Inhofe Intros Bill to Avoid Sequestration

RECOGNIZED. MR. INHOFE: I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THE QUORUM CALL IN PROGRESS BE VITIATED. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. MR. INHOFE: MADAM PRESIDENT, I AM WAITING NOW FOR THEM TO BRING UP A BILL THAT I HAVE FILED TODAY AND WILL HAVE A NUMBER TO GO WITH IT, WHICH I'LL ANNOUNCE IN JUST A MOMENT. LET ME, FIRST OF ALL, SAY THAT THE TALK OF THE WHOLE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW IS IN THE SEQUESTRATION, THE PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE HAVING. I WOULD ONLY OBSERVE, I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S SO DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND, BUT PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS WRITTEN FOUR BUDGETS, AND HE -- THESE BUDGETS HAVE COME BEFORE US. IF YOU'LL ADD UP ALL OF THE DEFICITS IN THE FOUR BUDGETS IT COMES TO $5.3 TRILLION OF DEFICITS. AND I SUGGEST THAT IS MORE DEFICIT THAN ALL PRESIDENTS IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY FOR THE PAST 200-PLUS YEARS. AND SO PEOPLE TALK ABOUT HOW DID WE GET INTO THIS MESS. BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE THAT KIND OF A DEFICIT OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, YOU WONDER WHERE IT'S KOLG FROM. LET ME TELL YOU WHERE IT DIDN'T COME FROM, IT WASN'T SPENT ON, AND THAT'S MILITARY. I WENT OVER THE FIRST -- THAT FI RST BUDGET THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA HAD. I WENT OVER TO AFGHANISTAN SO I COULD MAKE SURE THAT I COULD GET THE ATTENTION OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND LET THEM KNOW JUST HOW THIS DISARMING OF AMERICA BY PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS GOING. IF YOU REMEMBER THAT FIRST BUDGET, MADAM PRESIDENT, THAT'S ONE THAT, LET'S SEE, THAT CUT OUT OUR ONLY FIFTH GENERATION FIGHTER, THE F-22, OUR LIFT CAPACITY, THE C-17, THE FUTURE COMBAT SYSTEM, THE GROUND-BASED INTERCEPTOR IN POLAND. THAT WAS JUST THE FIRST BUDGET. THEN IT'S GOTTEN WORSE SINCE THAT TIME. SINCE THERE ISN'T TIME TO GO INTO THAT DETAIL YEAR BY YEAR, OEUPBLD SAY THAT THE PRESIDENT'S -- I WOULD ONLY SAY THAT THE PRESIDENT'S CUT IN HIS BUDGET OVER THE NEXT DECADE $487 BILLION, ROUGHLY $500 BILLION, A HALF A TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEFENSE SPENDING OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS. AND I WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE -- AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S VERY FRUSTRATING BECAUSE THEY ASSUME THAT WHEN WE SEND OUR KIDS INTO BATTLE THAT THEY HAVE THE BEST OF EQUIPMENT. AND THIS JUST FLAT ISN'T TRUE. THE PWEURBGT HAVE AN -- THE BRITISH HAVE AN AS-90, BETTER THAN OURS; THE RUSSIANS THE TWO S-19, BETTER THAN OURS; EVEN AFRICA SOUTH AFRICA THAT IS A SYSTEM THAT IS A BETTER NONLINE OF SIGHT CANNON THAN WE HAVE IN OUR ARSENAL. THE CHINESE HAVE A J T-PB 10. IT'S -- THE CHINESE HAVE A J-10, AND THEY ARE BETTER THAN OURS. THE POINT I'M MAKING HERE IS THAT THERE JUST HAS BEEN NO EMPHASIS. IF YOU GO OUT AND YOU BORROW AND INCREASE THE DEFICIT BY $5.3 TRILLION AS THIS PRESIDENT IS DOING, YOU'D THINK THAT WE WOULD BE IN A POSITION TO HAVE A LOT MORE ROBUST MILITARY, BUT THAT'S -- BUT THE MILITARY'S BEEN CONSISTENTLY CUT FOR THAT PERIOD OF TIME. NOW, THE -- IN THE EVENT THAT THE OBAMA SEQUESTRATION AS IT'S DESIGNED RIGHT NOW GOES THRURBGS THAT WILL BE ANOTHER -- GOES THROUGH, THAT WILL BE ANOTHER $500 BILLION THAT WILL COME OUT OF THE MILITARY. EVEN THE PRESIDENT'S OWN SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, SECRETARY PANETTA, HAS SAID IF THESE CUTS TAKE PLACE, TALKING ABOUT THE OBAMA SEQUESTRATION CUTS, IT WOULD BE -- QUOTE -- "DEVASTATING TO THE MILITARY" WE WOULD HAVE THE SMALLEST GROUND FLEET SINCE 1940, THE SMALLEST FLEET OF SHIPS SINCE 1915 AND THE SMALLEST TACTICAL FIGHTER CAPABILITY FORCE IN THE HISTORY OF THE AIR FORCE. SO IF YOU WANT US TO, THE UNITED STATES TO CONTINUE PROVIDING THE TYPE OF GLOBAL LEADERSHIP OUR PEOPLE HAVE COME TO EXPECT AND MEET THE EXPECTATIONS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE -- WHEN YOU TALK TO THEM, THEY ARE SHOCKED WHEN THEY FIND OUT OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE THINGS THAT ARE BETTER THAN WE HAVE. IF YOU WANT TO BEAT THIS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE, NUMBER ONE, WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE MILITARY AND NUMBER, TWO, THE SEQUESTRATION. I'VE GOT IT ALL IN ONE BILL, AND IN A MINUTE WE'LL GET A NUMBER FOR THAT BILL. OR DO WE HAVE IT ALREADY? ANYWAY IT'S CALLED THE SEQUESTRATION PREVENTION ACT OF 2012. AND IT REPLACES THIS SEQUESTRATION CUTS WITH SOME SMART REFORMS. I'M GOING TO RUN OVER THOSE IN JUST A MINUTE TO SHOW YOU WHAT THEY ARE. IT REPEALS THE SEQUESTER AND REPLACES THE $1.2 TRILLION AND THEN HAS A LOT OF MONEY LEFT OVER. LET ME KIND OF GO OVER WHAT THIS BILL WOULD DO. PEOPLE KEEP SAYING WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE SEQUESTRATION, THE CUTS. WE HAD THIS GREAT COMMITTEE THAT'S SUPPOSED POSSIBLE OUT THERE FINDING $1.2 TRILLION OVER A TEN-YEAR PERIOD AND YET WE HAD A PRESIDENT WHO WAS ABLE TO GIVE US THE DEFICITS OF FIVE TIMES THAT MUCH OVER JUST A FOUR-YEAR PERIOD. WELL, WHAT IT DOES, FIRST OF ALL, TO COME UP WITH THIS $1.2 TRILLION PLUS REBUILDING THE MILITARY, NOW WE WANT TO REBUILD THE MILITARY, IN MY ESTIMATION, UP TO 4% OF G.D.P. FOR THE LAST 100 YEARS PRIOR TO 1990, FOR 100 YEARS THE AVERAGE DEFENSE SPENDING CONSTITUTED 5.7% OF G.D.P. THAT'S AVERAGE, IN TIMES OF WAR, IN TIMES OF PEACE. IT'S ALL THE WAY DOWN AFTER HIS SEQUESTRATION TO BELOW 3%, IN OTHER WORDS ABOUT HALF OF THAT. SO WHAT I WANT TO DO WITH THE ADDITIONAL FUNDS THAT COME FROM THIS BILL THAT I'M INTRODUCING TODAY IS PUT THAT BACK INTO THE MILITARY AND BRING US UP TO 4% OF G.D.P. STILL, CONSIDERABLY LESS THAN WHERE WE HAVE BEEN OVER THE LAST 100 YEARS. SO THE FIRST THING IT DOES, COMPLETELY REPEALS OBAMACARE. IT ADOPTS PAUL RYAN'S APPROACH TO BLOCK GRANTING THE MEDICAID PROGRAM SO THAT STATES HAVE COMPLETE CONTROL OVER THE DOLLARS THAT THEY USE TO REACH THEIR LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS WITH HEALTH CARE ASSISTANCE. NOW, TOGETHER, THESE TWO CHANGES WILL REDUCE BY $1.1 TRILLION OVER TEN YEARS. SECONDLY, IT RETURNS NONDEFENSE DISCRETIONARY, NONDEFENSE DISCRETIONARY FUNDING TO THE 2006 LEVELS. WHEN THIS PRESIDENT CAME IN, THAT SURGED. THE AMOUNT OF THE NONDEFENSE DISCRETIONARY SPENDING SURGED. THIS WOULD HAVE A SAVINGS OVER THAT PERIOD OF TIME OF $952 BILLION. THIRDLY, IT BLOCK GRANTS THE FOOD STAMP PROGRAM AND CONVERTS IT INTO DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS SO THE STATES HAVE COMPLETE CONTROL OVER THE DESIGN OF THEIR NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS TO BEST MEET THE NEEDS OF THEIR LOW-INCOME POPULATION. THIS PROVISION REVERSES THE MASSIVE EXPANSION THAT WE HAVE SEEN OF THE FOOD STAMP PROGRAM UNDER THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, WHICH HAS LITERALLY DOUBLED IN SIZE, UP TO 100% SINCE HE TOOK OFFICE. ON PRESIDENT OBAMA'S INAUGURATION DAY, JUST UNDER 32 MILLION PEOPLE WERE ON FOOD STAMPS. TODAY IT'S MORE THAN 46 MILLION PEOPLE. THEY RECEIVED THESE BENEFITS. SO IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO STOP. IT WILL CONTINUE TO GO UP IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. THIS PROVISION SAVES $285 BILLION. BY THE WAY, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE FARM PROGRAM, THE FARM PROGRAM IS REALLY A WELFARE PROGRAM BECAUSE THEY INCREASE THE -- ALL OF THESE PROVISIONS AND CALL IT PART OF THE FARM BILL. THAT'S A DIFFERENT SUBJECT. WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT LATER. NOT TODAY BUT LATER. THE FOURTH THING IT DOES, THE LEGISLATION REDUCES THE FEDERAL WORK FORCE BY 10% THROUGH ATTRITION. NOBODY OUT THERE IS GOING TO BE FIRED, THERE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ANY CUTS. IN FACT, IT WOULD CONTINUE TO HAVE SOME MODEST INCREASES IN PAYMENTS FOR THOSE WHO ARE THERE. THROUGH ATTRITION, THIS CUT WOULD BE ABOUT $144 BILLION OVER TEN YEARS. THE BILL REPEALS THE AUTHORITY -- THIS IS THE FIFTH THING -- THE AUTHORITY FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO SPEND ANY TAXPAYERS' DOLLARS ON CLIMATE CHANGE OR GLOBAL WARMING. THIS IS KIND OF INTERESTING BECAUSE VERY FEW PEOPLE KNOW THAT EVEN THOUGH -- THEY REMEMBER THAT EVERY TIME THERE HAS BEEN A BILL ON CAP-AND-TRADE, A COST TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE OF SOMEWHERE BETWEEN $300 BILLION A YEAR AND $400 BILLION A YEAR -- SOMETIMES IN MY HOME STATE OF OKLAHOMA, PEOPLE'S HEADS START SPINNING WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THESE LARGE AMOUNTS. SO WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS I TAKE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF FAMILIES WHO FILE FEDERAL TAX RETURNS AND I APPLY THIS TO IT. THIS WOULD BE ABOUT $3,000 PER FAMILY IN MY STATE OF OKLAHOMA. YET, EVEN THE DIRECTOR OF THE E.P.A. ADMITS THAT IF WE DID THIS, IT WOULD NOT REDUCE Co2 EMISSIONS WORLDWIDE. THAT'S THE DIRECTOR OF THE E.P.A., LISA JACKSON. AND THAT'S ON THE RECORD. I APPRECIATE HER HONESTY IN THAT RESPECT. SO IF WE DO THIS, RIGHT NOW WHAT PEOPLE DON'T KNOW, THIS PRESIDENT HAS SPENT $68.4 BILLION SINCE HE HAS BEEN PRESIDENT ON ALL THIS GLOBAL WARMING STUFF. NOW, THAT'S WITHOUT AUTHORITY BECAUSE WE HAVE CLEARLY DEFEATED ALL OF THOSE BILLS. SO WHAT HE HAS DONE THROUGH REGULATION IS WHAT HE COULDN'T DO THROUGH LEGISLATION, BUT NOBODY KNOWS ABOUT IT UNTIL NOW. NOW THEY KNOW ABOUT IT. ANYWAY, IF WE STOP DOING THAT OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS, THAT WOULD SAVE AN ADDITIONAL $83 BILLION. AND FINALLY, THE LEGISLATION INCLUDES COMPREHENSIVE MEDICAL MALPRACTICE, TORT REFORM. THAT SAME THING THAT WAS PASSED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AND THAT WOULD BE $74 BILLION OVER TEN YEARS. ALL TOLD, ALL SAVINGS GENERATED WOULD BE $2.6 TRILLION. NOT $1.2 TRILLION. $2.6 TRILLION. SO DON'T LET ANYONE TELL YOU YOU CAN'T GET THERE FROM HERE BECAUSE CLEARLY YOU CAN GET THERE FROM HERE. NOW, WE USED THE REMAINING AMOUNT TO BEEF UP THE MILITARY TO GET BACK TO OUR 4%, AND I BELIEVE IF YOU WERE TO TALK TO THE AVERAGE AMERICAN, THEY WOULD SAY YEAH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THIS, WHY AREN'T WE DOING IT NOW? LET ME MENTION ONE OTHER THING BEFORE I CONCLUDE. THAT IS WE HAVE A THING CALLED THE WARN ACT. WHAT THAT DOES IS REQUIRE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE -- THE EMPLOYERS WHO KNOW THAT BECAUSE OF SCWEEFERTION T HERE IS GOING -- SEQUESTRATION THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE LAYOFFS, THAT THEY HAVE TO GIVE PINK SLIPS AT LEAST 60 DAYS PRIOR TO THE TIME THAT HAPPENS. UNDER SEQUESTRATION, IF THEY DON'T ADOPT MY ACT, IF THEY DO THAT, THOSE PINK SLIPS WOULD HAVE TO BE OUT THERE BY NOVEMBER 2. NOW, THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN. HE DOESN'T WANT THE OBAMA SEQUESTRATION TO BE POINTED OUT AND IDENTIFIED AS WHAT'S CAUSING THEM TO LOSE THEIR JOBS, SO HE IS TRYING TO GET COMPANIES NOT TO COMPLY WITH THIS WARN ACT. CLEARLY, THE WARN ACT SAYS AN EMPLOYER SHALL NOT ORDER A PLANT CLOSING OR MASS LAYOFF UNTIL THE END OF A 60-DAY PERIOD AFTER THE EMPLOYER SERVES WRITTEN NOTICE OF SUCH AN ORDER. THE WARN ACT STATES -- THIS IS VERY, VERY SIGNIFICANT HERE, BECAUSE IF THERE ARE COMPANIES OUT THERE WHO ARE LISTENING TO THE PRESIDENT WHEN HE IS ASKING THEM NOT TO ISSUE THE PINK SLIPS, THIS IS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. IT STATES THAT ANY EMPLOYER WHO ORDERS A PLANT CLOSING OR A MASS LAYOFF IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 3 SHALL BE LIABLE TO EACH AGGRIEVED EMPLOYEE WHO SUFFERS AN EMPLOYMENT LOSS AS A RESULT OF SUCH CLOSING OR LAYOFF. IN OTHER WORDS, IF HE DOESN'T DO IT, THEN THAT OPENS THE DOORS FOR ALL THE TRIAL LAWYERS TO COME IN, AND JUST IMAGINE THE CASE. LOCKHEED MARTIN, THEY SAY THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LET GO SOME 120,000 PEOPLE. IF THEY HAVE A CLASS ACTION SUIT AND EACH ONE WHO IS LET OFF WOULD RECEIVE SOMETHING LIKE $1,000, THAT WOULD BE $120 MILLION THAT THAT COMPANY WOULD HAVE TO PAY. AND I CAN'T IMAGINE A BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF ANY COMPANY