Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
WOULD BE FOLLOWING UP WITH THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
TO SEE WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION
STATUS WAS AND THEN REPORTING IT
COMMITTEES.
TO THE APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL
LET'S GO TO CHARLES.
HONG CALLER: GOOD -- CALLER:
GOOD MORNING.
WILL THE GAO OFFER AN
OVERLAPPING LIST OF THE PROGRAMS
ON THEIR WEB SITE SO WE CAN
WATCH THE YEAR AFTER YEAR?
WE ARE STILL WORKING OUT
THE MECHANISMS FOR THAT, BUT I
SUSPECT WE WILL HAVE THAT ON OUR
WEBSITE.
AS I SAID, WILL BE ISSUING A
REPORT EVERY YEAR.
I EXPECT THAT WE WILL UPDATE THE
STAT OF EACH OF THE AREAS THAT
WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS YEAR
AND BE ADDING NEW ONES.
IT WILL BE IN A SINGLE PLACE ON
OUR WEBSITE.
IF YOUAVE CHECKED OUR WEBSITE,
YOU WILL ALSO SEE THAT WE HAVE
PUBLISHED THIS REPORT IN AN
ELECTRONIC FORMAT SO THAT FOR
EACH ONE OF THE ISSUE AREAS THAT
WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT YOU CAN
ACTUALLY DRILL DOWN INTO ALL OF
OUR WORK ABOUT THAT ISSUE.
AND FOR EACH ONE OF THE AREAS WE
HAVE ISSUED MULTIPLE REPORTS
OVER THE YEARS.
AND THAT IS GAO.GOV AND
THE REPORT CAN BE FOUND ON LINE
THERE.
GUESS.
-- YES.
AND FINAL THOUGHTS.
IT WOULD BE SUCCESS HERE?
-- WHAT WOULD BE SUCCESSFUL
HERE?
I THINK SUCCESS WOULD BE
THAT WE ACTUALLY TACKLED SOME OF
THESE AREAS AND THAT WE CAN SEE
IMPROVEMENT, THAT WE ARE NOT
REPORTING THE SAME THING YEAR
AFTER YEAR.
HOPEFULLY, NEXT YEAR AT THIS
TIME WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT
SOME OF THE SUCCESSES AND
ACCOMPLISHMENTS THAT HAVE
OCCURRED, AT LEAST IN SOME OF
THE AREAS.
I DO NOT THINK IT WILL BE IN
ALL, BUT DEFINITELY SOME.
MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
REPUBLICAN LEADER.
I ASK THAT
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE
QUORUM CALL BE DISPENSED WITH.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
AS WE REENGAGE
IN THE ONGOING DEBATE OVER
GOVERNMENT SPENDING, IT'S WORTH
NOTING THAT SOME ON THE OTHER
SIDE HAVE ALREADY DECIDED TO
FOLD UP THEIR TENTS.
LAST WEEK REPUBLICANS SHOWED WE
COULD CHANGE THE STATUS QUO IN
SPENDING.
WASHINGTON BY CUTTING GOVERNMENT
IT WAS A SMALL STEP, BUT A STEP
IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
AND SOME OF US WERE HOPEFUL
MOMENTUM WAS FINALLY BUILDING
FOR THE KIND OF BIPARTISAN
CONSENSUS THAT WOULD ENABLE US
TO CUT EVEN MORE GOVERNMENT RED
INK THIS WEEK.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE ASSISTANT
MAJORITY LEADER SEEMS TO HAVE
HAVE ENOUGH.
YESTERDAY HE SAID THAT CUTTING
$6 BILLION PUSHES LIMITS OF
WHAT'S NEEDED TO LIVE WITHIN OUR
MEANS.
PLP, THIS IS LUDICROUS.
LUDICROUS.
SO FAR THIS FISCAL YEAR,
WASHINGTON HAS SPENT NEARLY $650
BILLION MORE THAN IT'S TAKEN IN.
THIS YEAR.
THAT'S A LITTLE MORE THAN $4
BILLION A DAY THAT WASHINGTON IS
SPENDING OVER AND ABOVE WHAT IT
HAS TO SPEND.
AND SENATOR DURBIN THINKS
DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS HAVE
PUSHED THE LIMITS OF
RESPONSIBILITY BY AGREEING TO
CUT $6 BILLION MORE THIS YEAR.
IMAGINE, IF EVERY AMERICAN HAD
THE SAME APPROACH TO THEIR
CREDIT CARD BILLS.
IMAGINE CALLING UP YOUR CREDIT
CARD COMPANY AND ASKING FIRST IF
YOU COULD JUST FREEZE YOUR
OUT-OF-CONTROL SPENDING HABITS
IN PLACE.
JUST FREEZE THEM IN PLACE.
THEN WHEN THEY SAY "NO," IMAGINE
TELLING THEM YOU DON'T WANT TO
CUT DOWN YOUR MONTHLY SPENDING
BECAUSE YOU PREFER LIVING
OUTSIDE YOUR MEANS.
THIS IS THE LOGIC OF OUR FRIENDS
ON THE OTHER SIDE.
NOW, ACCORDING TO THIS LOGIC,
THEY'D RATHER DRAW A LINE IN THE
SAND THAN AGREE TO CUT ANOTHER
DIME IN SPENDING AT A TIME WHEN
WASHINGTON IS SPENDING ABOUT $4
BILLION MORE EVERY DAY -- EVERY
IN.
SINGLE DAY -- THAN IT IS TAKING
REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN HOPEFUL
THAT WE COULD MAKE PROGRESS AND
REACH A BIPARTISAN SOLUTION ON
THIS ISSUE.
SO IT'S MY HOPE THAT THE
ASSISTANT MAJORITY LEADER WAS
SPEAKING FOR HIM SIEVED AND NOT
FOR HIS ENTIRE SIDE.
THAT MOST PEOPLE IN WASHINGTON
THIS OF COURSE IS THE DEBATE
WILL CONTINUE TO BE FOCUSED ON
THIS WEEK.
AND IT'S AN IMPORTANT DEBATE.
BUT FOCUSING ON DAY-TO-DAY
EXPENSES THREATENS TO OBSCURE AN
EVEN LARGER THREAT, AND HERE I'M
TALKING OF COURSE OF ENTITLEMENT
PROGRAMS LIKE SOCIAL SECURITY,
EXPHAIR, MEDICARE, AND MEDICAID.
ANYONE WHO HAS LOOKED AT THESE
PROGRAMS CLOSELY KNOWS THEY'RE
BECOMING UNAFFORDABLE.
THAT DOING NOTHING RISKS NOT
ONLY THE FUTURE OF THESE
PROGRAMS OURSELVES, BUT OUR
NATION'S FUTURE AS WELL.
ANYONE WHO LOOKS AT HISTORY ALSO
KNOWS THAT THE BEST TIME TO
ADDRESS A CRISIS LIKE THIS IS A
TIME LIKE RIGHT NOW, WHEN TWO
PARTIES SHARE POWER IN
WASHINGTON.
THIS IS THE TIME, MR. PRESIDENT.
I MADE THE CASE FOR ACTION
PUBLICLY AND IN PRIVATE
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE WHITE
HOUSE.
AS REPUBLICAN LEADER, I PUT THIS
ISSUE FRONT AND CENTER MY FIRST
DAY ON THE JOB.
FOUR YEARS AGO I CAME TO THE
FLOOR AND SAID THAT THE
DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES TAKING PLACE
IN AMERICA MADE IT INCUMBENT
UPON US AS A BODY TO REFORM
SOCIAL SECURITY.
TWO YEARS LATER WHEN THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE PUT A DEMOCRAT
IN THE WHITE HOUSE, I RENEWED MY
CALL FOR ACTION.
I SAID THAT REPUBLICANS READY TO
WORK WITH THE PRESIDENT ON
ENTITLEMENT REFORM, AND I
REPEATED THAT CALL AGAIN FOUR
MONTHS AGO WHEN THE VOTERS
DECIDED TO PUT REPUBLICANS IN
CHARGE OF THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES.
THROUGHOUT THIS TIME I'VE HELD
OUT HOPE THAT OUR FRIENDS ON THE
OTHER SIDE WOULD RISE TO THE
OCCASION.
IF NOT WHEN REPUBLICANS
CONTROLLED THE WHITE HOUSE, AT
LEAST WHEN THEY DID.
I WAS ENCOURAGED FURTHER WHEN
PRESIDENT OBAMA SAID REPEATEDLY
BACK IN 2009 THAT HIS
ADMINISTRATION WOULD SEEK TO
WORK WITH US ON SERIOUS
ENTITLEMENT REFORM THAT
PRESERVES THE SAFETY NET FOR OUR
SENIORS, FOR PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES AND WHICH ALSO PUTS
ON A FIRMER, STABLE FOOTING FOR
GENERATIONS TO COME.
SO THE PRESIDENT HAS
ACKNOWLEDGED THE SERIOUSNESS OF
THE PROBLEM.
HE HAS NOTED HIMSELF THAT CALLS
ARE ESCALATING EVEN AS THE
POPULATION IS GETTING OLDER,
CREATING THE PERFECT STORM FOR A
FISCAL CRISIS THAT DWARFS EVEN
TODAY'S BUDGET CRISIS, AS URGENT
AS IT IS.
IF BOTH PARTIES AGREE ON ALL OF
THIS, I THOUGHT, THEN THERE'S NO
REASON WE CAN'T DO THIS FOR THE
GOOD OF THE COUNTRY.
THE URGENCY FOR ACTION IS ONLY
INTENSIFIED IN RECENT MONTHS AS
WE'VE SEEN AN UPROAR IN A NUMBER
OF STATE CAPITALS.
EVERY STATE IS DIFFERENT, BUT
THE PROBLEMS IN EVERY ONE OF
THEM CAN BE SUMMED UP PRETTY
EASILY.
LAWMAKERS FROM NEW JERSEY TO
CALIFORNIA AND JUST ABOUT
EVERYWHERE IN BETWEEN MADE
PROMISES THEY COULDN'T KEEP.
BUT THE PROMISES LAWMAKERS IN
WASHINGTON HAVE MADE PUTS THE
STATES TO SHAME.
IF YOU ADD UP THE UNFUNDED
LIABILITIES IN ALL 50 STATES,
YOU GET BY ONE ESTIMATE ABOUT $3
TRILLION TOTAL.
ADD UP WASHINGTON'S PROMISES ON
SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE
ALONE, AND IT'S OVER $50
TRILLION.
$50 TRILLION THAT WE PROMISED TO
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT WE
DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE GOING TO
PAY FOR.
SOMETHING MUST BE DONE, AND NOW
IS THE TIME TO DO IT.
REPUBLICANS ARE READY AND
WILLING.
WHERE IS THE PRESIDENT?
SUDDENLY AT THE MOMENT WHEN WE
CAN ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING ABOUT
THIS, HE'S SILENT.
AS ONE COLUMNIST IN "THE
WASHINGTON POST" PUT IT, FOR A
MAN WHO WON OFFICE TALKING ABOUT
CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN, THE
PRESIDENT CAN BE A STRANGELY
PASSIVE PRESIDENT.
ONE OF THE GREATEST -- ON THE
GREATEST FISCAL CHALLENGE OF THE
DAY, HE APPEARS AT LEAST SO FAR
TO HAVE TAKEN A PASS.
THIS IS OBVIOUSLY DEEPLY
DISAPPOINTING TO ME PERSONALLY
GIVEN MY REPEATEDLY RAISING OF
THIS ISSUE.
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, IT SHOULD
BE DEEPLY DISAPPOINTING TO EVERY
AMERICAN WHO HAD REASON TO HOPE
THAT WE COULD TACKLE THESE
GOVERNMENT.
ISSUES IN A MOMENT OF DIVIDED
AND IT SHOULD BE DISAPPOINTING
TO ALL OF THOSE WHO BELIEVE THIS
PRESIDENT WHEN HE PLEDGED HE
WASHINGTON.
WOULD SHAKE UP THE STATUS QUO IN
PAST PRESIDENTS HAD THE
FORESIGHT TO SEIZE THE MOMENT,
REACH ACROSS PARTY LINES TO
SOLVE AN EARLIER FUNDING PROBLEM
WITH SOCIAL SECURITY, IN THE
CASE OF PRESIDENT REAGAN; AND
WELFARE REFORM IN THE CASE OF
PRESIDENT CLINTON.
SO IT'S NOT A QUESTION OF
QUESTION OF WHETHER THE
WHETHER IT'S POSSIBLE, BUT A
PRESIDENT HAS THE COURAGE TO
STEP UP TO THE CHALLENGES THAT
WE FACE.
IN THIS CASE ONE CAN'T HELP BUT
WONDER IF THE PRESIDENT WHO CAME
INTO OFFICE PROMISING CHANGE HAS
BEEN CHANGED BY THE OFFICE
INSTEAD.
I HOPE I'M WRONG ABOUT ALL OF
THIS, BUT ALL THE SIGNS POINT
TOWARD INACTION ON THE PART OF
THE WHITE HOUSE.
AND, IN MY VIEW, THIS WOULD BE A
TRAGIC FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP.
MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS.
MR. PRESIDENT, I
ASK CONSENT TO SPEAK AS IF IN
MORNING BUSINESS.
WITHOUT
MR. PRESIDENT,
OBJECTION.
THERE WAS AN INTERESTING LETTER
TO THE EDITOR IN "THE NEW YORK
TIMES" OVER THE WEEKEND AND IT
WAS SENT BY TWO MINNESOTA STATE
REPRESENTATIVES.
AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT HAVING
THEIR NAMES IMMEDIATELY AT MY
FINGERTIPS BUT I'M GOING TO
INCLUDE THEM IN THE RECORD WHEN
HERE.
WE HAVE A CHANCE TO INSERT THEM
BUT A DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN
MINNESOTA STATE REPRESENTATIVE
WROTE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR.
IT WAS IN RESPONSE TO AN ARTICLE
WRITTEN BY DAVID BROOKS.
AND BROOKS, WHOM I RESPECT VERY
MUCH, IS A CONSERVATIVE BUT A
VERY THOUGHTFUL MAN THAT I READ
WITH A LOT OF INTEREST.
AND BROOKS HAD WRITTEN ABOUT
WHAT TO DO WITH THE STATE AND
FEDERAL CHALLENGES WHEN IT CAME
TO BUDGET DEFICITS.
WHAT THESE TWO MINNESOTA STATE
REPRESENTATIVES SAID, DEMOCRAT
AND A REPUBLICAN, IS THAT WE
ACKNOWLEDGE IN OUR STATE AND
NATION WHAT WE FACE.
WE FACE A SITUATION WHERE WE
HAVE A WEAK ECONOMY AND WE FACE
A SITUATION WHERE THE DEBTS THAT
ARE BEING INCURRED BY OUR LEVELS
FAST.
OF GOVERNMENT ARE GOING UP TOO
AND SO HAVING ACKNOWLEDGED THAT,
WE'VE GOT TO FIND A SOLUTION.
I'M GOING TO PROBABLY NOT SAY
THIS AS ACCURATELY, BUT I
THOUGHT THEY SAID IT SO WELL.
THEY SAID WE'VE COME TO THE
CONCLUSION THAT WE JUST CAN'T
CUT OUR WAY OUT OF THE PROBLEM
AND WE CAN'T TAX OUR WAY OUT OF
THE PROBLEM.
WE'VE GOT TO THINK OUR WAY OUT
OF THE PROBLEM.
WE CAN'T LURCH FROM ONE BUDGET
BATTLE TO ANOTHER BUDGET BATTLE
WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE FACT THAT
OUR CHALLENGE IS A STRUCTURAL
LONG-TERM CHALLENGE.
IT DOESN'T RELATE TO THE
IMMEDIATE BUDGET BUT TO A LOT OF
THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING OVER A
LONG PERIOD OF TIME.
AND I REFLECTED ON THAT FOR A
MINUTE, AND I THOUGHT I THINK
THERE'S REAL WISDOM IN WHAT THEY
SAY, BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT
WE FACE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL,
THERE ARE REASONS WHY WE'RE
RUNNING INTO THESE BUDGET
PROBLEMS, NOT THE LEAST OF
WHICH, AS SENATOR McCONNELL
MENTIONED EARLIER, IS THE FACT
THAT THE POPULATION OF AMERICA
IS CHANGING.
BABY BOOMERS ARE GOING TO REACH
A POINT WHERE THEY'LL BE DRAWING
ON GOVERNMENT BENEFITS THEY PAID
FOR OVER A LIFETIME.
AS MORE AND MORE OF THEM DRAW ON
THESE BENEFITS, THERE'S AN
OBVIOUS QUESTION AS TO WHETHER
THE RESERVES ARE THERE TO TAKE
CARE OF THEM.
HOW DO WE DEAL WITH THAT?
LET ME SPEAK TO TWO ISSUES
SENATOR McCONNELL RAISED.
THE FIRST IS SOCIAL SECURITY.
SOCIAL SECURITY, IS THERE A
PROGRAM THAT IS MORE IMPORTANT
TO AMERICA?
I CAN'T THINK OF ONE.
THAT IS THE STARTING POINT OF
THE NEW DEAL.
WHEN PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT SAID WE
HAVE GOT TO GIVE SENIORS IN
AMERICA SOME PEACE OF MIND THAT
WHEN RETIREMENT ROLLS AROUND AND
THEIR SENIOR YEARS ROLL AROUND
THAT THEY WILL IN FACT HAVE
ENOUGH MONEY TO LIVE ON.
NOT IN A LUXURIOUS WAY, BUT THE
BASICS.
THERE WAS A TIME, I CAN REMEMBER
IN MY FAMILY AND IN MANY
AMERICAN FAMILIES WHERE
GRANDPARENTS MOVED BACK IN WITH
THE KIDS BECAUSE THERE WAS NO
PLACE TO GO.
THEY COULD NO LONGER WORK AND
THEY CAN NO LONGER AFFORD THEIR
HOMES, AND THEY BECAME PART OF
THE LARGER FAMILY.
IT HAPPENED IN MY FAMILY.
IT HAPPENED IN OTHERS.
THEN CAME SOCIAL SECURITY.
AND WITH A LITTLE PLANNING AND A
LITTLE SAVING AND SOCIAL
HAD INDEPENDENCE.
SECURITY CHECKS, SENIOR CITIZENS
IT WAS A CRITICALLY IMPORTANT
THING.
IT WAS AN INSURANCE PLAN, NOT A
WELFARE PLAN, AN INSURANCE PLAN
THAT VIRTUALLY EVERY AMERICAN
PAID INTO AND DREW FROM.
SO WHERE ARE WE TODAY?
I ARRIVED IN CONGRESS IN 1983 --
BRAND-NEW MEMBER OF THE HOUSE
FROM ILLINOIS -- AND THEY SAID
WELCOME TO WASHINGTON, SOCIAL
SECURITY'S BROKE.
I SAID GREAT.
I THOUGHT I'D GET A LITTLE
BREATHING SPACE HERE, BUT IN
FACT THERE WAS NONE.
AND SO, PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN
AND HOUSE SPEAKER TIP O'NEILL --
A POLITICAL ODD COUPLE IF YOU
HAVE EVER SEEN ONE -- GOT
AGREEMENT.
TOGETHER AND HAMMERED OUT AN
THE AGREEMENT WE REACHED AND
VOTED FOR IN 1983 RESULTED IN
SOCIAL SECURITY REMAINING
SOLVENT FROM THEN UNTIL 2037.
WE WANTED TO BUY 75 YEARS OF
SOLVENCY BUT WE BOUGHT OVER 50.
SO THOSE WHO SAY TODAY THAT
SOCIAL SECURITY IS IN TROUBLE, I
WOULD REMIND THEM, UNTOUCHED
WITH NO ACTION BY CONGRESS,
SOCIAL SECURITY WILL MAKE EVERY
PAYMENT IT HAS PROMISED TO EVERY
SOCIAL SECURITY RECIPIENT WITH A
COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENT EVERY
MONTH OF EVERY YEAR UNTIL 2037.
THERE AREN'T MANY THINGS YOU CAN
SAY THAT ABOUT IN WASHINGTON,
THAT FOR OVER 25 YEARS THIS
PROGRAM IS FINANCIALLY SOUND.
BUT THE BAD NEWS IS IN 2037
THINGS CHANGE DRAMATICALLY.
UNTOUCHED AT THAT POINT, SOCIAL
22%.
SECURITY BENEFITS WILL GO DOWN
NOW THAT'S A HEAVY HIT ON
LOWER-INCOME RETIREES AND
MIDDLE-INCOME RETIREES.
AND SO WE KNOW THAT LOOMING 25
YEARS OVER THE HORIZON IS A
TERRIFIC CHALLENGE.
PRESIDENT OBAMA CREATED A
DEFICIT COMMISSION.
SENATOR HARRY REID WAS KIND
ENOUGH -- I GUESS KIND IS A
WORD -- WAS NICE ENOUGH TO
APPOINT ME TO THIS COMMISSION
AND I SPENT TEN MONTHS LISTENING
AND THEN VOTED FOR THE FINAL
COMMISSION PRODUCT.
IT WENT INTO SOCIAL SECURITY,
AND IT SUGGESTED SOME THINGS
THAT ARE INHERENTLY
CONTROVERSIAL.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU'RE GOING TO
GIVE SOCIAL SECURITY A LONGER
LIFE, WHAT'S THE MIX?
WHAT WILL YOU CUT IN BENEFITS?
HOW MUCH WILL YOU INCREASE
REVENUE?
THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS.
I SAID SOCIAL SECURITY IS
BASICALLY ARITHMETIC.
MEDICARE IS ADVANCED CALCULUS.
SOCIAL SECURITY IS BASICALLY
ARITHMETIC ALTHOUGH THOSE BASIC
DECISIONS GET TO THE HEART OF
WHEN YOU RETIRE, HOW MUCH YOU
RECEIVE WHEN YOU RETIRE, AND HOW
DEDUCTIONS EACH MONTH.
MUCH YOU PAY IN YOUR PAYROLL
SO THE COMMISSION REACHED AN
AGREEMENT, AND THERE WERE PARTS
OF IT I DIDN'T LIKE, BUT IT DID
BUY 75 YEARS OF SOLVENCY FOR
SOCIAL SECURITY.
IT IS INTERESTING THAT WE
BROUGHT IT UP THEN AS PART OF
THE DEFICIT COMMISSION BECAUSE
LITERALLY SOCIAL SECURITY DOES
NOT ADD TO THE DEFICIT.
CURRENTLY THERE IS A SURPLUS IN
THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND,
AND THAT TRUST FUND IS BEING
INVESTED IN GOVERNMENT
SECURITIES AND BEING PAID
INTEREST, BUT IT DOES NOT ADD TO
THE DEFICIT.
AND SO MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES
ARGUED WHY ARE WE DEBATING
SOCIAL SECURITY AS PART OF
DEFICIT REDUCTION IF IT DOESN'T
HAVE A DIRECT CONNECTION?
AND THAT'S A LEGITIMATE POINT.
I'VE RAISED THE SAME POINT
MYSELF.
I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT IT.
WE SHOULD DO IT IN A SEPARATE
AND PARALLEL TRACK TO DEFICIT
REDUCTION.
AND I WELCOME WHAT SENATOR
McCONNELL SAID.
LET'S HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IT NEEDS
TO BE THE NECESSARY STARTING
POINT FOR DEFICIT REDUCTION
BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONNECTION
BETWEEN THE TWO.
THEN I HEARD SENATOR McCONNELL
SAY THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS NOT
SHOWN LEADERSHIP ON MEDICARE.
I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH
SENATOR McCONNELL.
THE WHOLE DEBATE ABOUT HEALTH
CARE REFORM WAS LOWERING THE
COST OF HEALTH CARE.
YOU CANNOT BALANCE THE BUDGET OF
AMERICA WITH 13 MILLION PEOPLE
UNEMPLOYED AND WITHOUT
ADDRESSING THE SKYROCKETING
COSTS OF HEALTH CARE.
AND SO PRESIDENT OBAMA WORKED
WITH CONGRESS, HOUSE AND THE
SENATE, TO REDUCE THE GROWTH IN
THE COST OF HEALTH CARE.
ONE AREA WAS IN MEDICARE.
AND TIME AND AGAIN THE SENATOR
FROM KENTUCKY AND HIS COLLEAGUES
CAME TO THE FLOOR AND GAVE
CRITICAL SPEECHES SAYING --
QUOTE -- "THE OBAMA PLAN IS
GOING TO TAKE $500 BILLION OUT
OF MEDICARE."
DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY, $500
BILLION OUT OF MEDICARE.
WELL, IF WE ARE SERIOUSLY
TALKING ABOUT BUDGET DEFICIT
REFORM, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
MEDICARE REFORM, WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT REDUCING THE ANTICIPATED
EXPENSE OF MEDICARE AND REDUCING
AT LEAST $500 BILLION IN COSTS.
WHAT WILL THAT MEAN TO THE
AMERICA?
MEDICARE RECIPIENTS ACROSS
DOES IT MEAN LESS COVERAGE, LESS
CARE?
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO.
I ALWAYS USE AS AN ILLUSTRATION
THE AVERAGE COST PER MEDICARE
BENEFICIARY IN MY HOMETOWN OF
SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, THE
AVERAGE ANNUAL COST IS BETWEEN
$7,000 AND $8,000.
YOU GO UP TO CHICAGO, MORE
SPECIALTY HOSPITALS, HIGHER COST
OF LIVING, IT IS $8,000 TO
$10,000 A YEAR FOR THE AVERAGE
MEDICARE BENEFICIARY.
THEN YOU GO DOWN TO MIAMI AND
$15,000.
THE NUMBER IS $14,000 TO
WHY THE DRAMATIC DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN CHICAGO AND MIAMI?
THAT'S A QUESTION WE OUGHT TO
ASK.
IS THERE BETTER CARE IN FLORIDA
OR JUST MORE EXPENSIVE CARE?
CAN WE BRING THE COST OF THAT
CARE DOWN AND NOT COMPROMISE THE
QUALITY OF THE CARE?
HARD QUESTIONS BUT THE ONLY
QUESTIONS THAT COUNT IF YOU WANT
TO HAVE REFORM IN MEDICARE THAT
BENEFITS.
DOESN'T SACRIFICE THE BASIC
WHAT I WOULD SAY TO SENATOR
McCONNELL IS THIS: YESTERDAY
HE QUOTED ME EARLIER IN A
STATEMENT.
I WASN'T ON THE FLOOR.
YESTERDAY I SAID THAT I WAS
SUPPORTING NOT THE HOUSE
REPUBLICAN BUDGET, BUT THE
BUDGET PROPOSED BY SENATOR
INOUYE.
THIS BUDGET FOR THE REMAINDER OF
THIS YEAR, THE NEXT SIX AND A
HALF MONTHS, WOULD CUT ABOUT $10
BILLION MORE OUT OF SPENDING.
WE WOULD HAVE CUT $51 BILLION
BELOW WHAT PRESIDENT OBAMA ASKED
FOR THIS YEAR.
SO IN THE SENATE WE WILL HAVE
REACHED $51 BILLION.
IN THE HOUSE THEY WENT $100
ASKED.
BILLION BELOW WHAT THE PRESIDENT
A QUALITATIVE,
NOT JUST QUANTATIVE BUT
QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCE IN THE
APPROACH.
I THINK THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN
BUDGET WENT TOO FAR.
I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE
NEED TO CUT THE BASICS IN
EDUCATION FOR THE LOWER-INCOME
FAMILIES ACROSS AMERICA.
AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE
HOUSE REPUBLICAN BUDGET DOES.
LET ME GIVE YOU AN ILLUSTRATION.
THEY REDUCE DRAMATICALLY THE
AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S GOING TO
BE SPENT ON HEAD START.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY MEMBERS
HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO VISIT HEAD
START PROGRAMS.
CHICAGO.
I DID A COUPLE WEEKS AGO IN
THESE ARE KIDS FROM THE
CHICAGO.
LOWEST-INCOME FAMILIES IN
THESE ARE KIDS WHO ARE MOST
LIKELY TO DROP OUT WITHOUT SOME
INTERVENTION, MOST LIKELY TO
STRUGGLE IN PRE-K AND
KINDERGARTEN AND MOST LIKELY TO
HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME LEARNING.
SO THEY BRING THEM INTO HEAD
START AT AN EARLY AGE AND THEY
LEARN.
AND THE ONE THAT I VISITED IN
AMAZING.
CHICAGO WAS NOTHING SHORT OF
THEY WERE TEACHING THESE LITTLE
KIDS, AND THEY WERE SO
IMPRESSIVE, CHINESE AS WELL AS
NIGERIAN LIE ELECTRICNIGER DIALECT, THEY WERE
CHATTERING AWAY.
THIS CANNOT HELP BUT PREPARE
SETTING.
THESE KIDS FOR A CLASSROOM
THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN BUDGET
DRAMATICALLY CUTS THE HEAD START
PROGRAMS.
THESE KIDS AND THE TEACHERS AND
STAFF THAT SUPPORT THEM WILL BE
GONE UNDER THEIR PROPOSAL.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THOSE KIDS?
I'M NOT SURE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WILL BE A
BABY SITTER DOWN THE STREET OR
INTERVENE.
WHETHER SOMEONE ELSE WILL
IT IS POSSIBLE WITHOUT EARLY
INTERVENING AND EARLY TRAINING
THAT THESE KIDS WILL SHOW UP IN
A YEAR OR TWO FOR KINDER ARE
GARTEN AND PREKINDERGARTEN WILL
NOT BE ALONG AS FAR AS THEY
SHOULD BE.
THE SECOND AREA THAT THE HOUSE
REPUBLICAN BUDGET CUTS IS THE
MONEY TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE
POOR PARTS OF AMERICA.
NOW, IN MY HOME STATE, THERE ARE
PLENTY OF THOSE.
MY HOMETOWN IN EAST ST. LOUIS,
ILLINOIS, FOR EXAMPLE TO CUT
BACK ON FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO
THAT POOR COMMUNITY AT THIS
MOMENT IN TIME, I THINK, WOULD
REALLY BE A MISTAKE.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE
YOUNG PEOPLE HAVE GOOD TEACHERS
AND GOOD RESOURCES AND CAN LEARN
EVEN THOUGH THEY LIVE IN A TOWN
THAT IS ECONOMICALLY POOR.
THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN BUDGET CUTS
THE MONEY AND CUTS THE TEACHERS
FOR THESE SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND
CUTS THE MONEY FOR PELL GRANTS.
PELL GRANTS ARE THE COLLEGE-AID
GRANTS GIVEN TO STUDENTS FROM
LOWER-INCOME FAMILIES.
MANY OF THEM DON'T HAVE A CHANCE
TO GO TO SCHOOL UNLESS THEY GET
A GRANT TO PROCEED WITH THEIR
EDUCATION.
THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN BUDGET CUTS
CUTS $150,000 A YEAR OUT OF THE
PELL GRANTS FOR STUDENTS FROM
LOWER-INCOME FAMILIES.
THAT, UNFORTUNATELY, WILL MEAN
THAT MANY OF THEM WILL DROP OUT.
WHEN I WENT TO VISIT WITH THE
PRESIDENT OF A PRIVATE LUTHERAN
COLLEGE IN THE QAWD QAWD CITY AREA
THEY PREDICTED THEY WOULD LOSE
STUDENTS.
WHEN WE HAVE HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT
IN A RECESSION STUDENTS ARE
DROPPING OUT OF COLLEGE BECAUSE
OF HOUSE REPUBLICAN BUDGET CUTS,
OBVIOUS QUESTION, DOES THAT MAKE
AMERICA'S WORKFORCE ANY BETTER.
ARE WE IN A BETTER POSITION TO
COMPETE WITH CHINA OR OTHER
COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD OR WILL
WE SACRIFICE OUR ADVANTAGE
BECAUSE STUDENTS HAVE TO DROP
OUT OF SCHOOL?
I THINK THE ANSWER'S OBVIOUS.
THAT'S WHY THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN
BUDGET WHICH SOME SUPPORT I
THINK GOES TOO FAR.
IT CUTS TOO TOO MUCH IN EDUCATION.
IT WOULD CUT DRAMATICALLY IN
MEDICAL RESEARCH.
WHAT WERE THEY THINKING THAT WE
WOULD CUT THE MEDICAL RESEARCH
IN CRITICAL AREAS, ALZHEIMER'S,
LOU GERHIG'S DISEASE, CANCER, AT
A TIME WE KNOW THAT RESEARCH AND
INNOVATION ARE CRITICAL FOR
AMERICA'S SUCCESS, WHY WOULD THE
HOUSE REPUBLICAN BUDGET CUT BACK
TO DRAMATICALLY IN AREAS THAT WE
KNOW WOULD PAY OFF?
CHOICES.
I THINK THEY MADE SOME POOR
THAT'S WHY I SUPPORT THE SENATE
DEMOCRATIC APPROACH, $10 BILLION
IN CUTS, BUT PRESERVING IN
EDUCATION, WORKING TRAINER,
EDUCATION RESEARCH, INNOVATION,
AND INFRASTRUCTURE, THE
INVESTMENTS WE NEED AT THIS
MOMENT IN OUR HISTORY WITH THE
13 MILLION AMERICANS OUT OF
RECESSION THAT WE FACE AND
WORK.
THAT, TO ME, IS WHY THE
CONTRAST.
DIFFERENCE IS SO STARK AND
PRESIDENT McCONNELL -- PARDON
ME, SENATOR McCONNELL SPOKE
WITH THE PRESIDENT AND SAID THAT
HE NEEDED TO SHOW MORE
LEADERSHIP.
I KNOW WHERE THE PRESIDENT IS ON
THIS.
HE WANTS US TO REACH AN
AGREEMENT IN TERMS OF THE -- THE
DECISIONS WHICH WE NEED TO MAKE
BUDGET.
TO MOVE US TOWARD A BALANCED
BUT WE NEED TO DO IN A
THOUGHTFUL WAY.
FIRST, COMING OUT OF THIS
RECESSION MAKING AMERICA'S
WORKFORCE STRONGER FOR THE
FUTURE, HELPING SMALL BUSINESSES
CREATE JOBS AND INVESTING IN
INFRASTRUCTURE WHICH CREATES
GOOD-PAYING JOBS RIGHT HERE IN
AMERICA.
I'M GOING TO ASK NOW,
MR. PRESIDENT, THAT I UNDERSTAND
THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO
EXECUTIVE SESSION.
AND I'VE GOT TO PAUSE AT THAT
TIME AND ASK THAT IF THE CHAIR'S
READY TO REPORT EXECUTIVE
SESSION SO THAT I CAN DISCUSS
TWO JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS?
MORNING
BUSINESS IS CLOSED.
AND UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER THE
EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSIDER
SENATE WILL NOW PROCEED TO
THE FOLLOWING NOMINATIONS WHICH
THE CLERK WILL REPORT.
NOMINATION, ANTHONY
J. BATTAGLIA OF CALIFORNIA TO BE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
SUE E. MYERSCOUGH OF ILLINOIS TO
BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
JAMES E. SHADID OF NEW YORK TO
BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
UNDER THE
PREVIOUS ORDER THERE WILL NOW BE
ONE HOUR FOR DEBATE WITH RESPECT
TO THESE NOMINATIONS WITH THE
TIME EQUALLY DIVIDED IN THE
USUAL FORM.
MR. PRESIDENT, I
RISE IN SUPPORT OF TWO OF THE
NOMINEES.
I RISE IN SUPPORT OF TWO OF THE
NOMINEES, SUE MYERSCOUGH AND
JAMES SHADID TO BE U.S. DISTRICT
JUDGES FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT
OF ILLINOIS.
THESE ARE NOMINEES WHICH I
PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT AND
PASSED THROUGH THE REVIEW NOT
ONLY BY THE WHITE HOUSE BUT
THROUGH THE SENATE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE AND NOW COME BEFORE US
TO BE CONSIDERED BEFORE THE
UNITED STATES SENATE.
THIS DAY HAS COME NOT A MOMENT
TOO SOON FOR CENTRAL DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS WHICH I CALL HOME.
IT INCLUDES 46 COUNTIES.
SINCE LAST AUGUST THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS HAS HANDLED
ONE -- HAD ONLY ONE DISTRICT
COURT JUDGE OUT OF FOUR.
THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE FOUR AND
UNFORTUNATELY THREE SEATS HAVE
BEEN VACANT.
THEY HAVE BEEN JUDICIAL -- THE
ONLY ACTIVE JUDGE, MIKE MIKUSKI
HAS DONE AN AN AMAZING JOB
KEEPING THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM
MONTHS.
RUNNING FOR THE PAST SEVEN
MIKE IN YEARS GONE BY HAD HAD
SOME HEALTH ISSUES AND I ASKED
HIM WHETHER THERE WAS ANYTHING
THEY COULD DO TO LEAVE THE
STRESS HE WAS FACING BEING THE
ONLY JUDGE OUT OF FOUR IN THE
DISTRICT AND HE SAID ONLY THE
SENATE CAN RELIEVE THIS STRESS.
SO TODAY MIKE, WE'RE GOING TO DO
OUR BEST TO RELIEVE THAT STRESS
AND SEND TWO EXCELLENT NEW
DISTRICT COURT JUDGES.
IT HASN'T BEEN EASY.
RIGHT NOW THERE ARE NO ACTIVE
STATUS JUDGES IN THE FEDERAL
COURSES IN STRINGFIELD AND
PEORIA.
JUDGE MIKOSKI IS BASED IN YOUR
BANNA AND -- URBANA.
I SALUTE HIM FOR HIS DEDICATED
SERVICE AND I WANT TO SALUTE
JUDGES MIKE MIM, HAROLD BAKER
AND RICHARD MILLS WHO HELPED OUT
IN THE DISTRICT DESPITE PERSONAL
CHALLENGES, FAMILY AND HEALTH
CHALLENGES, THEY STEPPED IN EVEN
THOUGH THEY ARE ON SENIOR STATUS
IS SERVED.
TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DISTRICT
I'M PLEASED TODAY THAT HELP IS
ON THE WAY TO THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS.
AND I WANT TO THANK MY
COLLEAGUE, SENATOR MARK KIRK,
WHO HAS JOINED ME IN PRESENTING
THESE NOMINEES TO THE SENATE.
FIRST, I WANT TO MENTION IS A
FRIEND OF MINE FOR MANY YEARS,
SUE MYERSCOUGH.
SHE HAS BEEN PROMINENT ON THE
LEGAL LANDSCAPE OF SPRINGFIELD
FOR MANY YEARS.
SHE HAS 23 YEARS OF JUDICIAL
DISTRICT.
SERVES ON THE ILLINOIS FOURTH
DISTRICT APPELLATE COURT.
SHE HAS BEEN NOMINATED TO FILL
THE VACANCY OF JUDGE GENE SCOTT.
JUSTICE MYERSCOUGH IS A
SPRINGFIELD NATIVE.
SHE EARNED HER BACHELOR'S AND
LAW DEGREE FROM SOUTHERN
ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY.
SHE BEGAN HER LEGAL CAREER AS A
LAW CLERK FOR HAROLD BAKER AND
FOLLOWING HER CLERKSHIP SHE
PRACTICE.
WORKED FOR SIX YEARS IN PRIVATE
JUDGE MYERSCOUGH WAS APPOINTED
AS AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE OF THE
SENATE CIRCUIT IN SPRINGFIELD IN
1987, IN 1990 RING LECTD AS
CIRCUIT JUDGE FOR THAT COURT.
DURING HER 11 YEARS AS A TRIAL
JUDGE SHE PRESIDED OVER BENCH AN
JURY TRIALS INCLUDING COMPLEX
*** TRIALS.
IN 1988 SHE WAS ELECTED TO HER
CURRENT SEAT ON THE ILLINOIS
APPELLATE COURT.
DURING HER YEARS ON THE
APPELLATE COURT SHE AUTHORED
OVER 1,200 DECISIONS ON A WIDE
RANGE OF ISSUES.
JUSTICE MYERSCOUGH HAS WORKED TO
PROMOTE LEGAL EDUCATION FOR
SCHOOL CHILDREN AND SINCE 2001
SHE SERVED ON THE BOARD OF
VISITORS FOR THE SOUTHERN
ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL.
SHE IS AN EXCELLENT JUDGE.
SHE'S AN EXCELLENT LAWYER.
SHE HAS A GREAT FAMILY.
AND I'M JUST PROUD THAT THE
PRESIDENT PRESENTED HER NAME IN
THE SENATE -- AND THE SENATE
WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO VOTE ON
HER TODAY.
JIM SHADID CURRENTLY SERVES AS
JUDGE IN THE TENTH JUDICIAL
CIRCUIT IN PEORIA.
HE WILL FILL A JUDGESHIP VACATED
STATUS.
WHEN JUDGE MIMM TOOK SENIOR
HE WAS BORN IN PEORIA AND
RECEIVED HIS UNDERGRADUATE
DEGREE FROM BRADLEY UNIVERSITY.
HE WAS A BASEBALL PLAYER FOR THE
BRADLEY BRAVES AND WAS A
TWO-TIME M.V.P.
AFTER GRADUATION HE PLAYED A
SEASON OF MINOR LEAGUE.
HE WON RETENTION ELECTIONS IN
2002 AND 2008.
HE HAS PRESIDED OVER
APPROXIMATELY 300 TRIALS AND
THOUSANDS OF ADDITIONAL PLEAS
AND SENTENCING.
PRIOR TO HIS SERVICE ON THE
STATE BENCH, JUDGE SHADID WORKED
AS A PART-TIME PEORIA COUNTY
PUBLIC DEFENDER, AND AS
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL IN
ILLINOIS.
IN ADDITION TO HIS BROAD LEGAL
EXPERIENCE, JUDGE SHADID HAS AN
IMPRESSIVE RECORD OF SERVICE TO
THE PEORIA COMMUNITY.
JUDGE SHADID WAS THE FIRST ARAB
AMERICAN TO SERVE AS STATE JUDGE
IN ILLINOIS.
UPON HIS CONFIRMATION, HE WILL
BE THE ONLY ARAB AMERICAN
FEDERAL JUDGE IN THE STATE AND
NATIONWIDE.
ONE OF ONLY A HANDFUL
THERE IS A LARGE ARAB COMMUNITY
IN PEORIA INCLUDING MY FRIEND
LaHOOD.
THE TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY RAY
I KNOW THIS COMMUNITY AND ALL OF
ILLINOIS WILL BE SO PROUD OF
JUDGE SHADID.
JUSTICE MYERSCOUGH AND JUDGE
SHADID WERE UNANIMOUSLY REPORTED
BY THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES WILL AGREE
THE PEOPLE OF ILLINOIS WILL BE
WELL SERVED WITH THESE TWO FINE
INDIVIDUALS ON THE BENCH.
WE'LL STILL HAVE ONE VACANCY
WHEN THESE TWO ARE APPROVED AND
FORTUNATELY PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS
NOMINATED ANOTHER EXCELLENT
CANDIDATE TO FILL THAT VACANCY.
I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH
MY COLLEAGUE SENATOR KIRK TO
CONSIDER HER NOMINATION IN AN
EXPEDITED FASHION.
I ALSO AM WORKING WITH SENATOR
KIRK TO FILL ALL VACANCIES.
SENATOR KIRK IS ALONGING TO FILL
ONE OF THE VACANCIES IN THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS.
LAST YEAR THE SENATE CONFIRMED
THREE EXCELLENT JUDGES, JUDGE
FIREMAN, JUDGE COLEMAN AND JUDGE
CHANG.
JUDGE CHANG WAS RECOMMENDED BY
THE REPUBLICAN SENATE COMMITTEE
THE YEAR BEFORE AND I FOUND HIM
TO BE AN EXCELLENT CANDIDATE.
PARTY ASIDE, HE IS GOING TO
SERVE VERY WELL AND IS NOW
DISTRICT.
SERVING ON THE NORTHERN
SENATOR KIRK AND I WILL CONTINUE
TO WORK TOGETHER TO FIND
EXCELLENT YUDGES.
IN CONCLUSION AS WE PROCEED
TOWARD THIS EVENING'S VOTE I
JUDGE SHADID.
SUPPORT JUDGE MYERSCOUGH AND
I YIELD THE FLOOR AND SUGGEST
THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.
THE CLERK
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
MR. PRESIDENT UNTIL.
THE
SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS.
I ASK CONSENT THAT
THE QUORUM CALL BE SUSPENDED.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
I ASK THAT THE TIME
UNDER THE QUORUM CALL BE EQUALLY
DIVIDED BETWEEN THE REPUBLICAN
AND DEMOCRATIC SIDES.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
SUGGEST THE ABSENCE
OF A QUORUM.
THE CLERK
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
QUORUM CALL:
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA.
MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK
THAT THE QUORUM CALL BE
DISPENSED WITH.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. PRESIDENT, I'M
HONORED TODAY TO SUPPORT THE