Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
THAT WE WERE ONE OF A HUNDRED
AMERICANS OUT OF 300 MILLION
AMERICANS THAT LET THE
COUNTRY.
UNTHINKABLE HAPPEN TO THIS
MR. PRESIDENT, THANK YOU FOR
ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK, AND I
YIELD THE FLOOR.
MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA.
THANK YOU.
AND I WANTED TO SPEND SOME TIME
TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS COMING
BEFORE US SATURDAY MORNING.
AS A MEMBER OF THE GANG OF SIX,
I'M WANTING US TO SOLVE OUR
PROBLEM.
BUT THE BEST WAY TO SOLVE THAT
PROBLEM WOULD BE THE BILL THAT'S
GOING TO BE VOTED ON ON SATURDAY
MORNING.
AND WHY IS THAT?
YOU KNOW, WE'RE BORROWING
$4 BILLION A DAY.
AND I'VE GOT ENOUGH GRAY HAIR TO
KNOW THAT REGARDLESS OF ALL THE
GOOD INTENTIONS AND REGARDLESS
OF ALL THE STATEMENTS OF THE
MEMBERS ON THE FLOOR THAT WE'LL
NEVER LIVE WITHIN OUR MEANS IN
WASHINGTON UNTIL WE ARE FORCED
TO LIVE WITHIN OUR MEANS.
AND JUST BECAUSE A
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT WOULD
TAKE PROBABLY FOUR YEARS TO PASS
PASS, GIVEN WHAT THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE THINK ABOUT IT, ISN'T A
REASON NOT TO GO ON AND DO IT
REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE DO ABOUT
OUR SHORT-TERM PROBLEM COMING UP
AUGUST 2.
SO THE VERY FACT THAT PEOPLE
WOULD SAY, WE'RE NOT GONNA PASS
THE CUT, CAP AND BALANCE BECAUSE
IT WON'T HAPPEN IN A PERIOD OF
TIME IS EXACTLY THE SAME
APPROACH THAT GOT US
$14.3 TRILLION IN DEBT, THAT HAS
OUR CREDIT RATING AT RISK AND
PUTS US IN THE KIND OF PROBLEMS
THAT WE HAVE TODAY.
SO I'VE OFFERED A PLAN I THINK
IS EVEN BETTER.
I KNOW NOT MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES
WILL, BUT HERE'S A PLAN TO CUT
$9 TRILLION OVER THE NEXT TEN
YEARS, BUT IT'S THE ONLY PLAN
THAT SPECIFICALLY STATES WHAT
YOU WOULD CUT, WHERE YOU WOULD
CUT IT AND WHY YOU WOULD CUT IT.
IT'S BACKED UP WITH THE FACTS.
NOBODY ELSE CAN CLAIM THAT.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIKE ALL OF
THEM, BUT WHAT WE DO KNOW IS IF
SOMETHING DOESN'T COME OUT OF
THIS BODY BETWEEN NOW AND AUGUST
2 THAT CUTS AT LEAST $4 TRILLION
$4 TRILLION, THIS COUNTRY'S
GOING TO SEE SIGNIFICANTLY
INCREASED INTEREST RATES AS A
COST OF THAT.
AND WHAT SO OFTEN HAPPENS IS YOU
HEAR WONDERFUL WORDS AND
WONDERFUL SPEECHES ON THE SENATE
FLOOR BUT NOBODY PUTTING THEIR
NAME ON WHERE YOU WOULD CUT.
WELL, I'VE PUT MY NAME ON
$9 TRILLION WORTH OF CUTS.
IT PINCHES EVERYBODY IN THIS
COUNTRY, EVERYBODY.
IT PINCHES EVERYBODY.
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT?
WE'RE ALL IN THIS.
WE HAVE LIVED THE LAST 30 YEARS
IN THIS COUNTRY ON THE BACKS OF
THOSE WHO ARE GOING TO PAY THE
TAXES FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS.
IT'S TIME WE START PAYING BACK.
IT'S TIME WE START GIVING BACK.
YOU KNOW, THE SENATE IS A
DIFFERENT PLACE TODAY THAN WHEN
I CAME TO THE SENATE.
WHEN I CAME TO THE SENATE, THE
IDEA WAS NOT TO BLOCK
LEGISLATION BUT TO DISCUSS
LEGISLATION.
TO HAVE THE COURAGE AND THE
BACKBONE TO VOTE AGAINST
SOMETHING AND GO HOME AND TELL
YOUR CONSTITUENTS WHY YOU VOTED
AGAINST IT.
TO OFFER AMENDMENTS THAT YOU
THOUGHT WOULD IMPROVE
LEGISLATION AND DEFEND THOSE
AMENDMENTS.
AND TO VOTE FOR A BILL THAT YOU
THOUGHT WAS IN THE BEST INTEREST
OF THE COUNTRY AND BE ABLE TO
DEFEND THAT.
WHAT'S HAPPENED THE LAST 3 1/2
YEARS IN THE SENATE IS WE JUST
DON'T VOTE BECAUSE THE
POLITICIANS OF THE SENATE DON'T
WANT TO GO HOME AND EXPLAIN
THEIR POSITIONS.
SO IF YOU'RE NOT VOTING, YOU'RE
NOT ACCOUNTABLE AND YOU'RE NOT
RESPONSIBLE.
THAT TYPE OF BEHAVIOR IS EXACTLY
THE OPPOSITE BEHAVIOR WE NEED TO
HAVE TODAY.
SO COME SATURDAY MORNING, WHEN
MEMBERS OF THE SENATE VOTE
AGAINST PROCEEDING TO CUT, CAP
AND BALANCE, THEY WILL DISPLAY
EITHER COURAGE OR COWARDICE.
AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT SIMPLE
WORDS.
THERE IS ONLY ONE PLAN THAT HAS
PASSED THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES THAT RAISES THE
DEBT LIMIT AND ADDRESSES WHAT IS
SAID TO BE NEEDED BY THE RATING
AGENCIES AND THAT'S CUT, CAP AND
BALANCE.
AND NOT TO ALLOW A VOTE TO
PROCEED -- NOT TO ALLOW
PROCEEDING TO THAT DEBATE,
WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH IT OR
AMENDMENTS.
NOT, YOU CAN CHANGE IT THROUGH
YOU HAVE THE VOTES TO CHANGE IT
THROUGH AMENDMENTS.
BUT TO NOT ALLOW IT TO PROCEED
SO THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE CAN
SEE THEIR ELECTED SENATORS AND
THEIR REAL POSITIONS AND WHAT
THEY KNOW HAS TO BE DONE, YOU
KNOW, WHAT REALLY HAPPENS AROUND
HERE IS WE SAY THINGS SO WE CAN
PROTECT OUR POLITICAL CAREERS.
AND YOU KNOW WHAT?
WHAT THAT DOES IS WE'RE NOT ONLY
BANKRUPTING OUR FINANCIAL, WE'RE
BANKRUPTING OUR COUNTRY'S
HISTORY AND HERITAGE.
THE HERITAGE OF THIS COUNTRY WAS
SACRIFICED AND THAT MEANS EVEN
SACRIFICE OF A POLITICAL CAREER
TO DO THE RIGHT THING RIGHT NOW
FOR THE COUNTRY.
I BELIEVE IF YOU WERE TO PASS
SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WE WOULD
LOWER OUR DEBT BY AT LEAST
$2 TRILLION OVER THE NEXT TEN
YEARS, THE ECONOMY WOULD
ABSOLUTELY BOOM, WE WOULD QUIT
UNDERMINING SELF-RELIANCE AND
ENFORCING DEPENDENCY, WE WOULD
HOLD ACCOUNTABLE A PENTAGON
THAT'S WASTEFUL, WE WOULD
ELIMINATE DUPLICATIONS OF
HUNDREDS OF PROGRAMS THAT ALL DO
THE SAME THING WITH MULTIPLE
LAYERS OF REDUNDANCY AND
ADMINISTRATIVE BUREAUCRACY.
IF WE WERE TO DO THAT, THIS BILL
WILL NEVER -- THIS PROPOSAL WILL
NEVER COME TO A VOTE IN THE
SENATE NOR ANY OF THE ASPECTS OF
IT BECAUSE SENATORS DON'T WANT
TO MAKE THOSE HARD CHOICES.
AND THAT'S WHAT THE DEBATE ABOUT
CUT, CAP AND BALANCE IS ALL
ABOUT.
FORCING SENATORS TO GO BACK TO
EMBRACE THE HERITAGE OF THIS
COUNTRY AND MAKE THE HARD
CHOICES.
BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T PASS A
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT AND
YOU DON'T FORCE THE DISCIPLINE,
THE POLITICAL EXPEDIENCY OF THIS
COUNTRY WILL CONTINUE TO REIGN
AND THE PROBLEM WILL NOT BE
SOLVED.
I WOULD ALSO SAY, RAISING THE
DEBT LIMIT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING
TO DO WITH OUR REAL PROBLEMS
BECAUSE THAT'S JUST THE STOSM
OF THE PROBLEM.
THE -- THAT'S JUST THE SYMPTOM
THE PROBLEM IS NOT LIVING WITHIN
OUR MEANS.
AND SOMEHOW THINKING THAT THE
U.S. GOVERNMENT IS DIFFERENT
THAN ALL THE STATE GOVERNMENTS,
ALL THE CITY AND COUNTY
GOVERNMENTS, EVERY FAMILY IN
THIS COUNTRY, EVERY BUSINESS IN
THIS COUNTRY AND EVERY OTHER
ORGANIZATION IN THIS COUNTRY
THAT HAS TO LIVE WITHIN ITS
MEANS.
I CANNOT BELIEVE, I REFUSE TO
BELIEVE THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
WILL NOT HOLD MEMBERS OF THE
SENATE ACCOUNTABLE FOR NOT
GIVING THEM A CHANCE TO PUT
THOSE FIXED PARAMETERS ON US AND
THEIR GOVERNMENT FOR THE FUTURE.
WE'RE GOING TO HEAR ALL SORTS OF
REASONS WHY WE CAN'T DO THAT AND
WHY WE WON'T DO THAT, OR WE MAY
NOT HEAR MANY AT ALL, WHAT WE'LL
JUST SEE IS A VOTE AGAINST
PROCEEDING TO THE PROCEDURE WITH
NO COMMENT WHATSOEVER.
MY PLAN IS, IF THAT HAPPENS, IS
TO BE ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY TO
MAKE SURE EVERY CITIZEN OF EVERY
STATE OF EVERY SENATOR WHO DOES
NOT ALLOW THAT TO PROCEED, FOR
THEM TO BE AWARE OF THAT.
I WANT TO PERSONALLY MAKE THEM
AWARE OF THAT IN EVERYTHING THAT
I CAN DO.
BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE REALLY DOING
IS DENYING THE LIBERTY AND THE
FREEDOM OF THIS COUNTRY TO HOLD
YOU ACCOUNTABLE TO DO THE RIGHT
THING.
SO WE'RE GOING TO SEE.
I WANTED TO SPEND A FEW MINUTES
SAYING THAT THE ONLY THING THAT
IS POSSIBLE RIGHT NOW TO SOLVE
THE PROBLEMS IN FRONT OF US --
THE ONLY THING -- EVEN THOUGH
I'VE ENDORSED A $9 TRILLION PLAN
AND A $3.7 TRILLION PLAN -- THE
ONLY THING IS THIS $6 TRILLION
PLAN BECAUSE IT'S PASSED THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THEY VOTED TO INCREASE THE DEBT
LIMIT AND THEY PUT SIGNIFICANT
CUTS INTO OUR BUDGET FOR NEXT
YEAR.
THEY'VE PUT SIGNIFICANT CAPS AS
WE GO FORWARD, AND THEY'VE SAID
WE'VE GOT TO VOTE TO PASS A
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT.
RIGHT NOW THAT'S THE ONLY THING
THAT WILL GET US OUT OF THE JAM.
AND YOU KNOW WHAT?
DO.
THAT'S REALLY NOT THAT HARD TO
FIRST POINT, WE'RE GOING TO CUT
$111 BILLION AT LEAST NEXT YEAR,
NO MATTER WHETHER THAT PASSES OR
NOT.
WE'RE GOING TO CAP SPENDING IN
THE YEARS THAT GO FORWARD
WHETHER THAT BILL PASSES OR NOT.
BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS, AS SOON
AS WE GET OUR BALANCE AGAIN, THE
POLITICIANS WHO DON'T WANT TO
MAKE HARD CHOICES WILL BE BACK
TO NOT MAKING HARD CHOICES AND
WE'LL GET IN TROUBLE AGAIN.
AND THAT'S WHY IT'S ABSOLUTELY
CRITICAL THAT THIS COUNTRY'S
CITIZENS HAVE THE ABILITY TO
HOLD US ACCOUNTABLE WITHIN THE
PARAMETERS OF LIVING WITHIN OUR
MEANS.
WE'LL HEAR ALL SORTS OF REASONS
WHY WE CAN'T DO THAT, THAT IT
MIGHT HURT THE POOR.
NOBODY HERE WANTS TO IN ANY WAY
INTEND ANY -- ANYTHING OTHER
THAN SUPPORT FOR THOSE WHO CAN'T
HELP THEMSELVES.
THAT'S THEIR EXCUSE, WE CAN'T DO
THAT.
WELL, LET ME TELL YOU WHAT'S
GOING TO HAPPEN IN OUR COUNTRY,
IS THE VERY PROGRAMS THAT HELP
THE POOR, THE VERY PROGRAMS THAT
HELP THE POOR ARE GOING TO BE
DIMINISHED IN THE FUTURE THROUGH
FISCAL NECESSITY WHEN WE ARE
MANDATED TO MAKE CUTS TO BE ABLE
TO BORROW MORE MONEY.
SO IT'S A FALSE -- IT'S A FALSE
STATEMENT, BECAUSE BY NOT VOTING
TO BALANCE THE -- FOR A BALANCED
BUDGET AMENDMENT, WHAT YOU'RE
REALLY SAYING IS I WANT TO CLAIM
ONE THING BUT I KNOW SOMETHING
ELSE IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
I PARAPHRASED A STATEMENT OF
MARTIN LUTHER KING THAT I THINK
DESCRIBES THIS PLACE MORE THAN
ANYTHING I'VE EVER KNOWN.
AND IT
WAS THIS.
VANITY ASKS THE QUESTION IS
SOMETHING POPULAR.
COWARDICE ASKS THE QUESTION IS
IT EXPEDIENT.
CHARACTER ASKS THE QUESTION IS
IT TRUE AND RIGHT.
AND WE HAVE TONS OF VANITY, WE
HAVE TONS OF COWARDICE.
WE LIMIT OURSELVES ON COURAGE
AND CHARACTER.
AS YOU LISTEN TO THE DEBATES
OVER THE NEXT TWO DAYS ON THIS
MOTION TO PROCEED ON THE ONLY
THING THAT WILL SOLVE THE
PROBLEM IN FRONT OF US TODAY, I
WANT YOU TO LISTEN FOR POLITICAL
EXPEDIENCY.
I WANT YOU TO LISTEN FOR VANITY.
AND THEN I WANT YOU TO SEARCH
HARD TO TRY TO FIND COURAGE AND
CHARACTER BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING
TO SEE AN ABSENCE OF IT ON THOSE
THAT OPPOSE THIS.
THEY KNOW THIS WILL SOLVE THE
PROBLEM.
THEY KNOW THIS IS ONE OF THE FEW
THINGS THAT CAN PASS THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES.
AND YET, WE'RE NOT GOING TO
DENY -- WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE
IT COME TO THE FLOOR FOR AN
AMENDMENT PROCESS, FOR A FULL
DEBATE AND FOR A VOTE, AND WE'RE
NOT GOING TO HAVE IT FOR THE
VOTE BECAUSE WE'RE EXPEDIENTLY
COWARDS.
WE DO NOT WANT TO TRULY ADDRESS
THE PROBLEM BECAUSE IT MIGHT
AFFECT OUR POLITICAL CAREERS.
THAT IS A SAD COMMENTARY ON THE
HERITAGE OF THIS COUNTRY, A SAD
COMMENTARY, BUT IT'S A
COMMENTARY TO BE EXPECTED.
OTHERWISE, WE WOULD HAVE NEVER
GOTTEN INTO THE POSITION WE'RE
IN TODAY.
LET ME TALK ABOUT SOME DETAILS
OF WHAT YOU CAN DO.
WE'RE GOING TO HEAR ALL SORTS OF
REASONS WHY YOU CAN'T DO THINGS,
ALL SORTS OF REASONS WHY YOU
COULDN'T COME UP WITH
WITH $9 TRILLION, BUT WHEN THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE REALLY KNOW
WHAT'S GOING ON, IF THEY REALLY
GO AND READ ABOUT BACK IN THE
BLACK, REALLY FIND OUT ABOUT ALL
THE WAYS, ALL THE DUPLICATION,
ALL THE STUPIDITY THAT GOES ON
IN OUR GOVERNMENT, ALL THE LACK
OF ACCOUNTABILITY, THE LACK OF
RESPONSIBILITY IN BUREAUCRATIC
AGENCIES, ALL THE SILLY
DECISIONS THAT GET MADE TO SPEND
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT DON'T
REALLY HELP ANYBODY, THE TAX
CODE, TAX EARMARKS AND TAX
CREDITS AND TAX EXPENDITURES ARE
NOTHING BUT MOST OF THE TIME
CORPORATE WELFARE OR SOCIALISM.
THE GREATEST TAX IN THE WORLD
COMES WHEN WE ALLOW THE FEDERAL
RESERVE TO PRINT MONEY WHICH
DEVALUES YOUR ASSETS THROUGH
INFLATION AND THE EARNINGS ON
THOSE ASSETS.
SO THE GREATEST TAX IN THE WORLD
THAT'S COMING FOR AMERICA IS
THAT WE'RE GOING TO DEVALUE THE
VALUE OF THE DOLLAR AND
INFLATION IS GOING TO GO UP AND
WHAT YOU CAN EARN ON YOUR ASSETS
IS GOING TO BE LIMITED BY THE
INTEREST RATES AND THE
DIFFERENTIAL IS THAT WHICH YOU
ACTUALLY LOSE IN REAL VALUE OF
WHAT YOU OWE EVERY DAY.
THE OTHER THING I'D POINT OUT IS
THROUGH THE TAX EARMARKS AND TAX
CREDITS IN OUR TAX CODE, ANYBODY
THAT DOESN'T GET ONE OF THOSE IS
ACTUALLY PAYING FOR THEM.
SO IF YOU DON'T HAVE AN IN UP
HERE, IF YOU DON'T HAVE A
LOBBYIST, IF YOU DON'T HAVE SOME
SPECIAL INTERESTS LOOKING OUT
FOR YOU AND YOU DON'T GET ONE OF
THOSE, YOU'RE PAYING FOR THEM
THROUGH YOUR INCREASED TAXES ON
YOUR PART.
THEY ARE INHERENTLY UNFAIR.
BUT LET'S JUST LOOK AT
DUPLICATION FOR A MINUTE.
IT'S INTERESTING TO LOOK, AS WE
HAVE GONE THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT
PROGRAMS IN A DETAILED FASHION
WITH THE G.A.O. BASED ON THEIR
REPORT, WE HAVE 100 DIFFERENT
PROGRAMS WITH 100 SETS OF
BUREAUCRACIES FOR SURFACE
TRANSPORTATION.
WHY DO WE HAVE THAT?
BECAUSE CONGRESS HAS MISMANAGED.
THAT'S WHY.
BECAUSE OF EXPEDIENCY, BECAUSE
OF VANITY, BECAUSE OF WANTING TO
GET RE-ELECTED, WE CREATE
ANOTHER PROGRAM AND ANOTHER
PROGRAM.
IT LOOKS GOOD, SOUNDS GOOD, BUT
NOBODY EVER DOES THE RESEARCH TO
SEE WHERE THEY OVERLAP, NOBODY
EVER REQUIRE THAT THE METRICS
SAY IS THIS PROGRAM EFFECTIVE
AND NOBODY REALLY LOOKS AT THE
CONSTITUTION TO SAY DOES IT FIT
WITH ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 OF THE
CONSTITUTION?
THE ENUMERATED POWERS THAT WE
ARE SUPPOSED TO LIVE WITHIN
WHICH WE BLOW BY ALL THE TIME
DOING THINGS.
THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE TODAY
PASSED A BILL FOR STATE PRISONS
CALLED THE SECOND-CHANCE ACT.
WHEN WE PASSED IT THE FIRST
TIME, I FINALLY LET IT GO
BECAUSE IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A
DEMONSTRATION AND A LIMITED
PROGRAM.
IT'S NOW GOING TO GET
REAUTHORIZED FOR FIVE MORE
YEARS.
IT'S LEGITIMATELY -- HAS ZERO
ROLE FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
AND WE'RE GOING TO SPEND
SPEND $600 MILLION ON IT, WHICH
WE DON'T HAVE, WE'LL BORROW.
IT'S WELL INTENDED, BUT IT'S NOT
OUR ROLE, IT'S THE STATES' ROLE.
AND WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF THINGS JUST LIKE
THAT WHERE WE HAVE IGNORED WHAT
THE CONSTITUTION SAYS SO WE CAN
LOOK GOOD POLITICALLY.
WE HAVE TEACHER QUALITY
PROGRAMS, TEACHER QUALITY
PROGRAMS.
82 DIFFERENT PROGRAMS BY THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO IMPROVE
THE QUALITY OF OUR TEACHERS.
YOU KNOW, THOMAS JEFFERSON WAS
REALLY THE FATHER OF EDUCATION
IN OUR COUNTRY.
HE WORKED FOR YEARS TO ESTABLISH
THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA.
HE WAS COMMITTED TO THE FACT
THAT A GREAT EDUCATION WILL
PRODUCE GREAT BENEFITS, NOT ONLY
FOR THE INDIVIDUAL WITH THE
EDUCATION BUT FOR THEIR FAMILY
AND OUR COUNTRY AS A WHOLE.
HERE'S WHAT HE SAID.
FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO
BECOME INVOLVED IN EDUCATION
WOULD REQUIRE A CHANGE TO THE
U.S. CONSTITUTION, WHO HE
HAPPENED TO BE ONE OF THE PEOPLE
WHO WROTE IT.
AND YET, WHAT HAVE WE DONE SINCE
OF EDUCATION?
THE BEGINNING OF THE DEPARTMENT
WE HAVE SPENT $2.6 TRILLION ON
EDUCATION IN THIS COUNTRY AT THE
FEDERAL LEVEL, AND EVERY
PARAMETER MEASURING A METRIC ON
THE PROGRESSION OF OUR KIDS IN
SCHOOLS IS WORSE OR THE SAME
AFTER THAT $2.6 TRILLION.
I CAN'T TELL YOU, IT'S NOT
WORKING.
AND THE REASON IT'S NOT WORKING
IS YOU CAN BE A TEACHER AT HOME
AND IF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
LOOKS AT YOU, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT
TO DO, BUT WE CAN HIRE TO YOU DO
THE WORK IN WASHINGTON AND ALL
OF A SUDDEN YOU KNOW WHAT THEY
NEED TO DO.
SO WE HAVE THIS MASSIVE
BUREAUCRACY THAT HAS RUINED OUR
EDUCATION BECAUSE WE SPEND ALL
OUR MONEY FILLING OUT FORMS AND
REQUIREMENTS AND MEETING
MANDATES OF THE FEDERAL
EDUCATION AND WE HAVE TAKEN THE
POWER AWAY OF THE CONTROL OF
EDUCATION FROM THE PARENTS AND
THE TEACHERS, THE VERY PEOPLE
WHO CARE MOST ABOUT THE KIDS AND
EDUCATION.
$2.6 TRILLION, WITH NOTHING TO
SHOW FOR IT OTHER THAN FOR THE
POLITICIANS TO FEEL GOOD ABOUT
THEMSELVES AND TO SAY WE WERE
DOING SOMETHING.
WE HAVE 88 DIFFERENT ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS, $6 BILLION
JUST IN FOUR OF THEM.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
ON NOT ONE OF THOSE 88 PROGRAMS
IS THERE A METRIC ANYWHERE THAT
SAYS IT IS MONEY WELL SPENT THAT
GETS A POSITIVE RESULT FOR THE
COUNTRY.
THERE IS ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE THAT
IT WORKED HERE, IT WORKED HERE,
BUT NO, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE
ARE DOING.
WE ARE THROWING MONEY THAT WE
DON'T HAVE ON THINGS THAT WE
DON'T KNOW ARE WORKING AND WHEN
WE GO TO VOTE FOR THEM, TO
ELIMINATE THEM, THE SENATE VOTES
AGAINST IT BECAUSE IT MIGHT
BOTHER THEIR POLITICAL POSITION.
ELECTION.
IT MIGHT BOTHER THEIR NEXT
WE DON'T DO IT.
WE DON'T ADDRESS AND DO OUR JOB.
I'LL NEVER FORGET, IN ONE OF THE
COMMITTEES I WAS IN LAST YEAR,
TWO SEPARATE TIMES, BILLS WERE
BROUGHT UP TO THE COMMITTEE THAT
WERE -- THAT WOULD DO IDENTICAL
THINGS THAT WE WERE ALREADY
DOING IN THE AGENCIES, AND THE
SENATOR AND THEIR STAFF DIDN'T
KNOW IT.
AND HAD I NOT RAISED OBJECTIONS,
WE WOULD HAVE CREATED MORE
AGENCIES.
80 PROGRAMS FOR TRANSPORTATION
ASSISTANCE.
80?
IF IT'S OUR ROLE, WHY DO WE NEED
80?
AND OH, BY THE WAY, HAS ANYBODY
MEASURED TO SEE IF ANY OF THE 80
ACTUALLY WORK?
THE ANSWER IS NO.
WE HAVE NONE THAT HAVE A REPORT
ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE
EFFECTIVE TO THE GOALS OF WHAT
THEY WERE SET OUT TO DO BECAUSE
OUT BY CONGRESS.
THERE IS NO OVERSIGHT CARRIED
WE WERE SO BUSY EARMARKING FOR
SO MANY YEARS, EVERYBODY FORGOT
TO CHECK AND SEE, WHAT WE
INTENDED TO DO, IS IT WORKING.
AND WE'RE STILL NOT DOING IT.
WE HAVE 56 DIFFERENT PROGRAMS TO
TEACH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO
BECOME FINANCIALLY LITERATE.
56?
US, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,
TEACHING FINANCIAL LITERACY WHEN
WE CAN'T BALANCE OUR BUDGET, WE
HAVE MULTIPLE PROGRAMS, WE DON'T
LIVE WITHIN A CONFINED BUDGET.
THE FIRST PRINCIPLE OF FINANCIAL
LITERACY IS LIVING WITHIN YOUR
MEANS.
AND YET, WE HAVE THIS MANY
PROGRAMS, 56, TO TEACH AMERICAN
CITIZENS TO BE FINANCIALLY
LITERATE?
BEST.
JOB TRAINING, HERE'S ONE OF MY
THIS IS -- THIS IS GREAT.
WE HAVE 47 JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS
THAT COST $16 BILLION A YEAR.
ALL BUT THREE OVERLAP ONE
ANOTHER.
THAT'S WHAT THE G.A.O. SAYS, AND
THERE IS NOT A METRIC ON ONE OF
THEM TO SEE IF THEY'RE WORKING.
AND WHEN YOU TALK TO THE PEOPLE
THAT GO THROUGH THE PROGRAM,
HALF OF THEM SAY IT'S A WASTE,
IT'S A JOKE, BECAUSE I HAVE
ACTUALLY TALKED TO THEM, AND YET
WE'RE SPENDING THAT KIND OF
MONEY, IN EXCESS OF $15 BILLION
A YEAR ON JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS?
NOW, THERE IS NO QUESTION WE
NEED JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS, BUT
THAT WORK.
WE NEED JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS
AND WHY WOULD WE NEED 47?
SO WHEN SOMEBODY TELLS YOU WE
CAN'T BALANCE OUR BUDGET, YOU
OUGHT TO BLOW A HOLE RIGHT
THROUGH THEM WITH YOUR THOUGHT
THAT SAYS YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T
KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
HOMELESS PREVENTION ASSISTANCE,
20 DIFFERENT FEDERAL PROGRAMS.
NOW, WE SHOULD BE HELPING PEOPLE
WHO NEED OUR HELP, I'M NOT
DENYING THAT, BUT HOW WE HELP
AND THE MECHANISMS OF HOW WE
HELP OUGHT TO BE FRUGAL,
EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE.
YOU KNOW, I HAVE SERVED IN
CONGRESS, I'M IN MY 13th YEAR.
SIX YEARS AS CONGRESSMAN, FOUR
YEARS OUT OF HERE TO GET A
BREATH OF FRESH AIR, AND NOW MY
SEVENTH YEAR IN THE SENATE.
WHAT I KNOW IS WE DON'T KNOW
WHAT WE'RE DOING.
AND IT'S OBVIOUS LOOKING AT OUR
BUDGET.
IT'S ALSO OBVIOUS LOOKING AT THE
DYSFUNCTION OF THE SENATE AND
THE LEADERSHIP IN THE SENATE
THAT WE DON'T WANT -- WE HAVEN'T
HAD A BUDGET IN TWO YEARS.
THE ONE THING ANY FINANCIAL
COUNSELOR WILL TELL YOU IS THE
FIRST THING YOU HAVE GOT TO KNOW
IS WHERE YOU ARE AND SET A PLAN.
WE HAVE HAD NO ATTEMPT TO BRING
A BUDGET TO THIS BODY IN WELL
OVER TWO AND A HALF YEARS, NO
ATTEMPT.
WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?
IT GOES BACK TO VANITY.
IT GOES BACK TO COWARDICE.
IT GOES BACK TO US NOT DOING
WHAT WE'RE INTENDED TO DO
BECAUSE WE CARE MORE ABOUT OUR
POSITION THAN WE CARE ABOUT THE
COUNTRY.
WE HAVE 18 PROGRAMS TO FEED THE
HUNGRY.
WE HAVE 17 DISASTER RESPONSE
PREPAREDNESS JUST IN FEMA.
17 DIFFERENT PROGRAMS, OF WHICH
11 OVERLAP.
NOW, FEMA DIDN'T SET THOSE UP.
THE BUREAUCRACY DIDN'T CREATE
THOSE.
WE DID.
EVERY ONE OF THESE PROGRAMS WAS
CREATED BY A MEMBER OF CONGRESS.
SO YOU CAN'T BLAME
ADMINISTRATIONS AND YOU CAN'T
BLAME PRESIDENTS.
WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO IS BLAME
CONGRESS.
WE HAVE 130 OVERLAPPING PROGRAMS
IN THE DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE, 18 OVERLAPPING
PROGRAMS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE, 230 OVERLAPPING
PROGRAMS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION, 17 IN THE DEPARTMENT
OF ENERGY, 36 IN THE DEPARTMENT
OF HUMAN SERVICES, 2 IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
60 IN THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, 40 IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, 53 IN
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 35 IN
THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, SIX IN
THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND 180
GOVERNMENTWIDE IF YOU LOOK AT
ALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAMS, 180.
AND WE JUST LISTED THE 88 THAT
AGENCIES.
RUN THROUGH FOUR OF THE
IS IT ANY WONDER THAT WE'RE
GOING BELLY UP?
AND THE PROBLEM IS US.
THE PROBLEM IS WE'VE GOT A
SOLUTION NOW THAT'S COME TO US
FROM THE HOUSE AND WE'RE NOT
GOING TO LET THAT SOLUTION GO
FORWARD BECAUSE POLITICALLY,
POLITICALLY IT'S UNCOMFORTABLE.
POLITICALLY, WE DON'T WANT TO
ALLOW THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY
TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE
OUGHT TO LIVE WITHIN OUR MEANS
AND PUT A BRIDLE WITH A BIT IN
OUR MOUTH THAT SAYS WHOA, YOU'RE
NOT GOING TO CONTINUE TO DESTROY
THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY AND
THE PROSPECTS FOR OUR CHILDREN
ANY MORE.
WHEN I CAME TO THE SENATE, I
CAME AFTER HAVING READ A BOOK
CALLED "RUNNING ON EMPTY."
IT WAS WRITTEN BY A NONNAMED
PETE PETERSON.
HE WAS BIPARTISAN IN HIS
CRITICISM OF BOTH PARTIES, AND
HE WAS ABSOLUTELY ACCURATE.
WE'RE IN TROUBLE BECAUSE PARTIES
MATTER MORE THAN THE COUNTRY,
BECAUSE CONTROL MATTERS MORE
THAN THE COUNTRY, THAT POLITICAL
CAREERS MATTER MORE THAN OUR
CHILDREN OR OUR GRANDCHILDREN.
I GO BACK AND TALK ABOUT WHAT'S
POSSIBLE.
A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL DISAGREE
WITH WHAT'S IN HERE.
THIS $9 TRILLION WHICH THE HOUSE
HAS SENT US, WE'LL TAKE ABOUT
600% OF.
HERE -- WE'LL TAKE ABOUT 60% OF.
HERE'S WHAT I SAY TO MY
COLLEAGUES WHO DON'T WANT TO
VOTE ON A BALANCED BUDGET
AMENDMENT, DON'T WANT TO VOTE ON
CUT, CAP, AND BALANCE, WHERE'S
YOUR PLAN?
I'VE LISTED CUTS, SPECIFIC CUTS,
ELIMINATION OF WASTE,
ELIMINATION OF FRAUD IN THIS,
3,000 FOOTNOTES, LOOKED AT EVERY
PROGRAM THROUGHOUT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, LOOKED AT EVERY
C.R.S. REPORT, LOOKED AT EVERY
O.I.G., EVERY O.M.B. REPORT AND
LOOKED AT EVERY OTHER OUTSIDE
REPORT THAT WE COULD FIND.
THE FACT IS WE COULD SOLVE OUR
PROBLEMS TOMORROW, AMERICA.
WE COULD SOLVE THEM TOMORROW
WITH GOOD, OLD-FASHIONED COMMON
SENSE THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF
AMERICANS HAVE AND IS SORELY
LACKING.
WE DON'T HAVE A FISCAL CRISIS.
WE HAVE A COMMONSENSE CRISIS IN
THIS BODY AND IN THE LEADERSHIP
IN CONGRESS.
WE LACK COMMON SENSE.
WE LACK SOUND JUDGMENT.
AND WE NEED THE HARD BIT OF A
BRIDLE PUT ON US THROUGH A
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT TO
CONTROL US, BECAUSE HUMAN NATURE
IS HUMAN NATURE.
AND WHATEVER WE DO TODAY, WE'LL
BE BACK TO OUR BAD HABITS
TOMORROW.
EVEN IF WE PASS CUTS, EVEN IF WE
CAP SPENDING, IF WE DON'T HAVE A
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT
FORCES US TO LIVE WITHIN THE
CONSTRAINTS OF OUR REVENUE, WE
WILL BE BACK THERE AGAIN.
AND WHAT DOES THAT STPHAOEPB
THAT MEANS THE FEW -- WHAT DOES
THAT MEAN?
THAT MEANS THE FUTURE OF AMERICA
IS SUSPECT.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE.
EVERY OTHER REPUBLIC.
WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THE WAY OF
WE DON'T HAVE TO FAIL OVER
FISCAL ISSUES.
WE CAN CHEAT THINKS TRY.
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE THE
GREATEST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD
BECAUSE THEY ARE A BLEND OF ALL
THE PEOPLE IN THE WORLD AND THEY
DESIRE FREEDOM AND OPPORTUNITY.
AND THAT'S LIMITED BECAUSE WE'VE
LIMITED IT.
THROUGH OUR PROFLIGATE SPENDING,
INATTENTION TO DETAIL, OUR
FAILURE TO DO OVERSIGHT, WE HAVE
COUNTRY.
UNDERCUT THE POTENTIAL OF OUR
LET'S RESTORE IT.
LET'S RESTORE IT.
LET'S RESTORE IT SATURDAY
MORNING BY MOVING ON TO THIS
BILL AND ALLOWING OURSELVES TO
HAVE A DEBATE, OFFER AMENDMENTS
AND REALLY DEBATE.
HAVE WHAT THE SENATE HASN'T HAD
IN A YEAR AND A HALF, A REAL
DEBATE ABOUT THE ISSUES OF OUR
DAY AND THE REASONS BEHIND IT.
BUT WHAT I WOULD CAUTION THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE IS REMEMBER WHAT
MARTIN LUTHER KING SAID AS YOU
HEAR THAT DEBATE.
VANITY ASKS THE QUESTION: IS IT
POPULAR?
COWARDICE ASKS THE QUESTION IS
IT EXPEDIENT.
BUT CONSCIENCE, CONSCIENCE AND
RIGHT AND GOOD ASKS: IS IT
RIGHT?
I'LL TELL YOU, IT'S NOT RIGHT TO
HAVE MULTIPLE PROGRAMS DOING THE
FUTURE.
SAME THING, WASTING OUR KIDS'
IT'S NOT RIGHT FOR THE CONGRESS
NOT TO OVERSIGHT AND ELIMINATE
PROGRAMS.
IT'S NOT RIGHT FOR US TO SPEND
MONEY WE DON'T HAVE ON THINGS WE
DON'T ABSOLUTELY NEED.
IT'S NOT RIGHT FOR US TO TAKE
THE CONTROL OUT OF THE
CHILDREN'S EDUCATION, FROM THE
PARENTS AND TEACHERS WHO HAVE
THE BEST, THEIR BEST INTEREST AT
HEART AND PLACE IT IN A
BUREAUCRACY THAT HAS NO
COMPASSION WHATSOEVER, EVEN
THOUGH IT FEIGNS THAT IT DOES.
IT'S NOT RIGHT.
MAYBE POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT,
MAYBE POPULAR TO SOME PEOPLE.
BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE IT RIGHT.
SO AS YOU LOOK, HERE IS HOW YOU
GET $9 TRILLION.
AND YOU CAN PICK ANY PART OF
THAT AND MEET THIS CUT, CAP, AND
BALANCE, OR YOU CAN COME UP WITH
YOUR OWN.
BUT THE FACT IS NOBODY WANTS TO
LAY ON THE TABLE WHAT THEY
THINK.
I'VE ALREADY BEEN ROUNDLY
CRITICIZED IN THE PRESS FOR
CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THIS; PEOPLE
WHO DISAGREE.
THAT'S FINE.
I PLAN ON DEFENDING EVERYTHING
THAT I PUT IN HERE WITH THE BEST
OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND A GREAT
STAFF THAT SPENT THOUSANDS UPON
THOUSANDS OF HOURS.
WE CAME UP WITH A WAY TO SOLVE
AMERICA'S PROBLEMS, AND WE CAN
DO IT.
AMERICA CAN BE BRIGHT, CAN BE
GROWING, CAN BE DEVELOPING JOBS
IF WE GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
THE WAY AND LIMIT THE ROLE OF
I SEE MY COLLEAGUE FROM
DELAWARE, ONE OF MY GREAT
FRIENDS.
YOU HEAR THAT SAID A LOT HERE,
BUT HE IS A GREAT FRIEND.
IT'S NOT THE CONVENTIONAL JUST
COMMON GREETING.
I BELIEVE I'M OVER MY TIME.
I WILL BE BACK TO THE FLOOR TO
FINISH THIS CONVERSATION.
BUT AMERICA NEEDS TO KNOW WE
DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WE CAN'T
FIX.
WHAT WE LACK IS LEADERS WHO WILL
FIX IT.
THAT'S OUR DEFICIT.
IT'S A DEFICIT OF COURAGE.
IT'S A DEFICIT OF WILL.
AND WITH THAT, I YIELD THE
FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MADAM PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM DELAWARE.
MADAM PRESIDENT,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS
TIME TO SPEAK.
ABOUT DR. COBURN LEAVES THE
FLOOR, THANK YOU FOR THE KIND
THINGS YOU JUST SAID.
THE SENATOR FROM COBURN, A LOT
OF PEOPLE SAY THAT'S AN UNLIKELY
DUO THAT WOULD END UP WORKING
TOGETHER AS MUCH AS WE HAVE AND
ACTUALLY HAVE A SENSE OF TRUST
AND FRIENDSHIP.
THERE ARE THINGS THAT PEOPLE
CERTAINLY FIND IN ME NOT TO
ALL OF US.
LIKE, AND THE SAME IS TRUE OF
BUT I WOULD SAY THERE IS NOBODY
IN THE SENATE WHO CARES MORE
ABOUT GETTING OUR DEFICIT UNDER
CONTROL.
HE AND I THINK *** DURBIN HAVE
SHOWN TERRIFIC COURAGE AND
LEADERSHIP ALONG WITH OTHERS IN
THIS SO-CALLED GANG OF SIX, AND
ALSO AS MEMBERS OF THE DEFICIT
COMMISSION, IN TRYING TO GET US
TO A COMPREHENSIVE BIPARTISAN
SOLUTION OF HOW DO WE REIN IN
THE BUDGET DEFICIT WITHOUT
DESTROYING OUR ECONOMY, MAKING
SURE WE DON'T PIERCE THE DEBT
CEILING AND HAVE OUR FINANCIAL
US.
WORLD BEGIN TO CRUMBLE AROUND
I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE WHAT HE
SAID TODAY.
I HEARD MOST OF IT, NOT ALL OF
IT, BUT A CHANCE TO WORK WITH
HIM ON A NUMBER OF AREAS WHERE
WHAT WE TRIED TO DO -- AND
SENATOR McCASKILL WHO IS
PRESIDING AT THIS MOMENT, WHAT
WE TRY TO DO IS LOOK IN EVERY
NOOK AND CRANNY OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT ON THIS DEFENSE
SPENDING WHR-RBGS IT'S
ENTITLEMENT SPENDING, WHETHER
IT'S DOMESTIC SPENDING, WE LOOK
AT TAX EXPENDITURES, TAX BREAKS
AND SO FORTH.
WE LOOK AT ALL OF THEM.
WE ASK THIS QUESTION: HOW CAN WE
GET A BETTER RESULT, WHETHER
IT'S HEALTH CARE,
TRANSPORTATION, DEFENSE?
HOW CAN WE GET A BETTER RESULT
FOR LESS MONEY OR HOW CAN WE GET
A BETTER RESULT FOR NOT MUCH
MORE MONEY?
GOVERNMENT.
WE NEED TO DO THAT ACROSS OUR
WE NEED TO CHANGE THE CULTURE OF
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO SORT OF A
CULTURE OF SPENDTHRIFT WHICH A
LOT OF PEOPLE THINK WE OPERATE
UNDER, WE HAVE TO CHANGE IT TO A
CULTURE OF THRIFT.
NOT JUST FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS,
A COUPLE OF MONTHS, A COUPLE OF
YEARS.
I MEAN AS FAR AS THE EYE CAN SEE
WHERE THESE PAGES WHO ARE
SITTING IN FRONT OF ME WHO ARE
RISING JUNIORS IN HIGH SCHOOL
UNTIL THEY ARE RISING JUNIORS IN
COLLEGE, OUT INTO THE WORLD AND
WELL BEYOND THAT.
THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO.
THAT'S PART OF OUR OBLIGATION.
THAT'S PART OF OUR OBLIGATION.
ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS --
I'M GOING TO GO BACK, OVER A
YEAR AGO WHEN WE VOTED HERE ON
WHETHER OR NOT TO CREATE A
DEFICIT COMMISSION THAT WOULD
HAVE A NUMBER OF MEMBERS WHO
WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE, SOME
ELECTED, SOME NOT; THEY WOULD
HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO LOOK
ACROSS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND TO
COME BACK TO US AT A DATE
CERTAIN WITH WAYS TO REIN IN THE
FEDERAL DEFICIT, GET US BACK ON
A MORE FISCALLY SUSTAINABLE AND
RESPONSIBLE TRACK.
WE VOTED IN THE SENATE.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL
RECALL NOT ALL THE FOLKS WHO
WERE COSPONSORS OF THE DEFICIT
COMMISSION CREATION ACTUALLY
ENDED UP VOTING FOR IT.
IN FACT, SEVEN OF THEM WHO WERE
COSPONSORS -- AS I RECALL I
DON'T THINK ANY OF THEM WERE ON
THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE, SOME OF
THEM VOTED AGAINST IT AND WE
DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTE TO ACTUALLY
CREATE THE DEFICIT COMMISSION.
WITH THAT HAPPENING, A NUMBER OF
US ENCOURAGED THE PRESIDENT TO
USE HIS EXECUTIVE POWERS AND
CREATE ONE BY EXECUTIVE ORDER.
HE DID THAT, AND LAST YEAR THE
DEFICIT COMMISSION WAS CREATED.
THERE WERE 18 PEOPLE NAMED TO
IT.
12 WERE ELECTED, SIX WERE NOT.
AND NAMED TWO COCHAIRS.
ONE ERSKINE BOWLES.
ERSKINE BOWLES.
WHO IS IS HE E?
ER SKIN WAS CHIEF OF STAFF FOR
PRESIDENT CLINTON.
AND HE WAS ASKED BY PRESIDENT
CLINTON TO NEGOTIATE A
DEFICIT-REDUCTION PACKAGE WITH
THE REPUBLICAN HOUSE AND SENATE.
AT THAT TIME THE REPUBLICANS
WERE IN THE MAJORITY IN THE
HOUSE AND SENATE DURING THOSE
YEARS.
AND PRESIDENT CLINTON
SAIDERSKINE, GO OUT AND
NEGOTIATE A DEFICIT-REDUCTION
DEAL, SOME ON THE SPENDING SIDE,
SOME ON THE REVENUE SIDE SO WE
CAN FOLLOW UP -- AN EARLY
PACKAGE WAS ADOPTED IN 1993 WITH
ONLY DEMOCRATIC VOTES.
HE SAID LET'S SEE IF WE CAN'T
ACTUALLY BALANCE OUR BUDGET.
WE HADN'T DONE IT SINCE 1968.
GOD BLESS ERSKINE BOWLES AND THE
FOLKS HE NEGOTIATED WITH.
HE WENT TO WORK IN 1997, CAME UP
WITH A DEFICIT-REDUCTION
PACKAGE, 50% REVENUES, 50%
SPENDING THAT HAD EVERYTHING ON
THE TABLE.
LONG STORY SHORT, WE ENDED UP
WITH A BALANCED BUDGET NOT ONE,
NOT TWO, I THINK AT LEAST THREE
YEARS IN A ROW AT THE END OF THE
CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, AND
ADMINISTRATION.
HANDED IT OFF TO A NEW
BALANCED BUDGET SURPLUSES AS FAR
AS THE EYE COULD SEE.
I REMEMBER ALAN GREENSPAN
TESTIFYING, I THINK, BEFORE THE
BANKING COMMITTEE.
ALAN GREENSPAN WAS THE FEDERAL
RESERVE CHAIRMAN.
HE SAID HE WAS CONCERNED AT THE
TIME THAT WE WERE GOING TO PAY
DOWN OUR DEBT TOO SOON, TOO
FAST.
I MENTIONED TO HIM LATER THAT
THAT CONCERN WAS MISPLACED
BECAUSE WE CERTAINLY DIDN'T PAY
DOWN OUR DEFICIT TOO FAST.
WE TURNED, STARTING TEN YEARS
AGO WE TURNED OUR BLACK INK
SURPLUSES AS FAR AS THE EYE
COULD SEE TO RED INK, TO
STP EUTS AS FAR AS THE EYE
CAN -- TO DEFICITS AS FAR AS THE
EYE CAN SEE.
A LOT OF PEOPLE LIKE TO REINVENT
HISTORY.
THEY SAY WE DIDN'T DO TOO MUCH
TO REDUCE DEFICITS IN THE YEARS
1993 TO 2000.
TWO BIG VOTES, ALL DEMOCRATS IN
19973.
IN 1997 THE REPUBLICANS IN THE
HOUSE NEGOTIATED WITH THE
PRESIDENT.
THOSE TWO, WE BALANCED THE
BUDGET NOT ONCE, NOT TWICE,
THREE TIMES.
CREATED SOMETHING LIKE 21
MILLION NEW JOBS.
AND ENDED UP THE LAST DECADE,
ACTUALLY THE DECADE BEFORE THAT,
ENDING IN THE YEAR 2000 WITH A
BALANCED BUDGET AND MOST
PRODUCTIVE WORKFORCE ON THE FACE
OF THE EARTH.
THOSE WERE HALCYON DAYS FOR OUR
COUNTRY.
WE NEED TO GET BACK TO THAT.
NAMING THE COCHAIR OF THE
DEFICIT COMMISSION GOES BACK TO
AN EARLIER PRESIDENT, TAPS
ERSKINE BOWLES.
ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE, WE'VE
GOT ALAN SIMPSON, REPUBLICAN
FROM WYOMING, AS MAYBE THE
FUNNIEST PERSON WHO SERVED IN
THE U.S. SENATE.
HE'S ALSO ONE OF THE MOST
INSIGHTFUL, COMMONSENSE DEFICIT
HAWK AND A GREAT GUY TO BE A
PARTNER WITH.
THEY WORK TOGETHER.
WE HAD 12 MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE
AND SENATE.
SOME OTHER FOLKS FROM CIVILIAN
LIFE.
CODY, CHAIRMAN OF HUNT C.E.O.,
AMONG THE PRIVATE-SECTOR
PARTICIPANTS.
THEY WORKED FOR MONTHS, GATHERED
INPUT FROM ALL KINDS OF SOURCES
AND CAME UP WITH A BROAD-BASED
PLAN THAT WAS RECOMMENDED,
ADOPTED, ENDORSED BY 11 OUT OF
THE 18 COMMISSIONERS.
AND THAT WASN'T -- 14 WAS THE
MAGIC THRESHOLD.
FOR IT TO ACTUALLY BE OFFICIAL,
THE COMMISSION.
THE OFFICIAL RECOMMENDATION OF
BUT IT WAS A MAJORITY.
IT INCLUDED THREE REPUBLICAN
SENATORS.
JUDD GREGG, THE SENATOR FROM NEW
CRAPO.
HAMPSHIRE, TOM COBURN, MIKE
AND I THOUGHT COURAGEOUS
REPUBLICAN SENATORS.
ON OUR SIDE, KENT CONRAD AND
*** DURBIN.
I WANT TO SAY MIKE.
HE'S BEEN A REAL LEADER.
DEMOCRAT.
I'M NOT SURE IF HE WAS THE THIRD
LONG STORY SHORT, MAYBE IT
WAS -- THE THIRD DEMOCRAT I
THINK WAS JOHN SCRANTON,
CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE BUDGET
COMMITTEE.
ANYWAY, THOSE THREE DEMOCRATS,
THREE REPUBLICANS BASICALLY
AGREED TO A PACKAGE THAT SAID
LET'S REDUCE THE DEFICIT OVER
THE NEXT TEN YEARS BY $4
TRILLION.
LET'S DO IT MOSTLY ON THE
SPENDING SIDE, TWO-THIRDS TO
THREE-QUARTERS ON THE SPENDING
SIDE.
BUT LET'S HAVE REVENUES AS WELL.
RATES.
THEY DIDN'T PROPOSE RAISING THE
WHAT THEY ACTUALLY PROPOSED WAS
TO REDUCE THE RATES FOR
BUSINESS, FOR OTHER ADVANCED
COUNTRIES, FROM 29% TO ROUGHLY
25%.
REDUCE PERSONAL INCOME TAX
RATES FOR MIDDLE-INCOME TAX AND
REDUCE THE UPPER INCOME FROM
20'S.
SOMEWHERE IN THE MID30'S TO HIGH
AT THE SAME TIME WE WOULD
ELIMINATE THE SO-CALLED TAX
EXPENDITURES.
THE TAX EXPENDITURES -- WHAT ARE
TAX EXPENDITURES?
THEY'RE TAX BREAKS.
SOME OF THEM ARE CALLED
LOOPHOLES.
ACTUALLY A LOT OF THEM ARE
MERITORIOUS, MORTGAGE DEDUCTION,
DEDUCTIONS THAT WILL ENCOURAGE
DONATIONS.
PEOPLE TO MAKE CHARITABLE
A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD SAY WE
DON'T WANT TO TKPWEUT RID OF
THAT.
-- GET RID OF THAT.
IF YOU ADD UP THOSE TAX
EXPENDITURES OVER THE NEXT TEN
TO?
YEARS, YOU KNOW WHAT IT ADDS UP
$15 TRILLION.
AND IF WE ONLY WERE ABLE TO
SOMEHOW REDUCE THAT BY 8% OR 9%,
WE WOULD COME UP WITH THE
REVENUES THAT WERE CALLED FOR IN
THE SIMPSON-BOWLES DEFICIT
COMMISSION TO BE PART OF A $4
TRILLION PACKAGE.
IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO BRING THE
RATES DOWN TO, LOWER THE RATES,
BROADEN THE BASE, IN ORDER TO DO
THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE
EXPENDITURES.
MORE THAN 8% OR 9% OUT OF TAX
MAY HAVE TO BE REDUCED BY AS
MUCH AS 50%.
BY THE END OF THE DAY WE SHOULD
PRESERVE THE DEDUCTION FOR THE
INTEREST WE PAY ON MORTGAGES
ESPECIALLY FOR OUR PRIMARY HOME
AND ALSO TO ENCOURAGE TRAVEL
DEDUCTION.
I THINK WE OUGHT TO ENCOURAGE
PEOPLE TO CONTINUE TO GET A
DEDUCTION FOR CHARITABLE
DONATIONS AND THERE ARE OTHERS
AS WELL.
THOSE ARE THE BIG ONES.
THAT WAS THE SUM AND STANCE OF -- THAT WAS
THE SUM AND STAINS OF WHAT THEY
CAME UP FOR.
WHAT ARE ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS?
THINGS THAT WE'RE ENTITLED TO BY
VIRGINIA TIE OF OUR AGE, IF WE
ARE 65 YEARS OF AGE, WE PAID
INTO SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE,
WE MAY BE ELIGIBLE -- WILL BE
ELIGIBLE IN ALL LIKELIHOOD FOR
MEDICARE F WE'RE DISABLED,
TOTALLY DISABLED TO WORK, WE'LL
BE ELIGIBLE FOR MEDICARE, EVEN
BEFORE AGE 65.
IF WE PAID INTO SOCIAL SECURITY
FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, WE'LL BE
ELIGIBLE FOYER EARLY RETIREMENT
FOR SACT AGE 62.
WE CAN TAKE IT AT 67 FOR FULL
RETIREMENT BENEFITS, WHICH I
THINK ARE ROUGHLY ABOUT $2,000
PER MONTH MAX, SOMETHING LIKE
THAT.
BUT ANYWAY, THOSE ARE SOME
SOCIAL SECURITY ARE ENTITLEMENT
THINGS -- MEDICARE, MEDICAID,
PROGRAMS.
THEY SAID THEY SHOULD ALL BE ON
THE TABLE.
THEY DID NOT PROPOSE USING
SOCIAL SECURITY TO BALANCE THE
BUDGET BUT WHAT THEY DID SAY IS
SAY WE'VE GOT A LONG-TERM
PROBLEM IN SOCIAL SECURITY WITH
THE IMBALANCE BETWEEN NOW THE
AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IS COMING
AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S GOING
INTO SOCIAL SECURITY AND THE
OUT.
AS THE BABY BOOMERS ARE STARTING
TO RETIRE, MY GENERATION, WE ARE
PAYING OUT NOW FOR THE FIRST
TIME IN A LONG TIME MORE IN
ARE RAISING.
SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS THAN WE
AND THE REASON WHY, FOR TODAY IT
IS ROUGHLY FOR EVERY ONE PERSON
RECEIVING SOCIAL SECURITY
BENEFITS, ABOUT TWO AND A HALF
PEOPLE ARE WORKING.
AND BEFORE LONG, IT'LL BE EVERY
ONE PERSON RECEIVING SOCIAL
SECURITY BENEFITS, ABOUT TWO
PEOPLE WORKING, PAYING INTO
SOCIAL SECURITY.
THE FLOW OF THE -- THE MISMATCH
OF INFLOWS INTO SOCIAL SECURITY
VERSUS THE OUTFLOWS IS GOING TO
GET WORSE, NOT BETTER.
SOMETIME IN A COUPLE DECADES
DOWN THE ROAD, WE'RE GOING TO
START RUNNING OUT OF MONEY TO
PAY 100% OF SOCIAL SECURITY
BENEFITS.
WE WON'T ALLOW IT TO STOP
ALTOGETHER BUT WE'LL HAVE TO
GIVE THEM A PRETTY SERIOUS
HAIRCUT.
I WAS A FRESHMAN CONGRESS MN
SWORN IN ON JANUARY 3, 20 -- 198
P 3.
THE DAY I WAS SWORN IN, THE
OTHER END OF THE CAPITOL, THEY
TOLD MY FRESHMAN CLASS, WE'RE
GOING TO RUN OUT OF MONEY IN
SOCIAL SECURITY.
THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID.
WE SAID, WHEN?
LIKE A COUPLE OF DECADES OR
WHEN?
AND THEY SID, NO, THIS YEAR.
THIS YEAR.
AND WE SAID, ARE WE GOING TO,
LIKE, PROVIDE A HAIRCUT, REDUCE
SOCIAL SECURITY PAYMENTS?
THEY SAID, NUH-UH, WE'RE GOING
TO STOP MAKING THEM.
BECAUSE WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF
MONEY IN THE SOCIAL SECURITY
TRUST FUND.
THAT'S WHERE WE WERE ON JANUARY
3, 1983.
THANKS TO THE WORK OF A
COMMISSION, LED BY ALAN
GREENSPAN AND OTHERS, BUT THE
GOOD WORK THEY DID THEN, THEY
HANDED TO HAVE US A SOLUTION.
NEW SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR SOCIAL
SECURITY AND SOME REDUCTIONS IN
BENEFITS, GRADUALLY RAISING FULL
RETIREMENT AGE OVER THE PERIOD
OF 25 YEARS FROM 65 TOW 678,
REQUIRING MORE PEOPLE TO PAY
INTO SOCIAL SECURITY, STATE AND
LOCAL EMPLOYEES AMONG OTHERS.
I THOUGHT IT WAS A BALANCED
PLAN.
RONALD REAGAN PROVIDED POLITICAL
COVER FOR THE DEMOCRATS.
TIP O'NEILL PROVIDED COVER TO
THE REPUBLICANS TO VOTE FOR
THAT.
AND ALMOST EVERYBODY, HOUSE,
SENATE, DEMOCRAT, AND REPUBLICAN
DRAINING THE KOOL-AID AND VOTED
TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY AND
PRESERVE IT FOR ANOTHER 25
YEARS.
WE SINCE THE HAVE TO STOP PAYING
SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS THAT
YEAR OR THE NEXT YEAR OR THE
YEAR AFTER THAT.
WE HAD SIGNIFICANT SURPLUSES
GOING UP IN THE SOCIAL SECURITY
TRUST FUND THAT NOW IS BEGINNING
TO BE PAID DOWN.
BUT WE'RE GOING TOSH THE FUND IS
GOING TO BE GOING IN THE WRONG
DIRECTION IN THE YEARS TO COME,
AND OVER TIME THE OUTLEVEL WILL
INCREASE.
DO WE WAIT UNTIL THE 1920'S OR
IT?
THE 1930'S TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD.
I SWORE -- WAS IT 28 YEARS AGO?
I DIDN'T WANT TO HAND OFF TO THE
NEXT GENERATION THE PROBLEMS WE
SHOULD SOLVE TODAY.
WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY NOT TO
USE SOCIAL SECURITY TO BALANCE
THE BUDGET BUT UNDER THE PLAN
THAT'S BEEN SORT OF REWORKED
FROM THE BOWLES-SIMPSON DEFICIT
COMIRKS THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SECURE SOCIAL SECURITY FOR THE
NEXT 75 YEARS, AND TO DO IT IN A
WAY THAT INVOLVES A NUMBER OF I
THINK RELATIVELY MODEST --
RELEVANTLYRELATIVELY MODEST CHANGES.
INCREASE SOCIAL SECURITY AGE
FROM 67 TO 68 BY 2006, JUST
REMEMBER WHEN SOCIAL SECURITY
WAS FIRST INTRODUCED, SIGNED
INTO LAW BY F.D.R. BACK IN THE
1930'S, PEOPLE -- YOU HAD TO BE
65 YEARS OF AGE IN ORDER TO
RECEIVE SOCIAL SECURITY
BENEFITS.
THE AVERAGE LIFE EXPECTANCY THEN
WAS JUST OVER AGE 60.
THINK ABOUT THAT.
BACK THEN YOU HAD TO LIVE TO BE
65 TO DRAW BENEFITS.
THE LIFE EXPECTANCY FOR MOST
PEOPLE UNDER 65 IS BETWEEN 60
AND 65.
WE'RE TALKING TODAY WITH A LIFE
EXPECTANCY OF CLOSER TO 80.
FOR PEOPLE STILL TO GET EARLY
BENEFITS FOR EARLY RETIREMENT
BENEFITS UNDER SOCIAL SECURITY
AT AGE 62 BUT TO CRADUALLY
INCREASE IT TO FULL RETIREMENT
AGE AS WELL.
I THINK THEY'RE RELATIVELY
MODEST CHANGES.
WHEN YOU PUT THEM ALL TOGETHER
OVER MANY YEARS, THEY CAN PUT
SOCIAL SECURITY ON A SAFE
FOOTING FOR ANOTHER 70-75 YEARS.
AND THE SIDE TO ACTUALLY LOLL
PROBLEMS.
THAT OFF FROM THE REST OF THE
WE'RE BASICALLY PRESERVING
SOCIAL SECURITY FOR A LOT
LONGER, FOR REALLY MY LIFE SPAN
AND THE LIFE SPAN OF THESE YOUNG
PAGES WHO ARE ABOUT 16 YEARS
AGE OR SO, THROUGHOUT THEIR
LIFETIMES AS WELL.
ON MEDICARE -- LET ME TALK ABOUT
MEDICARE, HEALTH CARE FOR PEOPLE
65 AND OVER, PEOPLE THAT ARE
TOTALLY DISABLED UNDER THE AGE
OF 65 AND UNABLE TO WORK.
WE WILL SPEND THIS YEAR ABOUT
$550 BILLION IN MEDICARE, ABOUT
$550 BILLION.
THE AMOUNT OF FRAUD IN MEDICARE
-- ERIC HOLDER, OUR ATTORNEY
GENERAL, TELLS US THAT FRAUD
LAST YEAR FOR MEDICARE WAS ABOUT
$60 BILLION.
THAT'S ROUGHLY 10% OF THE AMOUNT
OF MONTANA THAT WE SPEND IN
MEDICARE.
$60 BILLION, ROUGHLY 10%.
THERE'S -- G.A.O., GENERAL
ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE, KEEPS
TRACK OF SOMETHING ELSE CALLED
IMPROPER PAYMENTS.
AND ONE OF THINGS THAT G.A.O.
DOES IS TELL US EVERY YEAR HOW
MUCH WE'RE MAKING IN IMPROPER
PAYMENTS ACROSS THE BOARD.
THEY SAID LAST YEAR IT WAS ABOUT
$125 BSM THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM
FRAUD.
IT'S JUST OVERPAYMENTS,
ACCOUNTING MISTAKES, THAT SORT
OF THING.
$50 BILLION IN IMPROPER PAYMENTS
FOR MEDICARE AND ANOTHER $60
BILLION, ACCORDING TO ERIC
HOLDER, JUST FROM FRAUD.
THAT'S MORE -- THESE ACTUALLY,
IF THOSE NUMBERS ARE TRIEWRKS
$60 BILLION OUT OF $550 BILLION
IN MEDICARE PAYMENTS, THAT'S
ACTUALLY MORE THAN 10%.
WELL, LET'S JUST SAY IT'S ONLY
10% OR CLOSE TO 10%.
HOW ARE THEY DOING OVER IN THE
PRIVATE SECTOR?
HOW ARE THEY DOING IN TERMS OF
CONTROLLING FRAUD?
WELL, THEIR FRAUD COSTS ARE NOT
10% OF THEY ARE COSTS.
THAT'S PROBABLY NOT A SURPRISE.
THEY'RE NOT 9%, 8%, 7%.
ON BALANCE THEY'RE PROBABLY
CLOSER TO 5%, IN SOME CASES LESS
THAN 5%.
ROUGHLY HALF OVER THERE, FRAUD
COSTS IN MEDICARE.
MAYBE THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING IN
THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO CONTROL
FRAUD IN WAYS WE CAN LEARN FROM
IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
IF WE CAN LEARN THOSE LESSONS,
MAYBE WE CAN PROVIDE BETTER
RESULTS FOR LESS MONEY IN
MEDICARE.
EXAMPLES.
LET ME GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF
IMPROPER PAYMENTS, $50 BILLION,
MISTAKES, THAT KIND OF THING.
SEPARATE FROM FRAUD.
THETHE PRESIDENT SAYS WE'LL CUT IT
IN HALF BY THE END OF NEXT YEAR,
FROM $50 BILLION TO $25 BILLION.
IF WE DO THAT FOR TEN YEARS --
TEN YEARS TIMES $25 BILLION,
$250 BILLION.
WHAT DOES THAT ADD UP TO?
THAT'S REAL MONEY AROUND HERE, A
QUARTER OF A TRILLION DOLLARS.
IF ERIC HOLDER, OUR A.G., IS
RIGHT, IF WE COULD CUT THAT IN
HALF, AND WE PUT IN THE HEALTH
CARE LAW, THE NEW HEALTH CARE
LAW ALL KIND OF TOOLS TO DO THAT
KIND OF THING, IF WE CAN CUT
THAT IN HALF, THAT WOULD BE A
SAVINGS OF $30 BILLION A YEAR.
OVER TEN YEARS THAT'S $3 00
BILLION.
$300 BILLION IN POTENTIAL FRAUD
SAVINGS, $1250 BILLION IN
POTENTIAL SAIIVELINGS BY CUTTING
IN HALF IMPROPER PAYMENTS FOR
MEDICARE.
THAT'S $550 BILLION.
IT'S OVER A HALF A TRILLION
DOLLAR.
FOR THOSE WHO SAY WE HAVE TO --
LET ME TELL YOU JUST TO GIVE YOU
A SENSE FOR WHERE SOME OF THE
MONEY HAS BEEN LOST IN FRAUD,
THERE'S SOMETHING -- I'VE LEARN
ADD NEW TERM THIS LAST WEEK
CALLED THE DEF MAST MASTER FILES.
WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP TRACK OF
THE FOLKS THAT ARE DYING SO THAT
WHEN PEOPLE DIE THEY'RE GETTING
SOCIAL SECURITY, WE DON'T
CONTINUE SENDING OUT SOCIAL
SECURITY CHECKS FOREVER FOR
PEOPLE WHO ARE DEAD.
THE SAME THING WITH FOLKS WHO
ARE ELIGIBLE FOR OTHER BENEFITS,
WHETHER THEY'RE BENEFITS FOR,
WHETHER THEY HAPPEN TO BE
EDUCATIONAL BENEFITS OR HEALTH
BENEFITS, WE DON'T WANT TO PAY
BENEFITS FOR FOLKS WHO ARE NOT
WITH US ANYMORE.
AND BY THE SAME TOKEN, WE WANT
TO MAKE SURE WHEN DOCTORS DIRKS
WE DON'T FACE THE POSSIBILITY
THAT SOMEBODY STEALS THEIR
PROVIDER I.D. NUMBER, THE
MEDICARE PROVIDER I.D. NUMBER OR
THEIR MEDICAID PROVIDER I.D.
NUMBER, IF THEY HAVE ONE, AND
WRITE PRESCRIPTIONS FOR, AMONG
OTHER THINGS, CONTROLLED
SUBSTANCES.
BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE TODAY IS
CROOKS, CRIMINALS, STEALING
PROVIDER I.D. DOCTORS FROM DEAD
DOCTORS AND USING THOSE TO WRITE
PRESCRIPTIONS FOR CONTROLLED
SUBSTANCES WHICH THEN FEED THE
DRUG TRADE AND PROVIDE PROFITS
TO CRIMINAL GROUPS.
G.A.O. TOLD US IN A MOST RECENT
REPORT THAT IN TERMS OF BUYING
WHEELCHAIRS, WE SPEND ABOUT $200
MILLION A YEAR OR TWO AGO, OVER
HALF OF THEM WERE WRITTEN AND
PRESCRIBED FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE
MEDICALLY INELIGIBLE FOR THE
WHEELCHAIRS.
WE GOT TO BE SMARTER THAN THAT.
OVER IN JAPAN -- I HAVE MY
FRIEND FROM FLORIDA SIGNATURE
OVER HERE WAITING FOR ME.
I'LL CLOSE WITH THIS.
AS HE KNOWS, AND WE SERVE
TOGETHER IN THE FINANCE
COMMITTEE AND USED TO SERVE
TOGETHER IN THE HOUSE -- AN OLD
FRIEND AND A GOOD ONE -- AS WE
WRESTLE WITH HEALTH CARE REFORM
LEGISLATION A YEAR OR TWO AGO,
ONE OF THE THINGS WE HRD IN OUR
HEARINGS WAS OVER IN JAPAN WEES
COMPETE AGAINST JAPAN --
FRIENDLY COMPETITION, BUT
THEY'RE OUR COMPETEDDER IN A
LOST WAYS, ELECTRONICS, CARS,
ANY NUMBER OF PRODUCTS.
WE COMPETE AGAINST THEM.
THEY SPEND ABOUT 8% OF G.D.P.
FOR HEALTH CARE.
WE SPEND 16%.
THEY GET BETTER RESULTS.
LONGER LIFE LONGEVITY, LESS
INFANT MORTALITY.
THEY GET BETTER RESULTS.
THEY SPEND HALF AS MUCH, THEY
GET BETTER RESULTS.
THEY COVER EVERYBODY.
THEY COVER EVERYBODY.
I'D LIKE TO SAY, THEY CAN'T BE
THAT SMART.
AS SMART AS THEY ARE IN JAPAN,
THEY CAN'T BE THAT SMART.
AND WE CAN'T BE THAT DUMB.
AND THERE ARE ANY NUMBER OF WAYS
THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY SAVE MONEY
THAT DOES NOT REDUCE BENEFITS IN
MEDICARE OR MEDICAID AND WE CAN
LEARN FROM SOME OF THE THINGS
THAT THEY'RE DOING TO RECOVER
FRAUD AND JUST NAVIGATE SOME OF
THE IDEA OVERS TO THE PUBLIC
SECTOR AND USE -- FIND OUT WHAT
WORKS -- I LIKE TO SAY THIS,
ALAN BLINDER TESTIFIED BEFORE US
A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO -- A
MONTH OR TWO AGO AS BILL WILL
REMEMBER.
ALAN BLINDER SAID IN TERMS OF
REDUCING THE DEFICIT, I'M NOT AN
EXPERT ON THIS THING.
BUT HERE'S MY ADVICE TO YOU:
FIND OUT WHAT WORKS, DO MORE OF
THAT.
THINK OF THAT.
FIENTSDZFIND OUT WHATWORKS, DO MORE OF THAT.
IN CONGRESS IF WE DO THAT KIND OF THING
RNTIONZ IF WE JUST MAKE THAT
REALLY A CULTURAL CHANGE GOING
FORWARD, WE'LL GET US BACK ON
THE RIGHT TRACK.
THAT'S OUR CHALLENGE.
IT'S NOT JUST DERNLINGS NOT JUST
REPUBLICANS, NOT JUST THE
CONGRESS.
WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER.
AND IN CLOSING, THAT'S A GOOD
THING FOR US TO REMEMBER.
WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER.
WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE SMART
IDEAS ON THIS SIDE, NEITHER DO
THE REPUBLICANS.
GOT TO BE A COMBINATION OF
SPENDING AND REVENUES AND IF
WE'RE SMART ABOUT IT, WE'LL COME
DAY JUST FINE.
OUT OF THIS AT THE END OF THE
THANK YOU, AND WITH THAT, I
YIELD THE FLOOR TO MY FRIEND
FROM FLORIDA.
MADAM PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM FLORIDA.
MADAM PRESIDENT, I
KNOW THE SENATOR FROM
MASSACHUSETTS HAS TIME AND I
JUST WANTED TO TAKE THIS TIME
WHILE HE IS COMING INTO THE
CHAMBER TO SAY THAT THE DRUMBEAT
-- YOU CAN ALMOST HEAR THE
BACKGROUND VERY FOREBODING MUSIC
AS WE ARE COUNTING DOWN THE
DAYS, AND HERE WE ARE IN A
SITUATION IN WHICH WE CANNOT GET
A CERTAIN GROUP OF PEOPLE OVER
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
TO BE WILLING TO SIT DOWN AND,
AS THE GOOD BOOK SAYS, TO COME
LET US REASON TOGETHER.
AND IF WE'RE GOING TO GOVERN IN
COUNTRY, WE HAVE TO COME AND
REASON TOGETHER.
PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL WHO WILL
RESPECT EACH OTHER'S POINT OF
VIEW TO HAMMER OUT A FINAL
AGREEMENT IN ORDER TO START
BRINGING THIS COUNTRY INTO
BALANCE.
AND IT'S SAD THAT IT IS TAKING
THIS LONG AND THIS MUCH OF A
DIFFICULT, TORTUROUS PROCESS.
MADAM PRESIDENT, ON A MUCH
HAPPIER NOTE, AT A SUBSEQUENT
TIME, I WANT TO SHARE WITH THE
SENATE THE WONDERFUL HERITAGE
THAT WE HAVE IN THIS COUNTRY NOT
FROM THE ENGLISH BUT FROM THE
SPANISH, AND WE ARE ABOUT TO
CELEBRATE 500 YEARS OF THE
DISCOVERY OF WHAT IS NOW
AMERICA, THE UNITED STATES, FROM
A SPANISH EXPLORER, PONTS DAY
LEE ONWHO FIRST CAME TO THE
SHORES OF MY STATE AND THEN SOON
THEREAFTER WE WILL CELEBRATE THE
450th ANNIVERSARY OF THE
OLDEST CONTINUOUS SETTLEMENT, A
SETTLEMENT THAT IS 42 YEARS
BEFORE THE ENGLISH CAME AND
SETTLED JAMESTOWN.
AND THOSE CELEBRATIONS ARE GOING
TO BE NOT JUST FOR FLORIDA AND
NOT JUST FOR ST. AUGUSTINE BUT
FOR ALL OF FLORIDA AND ALL OF
THE COUNTRY.
WE HAVE A COMMISSION THAT HAS
BEEN APPOINTED BY THE SECRETARY
OF THE INTERIOR.
WE HAVE JUST KICKED OFF THAT
COMMISSION AND I WILL BE SHARING
WITH THE SENATE A LOT ABOUT THIS
HISTORICAL RESTORATION IN THE
PUBLIC'S MIND OF ALL OF THOSE
SPANISH EXPLORERS THAT HELPED
ESTABLISH THIS COUNTRY, FIRST
WITH PONCE DE LEON IN 1513, AND
HE CAME BACK IN 1539.
BY THE WAY, THE PUERTO RICAN
COMMUNITY IS QUITE ENERGIZED AND
EXCITED ABOUT THAT BECAUSE PONCE
DE LEON, WHEN HE CAME AND FOUND
AT THE FEAST DEFLOWERS, PASCA DEE
FLORES -- AND THUS HE NAMED LA
FLORIDA -- HE WAS THE GOVERNOR
OF PUERTO RICO.
SO THEY ARE QUITE EXCITED, AS
THEY SHOULD BE, AND GOING TO BE
PART OF THIS CELEBRATION.
AND AFTER HIM CAME A SPANISH
EXPLORER THAT SAILED UP THE
COAST NAMED DAE AYONE.
LATER IN 1527 CAME A SPANISH
EXPLORER, NARVIACE.
HE LANDED SOMEWHERE IN THE STAMP
AREGION AND WENT UP INTO THE --
IN THE TAMPA REGION AND WENT UP
INTO THE PANHANDLE OF FLORIDA.
AFTER HIM CAME THE SPANISH
FLORIDAER HERNANDO DE SOTO IN
THE LATE 1530'S.
HE ENDED UP ALSO IN THE TAMPA
BAY REGION WHEN ALL OVER FLORIDA
CELEBRATED THE FIRST CHRISTMAS
BECAUSE HE HAD SPANISH PRIESTS
WITH HIM AND WAS IN WHAT IS
TODAY SAL HAASY TALLAHASSEE BY CHRISTMAS
DAY THEY CELEBRATED THE FIRST
CHRISTIAN CHRISTMAS BY EUROPEANS
IN THIS NEW WORLD OF WHAT IS NOW
THE UNITED STATES.
AND THAT WAS THE LATE 1530'S.
AND THEN HE ENDED UP TRAVELING
ALL OVER THE U.S., SOUTHERN --
WHAT IS NOW THE SOUTHERN --
SOUTHEASTERN U.S.
AND THEN ALONG CAME DE LUNA,
THINKING HE WOULD HAVE THE FIRST
PENSACOLA.
PERMANENT SETTLEMENT IN 1559 IN
AND IN 1961, ALONG CAME A
HURRICANE AND WIPED THEM OUT.
WE HAD THE KING AND QUEEN OF
SPAIN IN PENSACOLA ON THAT
ANNIVERSARY BACK IN 2009.
AND THEN LATER CAME THE FRENCH
THINKING THEY WERE GOING TO SET
UP THE FIRST PERMANENT
SETTLEMENT AT FORT CAROLINE, AT
THE MOUTH OF WHAT IS TODAY THE
ST. JOHN'S RIVER AT JACKSONVILLE
IN 1564, BUT WHEN THEY HEARD
THAT THE SPANISH EXPLORER
MENENDEZ HAD COME 30 MILES TO
THE SOUTH TO SET UP THIS
PERMANENT SETTLEMENT AT ST.
AUGUSTINE, THEY SAILED TO WIPE
OUT THE SPANISH COLONY AND
INSTEAD GOT HIT BY A HURRICANE
AND WERE SHIPWRECKED AND WERE,
THUS, DISPATCHED BY THE SPANISH
EXPLORER MENENDEZ.
AND FROM THERE, ST. AUGUSTINE
CONTINUED ALL THE WAY TO THE
PRESENT DAY.
YOU OUGHT TO SEE THAT RESTORED
CITY.
IT IS A SIGHT TO BEHOLD AND IT
IS NOT ONLY THE HISTORY OF ST.
AUGUSTINE, THE HISTORY OF
FLORIDA, IT IS THE HISTORY OF
THIS UNITED STATES.
AND SO, MADAM PRESIDENT, I'LL
SHARE A LOT MORE ABOUT OUR
SPANISH HISTORY, OUR ROOTS IN
THIS COUNTRY.
AND I THANK THE SENATOR FROM
MASSACHUSETTS FOR HIS KIND
INDULGENCE SO THAT I MIGHT SHARE
THIS WITH THE SENATE.
MADAM PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE
THANK
FLOOR.
YOU.
THE SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS
IS RECOGNIZED.
MADAM PRESIDENT,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND I CONGRATULATE THE SENATOR