Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
THE RIGHT PATH TO ENSURE THAT
EVERYBODY GETS THAT FAIR SHOT
AND THAT ECONOMIC GROWTH THAT WE
ALL SEEK SO MUCH.
WITH THAT, MR. PRESIDENT, I
YIELD THE FLOOR AND NOTE THE
ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.
THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
G OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA.
I ASK THAT THE
QUORUM CALL BE DISPENSED WITH.
OBJECTION.
IF IN MORNING BUSINESS.
OBJECTION.
THANK YOU.
WE HAVE A LOT IN FRONT OF US AS
A NATION, AND MY PERCEPTION IS
THAT OUR COUNTRY IS ANXIOUS, AND
I THINK THEY HAVE GOOD REASON TO
BE ANXIOUS, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE
ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE DEBT
DEBATE.
THEY SHOULD BE ANXIOUS BECAUSE
WE'RE NOT LISTENING.
WE'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO
THE ANXIETY AND FEAR AND WORRY
THAT THE COUNTRY THEY KNOW AND
THE FREEDOMS AND LIBERTIES THAT
THEY HAVE ARE SLIPPING AWAY FROM
THEM.
AND THEY'RE SLIPPING AWAY
BECAUSE WE'RE PUTTING AMERICA IN
A DEBTOR'S PRISON.
WE'RE SLOWLY LOSING OUR ABILITY
TO MAKE FREE CHOICES ABOUT OUR
FUTURE BECAUSE WE FAILED TO BE
RESPONSIBLE IN THE PAST WITH THE
MONEY THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
HAVE GIVEN US.
WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DEBATES AND A
LOT OF STATEMENTS IN THE LAST
COUPLE OF WEEKS, BUT NO ONE EVER
TALKS ABOUT WHAT THE REAL
PROBLEM IS.
THE REAL PROBLEM IS WE'RE
SPENDING MONEY ON THINGS WITH
GOOD INTENTIONS, THAT DON'T
ACCOMPLISH THEIR PURPOSES.
WE'RE SPENDING MONEY THAT WE
DON'T HAVE ON THINGS THAT WE
DON'T ABSOLUTELY NEED.
AND THE PROGRAMS THAT WE DO
HAVE, WE FAIL TO OVERSIGHT TO
SEE THAT THEY'RE RUNNING BOTH
EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY.
CONSEQUENTLY, WE FIND OURSELVES
IN THE MIDST OF AN ECONOMIC
DOWNTURN WITH A $1.5 TRILLION TO
$1.6 TRILLION DEFICIT BORROWING
$4 BILLION A DAY.
THAT MEANS EVERY DAY AND A HALF
WE BORROW MORE MONEY THAN THE
STATE OF OKLAHOMA SPENDS IN A
YEAR.
AND WE HEAR ALL THE POLITICAL
SPEECHES AND ALL THE FINGER
POINTING, BUT WE DON'T HEAR THE
REAL SOLUTIONS TO OUR PROBLEM.
AND LET ME EXPLAIN WHAT I MEAN
ABOUT THAT.
EVERYBODY AGREES WE'RE GOING TO
HAVE TO MAKE SOME CUTS, BUT NOT
EVERYBODY'S HONEST ABOUT THE
NUMBERS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE
EVERYBODY AGREES THAT WE'RE
GOING TO HAVE TO TIGHTEN OUR
BELT, BUT NOBODY WANTS TO OFFER
SPECIFICALLY WHERE WE TIGHTEN
OUR BELT.
AND WHAT I WANTED TO DO TODAY IS
TO OFFER SPECIFIC PLACES WHERE
THE GOVERNMENT TODAY, RIGHT
TODAY, IN THIS BODY AND THE ONE
ACROSS THE CAPITOL, COULD MAKE A
BIG DIFFERENCE IN THE OUTCOME OF
OUR FUTURE BY CUTTING SPECIFIC
WEEK.
THAT'S ONE RARE THING YOU NEVER
HEAR IN WASHINGTON.
EVERYBODY SAYS YOU NEED TO CUT.
WHEN IT GETS DOWN TO TALK ABOUT
WHAT YOU CUT, NOBODY WANTS TO
COME UP WITH ANY COGENT IDEAS
BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO TAKE
THE POLITICAL HEAT, BECAUSE
EVERYBODY PROGRAM, NO MATTER HOW
WELL-INTENDED AND HOW
INEFFICIENT, HAS THOSE PEOPLE
WHO ARE GOING TO FIGHT FOR THAT
PROGRAM BECAUSE THERE'S MONEY
COMING INTO THE COFFERS FOR
SOMEBODY.
THE OTHER POINT THAT I WOULD
MAKE IS THE REASON WE'RE ANXIOUS
AND THE REASON WE'RE WORRIED IS
THAT WE'VE ABANDONED THE VERY
PRINCIPLES THAT OUR FOUNDERS
GAVE US THAT WOULD KEEP US
HEALTHY.
AND THAT WAS THE CONSTITUTION
AND ITS ENUMERATED POWERS
SECTION, WHICH SPELLS OUT VERY
SUCCINCTLY WHAT WAS OUR
RESPONSIBILITY AND WHAT WAS THE
STATES' RESPONSIBILITY.
AND
SO WE HAVE WHOLE DEPARTMENTS.
ONE, FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD BE THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
THAT THOMAS JEFFERSON SAID IF
YOU EVER HAD THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT DOING ANYTHING ON
EDUCATION, YOU WOULD HAVE TO
CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION.
THAT'S A DIRECT QUOTE OF HIS.
NOW, HE -- HE WAS ONE OF OUR
FOUNDERS, AND HE AS WELL AS
MADISON AND MONROE AND OTHERS
WROTE EXTENSIVELY ABOUT WHAT
THEIR INTENTIONS WERE IN THE
FEDERALIST PAPERS, AND YET WE
HAVE ALLOWED OURSELVES TO BE
WALKED LIKE IN A DREAM STATE
INTO THE CONTENTION THAT THE
CONSTITUTION DOESN'T MAKE ANY
DIFFERENCE AND THAT IT WOULD, IN
FACT, IF WE PAID ATTENTION TO IT
LIMIT OUR OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE
MISTAKES THAT WE HAVE MADE.
THE MISTAKES WE HAVE MADE,
ALTHOUGH WELL INTENTIONED, IS
THAT WE CAN BE THE ANSWER FOR
EVERY PROBLEM IN AMERICA.
WE CAN'T.
WHAT MADE OUR COUNTRY GREAT WAS
SELF-RELIANCE, INDIVIDUAL
FREEDOM AND INITIATIVE, PERSONAL
RESPONSIBILITY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY.
THAT'S WHAT BUILT OUR COUNTRY,
IN A SYSTEM THAT SAID IF, IN
FACT, YOU WORK HARD, THE
OPPORTUNITY IS THERE FOR YOU TO
LOVE.
AND NOW WE HAVE A GOVERNMENT
THAT AT EVERY PLACE, EVERY
DECISION THAT IS FOR ECONOMIC
BENEFIT FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS
THAT WOULD GRAB THAT DREAM, THEY
ARE CONFRONTED WITH THE LAYERS
UPON LAYERS OF BUREAUCRACY AND
RULES AND REGULATIONS TO THE
POINT WHERE NO LONGER ARE YOU
PRESUMED INNOCENT BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, YOU'RE PRESUMED
GUILTY AND YOU HAVE TO PROVE
YOURSELF INNOCENT TO THE
BUREAUCRACY TO BE ABLE TO
ACCOMPLISH THAT WHICH WOULD SET
YOU FREE, THAT WHICH WOULD PUT
YOU AHEAD, THAT WHICH WOULD
ESTABLISH YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO
GAIN THE WEALTH THAT THIS
COUNTRY PROMISED.
I HAVE PUT FORWARD A WEEK AGO
LAST MONDAY $9 TRILLION IN
POTENTIAL CUTS.
NOW, I KNOW PEOPLE AREN'T ALL
GOING TO AGREE WITH ME, BUT
EVERY ONE OF THESE CUTS IS
BACKED UP WITH A GOVERNMENT
STUDY THAT SAYS WHAT WE'RE DOING
IN THESE PROGRAMS AREN'T
EFFECTIVE, WHETHER IT'S THE
CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE,
THE INSPECTOR GENERALS, THE
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
OR O.M.B. OR THE CONGRESSIONAL
THERE IS OVER 3,000 FOOTNOTES TO
THE 600 PAGES THAT ARE IN HERE
THAT EXPLAINS VERY WELL WHY WE
SHOULDN'T BE DOING THIS
THIS $9 TRILLION WORTH OF STUFF.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU COULD
HAVE A GREAT DEBATE ON WHETHER
OR NOT ONE, IT'S OUR
CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY.
SOME OF IT CERTAINLY IS WHEN IT
COMES TO DEFENSE.
AND NUMBER TWO, YOU COULD HAVE A
GREAT DEBATE ON WHAT YOU THINK
ARE PRIORITIES, THOSE THAT FIT
WITHIN THE CONSTITUTION THAT ARE
OUR RESPONSIBILITY, BUT YOU
CAN'T DEBATE THE FACTS OF THE
OUTRIGHT WASTE, THE OUTRIGHT
FRAUD, THE OUTRIGHT ABUSE AND
THE OUTRIGHT DUPLICATION OF
MULTIPLE SETS OF PROGRAMS.
AND SO ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS --
AND THIS IS A FAR FROM COMPLETE
LIST, BUT HERE OVER THE NEXT TEN
YEARS, WE COULD SAVE
SAVE $150 BILLION
TO $200 BILLION, JUST BY
PROGRAMS.
WE HAVE OVER 100 PROGRAMS ON
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION.
THAT'S 100 SETS OF
BUREAUCRACIES, 100 OFFICES, 100
SETS OF REGULATIONS, 100 SETS OF
RULES, AND THE QUESTION IS IF WE
HAVE RESPONSIBILITY ON SURFACE
TRANSPORTATION, WHY IN THE WORLD
PROGRAMS?
WE HAVE 82 TEACHER IMPROVEMENT
AND TRAINING PROGRAMS RUN BY THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
NOBODY WILL COME DOWN HERE AND
ANSWER ME WHY.
IT.
YET NOBODY WILL COME DOWN HERE
AND JOIN ME TO ELIMINATE IT.
WE HAVE TO BE ASKING THE
QUESTION DO WE HAVE GOOD REASON
TO BE ANXIOUS WHEN WE WON'T DO
THE OBVIOUS?
WE HAVE 88 -- WE HAVE OVER 180
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
BUT WE HAVE 88 ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS THAT WE
SPEND $6.8 BILLION ON A YEAR,
RUN BY FOUR DIFFERENT SEPARATE
AGENCIES, AND NOT ONE OF THEM
HAS A STUDY THAT SHOWS THEY ARE
EFFECTIVE IN DEVELOPING ECONOMIC
ACTIVITY, NOT ONE OF THEM.
SO WHY WOULD WE CONTINUE TO SEND
MONEY INTO PROGRAMS WITH GOOD
INTENTIONS THAT AREN'T WORKING?
AND YET, WE HAVE OVER 100 OF
THEM, 180 OF THEM, 88 WITHIN
FOUR DEPARTMENTS.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIND ALL
THE REST OF THEM, BUT WE KNOW
THEY EXIST.
IT'S 88 SETS OF BUREAUCRATS.
WELL-INTENTIONED FEDERAL
THIS CONGRESS AND CONGRESSES
BEFORE US HAVE TOLD THEM TO DO
BUT NOT ACCOMPLISHING THE
PURPOSE FOR WHICH THAT MONEY,
ALMOST $7 BILLION A YEAR, IS
SENT.
WE HAVE 80 OTHER PROGRAMS FOR
TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE.
YOU SEE THE LITTLE COMMUNITY
VEHICLES, THE ONES TO HELP THOSE
THAT HAVE A DISABILITY.
WHY DO WE HAVE 80?
NOBODY CAN ANSWER THAT.
IT'S EASY TO FIGURE OUT HOW THAT
THEY ARE WELL INTENTIONED.
WE OUGHT TO HELP PEOPLE THAT
CAN'T GET AROUND.
THE QUESTION THAT OUGHT TO BE
ASKED IS THAT A STATE
RESPONSIBILITY?
RESPONSIBILITY, THAT'S
DEBATABLE, BUT IF IT IS, WHY
WOULD WE HAVE 80?
WE HAVE 56 DIFFERENT PROGRAMS
RUN BY SEVEN DIFFERENT AGENCIES
TO TEACH AMERICANS FINANCIAL
YOU HAVE GOT TO ASK YOURSELF THE
QUESTION HOW CAN A GOVERNMENT
THAT'S RUN ON A $1.6 TRILLION
DEFICIT, HAS $14 TRILLION IN
DEBT, OUR DEBT TO G.D.P. RATIO
IS AT 100%, HOW DO WE HAVE ANY
AUTHORITY TO TEACH ANYBODY ABOUT
FINANCIAL LITERACY?
THAT'S NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO IS WHERE IS THAT IN
THE CONSTITUTION THAT WE'RE
RESPONSIBLE FOR TEACHING PEOPLE
FINANCIAL LITERACY?
THAT'S BOTH A STATE FUNCTION, A
FUNCTION.
AND YET, WE HAVE 46 PROGRAMS.
NOT ONE OF THEM HAS THE METRIC
TO MEASURE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S
NOT ONE OF THEM.
JOB TRAINING, WE SPEND
SPEND $18.8 BILLION ON JOB
TRAINING.
THIS LAST YEAR, WE HAVE 47
THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING OFFICE
SAYS OF THOSE 47 PROGRAMS, ALL
OF THEM OVERLAP EXCEPT THREE.
SO BASED ON THE STUDY OF THE
PEOPLE WE PAY TO STUDY THIS, THE
MOST WE SHOULD HAVE IS FOUR JOB
TRAINING PROGRAMS.
AND WE'RE GOING TO SPEND
SPEND $18 BILLION,
ALMOST $19 BILLION ON THAT, AND
HERE'S WHAT WE KNOW.
THE RESULTS CAN'T JUSTIFY THAT
WE'RE SPENDING THE MONEY BECAUSE
THE RESULTS DON'T SHOW
PERFORMANCE, AND YET WE'RE
SPENDING $18 BILLION.
WE HAVE 20 DIFFERENT PROGRAMS
PREVENTION.
THAT'S A GREAT ROLE.
WE ALL WANT TO HELP THE
WE WANT TO DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO
GET THEM IN A STABLE SITUATION,
TO ASSIST THEM, BUT 20 DIFFERENT
PROGRAMS?
WHY WOULD WE DO THAT?
WHY WOULDN'T WE HAVE ONE?
AND WHY WOULDN'T ONLY THE ONE
PROGRAM BE ADMINISTERED THROUGH
A STATE IF, IN FACT, IT'S OUR
ROLE?
I HAPPEN TO THINK THAT'S THE
STATE OF OKLAHOMA'S ROLE, TO
TAKE CARE OF THE HOMELESS PEOPLE
IN OKLAHOMA, NOT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT'S, BUT IF IT IS THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S ROLE, WHY
WOULD WE HAVE 20 PROGRAMS?
FOOD FOR THE HUNGRY.
18 SEPARATE PROGRAMS, FIVE
DIFFERENT AGENCIES.
FIVE DIFFERENT AGENCIES.
AGAIN, I'M ALL FOR HELPING THOSE
PEOPLE WHO NEED TO HAVE FOOD.
WHY WOULD WE HAVE 18 SETS OF
BUREAUCRACIES, 18 DIFFERENT SETS
OF RULES, 18 DIFFERENT SETS?
AND TWO OF THESE ACTUALLY WORK.
16 DON'T.
BUT WE HAVEN'T ELIMINATED THEM.
WE'RE STILL SENDING THE MONEY
OUT THE DOOR.
DISASTER RESPONSE AND
PREPAREDNESS.
INSIDE FEMA, JUST FOR DISASTER
RESPONSE AND PREPAREDNESS, THERE
IS 17 PROGRAMS JUST INSIDE FEMA.
THAT DOESN'T COUNT ALL THE
DISASTER RESPONSE AND
PREPAREDNESS PROGRAMS IN ALL THE
OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES.
THAT'S JUST INSIDE FEMA.
YOU'VE GOT TO ASK THE QUESTION
WHAT ARE WE DOING?
ONE, WHAT HAVE WE DONE IN THE
PAST AND WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO
ABOUT THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE IN
FRONT OF US TODAY?
SO I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE'RE
OFF BASE AND YOU HAVE GOT A GOOD
REASON TO BE ANXIOUS ABOUT US
PROBLEMS.
WHEN WE BRING AMENDMENTS TO THE
FLOOR, THEY GET ROUTINELY
WHY IS THAT?
IS IT THAT WE'RE BEING DISHONEST
ABOUT THE FACTS?
OR IS IT WE'RE PROTECTING THE
POLITICIANS SO THAT THEY ARE NOT
ATTACKED BY THE VERY PEOPLE THAT
ARE BENEFITING INDIRECTLY -- NOT
DIRECTLY BUT INDIRECTLY FROM
THESE PROGRAMS, THE
BUREAUCRACIES AND THE OTHER
QUASIGOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES THAT
FEED OFF THESE PROGRAMS.
SO WHERE DO YOU GO TO START
FIXING THIS $1.6 TRILLION
I HAD SOME WONDERFUL EMPLOYEES
OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION COME TO ME ABOUT
A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, AND THEY
SAID -- AND THEY WANTED TO
REMAIN ANONYMOUS, AND I
UNDERSTAND WHY.
THEY SAID OUR DISABILITY
PROGRAM'S BROKEN.
WE'RE GIVING DISABILITY CHECKS
TO THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE EVERY
YEAR THAT ARE NOT DISABLED.
SO WE STARTED LOOKING AT IT IN
THE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON
INVESTIGATIONS, AND HERE'S WHAT
WE FOUND.
IF YOU TAKE VETERANS TOTALLY OUT
OF THE MIX, THIS DOESN'T APPLY
TO VETERANS, ONE IN 18 PEOPLE IN
THIS COUNTRY TODAY ARE
COLLECTING A DISABILITY CHECK.
AS A PHYSICIAN, I HAVE DONE ALL
SORTS OF DISABILITY
EXAMINATIONS, AND WHAT WE'RE
FINDING IS ABOUT 40% OF THE
PEOPLE WHO ARE ON DISABILITY
AREN'T DISABLED BECAUSE THE LAW
SAYS THIS: TO BE DISABLED IN
THIS COUNTRY AND TO RECEIVE A
CHECK FROM THE REST OF US FOR
THAT DISABILITY, THERE CAN BE NO
JOB IN THE ECONOMY THAT YOU CAN
DO, AND YET WE HAVE JUDGES THAT
NEVER DENY ANYBODY WHEN THEY
COME THROUGH THE DISABILITY
PROGRAM, WE HAVE PEOPLE ON
DISABILITY THAT ARE WORKING FULL
TIME AT OTHER JOBS, AND ONCE
YOU'RE ELIGIBLE FOR DISABILITY,
TWO YEARS AFTER THAT YOU'RE
ELIGIBLE FOR HEALTH CARE.
SO NOW WE HAVE UNDERMINED THE
SYSTEM THAT WAS DESIGNED TO HELP
THE TRULY DISABLED BY HAVING
THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS UPON
THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE COLLECTING
DISABILITY CHECKS THAT MEANS
THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE A CHECK
FOR SOMEBODY ELSE.
THE DISABILITY TRUST FUND WHICH
WE PAY INTO WHEN WE WORK, AS
WELL AS S.S.I., WHICH IS A
SEPARATE FUND THAT COMES JUST
FROM YOUR TAX DOLLARS, THEY ARE
BELLY UP.
NEXT YEAR, SOCIAL SECURITY AND
DISABILITY TRUST FUND RUNS OUT
OF MONEY, AND THE REASON IT'S
RUNNING OUT OF MONEY IS THE
SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM DOESN'T
GO TO SAY IF YOU WERE DISABLED,
NOW YOU'RE NOT, WHY ARE YOU
WORK?
THEY DON'T DO THEIR JOB BECAUSE
THE LEADERSHIP IN SOCIAL
SECURITY DOESN'T DEMAND THE JOB
IS BEING DONE.
AND SO WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT WAYS
OF IMPROVING THAT TO MAKE SURE
WE'RE HELPING THOSE PEOPLE WHO
ARE TRULY DISABLED, BUT YOU
CAN'T GET ANYBODY TO HELP YOU
GET THAT LAW PASSED.
AND TO SAY YOU WANT TO CLEAN UP
SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY, IT
DOESN'T MEAN YOU DON'T CARE
DISABLED.
IT MEANS YOU CARE ABOUT THOSE
THAT ARE GOING TO BE DISABLED IN
THE FUTURE SO THAT WE'LL HAVE A
DOLLAR TO HELP THEM WHEN THAT
NEED ARISES FOR THEM.
AND SO IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE
AREAS THAT HADN'T BEEN LOOKED AT
IN 25 YEARS.
THE SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM, ONCE
YOU'RE ON, YOU'RE ON.
THEY RARELY TAKE ANYBODY OFF.
AND THE FRAUD ASSOCIATED WITH
COLLECTING A DISABILITY CHECK
AND WORKING FOR CASH IN OUR
ECONOMY AND WORKING NOT FOR
JOBS.
WE HAD THREE INSTANCES WHERE WE
HAD THE GOVERNMENT
ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE FILLED
PEOPLE, TWO ACTUALLY HAD
SALARIES WITH THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT AND WERE COLLECTING
CHECKS FROM FEDERAL DISABILITY
AT THE SAME TIME THEY WERE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AS A FEDERAL
EMPLOYEE.
AND IT'S NOT SMALL, IT'S BIG.
AND SO THERE IS $60 BILLION A
YEAR THAT -- I MEAN OVER TEN
YEARS THAT WE COULD SAVE JUST BY
AND DISABILITY SYSTEM.
AND THAT DOESN'T SAY YOU DON'T
WANT TO HELP PEOPLE THAT ARE
IT SAYS YOU WANT TO DO WHAT'S
THE BEST THING FOR OUR COUNTRY
AND HELP THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE
DISABLED.
BUT WE HAVE UNDERMINED AND WE
HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THOSE
WHO NEED OUR LOVE AND CARE AND
THEY CHEAT THE SYSTEM AND WE
HAVE A BUREAUCRACY THAT DOESN'T
TAKE THEM OFF THE SYSTEM, AND WE
HAVE AN INCOMPETENT SYSTEM OF
JURISPRUDENCE WITHIN THE SOCIAL
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION THAT
PUTS PEOPLE ON THAT SHOULD NEVER
BE ON.
BUT THE ATTACK COMES THAT YOU
DON'T CARE ABOUT PEOPLE IF
YOU -- IF, IN FACT, YOU WANT TO
FIX THIS PROGRAM.
SOCIAL SECURITY, EVERYBODY SAYS
DON'T TOUCH SOCIAL SECURITY.
THIS CONGRESS AND THE CONGRESS
BEFORE IT HAS STOLEN
STOLEN $2.5 TRILLION FROM THE
SECURITY.
THEY HAVE WRITTEN A LITTLE BITTY
I.O.U. NOTE THERE AND SAID,
WELL, WHEN YOU NEED THE MONEY,
WE'LL PAY IT BACK.
WELL, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
THAT MEANS THE FULL FAITH AND
CREDIT OF THIS COUNTRY HAS TO BE
GOOD ENOUGH THAT WHEN WE GET
READY TO PAY THE $2.5 TRILLION
BACK, THAT WE CAN BORROW THE
MONEY AT AN ACCEPTABLE INTEREST
RATE TO BE ABLE TO PAY IT BACK.
SO WHAT DOES THE SOCIAL SECURITY
TRUST FUND ADMINISTRATION SAY WE
NEED TO DO?
YOU HAVE TO MAKE IT SUSTAINABLE.
AND, OH, BY THE WAY, WOULDN'T
IT BE NICE THAT IF THE POOREST
PEOPLE ON SOCIAL SECURITY COULD
GET A LITTLE BUMP SO YOU COULD
HELP THOSE THAT ARE TRULY
DEPENDENT ON IT AND MAKE IT
SUSTAINABLE SO THAT WE NEVER
HAVE TO DISCUSS SOCIAL SECURITY
AGAIN, EVEN WITH THE BABY
BOOMERS, YOU OUGHT TO DO THAT.
AND SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS
DESIGN, BASED ON SOCIAL
SECURITY, ON A SOLVENT PATH
OVER 75 YEARS AND LIKELY TO
ACHIEVE -- WE DIDN'T RAISE
ANYBODY'S TAXES, WE HELPED
THOSE MOST IN NEED THE MOST AND
THOSE THAT WERE MOST WELL OFF WE
SAID YOU CAN'T HAVE QUITE AS
IT.
WE SAID IF YOU'RE VERY, VERY
WEALTHY YOU'RE EVENTUALLY GET
YOUR MONEY OUT BUT NOT LIKE
THE PEOPLE THAT NEED AT THIS
TIME MOST ARE GOING TO HELP THE
MOST.
IT ALTERS THE RETIREMENT AGE
JUST TO GO ALONG WITH THE LIFE
IT DOESN'T ALTER IT A LOT.
IT ALTERS IT TWO YEARS OVER 60
YEARS BUT THE FACT IS, IS OUR
LIFE EXPECTANCY IS FAR ADVANCED
STARTED SOCIAL SECURITY.
WHEN WE FIRST STARTED WE HAD
ALMOST 50 PEOPLE WORKING FOR
SECURITY.
NOW WE HAVE LESS THAN FIVE.
AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE LONG
WE'LL HAVE LESS THAN THREE.
IT'S NOT SUSTAINABLE UNLESS WE
SO THE POINT IS, I UNDERSTAND
SOCIAL SECURITY'S IMPORTANT TO
PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY.
BUT IF WE DON'T CHANGE IT IN
2035 YOU'RE GOING TO GET 2/3 OF
THE BENEFIT THAT YOU PUT IN.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANY MORE
THAN THAT.
SO DO WE FIX IT NOW AND MAKE IT
SUSTAINABLE FOREVER, OR DO WE
JUST WAIT UNTIL IT GOES BELLY
UP, KNOWING WE CAN'T BORROW THE
$2.5 TRILLION WE HAVE STOLEN
FROM IT AND LET IT GO BELLY UP?
THE TYPICAL POLITICIAN SAYS I
DON'T WANT TO DO THAT BECAUSE I
DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE HEAT FROM
THE PEOPLE ON SOCIAL SECURITY OR
COMING ON SOCIAL SECURITY.
I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS.
IT'S THE RIGHT THING FOR US TO
WE GOT TO FIX IT AND WE CAN FIX
IT IF IN FACT WE'RE GOING TO
SAVE OUR COUNTRY.
THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE
HAVE TO DO TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
PEOPLE WHO BUY OUR BONDS, LOAN
US THE MONEY, THEY HAVE TO
RECOGNIZE THAT WE'VE GOT A
SALVAGEABLE SITUATION.
IGNORING SOCIAL SECURITY, IT'S
OUR SECOND BIGGEST THING NOW
OTHER THAN HEALTH CARE.
IT'S OUR SECOND BIGGEST THING.
AND TO IGNORE IT AND NOT FIX IT
SAYS WE WON'T BE ABLE TO BORROW
THE MONEY FOR IT OR ANYTHING
ELSE.
LET ME SPEND A MINUTE JUST KIND
OF GOING THROUGH A COUPLE OF
THINGS THAT WE CAN DO NEXT WEEK
THAT WOULD SAVE A LOT OF MONEY.
NOT HARD.
REALLY NOT CONTROVERSIAL.
AND THE QUESTION AMERICA OUGHT
TO ASK IS WHY -- WHY HAVEN'T WE
LET ME GIVE YOU SOME EXAMPLES.
WE OUGHT TO QUIT PAYING
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION TO
MILLIONAIRES.
DO YOU REALIZE THAT LAST YEAR WE
PAID $20 MILLION OUT IN
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION TO
PEOPLE WHO WERE MAKING A MILLION
DOLLARS THAT YEAR?
IS THAT NUTS OR WHAT?
UNEMPLOYMENT IS TO HELP THOSE
UNEMPLOYED.
IT'S NOT TO GIVE MONEY TO PEOPLE
WHO DON'T NEED IT BECAUSE
THEY'RE UNEMPLOYED AND YET WE
SPEND ALMOST $20 MILLION LAST
YEAR PAYING PEOPLE WHO MADE A
MILLION DOLLARS LAST YEAR
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION.
WE COULD SAVE A BILLION DOLLARS
OVER 10 YEARS BY QUIT MAKING
PAYMENTS TO DEAD PEOPLE.
YOU SAY YOU DON'T MAKE PAYMENTS
TO DEAD PEOPLE.
YES, WE DO.
$100 MILLION A YEAR.
THE BUREAUCRACIES PAY TO PEOPLE
WHO ARE DEAD.
AND A GOOD PORTION OF IT WE
NEVER GET BACK.
IT'S GONE.
WE DON'T FOLLOW IT UP.
WE KNOW WE COULD SAVE $5 BILLION
A YEAR MINIMUM, MINIMUM, IF WE
JUST ELIMINATED SOME OF THE
OVERLAPPING PROGRAMS THAT I
TALKED ABOUT.
THAT'S A VERY CONSERVATIVE
ESTIMATE.
IT'S PROBABLY MORE LIKE
$25 BILLION A YEAR.
BUT LET'S SAY IT'S 1/5 OF THAT.
$5 BILLION A YEAR, THAT'S
$50 BILLION THAT WOULD KEEP US
FROM BORROWING MONEY FOR 14
DAYS.
JUST BY ELIMINATING DUPLICATION
IN GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS.
WE COULD ELIMINATE $2 BILLION
OVER 10 YEARS BY ELIMINATING
SWEETHEART CONTRACTS AND BONUSES
TO CONTRACTORS WHO WORK FOR THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHO DON'T
EARN THEIR BONUSES.
YEAH, WE DO THAT.
WE PAY BONUSES TO PEOPLE WHO
BOTH DON'T PERFORM AND DON'T
PERFORM ON TIME.
YOU WOULDN'T DO IT.
IF SOMEBODY CAME IN TO DO
SOMETHING FOR YOU ON A FIXED
PRICE WITH A BONUS BASED ON
QUALITY AND TIME, AND THEY
DIDN'T MEET IT, YOU WOULDN'T
PAY THEM THE BONUS BUT YOUR
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES ANYWAY.
WE COULD SAVE A BILLION DOLLARS
OVER 10 YEARS BY COLLECTING
UNPAID TAXES OWED TO US BY OUR
OWN FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.
TAXES THAT ARE OWED, THEY'VE
BEEN ADJUDICATED, THERE'S
NOTHING ELSE GOING ON, IT'S
FINAL, IT'S SET, BUT WE DON'T
TAKE THE MONEY OUT OF THEIR PAY.
YEAR.
THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT THEY
OWE.
WE COULD SAVE $3.82 BILLION BY
REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF MONEY
CONGRESS SPENDS ON ITSELF BY
JUST 15%.
WOULD IT BE TOO MUCH TO ASK OF
THE CONGRESS TO TIGHTEN ITS BELT
BY 15% AND SAVE ONE DAY'S
BORROWING?
NO.
I TURNED BACK ON AVERAGE ABOUT
$500,000 TO $600,000 A YEAR.
I KNOW HOW TO RUN AN OFFICE
EFFICIENTLY AND PAY PEOPLE
EFFECTIVELY.
BUT THE FACT IS THAT WE HAVE TOO
BIG A BUDGET.
AND WE NEED TO TRIM IT AND WE
NEED TO LEAD BY EXAMPLE.
WE CAN SAVE $480 MILLION A YEAR
BY HAVING THE HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
PAY THE RIGHT PRICES FOR DRUGS
IN THEIR PROGRAMS VERSUS PAYING
TOO HIGH OF PRICES, PRICES
HIGHER THAN WHAT THEY CONTRACTED
FOR.
YOU KNOW, HALF A BILLION
DOLLARS DOESN'T SOUND LIKE
MUCH, BUT HALF A BILLION
DOLLARS OVER 10 YEARS, THAT'S A
HALF A BILLION.
THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S 1/30,
1/300 OF WHAT OUR PROBLEM IS
RIGHT NOW IN TERMS OF THE
WE COULD SAVE $5 BILLION BY
ELIMINATING UNNECESSARY
GOVERNMENT PRINTING.
WE COULD DO THAT TOMORROW.
$5 BILLION.
WE CAN GET $15 BILLION BACK BY
GETTING RID OF UNNECESSARY
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS THAT WE'RE
NOT USING THAT ARE COSTING US
$8 BILLION A YEAR TO MAINTAIN,
AND ELIMINATE THEM.
WE HAVE -- I CAN'T REMEMBER THE
EXACT NUMBER.
I THINK WE HAVE 63,000
FACILITIES RIGHT NOW, THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OWNS, 63,000
THAT ARE UNDERUTILIZED OR NOT
UTILIZED AT ALL.
THAT'S 12,000 MORE THAN WE HAD
TWO YEARS AGO AND WE'RE SIGNING
NEW LEASES ALL THE TIME AND
ABANDONING BUILDINGS THAT THE
GOVERNMENT OWNS.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD
DISPOSE OF EXCESS PROPERTIES
WITHIN FIVE YEARS.
ACCORDING TO PRESIDENT OBAMA'S
OWN ADMINISTRATION WE COULD SAVE
AT A MINIMUM $15 BILLION.
EVERY TIME WE'VE TRIED TO DO
THIS, SOMEBODY STOPS IT IN THE
SENATE.
WE COULD END SUBSIDIES FOR
ETHANOL BLENDING.
WE VOTED ON IT, HAD 74 SENATORS
VOTED ON IT BUT IT DIDN'T
HAPPEN.
$2 BILLION THAT WE COULD SAVE IF
WE PASSED IT TOMORROW.
WE COULD DECREASE THE NUMBER OF
LIMOUSINES OWNED BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, SAVE $115 MILLION.
WE COULD REDUCE THE FEDERAL
VEHICLE FLEET $5.6 BILLION.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT -- YOU
WON'T BELIEVE THIS NUMBER --
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OWNS
662,000 CARS.
662,000.
THE AVERAGE MILEAGE ON THEM IS
LESS THAN 20,000 MILES.
THE FLEET HAS GROWN BY 25% --
5% AND THE COST OF MAINTAINING
AND SEVICING THE FLEET HAS GROWN
BY OVER 25% IN THE LAST TWO
YEARS.
$4.6 BILLION A YEAR JUST
MAINTAINING THESE 600,000-PLUS
CARS.
THE AMOUNT OF VEHICLES IN OUR
FLEET COULD EASILY BE DECREASED
BY 20%.
WE HAVE ALL THE CAPABILITY OF
HAVING GO TO MEETING, OF HAVING
INTERNET, OF HAVING LIVE
CHATS, OF HAVING
TELECOMMUNICATIONS WITH VISUAL
CONFERENCING, HAVE ALL THOSE
THINGS AVAILABLE.
WE DON'T NEED THE CARS WE'VE GOT
AND EVEN THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION AGREES WE COULD
DO THAT.
WE COULD SAVE $43 BILLION BY
DECREASING TRAVEL BY GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES.
SAME REASONS.
WE SPEND $15 BILLION A YEAR ON
TRAVEL.
$15 BILLION.
ANYTHING THAT ISN'T MISSION
CRITICAL AND THAT COULD BE DONE
THROUGH TELECONFERENCING OUGHT
TO BE DONE.
WE ADVERTISE -- THE ADVERTISING
BUDGET FOR THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, $5.6 BILLION A
YEAR.
THEY DON'T PAY FOR ADS --
PUBLIC SERVICE ADS.
THIS IS ADS OUTSIDE OF PUBLIC
SERVICE ADS.
$5.6 BILLION.
WE SPEND A BILLION DOLLARS A
YEAR HOSTING GOVERNMENT
CONFERENCES.
WE COULD SAVE $4.1 BILLION --
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NOW OWNS
685 MILLION ACRES IN THE UNITED
STATES.
THE COST TO MAINTAIN THAT,
WE'RE NOT FUNDING, SO THE LAND
IS FALLING IN WORSE DISREPAIR,
AND WE'RE ADDING LAND EVERY
YEAR.
THERE'S LOTS OF LAND THAT WE
COULD GIVE UP THAT ISN'T
PRECIOUS RESOURCE, ISN'T
HERITAGE AREAS, ISN'T FOREST,
ISN'T PARKS, YET WE OWN IT.
WE COULD SAVE A LOT OF MONEY BY
NOT HAVING SO MUCH LAND AND PUT
IT BACK ON THE TAX ROLLS.
WE COULD SAVE $4.1 BILLION JUST
ON THE LAST TWO YEARS' AVERAGE
IN TERMS OF SLOWING DOWN AND NOT
BUYING ADDITIONAL LAND UNLESS
THERE IS A DIRECT NECESSITY FOR
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO HAVE
IT.
WE COULD SAVE $19 BILLION OVER
10 YEARS BY COMBINING THE P.X.'S
AND EXCHANGES ON OUR MILITARY
BASES.
$19 BILLION JUST BY PUTTING THEM
TOGETHER.
THAT'S WHAT WE COULD SAVE.
THE
SENATOR HAS USED 30 MINUTES.
I WOULD ASK FOR
THREE ADDITIONAL MINUTES.
OBJECTION?
A SENATOR: RESERVING THE RIGHT
TO OBJECT.
I WILL NOT OBJECT BUT I WOULD
LIKE TO ADD THREE MINUTES TO MY
TIME AS WELL.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
LET ME JUST END WITH
THIS.
IT COSTS US TO EDUCATE A STUDENT
ON OUR MILITARY BASES ANNUAL
AVERAGE OF $51,000 A STUDENT.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE LOCATIONS FOR
ALL THOSE -- WHERE ALL THOSE
ARE LOCATED THE COST OUTSIDE OF
THAT IS 1/4 OF THAT.
WE COULD EASILY DO THAT AND PAY
THE COMMUNITIES, BUT WE WON'T.
I'LL END WITH THIS -- WE CAN
SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS.
THERE'S $9 TRILLION WORTH OF
SPECIFIC SAVINGS IN THIS.
THEN.
HALF OF THEN.
IF YOU AGREED WITH A THIRD OF
THEM, WE'D BE WELL ON OUR WAY
AND THE FACT IS NOBODY WANTS TO
BE SPECIFIC, WE NEED TO BE
SPECIFIC.
EVERYBODY WANTS TO TALK IN
GENERALITIES, NOBODY WANTS TO
MAKE THE HARD CHOICES.
HARD CHOICES IS WHAT WE'RE HERE
FOR.
OUR TIME HAS COME TO STOP LIVING
THE NEXT 30 YEARS ON THE BACKS
OF OUR KIDS.
IT WOULD BE MY HOPE THAT AS WE
GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS THE NEXT
TWO WEEKS THAT WE WILL SEE A
RENEWAL IN THE SPIRIT OF OUR
COUNTRY THAT SAYS WE ARE GOING
TO LIVE WITHIN OUR MEANS, WE'RE
GOING TO REWARD SELF-RELIANCE,
REWARD INDIVIDUAL
ACCOUNTABILITY, WE'RE GOING TO
REWARD PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY
AND WE'RE GOING TO PUT THE ROLE
OF THE GOVERNMENT BACK TO WHAT
IT SHOULD BE, BOTH AT THE
FEDERAL AND STATE LEVEL, AND
HAVE A COMMENSURATE POLICIES
THAT WILL REFLECT THAT THAT WILL
RENEW OUR COUNTRY, THAT WILL
CREATE JOBS, THAT WILL CREATE
OPPORTUNITY FOR THE FUTURE OF
OUR COUNTRY.
WITH THAT I YIELD THE FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT.
THE
SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA.
I WANT TO SAY TO THE
SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA THAT
STANDING UP AND OFFER THE LIST
THAT OFFER OPPORTUNITIES FOR
ON MY LIST WE KNOW WELL OVER A
TRILLION DOLLARS THAT OWE MONEY
TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
AND HAVEN'T PAID IT.
IF WE EVEN GOT A PORTION OF THAT
OVER THE TEN-YEAR PERIOD,
THAT'S OVER A TEN-YEAR
PERIOD,ABOUT WE COULD DO THIS.
AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH HIM ON THIS.
BUT TONIGHT WE ARE NOT FACING A
THREE-WEEK TIME FRAME AS MY
COLLEAGUE PERHAPS SUGGESTED.
WE'RE JUST FACING DOWN A
FIVE-DAY TIME FRAME.
CRISIS HERE.
BY THAT I HAVE TO SAY A
REPUBLICAN-MADE CRISIS ON
RAISING THE DEBT CEILING.
WE HAVE NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF
THIS COUNTRY FACED A SITUATION
LIKE THIS.
WHY DO I SAY THIS?
BECAUSE THE DEBT CEILING HAS
BEEN RAISED 89 TIMES.
89 TIMES.
AND I COULD TELL YOU, BECAUSE I
VOTED FOR IT A NUMBER OF TIMES,
AND VOTED NO FOUR TIMES.
YES, ON OCCASION YOU VOTE NO ON
IT TO SEND A MESSAGE, BUT YOU
DON'T BRING IT DOWN.
I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE
THIS.
WE'RE GOING DOWN A DANGEROUS
PATH, AND WHEN I SAY WE HAVE
RAISED THE DEBT CEILING 89
TIMES, THAT IS IN THE RECORD.
55 TIMES, MR. PRESIDENT, UNDER
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS, 34
TIMES UNDER DEMOCRATIC
PRESIDENTS.
THE DEBT LIMIT WAS RAISED THE
MOST TIMES DURING RONALD
REAGAN'S PRESIDENCY.
DURING HIS EIGHT YEARS, THE DEBT
LIMIT WAS INCREASED BY 200%, AND
THIS IS WHAT PRESIDENT RONALD
REAGAN SAID WHEN IT WAS TIME TO
RAISE THE DEBT CEILING, WHICH,
AGAIN, UNDER HIS PRESIDENCY WAS
RAISED 18 TIMES.
HE SAID, "THE FULL CONSEQUENCES
OF DEFAULT -- OR EVEN A SERIOUS
PROSPECT OF DEFAULT -- BY THE
UNITED STATES ARE IMPOSSIBLE AND
AWESOME TO CONTEMPLATE.
DENIGRATION OF THE FULL FAITH
WOULD HAVE SUBSTANTIAL EFFECTS
ON THE DOMESTIC FINANCIAL
MARKETS AND ON THE VALUE OF THE
DOLLAR IN EXCHANGE MARKETS.
THE NATION CAN ILL AFFORD TO
ALLOW SUCH A RESULT."
THAT WAS RONALD REAGAN IN A
LETTER WRITTEN TO SENATOR HOWARD
BAKER IN 1983.
THE DEBT LIMIT WAS RAISED SEVEN
TIMES DURING THE PRESIDENCY OF
GEORGE W. BUSH AND DURING HIS
EIGHT YEARS, THE DEBT LIMIT WAS
INCREASED BY 90%.
HONEST-TO-GOODNESS,
MR. PRESIDENT, I DON'T REMEMBER
ONE REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUE -- AND
I COULD BE WRONG ON THIS -- THAT
SUGGESTED WE DON'T RAISE THE
DEBT CEILING WHEN GEORGE W. BUSH
WAS PRESIDENT.
AND I'LL TELL YOU SOMETHING, WE
ALL KNOW WHEN YOU RAISE THE DEBT
CEILING, IT'S FOR DEBTS ALREADY
INCURRED.
AND GEORGE W. BUSH TOOK A
SURPLUS OF OVER $200 BILLION A
YEAR AND HE TURNED IT INTO A
AND THE REASON WE HAVE TO RAISE
THE DEBT CEILING MOSTLY IS
BECAUSE OF GEORGE W. BUSH.
I NEVER HEARD ONE REPUBLICAN IN
THOSE YEARS SAY LET'S BRING THIS
DOWN, LET'S NOT RAISE THE DEBT
THEY WENT ON A BINGE.
THEY PUT TWO WARS ON THE CREDIT
CARD, MR. PRESIDENT.
THEY NEVER PAID FOR THOSE WARS.
THEY PUT A TAX CUT TO THE
RICHEST PEOPLE IN AMERICA ON
THAT CREDIT CARD.
THEY DIDN'T CARE.
THEY PUT A PRESCRIPTION DRUG
BENEFIT WHICH TIED THE HANDS OF
MEDICARE AND SAID YOU CAN'T
NEGOTIATE FOR LOWER DRUG PRICES
AND INSTEAD OF BEING AFFORDABLE
FOR THE GOVERNMENT IT BECAME A
BUDGET BUSTER.
THEY PUT THAT ON THE CREDIT CARD
CARD.
I NEVER HEARD THEM SAY, "LET'S
NOT RAISE THE DEBT CEILING" EVEN
THOUGH UNDER THEIR POLICIES THEY
TOOK A SURPLUS AND THEY TURNED
IT INTO A DEFICIT.
THEY TOOK US OFF THE PATH WHERE
WE WERE ABOUT TO FINISH UP WITH
OUR DEBT, FRANKLY, AND ADDED
DEBT AS FAR AS THE EYE COULD
SEE.
HYPOCRISY, HONESTLY -- AND I'M
BEING CAUTIOUS ABOUT THE WAY I
EXPRESS MYSELF HERE IN THE
SENATE -- HYPOCRISY DOESN'T EVEN
BEGIN TO DESCRIBE WHAT'S GOING
ON HERE.
IT'S DISINGENUOUS.
IT'S -- IT'S JUST PLAIN WRONG TO
PLAY POLITICS WITH THIS.
AND WE KNOW POLITICS IS AT PLAY
HERE.
NOW, I'VE RUN FOR ELECTION MANY
TIMES IN MY CAREER -- I THINK
IT'S 11, 12 TIMES -- AND I KNOW
THAT YOU HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION
TO POLITICS WHEN YOU'RE RUNNING.
WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT.
WE'RE NOT NAIVE ABOUT IT.
WE'RE TOUGH ON THE TRAIL.
WE KNOW BUT THERE IS A TIME TO
GOVERN.
THERE IS A TIME TO SET ASIDE THE
POLITICS AND GOVERN.
IF EVER THERE WAS A MOMENT IN
HISTORY, IT IS NOW.
I HAVE TO SAY, MY FRIEND,
SENATOR COBURN, SAID, PEOPLE ARE
ANXIOUS IN THE COUNTRY, THEY'RE
ANXIOUS IN THE COUNTRY, BUT
THEY'RE NOT NOT ANXIOUS, HE
BASICALLY SAID -- HE SAID THIS
SPECIFICALLY -- THEIR ANXIETY
HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DEBT
I DISAGREE RESPECTFULLY.
ANYONE WHO HAS A 401(K), WHO'S
SEEN THE STOCK MARKET GO DOWN
400 POINTS, IS WORRIED.
ANYONE WHO GETS A SOCIAL
SECURITY CHECK WHO FEARS WE
COULD DEFAULT IS WORRIED.
ANYONE ON MEDICARE IS WORRIED.
ANYONE ON VETERANS DISABILITY IS
WORRIED.
EVERY FEDERAL EMPLOYEE IS
WORRIED.
EVERY FEDERAL PRIVATE CONTRACTOR
AND BUSINESS IS WORRIED.
EVERY WORKER WHO WORKS FOR THOSE
PEOPLE, THEY'RE WORRIED TOO.
BECAUSE THEY KNOW IF WE DON'T
COME TOGETHER, MR. PRESIDENT, IN
A FAIR COMPROMISE, THEY KNOW
VERY WELL THAT WE WILL NOT BE
ABLE TO PAY ALL OF OUR BILLS.
NOW, AGAIN, RAISING THE DEBT
CEILING IS SOMETHING YOU HAVE TO
DO BECAUSE YOU'VE ALREADY
INCURRED ALL OF THESE DEBTS.
AND I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT HOW WE GOT INTO THIS
UNNECESSARY CRISIS AND HOW WE
NEED TO GET OUT OF IT.
WE GOT INTO IT BECAUSE
REPUBLICANS SAID THEY WOULDN'T
VOTE FOR A CLEAN INCREASE IN THE
DEBT CEILING, AS HAS BEEN DONE
89 TIMES BEFORE, THEY WANTED TO
EXTRACT A POUND OF FLESH AND SAY
SAY, WE DEMAND THAT YOU -- THAT
YOU CUT SPENDING NOW, TIE IT TO
THIS DEBT CEILING AND THAT'S
WHAT WE WANT.
AND WE SAID, OKAY, WE'RE READY
TO TALK.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE
DEMOCRATS ON THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE PUT OUT AN EXCELLENT
PLAN.
IT CUT NOT $850 MILLION, AS JOHN
BOEHNER'S PLAN DOES, BUT
$4 TRILLION.
AND IT PROTECTED SOCIAL SECURITY
AND MEDICARE, AND IT BASICALLY
SAID WE'VE GOT A PROBLEM, WE'RE
GOING TO SOLVE IT WITH
$2 TRILLION IN CUTS AND
$2 TRILLION IN REVENUES.
50-50.
KIND OF A FAIR WAY TO APPROACH
THIS.
AND GOING TO ASK THE
MILLIONAIRES AND THE
BILLIONAIRES TO PAY THEIR FAIR
SHARE.
FRANKLY, THAT PLAN, TO ME, IS
THE IDEAL PLAN.
IT'S THE FAIR PLAN.
IT GETS US ON FISCAL GROUND,
SAFE, GOOD, SOLID FISCAL GROUND,
AND IT SAYS HALF CUTS, HALF
REVENUES AND WE WILL MOVE
FORWARD AND LOOK AT MEDICARE AND
SOCIAL SECURITY TO MAKE THEM
STRONGER, NOT TO CUT BENEFITS.
THE REPUBLICANS OVER IN THE
HOUSE, I WOULD STAND HERE AND
SAY THAT'S THE ONLY PLAN I'LL
EVER CONSIDER.
I LOVE THAT PLAN.
IT SPEAKS TO MY VALUES.
IT SPEAKS TO MY STATE'S VALUES.
BUT I UNDERSTAND.
IN A NEGOTIATION, IN A SITUATION
LIKE THIS, NO SIDE GETS
EVERYTHING THEY WANT.
SO NOW, PRESIDENT OBAMA SAYS
LET'S ALL COME TOGETHER AND
LET'S WORK ON A PLAN.
LET'S DO SOMETHING BIG.
LET'S DO SOMETHING REAL.
AND FIRST ERIC CANTOR, THE
REPUBLICAN WHIP, MARCHES OUT OF
THERE WITH HIS TEDDY BEAR AND
REPUBLICAN BLANKET.
AND THEN A FEW WEEKS LATER,
BOEHNER WALKS OUT.
I JUST HAVE TO SAY, I WATCHED
SPEAKER PELOSI SIT AT THE WHITE
HOUSE MANY TIMES.
SHE SAT ACROSS FROM GEORGE W.
SHE DID NOT AGREE WITH HIM.
THE DEBT.
SHE FELT HE HAD ADDED TO THE
SHE DISAGREED WITH HIM ON
PROTECTING MILLIONAIRES AND
SHE DISAGREED WITH HIM ON THE
SHE DISAGREED WITH HIM ON THE
WAR IN IRAQ NANCY PELOSI NEVER
STOMPED OUT OF A MEETING.
I FIND IT, FRANKLY, APPALLING
THAT THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
BUT THE PRESIDENT KEEPS REACHING
OUT BECAUSE HE WILL TAKE THE
PERSONAL HITS BECAUSE THIS
COUNTRY GAVE HIM EVERYTHING AND
HE'S NOT GOING TO ALLOW IT TO
FALL AND TO DEFAULT AND TO
BECOME A DEADBEAT NATION.
SO SPEAKER BOEHNER SAID, I'M
GOING TO PUT TOGETHER MY OWN
PLAN, SEW PUTS TOGETHER HIS --
SO HE PUTS TOGETHER HIS OWN
PLAN.
FRANKLY, IT HAS HARDLY ANY CUTS.
IT COMES BACK, $8 AUTO MILLION50 MILLION IN
DOESN'T GET PROBLEM THIS PROBLEM
WE'RE FACING.
HE -- DOESN'T GET PAST THIS
PROBLEM WE'RE FACING.
HE ONLY RAISES THE DEBT FOR
WE'RE GOING TO BE BACK IN THIS
SOUP, BACK INTO THIS CHAOS, BACK
INTO THE MARKET SELLOFFS, BACK
INTO THE UNCERTAINTY, BACK INTO
TIME WHEN PEOPLE CAN'T EVEN
SLEEP WELL AT NIGHT.
BECAUSE SPEAKER BOEHNER AND HIS
PEOPLE OVER THERE WANT TO KEEP
THIS THING BOILING OVER.
THEY THINK SOMEHOW IT'S GOOD FOR
THEM.
I SAY, IT'S NOT GOOD FOR THEM.
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, I DON'T CARE
IF IT'S GOOD OR BAD FOR THEM AND
I DON'T CARE IF IT'S GOOD OR BAD
WHAT I CARE ABOUT, WHAT YOU CARE
ABOUT, WHAT WE CARE ABOUT IS
THIS NATION.
THAT IS EVERYTHING TO US.
AND WE HAVE TO STAND UP FOR THIS
NATION, AND THAT MEANS WE HAVE
TO LEAVE THE POLITICAL LABELS AT
THE DOOR AND WE HAVE TO SET
ASIDE OUR FAVORITE PLAN, LIKE
I'VE SET ASIDE MY FAVORITE PLAN,
AND SUPPORT A REAL COMPROMISE.
WELL, LET ME TELL YOU THE REAL
US.
IT IS THE REID APPROACH.
IT IS A REAL COMPROMISE, BECAUSE
WHAT DOES COMPROMISE MEAN?
NOBODY GETS EVERYTHING THEY WANT
WANT.
BUT EVERYBODY GETS SOMETHING
THAT THEY WANT.
WHAT DO THE REPUBLICANS SAY THEY
WANT?
THEY WANTED CUTS AND NO
REVENUES.
THEY GOT THAT THE IN THAT IN THE REID PLAN.
OUR LEADER, MAJORITY LEADER REID
AND NOT ONLY DOES HE HAVE CUTS,
HE HAS TWICE AS MANY CUTS AS THE
BOEHNER PLAN, CUTS THAT HURT A
LOT OF THE THINGS A LOT OF US
DON'T WANT TO HURT.
BUT WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE
TO GIVE SOMETHING.
SO THEY GET THAT.
WHAT DO WE GET?
WE GET CERTAINTY.
WE BELIEVE IT IS VERY IMPORTANT
THAT WE TAKE THIS ISSUE OF THE
DEBT CEILING AND WE GET IT PAST
THE ELECTION, PAST JANUARY OR
FEBRUARY OF 2013 AND GET BACK TO
THE BUSINESS OF JOB CREATION AND
WE GET THAT.
WE GET THAT.
WE ALSO TALKED BOTH SIDES -- WE ALSO TALKED
ABOUT, BOTH SIDES, A COMMITTEE
THAT WOULD LOOK AT THE
LONG-RANGE DEFICIT AND DEBT, THE
NEED TO DO REFORMS AND THE NEED
TO LOOK AT WHAT REVENUES MAKE
SENSE, AND THERE IS A COMMITTEE
IN THAT BILL.
SO THIS IS A TRUE COMPROMISE.
AND I AGREE, THE OTHER THING THE
DEMOCRATS GOT IS NO CUTS IN
SOCIAL YOU'RE AND -- SOCIAL SECURITY
AND MEDICARE.
BUT IF YOU REALLY, TRULY LOOK AT
THIS, THE REID PLAN GIVES THE
REPUBLICANS MORE THAN EVEN HE
GIVES THE DEMOCRATS.
BUT IT IS WORTH IT TO US TO GET
CERTAINTY IN THE MARKETS, TO
PROTECT SOCIAL SECURITY AND
MEDICARE, TO AVOID THE CHAOS OF
THE BOEHNER PLAN.
AVOID THE DANGER THAT WE FACE IF
OUR BONDS ARE DOWNGRADED.
THE BOEHNER PLAN RISKS
CATASTROPHIC DEFAULT AND WE ARE
CONCERNED THAT IF IT WERE TO
PASS, WE WOULD AGAIN SEE THIS
ECONOMY BEING HELD CAPTIVE, WE
WOULD AGAIN BE FACING DEEP CUTS
IN MEDICARE AND SOCIAL SECURITY,
WE WOULD AGAIN BE FACING, YOU
KNOW, ALL KINDS OF HOSTAGE
TAKING TO PROTECT THE
MILLIONAIRES AND THE
BILLIONAIRES.
I BELIEVE THAT NO ONE WHO LOVES
THIS COUNTRY, REGARDLESS OF
POLITICAL LABEL, SHOULD TAKE ANY
ACTION TO RESULT IN AMERICA
BECOMING A DEADBEAT NATION.
I'M A FIRST-GENERATION AMERICAN
ON MY MOTHER'S SIDE.
MY MOTHER NEVER EVEN WENT TO
HIGH SCHOOL, BECAUSE DURING HER
TIME IN HIGH SCHOOL, HER FATHER
GOT VERY ILL AND SHE HAD TO GO
TO WORK.
AND BECAUSE I WAS BORN IN THIS
COUNTRY, EVEN THOUGH WE HAD
BARELY ANYTHING, I WAS ABLE TO
GET AN EDUCATION.
I WAS ABLE TO GO TOE-TO-TOE WITH
MY COLLEAGUES WHO WENT TO THE
FANCIEST SCHOOLS.
I REMEMBER WHEN I WENT TO
BROOKLYN COLLEGE IN NEW YORK AND
THEY RAISED THE TUITION FROM $9
A SEMESTER TO $14 A SEMESTER, MY
DAD LOOKED AT ME AND SAID,
"HONEY, YOU'RE GETTING AWFULLY
EXPENSIVE."
I GOT A COLLEGE EDUCATION IN
THIS COUNTRY.
I GOT TO THE SENATE IN THIS
COUNTRY.
BUT I HAVE TO SAY, IF WE'RE
GOING INTO A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE
EVERYTHING WE DO TO FIGHT FOR
THE MIDDLE CLASS IS HELD HOSTAGE
TO PROTECTING THE RICHEST AMONG
US, THE BILLIONAIRES, THE
MILLIONAIRES, THE MULTINATIONAL
CORPORATIONS, IF THAT'S THE
PATTERN WE'RE GETTING INTO HERE,
I FEAR FOR THIS COUNTRY.
AND WE CAN'T LET IT HAPPEN, AND
THAT'S WHY WE'VE BEEN VERY CLEAR
THAT THE BOEHNER PLAN JUST
CONTINUES THIS HOSTAGE TAKING.
SO THE REID ALTERNATIVE IS THE
TRUE COMPROMISE, MR. PRESIDENT.
IT GIVES US SUBSTANTIAL CUTS IN
DEFICITS, IT GIVES US A PROCESS
FOR MORE DEFICIT AND DEBT
REDUCTION, IT GIVES US CERTAINTY
IN THE MARKETPLACE.
IN CLOSING, I WOULD SAY THIS.
WHEN EACH OF US HAS WON OUR
ELECTION, WE GO UP THERE TO THE
PLACE WHERE YOU ARE SITTING,
MR. PRESIDENT, AND WE PUT OUR
HAND ON THE BIBLE AND WE SWEAR
TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION.
AND I HAD THE HONOR OF SERVING
WITH SENATOR ROBERT BYRD, WHO
MOST OF US HERE HAVE, AND HE
ALWAYS CARRIED AROUND THIS
CONSTITUTION IN HIS POCKET.
SO TODAY I TOOK A LOOK AT
SECTION 4 OF THE 14th
AMENDMENT AND DO YOU KNOW WHAT
IT SAYS?
"THE VALIDITY OF THE PUBLIC DEBT
OF THE UNITED STATES SHALL NOT
BE QUESTIONED."
CONSTITUTION.
IT SAYS THE VALIDITY OF THE
PUBLIC DEBT OF THE UNITED STATES
AOUGT RISED BY LAW SHALL NOT BE
QUESTIONED.
SO I'M NOT GOING TO PLAY GAMES
WITH THIS.
AND I'M NOT GOING TO ALLOW THE
PUBLIC DEBT TO BECOME A
POLITICAL FOOTBALL.
I WANT TO SHOW YOU BEFORE I
LEAVE THE FLOOR JUST A COUCH
MORE CHARTS -- JUST A COUPLE OF
MORE CHARTS.
THIS IS WHAT SPEAKER BOEHNER
SAID JULY 11.
SAID I'M NOT INTERESTED IN A
SHORT-TERM INCREASE ON THE DEBT
HE SAID OUR ECONOMY WON'T GROW
AS LONG AS WE CONTINUE TO TRIP
IT UP WITH SHORT-TERM GIMMICKS
THIS IS WHAT SPEAKER BOEHNER
SAID, SO WHAT DOES HE GIVE US,
A SHORT-TERM EXTENSION OF THE
DEBT LIMIT A FEW MONTHS.
WE CAN'T DO THAT, EVEN HIS OWN
WORDS HE SAYS WE HURT THE
ERIC CANTOR SAID TO "POLITICO,"
IF WE CAN'T MAKE THE TOUGH
DECISIONS NOW, WHY WOULD WE BE
MAKING THOSE TOUGH DECISIONS
IT IS MY PREFERENCE THAT WE DO
THIS THING ONE TIME, PUTTING OFF
TOUGH DECISIONS IS NOT WHAT
PEOPLE WANT IN THIS TOWN.
AND YET, WHAT DO THEY DO?
THEY SEND US -- WE DON'T KNOW IF
THEY'LL GET THE VOTES TO SEND
IT, BUT THEY PLAN TO SEND AWES
SHORT -- SEND US A SHORT-TERM
DEAL WHICH LEAVES THIS GREAT
NATION IN CHAOS.
YOU TALK TO EVERY BUSINESSMAN,
THEY WILL TELL YOU THE WORST
THING THEY'D WORRY ABOUT IS
UNCERTAINTY.
UNCERTAINTY.
ERIC CANTOR SAID IT, BOEHNER
SAID IT, NO SHORT-TERM DEAL.
THEY'RE SENDING US A SHORT-TERM
DEAL.
AND I'LL CLOSE WITH THE "NEW
YORK TIMES," THE MOTHER OF ALL
BRAINERS, THEY SAY.
IF THE DEBT CEILING TALKS FAIL,
INDEPENDENT VOTERS WILL SEE THE
DEMOCRATS WERE WILLING TO
NOT.
IF RESPONSIBLE REPUBLICANS DON'T
TAKE CONTROL, INDEPENDENTS WILL
CONCLUDE THAT REPUBLICAN
THEY WILL CONCLUDE THAT
REPUBLICANS ARE NOT FIT TO
GOVERN, AND THEY WILL BE RIGHT.
MR. PRESIDENT, I APPEAL TO THE
REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES IN THIS
SENATE CHAMBER WHO HAVE SHOWN
WORKING WITH SENATOR DURBIN,
WORKING WITH SENATOR WARNER,
WORKING WITH OTHERS ON OUR SIDE,
SENATOR CONRAD, THAT THEY ARE
WILLING TO COME FORWARD AND DO
SOMETHING MEANINGFUL AND PUT THE
POLITICS ASIDE.
THAT.
THEY WILL FIND IN LEADER REID
SOMEONE WHO UNDERSTANDS THE ART
OF COMPROMISE, WHO UNDERSTANDS
THAT WE HAVE TO PUT ASIDE OUR
PARTY LABELS AND DO WHAT'S RIGHT
FOR THIS NATION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MR. PRESIDENT, AND I YIELD THE
FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA.
MR. PRESIDENT, I
RISE TODAY TO PAY HONOR A LIFE
CUT TRAGICALLY SHORT, TO A YOUNG