Serrano statement at full committee markup of FY2017 Financial Services & General Government Appropriations bill

Thank you, Chairman Rogers.

I mentioned this at subcommittee, but today marks Chairman Crenshaw’s last full committee markup as Chairman.  For the past four years, he has been a partner and a friend on this bill, and I was greatly saddened by his announcement to retire a few weeks ago.  I want to take a moment to thank him for the partnership we have had on this subcommittee, and for his friendship.  Although we don’t agree on everything, I think that Chairman Crenshaw has always tried to be fair with our side of the aisle. We may disagree on some of the priorities in this bill, but we have never been disagreeable.   

That is why I am disappointed to have to stand here today and oppose this will.  With an overall funding level that is 6 percent below last year, and 11 percent below the President’s request, the bill before us today underfunds agencies that are critical to the operation of the federal government.  Combined with the dozens of partisan policy riders that have been added to this bill, we are faced with a toxic combination that our side has no choice but to oppose.

Let me mention a few of the bigger problems. 

The IRS is cut $236 million from FY 2016.  From 2010 to 2015, budget cuts have forced the IRS to cut its workforce by 18 percent, and these cuts will exacerbate the problem.  This situation has actually led to an increase in the deficit, since without an adequate number of employees, we lose money that is legally owed to this government.  By continually cutting the IRS, we are simply empowering tax cheats and confusing honest taxpayers. 

Within the sphere of financial regulation, the Securities and Exchange Commission is funded at $226 million below the President's request, and $50 million below enacted.  I say this every year, but we should not cut funding for our cop on the beat for Wall Street.  Their job is to prevent the very abuses that cause the financial meltdown of 2007-2008. 

However, these funding problems pale in comparison to the dozens of unnecessary partisan riders and authorizing bills. These provisions, taken together, make compromise almost impossible.

The FCC is subject to several riders restricting its ability to address urgent issues. This includes another effort to stop the FCC’s net neutrality rule.  Such an effort is unwise and unnecessary, since it simply delays a rule that is already implemented and has been an effective protection for consumers, businesses, and internet service providers.  I will offer an amendment today to strip these riders.

The IRS is also subject to numerous partisan riders focused on continued efforts to undermine the successful Affordable Care Act, and to prevent the reform of the 501(c)(4) rules that have caused confusion and abuse in the campaign finance field.  All of these efforts are unnecessary and counterproductive- and in fact CBO calculates that the inclusion of the individual mandate rider would cost the government money, since implementing this rider would result in a serious loss of revenue.

The bill also includes riders that are harmful to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an entity charged with protecting consumers from unfair, deceptive, or abusive financial practices.

Additionally, the bill attempts to limit transparency in government by including two riders to restrict the public’s ability to know who corporations, and in particular federal contractors, are giving political donations to.  The bill also includes a number of riders limiting women’s health choices, both in federal health plans and in the District of Columbia, which is once again prevented from using its own dollars to provide legal abortion services to low-income women.  The bill includes further interference in the District of Columbia’s local affairs by repealing the locally passed law allowing the District to use its own local funds without the approval of Congress, even though courts have ruled in the District’s favor.  And the bill includes several provisions attempting to stop the President’s continued engagement with Cuba.  These efforts seek to reinstitute the failed policies of the past 50 years and should be removed.

All of these issues once again inject partisanship in the appropriations process and make finding common ground difficult, if not impossible.  The majority must know that many of these riders are unacceptable to our side.  I can only conclude that their inclusion means that this is not a serious effort to fund the agencies under this bill, but rather it is election year politics at its worst.  We will have several amendments to address some of the worst riders in this bill in this markup today, and I hope my colleagues on the other side will agree to them.  Absent serious change, the bill in its current form will be vetoed, and the result is that we will simply end up with a CR, or worse.  

Before I conclude, I would like to take a moment thank the staff on both sides of the aisle for their hard work on this bill.  Although I don’t agree with a lot of what is in this bill, I know just how hard it is to put something like this together, and I want to thank them for the many nights and weekends they spent crafting it.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.