On the recordMay 17, 2012
I yield myself 1 minute. I agree with a lot of what the gentleman said. For instance, he's right that we have to look at that other 61 percent of the budget. He is, however, wrong that it hasn't been touched since 2006. We Democrats touched it and reduced Medicare by $500 billion. And you Republicans beat--well, I can't say that--beat us up, shall we say, over the fact that we had done that. So there is a considerable amount of hypocrisy here. We want to avoid sequestration, without question. But to not allow for any revenue--which, again, is what this amendment does--just cuts, protecting defense, not protecting anything else, allowing for no revenue despite the fact that revenue has gone down by almost 30 percent over the course of the last 10 years, puts us on the path to sequestration. That's a path I don't want to be on. But we have to be broader in our thinking about it other than just devastating every other portion of the budget as the approach. Protect defense, no revenue. That's not a solution to sequestration. With that, I yield the last minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
