Martin Sabo: “I rise in strong opposition to the Kasich motion. This is not an instruction that deals with a sliver. It is a motion…”

“I rise in strong opposition to the Kasich motion. This is not an instruction that deals with a sliver. It is a motion that deals with reducing discretionary spending, which represents a little over a third of the Federal budget. It is the portion of the budget where a year ago we adopted a freeze at or below the estimated 1993 levels for the next 5 years, unprecedented. We are complying with the tough restrictions on discretionary spending that we set in 1993, which will put us at the lowest level of discretionary spending in relation to GDP in, I believe, close to 50 years, 45 years. It is on top of cuts and discipline of last year, a 1.5 percent cut in this portion of the budget that funds our investment programs, and funds our programs in education, pays for our national defense, builds the infrastructure of this country. My friend, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Kasich] would suggest it should have no impact on defense, and quotes some words from part of a Senate amendment. He takes the whereas clause and skips the resolve clause, which understands that the Senate amendment would have impact on both domestic discretionary spending and defense spending. The reality is that this amendment this year and over the next 4 years would have significant impact on everything that we choose to do on a discretionary basis, whether it is investing in kids, paying for health research, or defending our country.”