bowles. I've said that many times. If you look at the balance in Simpson-Bowles between the cuts and the revenue, it's something, I think, that is the model that we should be using in this body. And I do want to submit for the Record an analysis that was done by the Center For Budget Policy Priorities that shows exactly what that breakdown would be. I don't support every single recommendation within Simpson-Bowles, but I think we have an obligation, if we don't like one of their cuts, to come up with an alternative cut. If we don't like their revenue, we should come up with alternative revenue. But what the Simpson-Bowles proposal does is it creates a framework saying that we need to take a balanced approach to reducing our deficit. I was listening to my friend, Mr. Price, explaining his opposition to this. He didn't want to impose requirements on the President; simply ask the President to consider these proposals. And as the President himself has said, he has incorporated many of the proposals from Simpson-Bowles into his own budget, the ones he submitted last year and the one that he will submit this year. So I support the framework, not every recommendation, but the overall framework.…”