Nita Lowey: “I oppose this Budget Resolution because I believe that, in this time of great prosperity and urgent needs, we can do…”

“I oppose this Budget Resolution because I believe that, in this time of great prosperity and urgent needs, we can do better. We should be voting on a bipartisan and realistic budget resolution. Instead, we have a resolution that doesn't secure the future of Social Security and Medicare, and doesn't focus on critical education, health, and consumer safety needs. Under this resolution, our federal commitment to education would be $4.7 billion under the President's budget. The increases proposed are solely for elementary and secondary education, leaving no increase for critical needs in school modernization, professional development, Title I, and higher and adult education. Under this resolution, the NIH would received a lower increase than necessary to continue our bipartisan effort to double funding for the world's premiere biomedical research institution. And this increase would mean that other, equally worthy health programs at CDC, SAMHSA, HRSA and related agencies would be at or below a freeze. Under this resolution, programs like LIHEAP--so desperately needed this winter--would serve 164,000 fewer low-income families. Pell Grants would go to 316,000 fewer students by 2005; and more than 40,000 kids would be denied access to Head Start by 2005. The fact is that this budget resolution sets us against each other. We cannot have tax cuts of the extraordinary magnitude being discussed unless we make deep cuts in programs that millions of Americans rely upon.”