Yes. Not spending money we don't have. From my perspective, we did that when we cut taxes. We didn't pay for that. It wasn't like we had a real surplus. We had a projected surplus. We banked on that; and as I said earlier, we lost on that proposition. I suggest that whether or not, as I said, you use what you think is the bias towards not spending as opposed to a bias for spending, as someone who served on the Appropriations Committee for 23 years, we all know what will happen. The agency will come in and say this is what we are doing for 100 bucks, and this year we need 150 if you want us to continue to do that. My point is the Congress has the authority to say, no, we want you to do less. It is the Congress' role to make priorities. I suggest to the gentleman it won't be easier for us to do it under either scenario because it is hard to do. I agree with the gentleman that we ought to do it. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Wisconsin has expired.
Share & report
More from Steny Hoyer
We have less than 10 hours left until we go home for the holidays, less than 10 hours when we leave the field, and less than 10 hours before we act responsibly. The men and women of Ukraine will not go home for the holidays. They will not…
Time is wasting. Time is running out. We are sleeping while Ukraine is burning, the victim of an international criminal. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, as I have too many times before, just 72 hours before Members return to their districts for…
It has been 687 days since Putin invaded Ukraine. It has been 379 days since we secured our last aid package for the Ukrainians. It has been 97 days since Hamas launched its brutal terror attack on Israel and took numerous Israelis and…
I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, late at night, a ship being guided by people working for the Port Authority of Baltimore lost control of a gigantic ship. Unable to propel it or guide it, they immediately called the…





