Rob Andrews: “Reclaiming my time, the Spratt alternative, frankly, leaves room for the supplementals that would be necessary, because…”

“Reclaiming my time, the Spratt alternative, frankly, leaves room for the supplementals that would be necessary, because it does not opt for fiscally reckless tax cuts that have put the country in a position where it is borrowing $25 for every $100 that it spends. It is true, as the chairman points out, that the Spratt alternative doesn't lay out the true costs of this adventure in Iraq. But it is also true that the supplementals that are inevitably coming, inevitably, that there are resources for those supplementals because of what Mr. Spratt has done, and there are not resources beyond simply expanding the deficit because of what the majority has done. Whether one agrees with the policy in Iraq or disagrees with the policy in Iraq, the reality is we have to pay for it. To put on the floor a budget that doesn't pay for it and then takes up resources that could be used in a supplemental and soaks them up for the majority's worship at the altar of tax cuts for the wealthy, I think is irresponsibility beyond compare. There are a lot of debates one can have about the question of Iraq, but the debate we cannot have is whether we have to pay for what we are doing. The majority has put us in a position where we will only pay for it by borrowing money. Mr. Spratt has put us in a position where we can follow a more rational path. I urge adoption of the Spratt alternative.”