John Spratt: “Starting in 1999, if that were to become the will of the House, if that substitute were to carry, it would cut…”

“Starting in 1999, if that were to become the will of the House, if that substitute were to carry, it would cut discretionary spending government wide on a pro rata basis and reduce the tax cuts to increase transportation funding by $19 billion in budget authority, $12 billion in outlays. The reduction to defense would be $5.65 billion according to the best estimation of the Committee on the Budget, and $5.8 billion would come out of nondefense discretionary spending, across the board. Of the $12 billion increase in transportation spending, 94 percent would be offset by decreased discretionary spending, 6 percent would be offset by reduced tax cuts. What would be the consequences? The first consequence would be that this agreement, hard wrought, negotiated over 3 months, would be severely undercut. Second, the offset to pay the $12 billion would require, as I said, across-the-board reductions, so these carefully allocated cuts, these programs that have been protected as priorities, Head Start, for example, would be cut along with everything else. The good, the bad, the indifferent, everything would be cut.”