Discussion · House of Representatives
Blake D. Moore Republican
“The national debt is growing too fast, and we must cut the deficit. Last year, Republicans cut government spending, held back agency money, and used tariffs to reduce the deficit by about $360 billion. I want consistent tariff rules, and I want to keep cutting the deficit by finding fraud in government agencies.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In 10 years, the deficit will be greater than every penny spent by the Federal Government between 1789 and 2023. As we celebrate our 250th, this is the time to reflect on it and to focus on it. I am going to share something tonight that is going on every single day, specifically about trying to find the opportunity for deficit reduction. I have another colleague who will be here momentarily as well, but this is, obviously, an evergreen topic, something that we are constantly focused on, something that members of the Budget Committee, members of the Bipartisan Fiscal Forum, members of various groups that focus more heavily on this than maybe some other issues. I am proud to count myself as part of that. I remember voting against debt ceiling increases that didn’t have some type of spending reduction, even when my own side was proposing them, that didn’t have some type of spending reduction, a spending cap, or even a fiscal commission. There are many solutions. It is a key aspect, and it is something that we need to reflect on. In President Trump’s first year, as we started the 119th Congress, taking that first entire year, calendar year 2025, and comparing it to calendar year 2024, a very unique thing happened: We had about $360 billion worth of deficit reduction. We ran an approximately $1.8 to $1.9 trillion deficit over the last few years, and it has gone up considerably since COVID, during President Biden’s 4 years. The first year that Republicans had the White House, House, and Senate, we had an extraordinary feat of $360 billion worth of deficit reduction. There were spending constraints. There was restructuring of how we approached some of the student loan aspect of the budget, various elements within the entirety of the appropriations process from different agencies across the board that were pulling back and withholding some of their planned spending. That, mixed with revenues from tariffs, created a $360 billion deficit reduction. It doesn’t get reported much, doesn’t get talked about. A portion of that tariff money after the SCOTUS ruling will be refunded back, so of that 360, there will be money going back ultimately to some of these companies that are involved in this. The world of tariff and trade policy will continue to play out where you will still get revenue to help us offset some of the deficits. I have been critical of some of the tariff policy. I have been supportive of some of the tariff policy. I want two specific things from tariffs. I want them to be consistent. If they are going to exist, I want them to be consistent, something the companies, business folks, and families can plan on, as well as be a positive contributor to reducing deficits. I think there is an opportunity to do both of those things, and we are seeing that play out. I am going to talk a little bit tonight about what is actually going on with one of the most important aspects of the constant churn of us reducing deficits, and that is what is taking place within some of our administrative agencies on finding fraud. I am going to share some anecdotes and some data. I look forward to doing that. Before I do that, I have a colleague here who is going to share a brief message. I yield to the gentleman from the great State of North Carolina (Mr. Edwards).”
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In 10 years, the deficit will be greater than every penny spent by the Federal Government between 1789 and 2023. As we celebrate our 250th, this is the time to reflect on it and to focus on it. I am going to share something tonight that is going on every single day, specifically about trying to find the opportunity for deficit reduction. I have another colleague who will be here momentarily as well, but this is, obviously, an evergreen topic, something that we are constantly focused on, something that members of the Budget Committee, members of the Bipartisan Fiscal Forum, members of various groups that focus more heavily on this than maybe some other issues. I am proud to count myself as part of that. I remember voting against debt ceiling increases that didn’t have some type of spending reduction, even when my own side was proposing them, that didn’t have some type of spending reduction, a spending cap, or even a fiscal commission. There are many solutions. It is a key aspect, and it is something that we need to reflect on. In President Trump’s first year, as we started the 119th Congress, taking that first entire year, calendar year 2025, and comparing it to calendar year 2024, a very unique thing happened: We had about $360 billion worth of deficit reduction. We ran an approximately $1.8 to $1.9 trillion deficit over the last few years, and it has gone up considerably since COVID, during President Biden’s 4 years. The first year that Republicans had the White House, House, and Senate, we had an extraordinary feat of $360 billion worth of deficit reduction. There were spending constraints. There was restructuring of how we approached some of the student loan aspect of the budget, various elements within the entirety of the appropriations process from different agencies across the board that were pulling back and withholding some of their planned spending. That, mixed with revenues from tariffs, created a $360 billion deficit reduction. It doesn’t get reported much, doesn’t get talked about. A portion of that tariff money after the SCOTUS ruling will be refunded back, so of that 360, there will be money going back ultimately to some of these companies that are involved in this. The world of tariff and trade policy will continue to play out where you will still get revenue to help us offset some of the deficits. I have been critical of some of the tariff policy. I have been supportive of some of the tariff policy. I want two specific things from tariffs. I want them to be consistent. If they are going to exist, I want them to be consistent, something the companies, business folks, and families can plan on, as well as be a positive contributor to reducing deficits. I think there is an opportunity to do both of those things, and we are seeing that play out. I am going to talk a little bit tonight about what is actually going on with one of the most important aspects of the constant churn of us reducing deficits, and that is what is taking place within some of our administrative agencies on finding fraud. I am going to share some anecdotes and some data. I look forward to doing that. Before I do that, I have a colleague here who is going to share a brief message. I yield to the gentleman from the great State of North Carolina (Mr. Edwards).