Rep. Schweikert's Amendment: Re-evaluating Appropriated Funds for Budgetary Discipline

The Need for Budgetary Discipline

• 💡 Representative Schweikert highlights a project by the Joint Economic Committee that identified appropriated funds sitting in accounts for years.
• 🎯 The amendment aims to instill budgetary discipline by re-examining these funds to see if they are still needed or if a newer, better, faster way exists to achieve the original goal.
• 💰 An estimated over a trillion dollars is currently sitting in unspent accounts, a practice Schweikert argues against, regardless of whether he opposes the original appropriation.

Opposition to the Amendment

• ⚠️ The opposing representative argues that Schweikert's amendment undermines the bill's aim to promote national security, energy security, and economic prosperity.
• 📉 The amendment proposes a $37 billion cut, including a $16 billion cut to defense funding, which could harm national security.
• ⚛️ Specifically, the amendment includes a nearly $9 billion cut to the National Nuclear Security Administration, potentially damaging the nation's nuclear deterrent and modernization programs.
• 🚢 Cuts to naval reactors are also a concern, with potential cascading impacts on submarines and aircraft carriers.

Schweikert's Rebuttal and Fiscal Context

• 🗣️ Schweikert uses the example of clean coal technology, appropriated in 2015 with an unobligated balance of $2 million, to illustrate his point about stagnant funds.
• 💸 He emphasizes the scale of national borrowing, approximately $72,000 per second, and the fiscal year's projected borrowing of 7.3% of the entire economy.
• ⚖️ Schweikert argues that true fiscal responsibility requires reviewing and modernizing every line item in the budget, rather than simply stacking new appropriations on top of old, unspent funds.
• ✅ The amendment is presented as a call for adults and professionals to do their job by ensuring funds are still needed and relevant.