Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
SHOULDN'T GET THEM AT THE
EXPENSE OF OUR SENIORS,
CHILDREN, AND THE MIDDLE CLASS.
WITH THAT I YIELD THE FLOOR.
I THANK THE SENATOR.
SENATOR ALEXANDER IS NEXT.
I WONDER IF WE COULD ENTER INTO
A QUICK TIME AGREEMENT TO GET
THE NEXT SENATORS SLOTTED.
THAT MIGHT HELP US MANAGE THE
FLOOR, I'D SAY TO MY
COLLEAGUE, SENATOR SESSIONS.
RIGHT.
I BELIEVE SENATOR TOOMEY IS HERE
AND WILL BE PREPARED TO GO NEXT
AFTER SENATOR ALEXANDER --,
WE HAD SENATOR REED
SLOT NET BETWEEN.
MR. ALEXANDER, HOW MUCH TIME
WOULD YOU LIKE?
SENATOR *** AND
I WERE HOPING TO INTRODUCE A
PIECE OF LEGISLATION ON ANOTHER
MATTER AND TALK ABOUT IT.
I THINK GIVEN THE FOCUS ON THE
BUDGET HERE I'M GOING TO SUGGEST
TO SENATOR *** THAT WE -- WHO
WILL BE COMING HERE AT 12:45 WE
JUST MENTION OUR BILL.
IF HE COULD HAVE TIME TO DO
THAT, AND THEN WE STAY FOCUSED
ON THE BUDGET AND WE'LL TALK
ABOUT THE OTHER MATTER TOMORROW.
WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IF I MAY
SUGGEST, IS ASK THAT I HAVE
FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK ON THE
BUDGET, AND MAYBE FIVE MINUTES
TO SPEAK ON THE OTHER MATTER FOR
SENATOR *** TO BE RECOGNIZED
FOR FIVE MINUTES, AND THAT
WOULD TAKE ALL OF THE TIME THAT
I WOULD ASK FOR.
THE PROBLEM IS WE'RE
OVERSUBSCRIBED BY THAT -- WE
NOW ARE -- DIFFICULT TO --
WE'VE NOT BEEN YIELDING TO
THINGS THAT WEREN'T JUST
BUDGET-RELATED I'D SAY TO THE
SENATOR.
I WONDER IF IT WOULD BE
AGREEABLE IF THE SENATOR WOULD
TAKE FIVE MINUTES ON THE
BUDGET, WE COME BACK TO SENATOR
REED, IF HE COULD TAKE FIVE
MINUTES ON THE BUDGET AND THEN
WE GO TO SENATOR TOOMEY FOR 15
MINUTES ON THE BUDGET BECAUSE HE
HAS A SUBSTANTIVE BUDGET
ALTERNATIVE THAT DESERVES
ADDITIONAL TIME.
MR. PRESIDENT, I
THINK THAT'S A REASONABLE
REQUEST AND I WONDER IF I MIGHT
ASK ON BEHALF OF SENATOR ***
IF HE SHOULD COME TO THE FLOOR
HE SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE
MINUTE TO SIMPLY STAND UP AND
SAY HE WAS PLANNING TO DO THIS
BUT WE'LL DEFER OUR INTRUKS
UNTIL TOMORROW DUE TO THE BUDGET
DISCUSSION.
I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT SENATOR ALEXANDER
BE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES
ON THE BUDGET, SENATOR REED OF
RHODE ISLAND FOR FIVE MINUTES ON
THE BUDGET, THEN SENATOR TOOMEY
FOR 15 MINUTES ON THE BUDGET,
AND IF SENATOR *** COMES AFTER
THAT POINT THAT HE BE RECOGNIZED
FOR A MINUTE ON A SEPARATE
MATTER, AND THEN WE COME BACK
TO SENATOR WHITEHOUSE FOR EIGHT
MINUTES.
IF WE COULD LOCK THOSE IN, I
THINK THAT WOULD HELP ALL
MEMBERS.
OBJECTION?
WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
MR. PRESIDENT.
AM I NOW RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE
MINUTES?
THE
SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
PLEASE LET ME
REMAINING.
I WILL.
SENATOR *** AND
I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON
SUPPORT.
IT PINS A GREEN CARD ON THE
LAPEL OF ANY FOREIGN STUDENT
INVOLVED IN SCIENCE,
ENGINEERING, TECHNOLOGY,
GRADUATE PROGRAMS WHO GETS A
DEGREE AND WHO WANTS TO STAY IN
THE UNITED STATES AND WORK, AND
THEN GO HOME -- WHAT WE WOULD
LIKE FOR THEM TO DO INSTEAD OF
GOING HOME TO CREATE THE NEXT
GOOGLE IN INDIA OR CHINA OR SOME
OTHER COUNTRY, WE'D LIKE THEM
TO STAY HERE AND CREATE IT HERE.
AND IT HAS BROAD BROD SUPPORT,
IT'S A RECOMMENDATION -- BROAD
SUPPORT, IT HAS THE
RECOMMENDATION OF THE AMERICA
COMPETES ACT WHICH I WORKED ON
IN 2005 AND 2007, BUT I WANT TO
SALUTE SENATOR *** FOR HIS
LEADERSHIP ON THIS AND RECOGNIZE
IT AND NOW I'LL TURN TO THE
BUDGET WITH MY REMAINING TIME.
FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN ALAN
GREENSPAN RECENTLY SAID THE
WORST MISTAKE PRESIDENT OBAMA
MADE WAS NOT EMBRACING HIS OWN
FISCAL COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATION TO REDUCE OUR
DEBT BY $4 TRILLION OVER THE
NEXT TEN YEARS.
TODAY, OUR NATIONAL DEBT IS
MORE THAN $15.6 TRILLION,
NEARLY $1.9 TRILLION HIGHER THAN
IT WAS WHEN THE FISCAL
COMMISSION RELEASED ITS
RECOMMENDATIONS AND
$6.4 TRILLION HIGHER THAN WHEN
PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS SWORN IN.
IN JANUARY 2013 THE FIRST THING
THE NEXT PRESIDENT WILL HAVE TO
DO IS TO ASK THE CONGRESS TO
INCREASE THE DEBT CEILING.
THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM IS THAT
WASHINGTON DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO
BALANCE ITS CHECKBOOK.
THE PRESIDENT HAS PROPOSED A
BUDGET THAT RAISES TAXES BY
$1.9 TRILLION OVER THE NEXT TEN
YEARS AND STILL SPENDS MORE THAN
IT TAKES IN EVERY YEAR INSTEAD
OF ENDORSING THE FISCAL
COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS OR
ANY OTHER PLAN TO ADDRESS OUR
NATION'S FISCAL CRISIS.
ACCORDING TO THE CONGRESSIONAL
BUDGET OFFICE UNDER THE
PRESIDENT'S BUDGET INTEREST ON
OUR DEBT WILL TRIPLE OVER THE
NEXT TEN YEARS AND BY 2022 WE'LL
BE SPENDING MORE IN INTEREST
THAN WE SPEND ON NATIONAL
DEFENSE.
THIS IS, MR. PRESIDENT, AN
IRRESPONSIBLE PROPOSAL, AND
INSTEAD OF PLAYING POLITICS WE
SHOULD BE WORKING TOGETHER ON A
PLAN TO ADDRESS THE DEBT WHICH
IS THE MOST URGENT PROBLEM
FACING OUR COUNTRY AND ACCORDING
TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT
CHIEFS, THE BIGGEST THREAT TO
OUR NATIONAL SECURITY.
THE SIMPSONS-BOWLES FISCAL
COMMISSION PLAN, THE
DOMENICI-RIVLIN PLAN, THE GANG
OF SIX PROPOSAL OFFER BIPARTISAN
BLIEWNTS FOR -- BLUEPRINTS FOR
HOW TO ADDRESS IT.
IT WOULD RESTRUCTURE ENTITLEMENT
TENG SPERNG.
ENTITLEMENT SPENDING THE THE
MAIN SOURCE OF OUR DANGEROUS
DO THOSE REFORMS SO SENIORS CAN
COUNT ON MEDICARE AND SOCIAL
SECURITY AND TAXPAYERS CAN
AFFORD THEM.
MANDATORY ENTITLEMENT SPENDING
WHICH IS 58% OF THE FEDERAL
BUDGET IS GROWING AT NEARLY
THREE TIMES INFLATION AND
BANKRUPTING OUR COUNTRY.
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING WHICH
FUNDS OUR NATIONAL DEFENSE, OUR
HIGHWAYS, OUR NATIONAL, A AND
PARKS AND NATIONAL LABORATORIES
IS ONLY 36% OF THE FEDERAL
BUDGET AND IS GROWING AT THE
RATE OF INFLATION.
FOCUSING OUR BUDGET CUTTING ON
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING IS JUST A
WAY FOR CONGRESS TO USE THE
PRESIDENT'S WORDS, TO KICK THE
CAN DOWN THE ROAD.
THE REAL WORK IS REDUCING THE
GROWTH OF MANDATORY SPENDING.
ALTHOUGH THE SENATE'S NOT
DEBATING ITS OWN BUDGET
RESOLUTION GOING 113 DATES
WITHOUT PASSING A BUDGET, WE'RE
GATE DWAITDING SEVERAL
PROPOSALS, I DO SUPPORT THE
HOUSE-PASSED BUDGET BECAUSE IT A
SERIOUS BUDGET BJ TO CUT
OUT-OF-CONTROL SPENDING AND
SOLVE OUR FISCAL CRISIS.
I WILL SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL
OFFERED BY SENATOR TOOMEY.
EVEN THOUGH IT CUTS NONDEFENSE
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING TO 2006
LEVELS, WHICH I BELIEVE IS TOO
LOW, IT REFORMS MANDATORY
FIVE-MINUTE SPENDING, IT CLOSES
TAX LOOPHOLES, LOWERS TAX
RATES, SAVE MEDICARE FOR FUTURE
SENATOR
SENATOR TOOMEY AND I HAVE ALSO
DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF
ALLOWING STATES TO HAVE THE
OPTION OF CHOOSING PER-CAPITA
CAPS ON THEIR AVERAGE MEDICAID
EXPENDITURES PER BENEFICIARY AS
AN ALTERNATIVE TO TRADITIONAL
BLOCK GRANTS AND I'M ENCOURAGED
BY THESE DISCUSSIONS.
SO, MR. PRESIDENT, LAST AUGUST I
SUPPORTED THE BUDGET CONTROL ACT
BECAUSE IT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO
TAKE AN IMPORTANT STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION.
THE HOUSE-PASSED BUDGET AND THE
BUDGET PROPOSED BY SENATOR --
THE
SENATOR HAS 30 MORE SECONDS.
MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN.
THE HOUSE-PASSED BUDGET AND THE
BUDGET PROPOSED BY SENATOR
TOOMEY ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKE
THE NEXT STEP AFTER THE BUDGET
CONTROL ACT AND I LOOK FORWARD
THEM TO ADOPT A
RESPONSIBLE BUDGET THAT GROWS
THE ECONOMY AND REDUCES OUR
I THANK THE PRESIDENT.
I YIELD THE FLOOR.
DAYS --
THE
SENATOR FROM RHODE ISLAND.
MR. PRESIDENT.
IN 46 DAYS, THE INTEREST RATE ON
STUDENT LOANS WILL BE DOUBLED,
AND ZEROING IN ON THESE BUDGETS
THAT ARE BEFORE US, ALL OF THEM
SEEM TO SUPPORT THE ESSENCE OF
THE RYAN BUDGET WHICH IS TO
IN FACT, THE RYAN BUDGET IN THE
HOUSE NOT ONLY ALLOWED A
DOUBLING OF STUDENT INTEREST
RATES, IT ALSO WOULD ELIMINATE
THE IN-SCHOOL INTEREST SUBSIDY
FOR STUDENT LOANS, PUTTING
MIDDLE-CLASS FAMILIES AT A
PARTICULARLY SEVERE
WE HAVE 46 DAYS TO LIMIT THIS
INCREASE ON THE INTEREST CHARGES
TO MIDDLE-INCOME FAMILIES AND
WE'VE GOT TO ACT.
NOW, WE HAVE SEEN DENIAL, DELAY,
DISRUPTION.
WE HAVEN'T SEEN COOPERATION THAT
WE NEED TO HELP THESE FAMILIES
THROUGHOUT THIS COUNTRY.
THE BUDGET BEFORE US NOT ONLY
ALLOWS THIS INTEREST RATE TO
DOUBLE BUT ALSO THROUGH ITS TAX
POLICY FAVORS THE WEALTHIEST AND
NOT THOSE THAT ARE STRUGGLING IN
THE MIDDLE TO JUST SIMPLY GET
AHEAD OR SIMPLY STAY WHERE THEY
ARE.
ONE OF THE OTHER INTERESTING
ASPECTS OF THE PROPOSAL IS THAT,
AS YOU LOOK AT THIS STUDENT RATE
INTEREST DOUBLING, MY COLLEAGUES
ON THE OTHER SIDE SAY WELL,
WE'LL DO IT, WE'RE FOR IT.
BUT AGAIN, ASK YOURSELF, IF
THEY'RE FOR IT, WHY ARE THEY
VOTING FOR BUDGETS -- SEVERAL
BUDGETS TODAY -- THAT WOULD, IN
FACT, SUPPORT THE DOUBLING?
IT SEEMS TO BE AN INCONGRUITY I
CAN'T UNDERSTAND.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, IT SEEMS TO
SAY IF WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD
AND DOUBLE THIS RATE, LET'S PAY
FOR IT THROUGH THE PREVENTION
FUND.
WHICH I THINK OVER TIME, FOR
HEALTH CARE IT'S NOT ONLY GOING
TO HELP FAMILIES ACROSS THIS
COUNTRY BUT IT'S GOING TO GHAIN
WE ALL SAY WE HAVE TO, BEND THAT
COST CURVE FOR HEALTH CARE.
INSTEAD OF I THINK A DEBATE
ABOUT HOW DO WE PAY FOR THIS IN
A RESPONSIBLE WAY -- AND WE'RE
CERTAINLY OPEN TO PROPOSALS IF
THEY HAVE THEM OTHER THAN THIS
PREVENTION FUND, WHICH IS I
THINK A NON-STARTER -- THEY HAVE
SUGGESTED THAT OUR PROPOSAL,
WHICH IS TO CLOSE AN EGREGIOUS
LOOPHOLE IN THE TAX CODE, IS
SOMEHOW A TAX INCREASE OR
SOMEHOW IT DOESN'T DO THE JOB.
BUT POLITIFACT, WHICH IS AN
OBJECTIVE BODY THAT LOOKS AT
THESE VARIOUS CHARGES, HAS
EVALUATED ONE CLAIM THAT, IN
INCREASE.
HERE'S WHAT THEY SAY.
"ACTUALLY, THE BILL CHANGES TAX
RULES ONLY FOR S-CORPORATIONS
AND ONLY ON PROFESSIONALS LIKE
LAWYERS AND ACCOUNTANTS WHO
COULD BE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE
TAX CODE TO AVOID PAYING PAYROLL
TAXES.
THE DEMOCRATS TOOK THE
ADDITIONAL STEP OF SAYING THE
RULE CHANGE WOULD ONLY APPLY TO
INDIVIDUALS WHO REPORT MORE THAN
$200,000 IN INCOME.
THE BILL'S INTENT" -- AND I'M
CONTINUING TO QUOTE -- "WAS TO
CLOSE THE LOOPHOLE ON PEOPLE WHO
ARE AVOIDING PAYROLL TAXES,
TAXES THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO
PAY ANYWAY."
IT GOES ON TO SAY -- QUOTE -- "
THE REPUBLICAN CRITICISM GIVES
THE IMPRESSION THAT ALL KINDS OF
MOM-AND-POP OPERATIONS MIGHT BE
SUBJECT TO NEW ADDITIONAL TAXES
WHEN ACTUALLY THE BILL IS AIMED
SQUARELY AT HIGH-INCOME
PROFESSIONALS WHO ARE TAKING
ADVANTAGE OF A LOOPHOLE."
THE CLAIM WAS RATED BY THIS
ORGANIZATION AS FALSE.
WE ARE CLOSING A LOOPHOLE THAT
BENEFITS THE WEALTHY AND SOME OF
THE MOST POWERFUL INTERESTS IN
THIS COUNTRY IN ORDER TO ALLOW
MIDDLE-INCOME FAMILIES TO SEND
THEIR CHILDREN TO SCHOOL.
I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING MORE
SENSIBLE, ANYTHING MORE FAIR,
ANYTHING THAT HAS TO BE DONE.
AND I'LL JUST RETURN TO THE
FINAL POINT ABOUT THESE BUDGETS.
AS I READ THEM, THEY, BY AND
LARGE, ECHO THE RYAN BUDGET
WHICH IS TO SAY DOUBLE THE
INTEREST RATE ON STUDENTS, DO
OTHER THINGS THAT WILL HARM
MIDDLE-INCOME AND MIDDLE-CLASS
PEOPLE ALL TO BENEFIT THE WEALTH
EAST THROUGH ADDITIONAL TAX
THAT'S NOT GOOD FISCAL POLICY.
POLICY.
IT'S NOT GOOD POLICY FOR GROWTH
FOR THIS COUNTRY, BECAUSE WE
HAVE TO INVEST IN EDUCATION.
AND IT'S NOT FAIR.
THEM.
WITH THAT, MR. PRESIDENT, I
WOULD YIELD THE FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM DELAWARE.
MR. PRESIDENT.
I RISE TO JOIN MY COLLEAGUE,
SENATOR ALEXANDER, IN BRIEFLY
MAKING REFERENCE TO A BILL WHICH
WE INTRODUCE TODAY AND WHICH WE
WILL SPEAK ABOUT IN MORE DETAIL
ON THE FLOOR TOMORROW.
THE SENATE IS AT THE MOMENT
ENGAGED IN AN IMPORTANT AND A
PURPOSEFUL DEBATE ON THE BUDGET
AND I SUPPORT CHAIRMAN CONRAD
AND HIS LEADERSHIP OF OUR BUDGET
COMMITTEE AND WE WILL CAST A
SERIES OF IMPORTANT AND
DIFFICULT VOTES ON BUDGET
MATTERS LATER TODAY.
BUT I TAKE JUST ONE MINUTE, IF I
CAN, TO SAY THAT AT A TIME WHEN
THERE IS NOT ENOUGH
BIPARTISANSHIP, I AM GRATEFUL TO
SENATOR ALEXANDER FOR HIS
LEADERSHIP AND FOR WORKING WITH
ME ON AN ISSUE THAT I HOPE WILL
MOVE FORWARD THE DEBATE ABOUT
HOW WE MAKE THE PROMISE AND THE
OPPORTUNITY OF AMERICA OPEN TO
MORE REAL JOB CREATORS.
THE RECORD SHOWS THAT A
SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF THE MOST
INNOVATIVE AND FASTEST-GROWING
COMPANIES IN AMERICA WERE
FOUNDED BY IMMIGRANTS.
IMMIGRANTS HAVE LONG CONTRIBUTED
SIGNIFICANTLY TO OUR CULTURE, TO
OUR STRENGTH, TO OUR
COMPETITIVENESS.
AND THIS PARTICULAR BILL, WHICH
OPENS UP A NEW CLASS OF VISA FOR
STUDENTS FROM OUTSIDE THE UNITED
STATES WHO WOULD PURSUE MASTERS
OR DOCTORAL PROGRAMS IN STEM,
IS, I THINK, AN IMPORTANT STEP
FORWARD.
THERE'S MANY OTHER ISSUES IN
IMMIGRATION WE NEED TO RESOLVE.
THERE'S MANY OTHER ELEMENTS WE
NEED TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT I'M
GRATEFUL FOR THE CHARNS TO
WORK -- CHANCE TO WORK WITH
SENATOR ALEXANDER ON THIS BILL
AND WILL ADDRESS IT FURTHER
TOMORROW.
THAT.
FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM PENNSYLVANIA.
THANK YOU,
MR. PRESIDENT.
I RISE TO SPEAK ON THE BUDGET
RESOLUTION THAT I'VE INTRODUCED
AND ON WHICH WE WILL HAVE A
VOTE, AT LEAST ON A MOTION TO
PROCEED, LATER TODAY.
BUT I WANT TO START WITH
UNDERSCORING THE MAGNITUDE OF
FACE.
WE HAVE A FULL-BLOWN CRISIS THAT
AWAITS US.
IT COULD ARRIVE AT ANY MOMENT
VIRTUALLY IF WE DON'T CHANGE THE
COURSE WE'RE ON.
THE DEFICIT THAT WE HAVE IN
2012, $1.3 TRILLION, FOURTH
CONSECUTIVE YEAR WITH THE
DEFICIT OF OVER A TRILLION
DOLLARS.
WE ARE NOW ROUTINELY RUNNING
G.D.P.
AND, OF COURSE, EVERY YEAR THAT
YOU RUN A DEFICIT, THE EXCESS OF
SPENDING OVER THE TAX REVENUE
HAS TO BE FUNDED BY MORE
BORROWING.
AND SO WE HAVE THE MOUNTING
DEALT -- MOUNTING DEBT THAT IS
NOW REALLY AT STUNNING LEVELS
FOR MUCH OF THE POST-WAR ERA,
AFTER THE BIG REPAYMENT OF DEBT
AFTER WORLD WAR II, THE NATIONAL
DEBT FLUCTUATED SOMEWHERE AROUND
40% OF OUR TOTAL ECONOMIC
OUTPUT.
TODAY OUR TOTAL -- OUR ACTUAL
DEBT HELD BY THE PUBLIC IS 73%.
OF OUR TOTAL ECONOMIC OUTPUT.
AND THAT'S JUST THE
PUBLICLY-HELD DEBT.
THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE
LIABILITIES WITHIN THE
GOVERNMENT WHICH, IF YOU ADD
THAT, IT'S UP TO 100% OF OUR
TOTAL ECONOMIC OUTPUT.
MR. PRESIDENT, THIS HAS NEVER
ENDED WELL FOR A COMPANY -- A
COUNTY THAT HAS CHOSEN TO RUN UP
MASSIVE DEFICITS AND MASSIVE
AND I WOULD ARGUE THAT WE ARE
SEEING EXACTLY HOW THIS
TYPICALLY PLAYS OUT, WE'RE
SEEING IT ACROSS THE ATLANTIC IN
EUROPE, WHERE COUNTRIES ARE A
LITTLE FURTHER DOWN THIS ROAD
THAN WE ARE TODAY, HAVING RUN
BIG STRUCTURAL DEFICITS FOR
LONGER THAN WE HAVE AND HAVING
ACCUMULATED MORE DEBT AS A
PERCENTAGE OF G.D.P. THAN WE
HAVE THUS FAR, WE SEE WHAT'S
ESPECIALLY IN COUNTRIES LIKE
GREECE, WHERE IT'S PARTICULARLY
OTHER COUNTRIES, ESPECIALLY ON
THE PERIPHERY OF EUROPE, THAT
ARGUABLY ARE NOT FAR BEHIND.
UNSUSTAINABLE.
AND WHAT I THINK WE'RE
WITNESSING TODAY ON THE SENATE
FLOOR IS THAT THERE IS ONE PARTY
IN THIS CHAMBER THAT IS
ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM.
THERE'S ONE PARTY THAT IS
SPECIFIC
AND IT'S PERFECTLY REASONABLE TO
HAVE OBJECTIONS AND DISAGREEMENT
WITH ANY NUMBER OF ELEMENTS IN
MY BUDGET RESOLUTION OR SENATOR
PAUL'S OR SENATOR LEE'S OR THE
RYAN BUDGET.
BUT WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS
HOW THE MAJORITY PARTY, THE
PARTY THAT'S ACTUALLY IN CONTROL
OF THIS CHAMBER, CAN THINK THAT
IT'S OKAY NOT TO HAVE AN
ALTERNATIVE, NOT TO OFFER A
VISION, NOT TO OFFER A SOLUTION
TO THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WE FACE
AS A NATION AND ONE THAT IS
IMMINENT, ONE THAT IF LEFT
UNADDRESSED CERTAINLY WILL
RESULT IN A CRISIS.
IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF WHEN.
I THINK THIS IS AN UNACCEPTABLE
ABDICATION OF RESPONSIBILITY.
BUT THAT'S WHERE WE ARE.
I WOULD ARGUE THAT WHAT GOT US
INTO THIS PROBLEM IS TOO MUCH
SPENDING.
IF YOU -- YOU LOOK AT THE
NUMBERS, THEY -- THEY SPEAK
VOLUMES.
SINCE 2000, FEDERAL SPENDING HAS
MORE THAN DOUBLED.
WE TOOK SPENDING WHICH WAS AS
RECENTLY AS 2007 ONLY A LITTLE
OF OUR TOTAL ECONOMIC
OUTPUT, GREW THAT TO 24% OF OUR
ECONOMIC OUTPUT.
THAT'S A TREMENDOUS SURGE NOT
JUST IN THE ABSOLUTE DOLLARS OF
SPENDING BUT IN THE RELATIVE
SIZE OF SPENDING RELATIVE TO OUR
ECONOMY.
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S BUDGET IS NOT
THIS.
IT WAS PUT ON THE FLOOR OF THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND GOT
PRECISELY ZERO VOTES.
IT FAILED BY 414-0, MEANING NOT
A SINGLE DEMOCRAT WANTED TO VOTE
FOR THE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL.
I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY.
THE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL IS TO
INCREASE SPENDING, INCREASE
TAXES AND INCREASE DEBT.
THE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL CLAIMS
TO LEVEL OFF DEBT AS A
PERCENTAGE OF G.D.P. FOR A BRIEF
TIME BUTTER THEN IT STARTS TO
GROW AGAIN.
AND THE REASON IS THAT THE
PRESIDENT ABSOLUTELY REFUSES TO
OFFER A BUDGET RESOLUTION THAT
SOLVES THIS PROBLEM IS BECAUSE
HE'S -- HE REFUSES TO DEAL WITH
THE REAL UNDERLYING DRIVER OF
THIS WHICH WE ALL KNOW ARE THE
BIG ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS.
THE CURRENT STRUCTURE OF THESE
PROGRAMS IS JUST UNSUSTAINABLE.
AND IF ANYONE DOUBTS IT, LOOK AT
WHAT C.B.O. HAS SHOWN US AND HAS
TOLD US.
BY 2021, JUST NINE YEARS FROM
NOW, IF YOU TAKE THREE
CATEGORIES OF FEDERAL SPENDING
SPENDING -- THE SOCIAL SECURITY
PROGRAM, INTEREST ON OUR DEBT
AND HEALTH CARE, HEALTH CARE
ENTITLEMENTS -- THOSE THREE
THINGS COMBINED WILL CONSUME
ALMOST 90% OF ALL THE REVENUE WE
COLLECT.
IF THE -- IF THE LAST SEVERAL
DECADES ARE ANY INDICATION OF
WHAT WE'RE GOING TO COLLECT.
HOW COULD IT POSSIBLY BE THAT WE
WOULD CONTINUE DOWN THIS PATH
WHERE THOSE THREE CATEGORIES ARE
GOING TO CONSUMER VIRTUALLY 9
ENTIRE BUDGET?
I WOULD ALSO OBSERVE, IT'S A
SIMPLE MATTER OF ARITHMETIC THAT
GOVERNMENT PROGRAM CAN GROW
FASTER THAN THE ECONOMY FOR VERY
LONG, BECAUSE EVERYTHING HAS TO
BE PAID FOR BY THE ECONOMY.
IN FACT, IT HAS TO BE PAID FOR
BY SOME FRACTION OF THE ECONOMY.
IF YOU HAVE A BIG PROGRAM
THAT'S CONSISTENTLY GROWING MUCH
FASTER THAN THE ECONOMY, WELL,
IT WILL CONSUME EVERYTHING.
AND THEN THESE PROGRAMS WILL
COLLAPSE.
DO?
RATHER THAN WAITING FOR THAT DAY
TO COME, SOME OF US ARE
PROPOSING SPECIFIC SOLUTIONS FOR
THIS PROBLEM.
MEDICARE IS GROWING MUST FASTER
THAN THE ECONOMY.
MEDICAID IS GROWING ARGUABLY AT
LEAST TWO TIMES AS FAST AS THE
ECONOMY.
OTHER MANDATORY HEALTH CARE
PROGRAMS, IF PRESIDENT OBAMA
GETS HIS WAY, WILL GROW EVEN
THIS IS ALL COMPLETELY
UNSUSTAINABLE AND WE'RE GOING TO
FIX THIS PROBLEM, THE QUESTION
IS WHETHER WE FIX IT WHILE WE
HAVE THIS WINDOW OF TIME WHEN
WE'RE STILL ABLE TO BORROW THE
MASSIVE SUMS THAT WE'RE
ROUTINELY BORROWING, OR WILL WE
WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE A FULL-BLOWN
CRISIS, THE BOND MARKETS HUSBAND
IS US DOWN AND THEN WE HAVE
SUDDEN, DRACONIAN AND REALLY
VERY DISRUPTIVE AND PAINFUL
DECISIONS TO MAKE?
I WOULD RATHER DO THIS WHILE WE
THIS MOMENT.
CHANGE THE COURSE WE'RE ON AND
PATH.
SO I'VE SUBMITTED A BUDGET FOR
THE SECOND CONSECUTIVE YEAR THAT
PUTS US ON A PATH TO BALANCE.
MY BUDGET BALANCES WITHIN THE
TEN-YEAR HISTORICAL WINDOW OF
BUDGET RESOLUTIONS.
IT ACTUALLY BALANCES IN THE
EIGHTH YEAR AND RUNS A VERY
NINTH YEAR.
I DO THAT IN PART BY REDUCING
THE TOATLEZ LEVEL OF SPENDING --
TOTAL LEVEL OF SPENDING RELATIVE
TO G.D.P. AS COMPARED TO THE
ALTERNATIVE BUDGETS.
SPECIFICALLY, THE PRESIDENT'S
ALTERNATIVE OR C.B.O.'S.
I CAN'T COMPARE IT TO THE SENATE
DEMOCRAT ALTERNATIVE BUDGET
BECAUSE THAT DOESN'T EXIST.
WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE SENATE
DEMOCRAT PROPOSAL IS.
BUT I'VE GOT ONE AND SO I'LL
ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT.
MY PROPOSAL IS THAT WE GET
SPENDING DOWN TO ABOUT 18.3% OF
THAT IS ABOUT THE SAME LEVEL OF
REVENUE HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN
AND THEREBY BRINGS OUR BUDGET
INTO BALANCE.
NOW, SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE
SUGGESTED THAT THERE ARE
DRACONIAN SPENDING CUTS THAT GET
US HERE.
BUT LET ME BE VERY SPECIFIC
ABOUT WHAT SPENDING CUTS ARE
NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THIS.
IN 2013, SPENDING IN MY BUDGET
IS 2.9% BELOW WHAT IT IS IN
2012, WHICH MEANS THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT WILL SPEND, UNDER MY
BUDGET, IT WOULD SPEND 97.1% OF
EVERYTHING IT SPENT THE PREVIOUS
YEAR.
PEOPLE CAN DECIDE WHETHER THAT
CONSTITUTES DRACONIAN CUTS.
NOW, HERE THE AMAZING THING.
AFTER THAT, ON AVERAGE OVER THE
TEN-YEAR WINDOW, MY BUDGET CALLS
FOR FEDERAL SPENDING TO
INCREASES.
AND, IN FACT, TO INCREASE AT
YEAR.
SEE, THIS IS MY POINT.
THIS IS AN EMINENTLY SOLVABLE
ALL WE NEED TO DO IS CUT OFF
SOME OF THE EXCESS, RESTRUCTURE
CERTAIN PROGRAMS AND ALLOW
THE -- THE GOVERNMENT SPEND CAN
GO GROW, IT JUST CAN'T GROW
QUITE AS RAPIDLY AS IT'S
CURRENTLY PROJECTED TO DO.
AND IF WE GET THAT UNDER
CONTROL, WE CAN PUT OURSELVES ON
A SUSTAINABLE PATH.
ANOTHER PART OF THIS IS TO HAVE
POLICIES THAT MAXIMIZE ECONOMIC
GROWTH.
I MEAN, THAT'S AN IMPORTANT GOAL
IN AND OF ITSELF BUT IT'S ALSO
THE PATH TO RESTORING BALANCE
BECAUSE STRONGER GROWTH
TREASURY.
WELL, MY BUDGET COULD DO THAT
WITHOUT RAISING TAXES.
WHAT I WOULD DO IS HAVE
PRO-GROWTH TAX REFORM THAT'S
COMPARABLE IN SPIRIT AND IN THE
DIRECTION IT GOES TO ALL OF THE
BIPARTISAN COMMISSIONS THAT HAVE
LOOKED AT THIS, WHETHER IT'S
SIMPSON-BOWLES OR
RIVLIN-DOMENICI OR ANY OF THE
OTHERS.
I -- I KNOW THERE IS BROAD
BIPARTISAN CONSENSUS ON THE --
THE PRINCIPLE THAT WE'D HAVE
STRONGER ECONOMIC GROWTH IF WE
SIMPLIFIED THE CODE, BROADEN THE
BASE ON WHICH WE APPLY TAXES AND
THEN APPLY THOSE TAXES BUT AT
LOWER MARGINAL RATES.
THAT'S WHAT MY BUDGET CALLS FOR.
IT REALLY SHOULDN'T BE ALL THAT
CONTROVERSIAL TO MOVE IN THIS
TAX SIMPLIFYING,
LOWERING MARGINAL RATES AND
OFFSETTING THE REDUCED REVENUE
BY REDUCING THE VALUE OF
LOOPHOLES AND WRITE-OFFS.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF AREAS THAT
I THINK ARE IMPORTANT AREAS
WHERE THERE IS BIPARTISAN
SUPPORT FOR ELEMENTS WITHIN MY
BUDGET.
ONE IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES SUGGESTED IN HIS
BUDGET THAT VERY WEALTHY SENIOR
CITIZENS CONTRIBUTE A LITTLE BIT
MORE FOR THE MEDICARE BENEFITS
THAT THEY OBTAIN.
SOME MEANS-TESTING ALREADY
OCCURS WITHIN MEDICARE, BUT I
HAPPEN TO AGREE WITH THE
PRESIDENT THAT IT'S REASONABLE,
ESPECIALLY UNDER THESE
CIRCUMSTANCES, TO ASK THE
WEALTHIEST MEMBERS OF OUR
SOCIETY TO PAY A LITTLE MORE FOR
THE BENEFITS THEY'RE GETTING
FROM THE GOVERNMENT.
SO MY BUDGET ADOPTS THE
PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL OF
EXPANDING MEANS-TESTING,
EXPANDING THE CONTRIBUTION WE'D
ASK FROM THE WEALTHIEST
AMERICANS FOR THEIR MEDICARE
BENEFITS.
I ALSO INCLUDE IN MY BUDGET A
LONG-TERM REFORM FOR MEDICARE
THAT MAKES MEDICARE VIABLE.
NOW, THIS HAS BEEN
MUCH-MALIGNED, DESPITE THE FACT
THAT ONE OF OUR DEMOCRATIC
SENATE CLERKS SENATOR WYDEN,
SUPPORTS THIS APPROACH AS WELL.
ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO
EMPHASIZE IS THIS IS A DIFFERENT
PLAN THAN WHAT IT WAS LAST YEAR.
LAST YEAR THERE WAS A CRITICISM
THAT ANY PREMIUM SUPPORT MODEL
THAT ESTABLISHES THE AMOUNT OF
MONEY GIVEN TO SENIORS TO
PURCHASE HEALTH CARE AT A FIXED
DOLLAR AMOUNT WAS A FLAWED
APPROACH BECAUSE WHAT IF HEALTH
CARE COSTS ROSE MORE RAPIDLY
THAN THAT AMOUNT COULD AFFORD
PAY FOR?
THAT'S VALID CONCERN.
AND SO THERE IS A DIFFERENT
DYNAMIC, A WHOLE DIFFERENT
MECHANISM IN THIS PROPOSAL --
THAT'S IN THE HOUSE-PASS BUDGET
AND IN MY BUDGET -- AND I THINK
IT IS PART OF THE REASON WHY THE
DEMOCRATIC SENATOR HAS EMBRACED
THIS AND ALICE RIVLIN, A FORMER
SENIOR MEMBER OF THE CLINTON
THIS.
BECAUSE THE SIDE THATTER YOU'D
HAVE IDEA -- THE IDEA IS THAT
YOU'D HAVE COMPETITION AND YOU'D
SET THE PREMIUM BASED ON THE
SECOND-LOWEST BID FOR THE HEALTH
PROVIDE.
THEREBY ENSURING THAT A SENIOR
CITIZEN WOULD HAVE ENOUGH MONEY
TO PURCHASE THAT PLAN.
NOT ONLY THAT BUT WE GO FURTHER
AND WE INCLUDE THE TRADITIONAL
FEE-FOR-SERVICE MEDICARE SYSTEM
FOR WHICH SENIORS ARE CURRENTLY
ACCUSTOMED.
WE INCLUDE THAT AS ONE OF THE
PLANS THAT WOULD BID.
SO IT IS ABSOLUTELY THE CASE
THAT ANY SENIOR CITIZEN THAT
WANTED TO STAY WITH THE
TRADITIONAL FEE-FOR-SERVICE
MEDICARE PROGRAM COULD DO THAT
UNDER THE REFORM PLANS.
NOW, I HAPPEN TO BELIEVE THAT IN
AN INNOVATIVE MARKETPLACE THERE
ARE GOING TO BE MORE ATTRACTIVE
OPTIONS, AND I HAPPEN KNOW THAT
UNDER THIS SYSTEM, THERE ARE A
LOT OF SENIORS -- MY PARENTS
INCLUDED -- WHO HAVE TO WAIT FOR
EVERY TO SEE A -- FOREVER TO SEE
PART OF THE PROBLEM IS BECAUSE
OF THIS DYSFUNCTIONAL SYSTEM WE
IT IS ALREADY COSTING US ACCESS
AND QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE.
SO I THINK THIS REFORM WILL MAKE
MEDICARE A BETTER PROGRAM FOR
THE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT.
AND, YEAH, WE'LL HAVE THE VERY
WEALTHY TO PAY A LITTLE MORE FOR
I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE.
THOSE SENIORS WHO WANT TO STAY
IN TRADITIONAL MEDICARE, THEY
COULD DO THAT, TOO.
IN THE WORLD.
IN THE PROCESS YOU CAN PUT IT ON
A SUSTAINABLE PATH.
AND IT HAS SOME BIPARTISAN
SUPPORT.
BUT, MR. PRESIDENT, WE -- WE
DON'T REALLY KNOW THE EXTENT OF
THAT BECAUSE OUR DEMOCRATIC
COLLEAGUES REFUSE TO PUT A
BUDGET, REFUSE TO MARK UP A
BUDGET IN COMMITTEE, PRESENT ONE
ON THE SENATE FLOOR, AND WHAT
I'M HOPING -- AND I GUESS WHAT
I'LL CLOSE WITH IS THIS REQUEST,
AND THAT IS VOTE FOR THE MOAS
MOTION TO-- VOTEFOR THE MOTION TO PROCEED.
LET'S GET ON MY BUDGET.
AND LET'S HAVE A DEBATE ON THIS
AND LATHE SEE WHERE PEOPLE ARE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE EVER
GOING TO REACH THE COMPROMISE
THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO
REACH TO PUT US ON A SUSTAINABLE
PATH IF ONE PARTY IS
CONSISTENTLY PUTTING OUT A WHOLE
LANGRANGE OF IDEAS AN IDEAS AND THE OTHER
PARTY REFUSES.
HOW DO YOU NEGOTIATE WITH
SOMEBODY WHO DOESN'T HAVE A
POSITION?
HOW DO YOU HAVE THAT DISCUSSION?
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF MY
DEMOCRATIC COLLEAGUES AGREE WITH
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES AND MY OWN THOUGHT THAT
WE OUGHT TO ASK WEALTHY SENIORS
TO PAY A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR
THEIR MEDICARE BENEFITS, BUT IF
WE GO GOT ON THE BILL, WE COULD
FIND OUT WHERE THE CONSENSUS IS.
I JUST THAT I THIS IS TOO BIG
AND TOO IMPORTANT AN ISSUE NOT
TO ADDRESS.
AND SO THE WAY TO ADDRESS IT IS
TO VOTE "YES" ON THE MOTION TO
PROCEED, TO GET ON A BUDGET
RESOLUTION, AND THEN LET'S HAVE
THAT DISCUSSION, LET'S LET THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE SEE IT, LET'S
TAKE THEIR IDEAS, LET'S TAKE ALL
THE IDEAS WE'VE GOT AND LET'S
SEE IF WE CAN MAKE SOME
BUT THERE'S AN UNAMBIGUOUS FACT
THAT I WANT TO UNDERSCOAMPLET
THERE'S ONE WITH PARTY THAT IS
SHOWING UP AT THIS DEBATE.
THREE REPUBLICAN SENATORS WHO
ARE PROPOSING BUDGET
RESOLUTIONS, COMPREHENSIVE
DOCUMENTS THAT ADDRESS THE
ENTITLEMENT REFORM WE NEED,
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS
THAT WE NEED, AND THE TAX REFORM
THAT WILL HELP GROW THIS ECONOMY
AND GENERATE THE REVENUE THAT WE
NEED.
WE'VE DONE THAT.
AND AS I SAY, IT'S PERFECTLY
FAIR AND UNDERSTANDABLE AND
LEGITIMATE TO CRITICIZE ANY
ASPECT OF ANY OF THAT.
BUT IT'S, I THINK, AN
OBLIGATION, ESPECIALLY OF THE
MAJORITY PARTY, TO OFFER ITS
VISION, ITS VIEW, ITS
ALTERNATIVE.
SO, MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD URGE
MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE IN FAVOR
OF THIS MOTION TO PROCEED,
ALLOWS TO GET ON WITH ADDRESSING
THE SINGLE-MOST PRESSING PROBLEM
FACING OUR COUNTRY TODAY:
RESTORING A FISCALLY VIABLE PATH
A LOUSEALLOWS US TO HAVE STRONG
ECONOMIC GROWTH.
I THANK THE
SENATOR.
SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.
SENATOR
WHITEHOUSE, I THINK WE ALREADY
ALLOCATED EIGHT MINUTES TO
SENATOR WHITEHOUSE, IS THAT
THE
SENATOR IS CORRECT.
IT WAS PART OF AN
UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT SO
THAT WE COULD MANAGES THE TIME
ON-- SO THAT WE COULD MANAGE THE
TIME ON THE FLOOR BETTER.
I WOULD SAY TO THE SENATOR, WE
SIDE.
THEY HAVE, I THIS I, 100 MINUTES
LEFT ON THEIR SIDE.
SO -- AND WE HAVE SEVEN SENATORS
SO --
IT JUST ABOUT
WORKS FROM THE MATH.
IT WORKS.
I THANK THE SENATOR.
SENATOR FROM RHODE ISLAND.
THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, MR. PRESIDENT.
LET ME THANK SENATOR CONRAD FOR
ISSUE.
I WOULD NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT
WITH THE CONCLUSION OF SENATOR
TOOMEY'S REMARKS, FOLLOWING
SENATOR REED'S, I THINK FOR THE
FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF THE
SENATE, WE HAD BACK-TO-BACK
PRESENTATIONS BY TWO SEPARATE
SENATOR GRADUATES FROM LaSALLE
ACADEMY IN RHODE ISLAND.
BUT I DID NOTE IN HIS REMARKS
HIS REFERENCES TO THE MAG IF MAGNITUDE
OF THIS CHACIALTION TO THE
FULL-BLOWN CRISIS THAT HE
PERCEIVES, THAT THE COMPLETELY
UNSUSTAINABLE NATURE OF OUR
OUTWARD DEBT, TO THIS BEING TOO
BIG AND TOO IMPORTANT NOT TO
ADDRESS, AND THAT THIS IS THE
SINGLE-MOST PRESSING PROBLEM OUR
COUNTRY FACES, ALL OF WHICH
MIGHT LEAD ONE TO CONCLUDE THAT
THIS WOULD BE THE MOST IMPORTANT
THING THAT THEY WOULD PURSUE.
AND YET WE KNOW IT IS LESS
IMPORTANT TO THEM TO ADDRESS OUR
DEBT PROBLEM THAN IT IS TO
PROTECT OIL AND GAS SUBSIDIES
FOR BIG OIL AT A TIME WHEN THEIR
PROFITS ARE UNPRECEDENTED.
IT IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN
PROTECTING TAX LOOPHOLES THAT
ALLOW HIGH-INCOME INDIVIDUALS TO
INCORPORATE THEMSELVES AND AVOID
PAYING FICA TAXES.
IT IS LESS IMPORTANT TO THEM
THAN PROTECTING SPECIAL TAX
RATES THAT ALLOW PEOPLE MAKING
$100 MILLION A YEAR TO PAY A
LOWER TAX RATE THAN A FAMILY
MAKING $IS $100,000 A YEAR.
SO IT SEEMS THAT WHEN YOU
ACTUALLY LOOK AT PRACTICE, WHAT
THEIR PRIORITIES ARE -- THIS
ISN'T QUITE THE PRIORITY THAT
THEY CLAIM.
AND I WILL AGREE THAT THERE ARE
OTHER PRIORITIES THAT WE FACE AS
A COUNTRY.
THIS JULY, UNLESS WE MOVE
QUICKLY, STUDENT LOAN INTEREST
RATES WILL DOUBLE.
THAT WILL HURT OUR ECONOMY, THAT
WILL HURT OUR GROWTH, THAT WILL
HIT FAMILIES ACROSS THIS
COUNTRY.
WE HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD A PLAN
TO KEEP THOSE RATES DOWN, BUT
OUR COLLEAGUES FILIBUSTERED IT.
OUR NATION'S HIGHWAY PROGRAMS
WILL EXPIRE NEXT MONTH,
JEOPARDIZING MILLIONS OF JOBS.
WE VOTED OVERWHELMINGLY ON A
BIPARTISAN BASIS TO REAUTHORIZE
THE HIGHWAY BILL AND TO MOVE
FORWARD ON IT ONLY TO HAVE THE
BIPARTISAN SENATE HIGHWAY BILL
STALLED BY HOUSE REPUBLICANS.
REPUBLICANS MAY TALK ABOUT
JOCKS, BUT THEY ARE BUSILY
THE MOST IMPORTANT JOBS
BILL THAT WE HAVE, AND THAT
STALLING AND THAT DELAY WILL
COST JOBS BECAUSE OF THE SUMMER
BUILDING SEASON IN SO MANY OF
OUR STATES.
ONE THING THAT HAS NOT BEEN
URGENT HAS BEEN TO PASS A
BUDGET.
WHY IS THAT?
WELL, IT'S BECAUSE WE ALREADY
HAVE ONE.
THIS WHOLE EXERCISE TODAY RESTS
0ENRESTSON A FALSE PREMISE AND THAT IS
THAT WE HAVE NO BUDGET.
LAST SUMMER CONGRESS PASSED AND
THE PRESIDENT SIGNED INTO LAW
THE BIPARTISAN BUDGET CONTROL
ACT WHICH SET BINDING
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LEVELS
FOR A DECADE AND ESTABLISHED
ENFORCEABLE BUDGET LEVELS FOR
THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR AND
NEXT, WHICH OUR APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEES ARE NOW WORKING
UNDER, REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS
TOGETHER.
YOU WONK WOULDN'T KNOW THIS LISTENING
TO SENATE REPUBLICANS.
INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON REAL
ISSUES WHERE REAL JOBS ARE AT
THEY ARE WASTING A DAY OF
FLOOR TIME ON EXTREMIST TEA
PARTY BUDGETS.
THEY ALSO PLAN TO FORCE A VOTE
ON WHAT THEY DESCRIBE AS THE
I PLAN TO VOTE AGAINST ALL OF
THE MOTIONS TO PROCEED FOR THE
SIMPLE REASON THAT WE ALREADY
HAVE A BUDGET IN PLACE THAT WE
YEAR.
TODAY'S VOTES ARE NOTHING MORE
THAN A REPUBLICAN ATTEMPT TO
PROMOTE A RADICAL AND UNWELCOME
AGENDA OF SLASHING MIDDLE-CLASS
PROGRAMS WHILE PROTECTING AND
EVEN ENLARGING TAX GIVEAWAYS FOR
THE YOU ULTRA RICH.
LET'S MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT WHAT
THESE PROPOSALS WOULD DO TO
THE HOUSE-PASSED REPUBLICAN
BUDGET WOULD START BY CUTTING
TAXES FOR BIG CORPORATIONS AND
THE ULTIMATE TRAR RICH ADDING
$4.6 TRILLION, ADDING $4.6
TRILLION TO OUR NATIONAL DEBT.
TO PAY FOR THESE EXTRA TAX CUTS,
REPUBLICANS WOULD DECIMATE
PROGRAMS ON WHICH REGULAR
AMERICAN FAMILIES AT SOME POINT
IN THEIR LIVES COME TO RELY.
THEY'D START BY ENDING MEDICARE
AS WE KNOW IT, BEGINNING FOR
WORKERS WHO RETIRE IN 2023, THE
HOUSE REPUBLICAN BUDGET WOULD
MAKE IT A VOUCHER SYSTEM, WHICH
ACCORDING TO THE NONPARTISAN
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE WILL
ADD AN ESTIMATED $6,000 IN
ANNUAL OUT-OF-POCKET COSTS FOR
EACH RETIREE BY 2050.
I DON'T KNOW, BUT IN RHODE
ISLAND THE AVERAGE ANNUAL SOCIAL
SECURITY BENEFIT IS ABOUT
THAT'S HARD TO IMAGINE HOW
FUTURE SENIORS LIVING ON A FIXED
SOCIAL SECURITY INCOME WILL BE
ABLE TO MAINTAIN HEALTH CARE
COVERAGE WITH THAT KIND OF EXTRA
INDIVIDUALLY.
AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY SLASH
MEDICARE, THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN
BUDGET GIVES THOSE MAKING OVER
$IS MILLION$1 MILLION, AN AVERAGE TAX CUT
OF OVER $150,000.
IF YOU'RE OACIALTIOND IF YOU'RE
GOING TO NEED MEDICARE ONE DAY,
IF YOU ARE A WORKING FAMILY,
WHAT DO YOU GET IN AN END TO
MEDICARE AS WE KNOW IT.
IF YOU'RE MAWING OVER $1
MILLION, WHAT DO YOU GET?
AN AVERAGE TAX CUT OF OVER
THOSE ARE NOT REAL PRIORITIES.
FOR PEOPLE THAT I RECOMMEND IN
RHODE ISLAND.
IT DOESN'T STOP THERE.
IT WOULD REPEAL THE AFFORDABLE
CARE ACT WHICH WOULD REOPEN THE
DOUGHNUT HOLE.
THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT HAS
HELPED 15,000 RHODE ISLANDERS
SAVE AN AVERAGE OF $554 EACH
LAST YEAR JUST BY CLOSING THE
DOUGHNUT HOLE PART WAY AND SOON
ALL THE WAY.
PEOPLE LIKE OLIVE WHOSE HUSBAND
FELL INTO THE DOUGHNUT HOLE LAST
JULY RECEIVED A DIS COUNT ON
THEIR FRUGS AND SAVED $2,400.
UNDER THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN
BUDGET, THEY'D BE STUCK PAYING
THAT FULL $2, 400 OUT-OF-POCKET
COST TO THE BIG DRUG COMPANIES.
THE RADICAL HOUSE BUDGET WOULD
SLASH FUNDING FOR PELL GRANTS
AND WOULD INCREASE INTEREST ON
STUDENT LOANS.
WE'VE ALL HEARD PEOPLE SAY HERE
THEY DON'T WANT TO
ENCOURAGE THE INCREASE IN
STUDENT LOANS THAT WE'RE FACING FACING.
THEY ARE OF COURSE FILIBUSTERING FILIBUSTERING
OUR EFFORT WHILE THEY SAY IT.
SO THEY SPEAK FROM TWO
THE HOUSE BUDGET REQUIRES ALMOST
$1 TRILLION IN ADDITIONAL AND
UNSPECIFIED CUTS, AND THAT WILL
BE DRACONIAN.
SENATOR PAUL'S BUDGET, WHICH WE
MAY TAKE UP TODAY, WOULD ALSO
SLASH MIDDLE-CLASS PROGRAMS
INCLUDING SOCIAL SECURITY.
HE INCLUDES AN EVENTUAL 39% CUT
TO SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS AND
WOULD END MEDICARE FOR ALL
SENIORS IN 2014.
SO IF YOU WANT TO PUT AN END TO
MEDICARE IN 2014, THE PAUL
BUDGET LOOKS LIKE A REAL GREAT
OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU.
BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT I THINK
COUNTRY.
I THINK ALMOST EVERY AMERICAN
WANTS TO SEE MEDICARE
STRENGTHENED AND SUPPORTED.
MR. PRESIDENT, WE SHOULD MOVE ON
FROM THIS UNNECESSARY BUDGET
MESSAGING EXERCISE AND RESUME OR
WORK TO KEEP STUDENT LOAN RATES
DOWN AND SUPPORT GOOD-PAYING
HIGHWAY JOBS, THINGS THAT ARE
BEING DELAYED RIGHT NOW THAT WE
NEED ACTION ON. WHEN WE DO TURN TO A
REAL DEBATE ABOUT DEFICIT
REDUCTION, I HOPE MY REPUBLICAN
COLLEAGUES WILL UNSHACKLE
THEMSELVES FROM THE TEA PARTY
AND PUT FORWARD A BUDGET THAT
DOES NOT PUT BIG OIL SUBSIDIES
AHEAD IN PRIORITY OF TAKING CARE
OF OUR REAL BUDGET PROBLEM.
THEY HAVE GOT TO GET OVER
PUTTING THE PRIORITY FIRST OF
PROTECTING BIG OIL SUBSIDIES --
THE
SENATOR'S TIME HAS EXPIRED.
AND WITH THAT,
I YIELD THE FLOOR.
THE
SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.
AND I THANK HIM
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S BEEN ANY
STRONGER VOICE FOR FUNDAMENTAL
HEALTH CARE REFORM ALONG THE
LINES OF DEALING WITH THE
PAYMENT SYSTEM THAT WE CURRENTLY
HAVE THAT BY MOST ACCOUNTS IS
COSTING US HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS
OF DOLLARS AND NOT ADDING TO THE
QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE.
NOBODY HAS BEEN A STRONGER VOICE
ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE OR OFF
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE ON THAT
I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE
SENATOR'S LEADERSHIP.
WE HAVE SENATOR WICKER IS NEXT.
SENATOR WICKER, DO YOU HAVE AN
ESTIMATE OF HOW MUCH TIME YOU'D
LIKE TO CONSUME?
I'VE BEEN TOLD
THAT I HAVE TEN MINUTES
ALLOCATED, AND ISSUES PROBABLY
LESS THAN THAT ALLOCATION.
VERY WELL.
SENATOR WICKER.
THE
SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI IS
THANK YOU FOR
RECOGNIZING ME AND I APPRECIATE
THE TIME.
I WANT TO AGREE WITH MY FRIEND
FROM RHODE ISLAND TO THIS
HE SAID THE DEBATE TODAY IS
BASED ON A FALSE PREMISE.
I AGREE WITH HIM IN THIS
RESPECT: THIS IS NOT A REAL
DEBATE ABOUT A BUDGET
RESOLUTION.
THESE ARE SHOW VOTES,
MR. PRESIDENT.
THESE ARE MESSAGING VOTES THAT
WE WILL HAVE TODAY.
YOU CAN ARGUE ALL YOU WANT TO
THAT WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT'S IN
PLACE THAT WE PASSED LAST YEAR.
THERE'S JUST NO GETTING AROUND
TO U.S.C. 631, WHICH IS THE
BUDGET LAW OF THE UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA PASSED BACK IN 1974,
AND THAT BUDGET LAW REQUIRES
CONGRESS EACH YEAR TO PASS A
BUDGET RESOLUTION.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, IT SAYS ON
OR BEFORE APRIL 15 OF EACH YEAR,
CONGRESS COMPLETES ACTION ON A
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE
BUDGET.
NOW THE LAST TIME THIS SENATE
DID THAT WAS 2009.
WE MISSED THAT APRIL 15 DEADLINE
IN 2010.
THE LEADERSHIP OF THIS BODY
MISSED THAT DEADLINE IN 2011.
YEAR.
LONG SINCE THIS
BODY, UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF MY
FRIENDS ACROSS THE AISLE, HAVE
COMPLIED WITH THE EXPLICIT TERMS
OF THE FEDERAL STATUTE AND
BROUGHT A BUDGET TO HAVE FULL
CONSIDERATION ON THE FLOOR.
NOW WHAT WE'LL HAVE TODAY IS
DEBATE ON FIVE CONCEPTS.
AND I'M HAPPY TO VOTE FOR SOME
OF THEM AND WILL CERTAINLY VOTE
AGAINST OTHERS.
BUT MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT,
THIS IS NOT THE PROCESS CALLED
FOR BY THE FEDERAL STATUTE.
AND IT DOESN'T SERVE THE LAW,
DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE LAW.
IT DOESN'T SERVE THE PURPOSES OF
ADVANCING PUBLIC POLICY IN THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
SO WE'RE LONG OVERDUE FOR REAL
BUDGET DEBATE THAT PUTS
SOMETHING IN PLACE.
AS I MENTIONED JUST A MOMENT
AGO, WE PASSED THE THREE-YEAR
MARK NOW.
1,100 DAYS SINCE THE SENATE
DEMOCRATS FULFILLED ONE OF THEIR
AS I
MENTIONED, IN FEDERAL STATUTE.
A RECENT COLUMN IN "THE
WASHINGTON TIMES" POINTED OUT
THAT THE iPAD HAD NOT YET EVEN
BEEN INTRODUCED WHEN THE LAST
BUDGET WAS PASSED ON THE FLOOR
OF THIS SENATE.
BUT SINCE THAT TIME, IN THREE
YEARS, FEDERAL SPENDING HAS
TOPPED A STAGGERING $10
TRILLION.
EVERY DAY OUR COUNTRY'S DEBT
GROWS CLOSER TO $16 TRILLION.
THIS IS MONEY THAT MY GENERATION
WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PAY.
WE HAVE OUR PAGES HERE ON THE
FLOOR, EVEN THEIR GENERATION,
MR. PRESIDENT, WILL NOT BE ABLE
TO PAY OFF THIS $16 TRILLION IN
IT WILL BE LEFT TO THEIR
CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN.
ANNUAL DEFICITS CONTINUE TO
SOAR, ADDING TO THAT DEBT.
OVER $1 TRILLION EACH YEAR
DURING PRESIDENT OBAMA'S TIME IN
OFFICE.
EVEN THOUGH THE PRESIDENT
PROMISED IN 2009 THAT HE WOULD
CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF DURING
HIS FIRST TERM, A PROMISE THAT
FULFILLED.
INSTEAD, HIS LATEST BUDGET
RELIES MORE ON SPENDING, NEW
TAXES, ACCOUNTING GIMMICKS, AND
IT LEAVES INSOLVENT ENTITLEMENT
PRAPLTS -- PROGRAMS WITHOUT
MEANINGFUL REFORM.
I NOTICE THAT THE PREVIOUS
SPEAKER, MR. PRESIDENT, STATED
THAT HE WOULD NOT BE VOTING FOR
PROPOSAL.
I THINK IT'S BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A
FALSE AND WEAK PROPOSAL.
I WOULD EXPECT THAT THE OBAMA
BUDGET TODAY WOULD GET THE SAME
RESPONSE THAT IT GOT ON THE
FLOOR OF THE SENATE DURING THESE
MESSAGING VOTES LAST YEAR, WHEN
IT FAILED TO GET A SINGLE VOTE.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT FAILED TO
GET A SINGLE VOTE IN THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES.
NOT ONE REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
EARLIER THIS YEAR WAS WILLING TO
STEP FORWARD AND EMBRACE THE
OBAMA BUDGET PROPOSAL, AND IT
GOT A BIG FAT ZERO WHEN THAT WAS
PUT TO A MESSAGING VOTE IN THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TRAJECTORY.
WE NEED TO CHANGE IT NOW.
FAMILIES, BUSINESSES, AND
ORGANIZATIONS IN MY HOME STATE
OF MISSISSIPPI AND IN EVERY
STATE ACROSS THE COUNTRY KNOW
THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A
SENSIBLE BUDGET AND LIVING
WITHIN THAT BUDGET.
LIKEWISE, TAXPAYERS DESERVE TO
SEE A BLUEPRINT OF WHERE THEIR
MONEY IS GOING AND HOW MUCH WILL
BE SPENT.
WASHINGTON MUST BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE.
WE HEARD TALK ON THE OTHER SIDE
OF THE AISLE ABOUT PRIORITIES
THAT OUR DEMOCRATIC FRIENDS
WOULD LIKE TO SEE ENACTED.
THE DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY IN THE
BUDGET COMMITTEE NEEDS TO BRING
THOSE PRIORITIES FORWARD.
THEY NEED TO WRAP THEM UP IN A
BUDGET RESOLUTION AND BRING THEM
TO THE FLOOR.
THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE'RE NOT
SEEING TODAY, IS A PROPOSAL BY
THE DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY.
IT ONLY TAKES 51 VOTES TO PASS A
THERE'S NO TWO-THIRDS RULE ON A
BUDGET RESOLUTION.
THERE'S NO FILIBUSTER ON A
BUDGET RESOLUTION.
MY DEMOCRATIC COLLEAGUES, MANY
OF WHOM ARE DEAR FRIENDS OF
MINE, HAVE 53 MEMBERS IN THIS
THEY'VE GOT THE VOTES.
WE KNOW THAT A BUDGET IS
REQUIRED EVERY YEAR, AND YET
WITH THE 53-VOTE MAJORITY AND
WITH ONLY 51 VOTES REQUIRED,
THEY DO NOT BRING A BUDGET TO
THE FLOOR FOR US TO CONSIDER SO
THAT WE COULD KNOW WHAT THEIR
BUDGET PRIORITIES ARE.
THERE ARE PLENTY OF EXCUSES FROM
ACROSS THE AISLE FOR NOT
COMPLYING WITH A CLEAR MANDATE,
BUT THERE REALLY IS NO EXCUSE.
IT IS INEXCUSABLE THAT THE
MAJORITY PARTY IN THIS CHAMBER
REFUSES TO FULFILL THE STATUTORY
RESPONSIBILITY WHEN THE WARNING
SIGNS OF FISCAL CALAMITY ARE AT
OUR DOORSTEP.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NO WONDER,
MR. PRESIDENT, THAT OUR
POPULARITY RATING AS A CONGRESS
IS DOWN AROUND 10% OR 11%, WHEN
THE FEDERAL STATUTE EXPLICITLY
REQUIRES US TO DO THIS EACH --
BY APRIL OF EACH YEAR AND WE DO
NOT DO IT.
IT'S NO WONDER WE'RE HELD IN
SUCH LOW REGARD BY THE PUBLIC.
INACTION ULTIMATELYILY BEQUEATHS
A BURDEN OF DEBT TO OUR CHILDREN
AND GRANDCHILDREN.
WE CERTAINLY CANNOT BLAME THE
INACTION ON AN ABSENCE OF IDEAS.
AS HAS BEEN STATED BY MY FRIEND
FROM RHODE ISLAND, WE HAVE FIVE
PROPOSALS BEFORE US TODAY.
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S WILL PROBABLY
GET ZERO VOTES.
THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN BLUEPRINT
WILL BE CONSIDERED.
AND BUDGETS FROM SENATORS LEE,
PAUL, AND TOOMEY.
SENATE DEMOCRATS
SIDELINE.
THEY HAVE THE VOTES, BUT WE DO
NOT HAVE THEIR PROPOSAL ON THE
FLOOR, ONE THAT THEY ARE WILLING
TO PUT FORWARD AND TELL THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT THEY OWN.
MY FRIEND, THE BUDGET CHAIRMAN,
HAS SUGGESTED THAT THE UPCOMING
ELECTION STANDS IN THE WAY.
IN APRIL HE SAID -- QUOTE --
IN COMMITTEE.
THIS IS THE WRONG TIME TO VOTE
ON THE FLOOR.
I DON'T THINK WE WILL BE
PREPARED TO VOTE BEFORE THE
NOW I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR, I
HAVE THE HIGHEST AFFECTION AND
REGARD FOR THE CHAIRMAN OF THE
BUDGET KPH-FPLT, BUT I DO
BELIEVE HE'S -- OF THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE, BUT I DO BELIEVE HE'S
SAYING, MR. PRESIDENT, WE HAVE A
JOB TO DO, WE HAVE A LAW TO
COMPLY WITH, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING
TO BRING IT UP AT THIS TIME
BECAUSE OF POLITICAL CONCERNS.
I THINK POLITICAL CONCERNS ARE
KEEPING OUR FRIENDS ON THE OTHER
SIDE FROM SAYING WHERE THEY
REALLY STAND ON THE BUDGET
ISSUES.
I THINK POLITICAL CONCERNS ARE
KEEPING THEM FROM MAKING THE
HARD CHOICES.
I CAN IMAGINE THE AMERICAN
TAXPAYER WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHEN
WILL BE THE RIGHT TIME FOR THE
SENATE TO BEGIN COMPLYING WITH
FEDERAL LAW AND THE RIGHT TIME
FOR A BUDGET THAT TAKES FISCAL
RESPONSIBILITY SERIOUSLY.
THEY KNOW THAT KICKING THE CAN
DOWN THE ROAD WILL NOT MAKE THE
DEBT PROBLEM GO AWAY.
I NOTICED RECENTLY OUR COMMANDER
IN CHIEF TOLD A RUSSIAN LEADER
THAT AFTER THE ELECTION HE WOULD
HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY ON A
NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE.
THE ISSUE OF NATIONAL MILITARY
HE SAID, "I NEED TO HAVE SOME
TIME, BECAUSE AFTER THE ELECTION
I'LL HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY.
VLADIMIR."
I SUPPOSE MY FRIENDS ON THE
OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE BELIEVE
MORE FLEXIBILITY ON
SPENDING ISSUES AND BUDGET
ISSUES AND TAXATION ISSUES AFTER
THE ELECTION.
THE TRUTH IS REPUBLICANS AND
DEMOCRATS HAVE DIFFERENCES ON A
NUMBER OF ISSUES, BUT THAT
SHOULD NOT DETER A CONCENTRATED
EFFORT TO HROERT DEFICIT AND --
LOWER THE DEFICIT AND CURB
RUNAWAY SPENDING.
I HOPE THIS WEEK WE CAN FOCUS ON
CONSTRUCTIVE DIALOGUE.
I WOULD HAVE HOPED WE WOULD HAVE
AN HONEST PROCESS AND DO WHAT IS
RIGHT AND NECESSARY TO PUT THIS
ORDER.
THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT.
I YIELD THE FLOOR.
MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM DELAWARE IS
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT.
IF I JUST MIGHT --
IF I JUST MIGHT?
IF THE SENATOR COULD DO HIS
PRESENTATION IN ABOUT EIGHT
WE'VE GOT SIX SPEAKERS LEFT, AND
WE'VE GOT 50 MINUTES.
TRY.
THANK YOU.
LISTENING TO THE PRESENTATION
FROM MY FRIEND FROM MISSISSIPPI,
I AM REMINDED OF THE WORDS OF
HARRY TRUMAN.
HARRY TRUMAN USED TO SAY THE
ONLY THING THAT IS NEW IN THE
WORLD IS THE HISTORY WE FORGOT
OR NEVER LEARNED.
I WANT TO GO BACK IN HISTORY.
I WANT TO GO BACK ABOUT 15
YEARS, AND WE HAD GONE FROM 1968
THROUGH 1997, NEVER BALANCED A
ALL THOSE YEARS, ALMOST 30
YEARS.
AND PRESIDENT CLINTON SAID
ERSKINE BOWLES, HIS CHIEF OF
STAFF, WHY DON'T YOU SEE IF YOU
CAN FIGURE OUT AND MAYBE
NEGOTIATE A BALANCED BUDGET DEAL
WITH THE REPUBLICAN HOUSE AND
SEE WHAT KIND OF DEAL YOU CAN
GET FOR US.
ER SKIN WENT OUT AND NEGOTIATED,
THEY CAME UP WITH A DEAL.
IT LED TO NOT ONE, NOT TWO, BUT
THREE BALANCED BUDGETS BY THE
END OF THAT DECADE.
INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, HALF OF
THE DEFICIT REDUCTION WAS ON THE
SPENDING SIDE.
HALF OF THE DEFICIT REDUCTION
WAS ON THE REVENUE SIDE.
PRESIDENT, PRESENT
ADMINISTRATION.
AS FAR AS THE EYE CAN SEE NOT
JUST BALANCED BUDGETS, BUT
PLENTY OF BLACK INK, SURPLUSES
FOR AS FAR AS THE EYE CAN SEE.
EIGHT YEARS LATER, ANOTHER
CHANGE OF THE ADMINISTRATION,
NEW PRESIDENT HANDED OVER A $1
TRILLION DEFICIT, THE WORSE
RECESSION SINCE THE DEPRESSION.
THIS PRESIDENT WHEN WE TRIED TO
PASS LEGISLATION TO CREATE A
DEFICIT COMMISSION A COUPLE OF
YEARS AGO SOME REPUBLICANS ENDED
UP NOT VOTING FOR T. T
PRESIDENT USED HIS EXECUTIVE
POWERS TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO
HAVE A DEFICIT COMMISSION AND
WHO DID HE ASK TO HEAD IT UP?
ERSKINE BOWLES AND ALAN SEUPL
SORPBGS FORMER DEFICIT HAWK FROM
WYOMING.
PEOPLE WENT TO WORK ON A REAL
DEFICIT-REDUCTION PLAN.
11 OUT OF THE 18 OF THEM ENDED
KIND OF PLAN.
NOT A 50-50 DEAL ON DEFICIT
REDUCTION, BUT $3 ON THE
SPENDING SIDE FOR EVERY $1 ON
THE REVENUE SIDE.
$4 TRILLION TO $5 TRILLION IN
DEFICIT REDUCTION OVER A
TEN-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME.
THAT, MY FRIEND, WE'VE SEEN A
LOT OF DIFFERENT IDEAS.
WE'VE GOT A BUNCH OF THEM HERE
ON THE FLOOR.
THE ADMINISTRATION SUBMITTED
THEIR BUDGET AS WELL.
FRANKLY, NONE OF THEM COME CLOSE
TO BEING AS GOOD AS
ALICE RIVLIN HAS DONE GOOD WORK,
PETE DOMENICI, OUR FORMER
SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO, HAS
DONE GOOD WORK.
BOWLES-SIMPSON SAYS WE'RE GOING
TO RAISE $1 REVENUE FOR EVERY
DOLLAR ON THE SPENDING SIDE.
THE GRAND COMPROMISE IS
DEMOCRATS AGREE TO AN
ENTITLEMENT REFORM TO MAKE SURE
THEY ARE GOING TO BE AROUND FOR
OUR GRANDCHILDREN AND
ON THE REVENUE SIDE WE REDUCE
RATES FOR THE INDIVIDUAL SIDE
AND CORPORATE SIDE.
WE ELIMINATE IT BY HALF THE
SO-CALLED TAX EXPENDITURES IN
THE TAX CODE.
TAX CREDITS, TAX DEDUCTIONS, TAX
LOOPHOLES, TAX BREAKS.
GET RID OF ABOUT HALF OF THEM.
THAT, THE BOWLES-SIMPSON DEFICIT
COMMISSION PLAN ENJOYS THE
SUPPORT OF ALMOST HALF THE
ALMOST HALF THE SENATE.
PRETTY MUCH AN EQUAL NUMBER OF
DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS.
WHEN WE GET
THROUGH THIS ELECTION -- WE HAVE
A BUDGET IN PLACE RIGHT NOW.
WE HAVE A BUDGET IN PLACE FOR
WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT'S GOING TO
BE EFFECTIVE IN 2013.
RIGHT NOW, WE'RE SEEING DEFICIT
REDUCTION, $600 BILLION IN
DEFENSE SPENDING IMPLEMENTED
OVER A TEN-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE SEEING A
$600 BILLION REDUCTION IN
DOMESTIC SPENDING IMPLEMENTED
OVER A TEN-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME.
IF WE DON'T COME UP WITH AN
AGREEMENT LIKE THE
SIMPSON-BOWLES AT THE END OF
THIS YEAR, WE'LL SEE
$600 BILLION MORE ON THE DEFENSE
SIDE, $600 BILLION ON THE
NONDEFENSE SIDE AND SOME
ENTITLEMENT CHANGES AS WELL.
THAT.
EVEN THOUGH THAT ADDS UP TO
ABOUT $2 TRILLION WORTH OF
DEFICIT REDUCTION FOR THIS YEAR
COMING FISCAL YEAR, A
MUCH BETTER PLAN IS A KIND OF
COMPREHENSIVE, BALANCED PLAN
THAT WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN BY THE
DEFICIT COMMISSION.
MY HOPE IS AT THE END OF THE DAY
WHEN WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY,
MR. PRESIDENT, WE HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DEBATE HERE LATER
THIS YEAR, WHEN THE ELECTIONS
ARE BEHIND US AND PEOPLE CAN
ACTUALLY TURN AROUND AND SAY
LET'S TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE
RIGHT THING TO DO AND DO IT,
THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
IN THE MEANTIME, LET'S JUST NOT
WASTE THE NEXT SIX, SEVEN
I WOULD SUGGEST TO MY COLLEAGUES
TO JOIN THE EFFORTS, THE
BIPARTISAN EFFORT THAT INCLUDES
PEOPLE LIKE TOM COBURN AND
MYSELF AND OTHERS.
SENATOR CONRAD AND SENATOR
GRASSLEY AND OTHERS, AND TO JOIN
US IN GOING TO WORK ON A TO-DO
LIST PROVIDED TO US BY G.A.O.,
THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE.
THAT TO-DO LIST IS JUST FULL OF
WAYS TO AVOID WASTING MONEY.
AND IT INCLUDES WAYS TO SAVE
MONEY BY REDUCING IMPROPER
PAYMENTS THAT ARE DOWN FROM
$119 BILLION LAST YEAR DOWN TO
$115 BILLION THIS YEAR.
FINALLY HEADED IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION.
REDUCING FRAUD IN MEDICARE AND
MEDICAID.
SOME VERY GOOD STUFF IS BEING
DONE THERE TO HELP REDUCE THE
FRAUD LOSSES.
SURPLUS PROPERTY, WE HAVE ALL
THIS SURPLUS PROPERTY, A LOT OF
WHICH WE DON'T NEED.
THE IDEA IS TO GO AHEAD AND GET
RID OF THAT.
WE HAVE TOO MANY BAD INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS, TOO MANY
INFORMATION PROCESSING CENTERS.
WE'RE GETTING RID OF A BUNCH OF
THOSE THAT WE DON'T NEED.
THERE IS ACTUALLY SOME GOOD WORK
THAT IS BEGINNING TO BE DONE.
WE CAN DO MORE AND WE OUGHT TO
DO MORE.
THE LAST THING I SUGGEST WE
OUGHT TO DO IS CONSIDER MAKING
THE PRESIDENT'S RESCISSION
POWERS REAL.
SENATOR McCAIN AND I AND ABOUT
40-SOME, ALMOST 45 DEMOCRATS AND
REPUBLICANS, HAVE PROPOSED THAT
WE MAKE THE PRESIDENT'S
RESCISSION POWERS REAL.
WE KNOW NOW THE PRESIDENT CAN
SIGN AN APPROPRIATIONS BILL
UNDER CURRENT LAW, SEND US A
PROPOSAL TO RESCIND OR REDUCE
SPENDING WITHIN THAT
APPROPRIATIONS BILL THAT HE HAS
JUST SIGNED INTO LAW, AND WEE
DON'T EVEN HAVE TO VOTE ON THE
RESCISSION.
WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE IT UP OR
LOOK AT IT.
FOR THE MOST PART, WE DON'T.
JOHN McCAIN AND ALMOST
HALF OF THIS SENATE, DEMOCRAT
AND REPUBLICAN, HAVE SAID IS
WHEN A PRESIDENT SIGNS AN
APPROPRIATIONS BILL INTO LAW AND
SENDS IT TO US, HE CONSIDERS THE
RESCISSION MESSAGE AS WELL, THEN
WE HAVE TO VOTE ON IT.
WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO VOTE ON IT.
IT DOESN'T AFFECT TAXES.
IT'S NOT A DEAL THAT WORKS ON --
THAT AFFECTS ENTITLEMENT
PROGRAMS, BUT ON APPROPRIATIONS.
AND WE TRY THIS FOR FOUR YEARS.
WITH THE SIMPLE MAJORITY, WE
LITERALLY VOTE ON THE
PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL WHERE HE
DOESN'T GET A SIMPLE MAJORITY IN
THE SENATE, 51 VOTES OR SIMPLE
MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE, 218
VOTES, THEN IT GOES AWAY, BUT AT
LEAST WE HAVE TO TAKE THE
RESPONSIBILITY AND BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE TO VOTE IT.
THE PRESIDENT WOULD HAVE SOME
EXTRA RESPONSIBILITY AND I THINK
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE FOR
MEANINGFUL REDUCTIONS.
MR. PRESIDENT?
HAVE I USED MY EIGHT MINUTES?
THE
SENATOR HAS 30 SECONDS LEFT.
I WANT TO CLOSE JUST TO SAY TO
OUR FRIEND, SENATOR CONRAD, I
KNOW YOU AS MUCH AS I FAVOR
BOWLES-SIMPSON, AND I JUST WANT
TO THANK YOU FOR THE WORK YOU'RE
DOING IN BRINGING ATTENTION TO
IT AGAIN AND SAY THIS IS STILL
THE BEST PLAN IN THE ROOM.
OUT THERE.
SO THE IDEA IS WHEN WE GET TO
THE DAY, THE WEEK AFTER THE
ELECTION, WE'LL BE READY TO MOVE
AND TO TAKE IT UP AND HOPEFULLY
TO EMBRACE AND ENDORSE LARGE
PARTS OF IT.
WITH THAT, I WILL YIELD BACK MY
TIME AND THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I THANK THE SENATOR.
I THANK HIM FOR HIS LEADERSHIP
ON THESE ISSUES.
NOBODY HAS BEEN MORE SERIOUS
ABOUT GETTING DEFICITS AND DEBT
UNDER CONTROL THAN THE SENATOR
FROM DELAWARE, SENATOR CARPER.
SENATOR GRASSLEY, HOW MUCH TIME
WOULD YOU LIKE TO USE IN YOUR --
EIGHT MINUTES OR A
LITTLE BIT LESS.
OKAY.
SENATOR GRASSLEY FOR TEN
THAT WORKS OUT WELL.
MAYBE WE COULD ENTER INTO A
QUICK UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST
TO LOCK IN THESE NEXT SENATORS
SO PEOPLE KNOW WHO ARE WAITING.
I AM NOT PREPARED
TO SPEAK FOR OUR SIDE.
THAT'S OKAY.
WE CAN DO IT.
SENATOR GRASSLEY FOR TEN
MINUTES.
SENATOR CARDIN, COULD YOU DO
AND SENATOR CRAPO, WOULD YOU --
OKAY.
SO I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT
SENATOR GRASSLEY BE RECOGNIZED
FOR TEN MINUTES, FOLLOWED BY
SENATOR CARDIN FOR EIGHT,
TEN MINUTES.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. PRESIDENT.
THE
SENATOR FROM IOWA IS RECOGNIZED.
ADOPTING A BUDGET
FOR THE COUNTRY IS ONE OF THE
MOST BASIC RESPONSIBILITIES AND
FUNDAMENTAL FUNCTIONS OF THE
THE BUDGET ACT OF 1974 REQUIRES
CONGRESS TO ADOPT A BUDGET BY
APRIL 15 EACH YEAR.
IT'S A REQUIREMENT THAT THIS
SENATE MAJORITY HAS IGNORED TIME
AND AGAIN.
IN FACT, THE SENATE HASN'T
ADOPTED A BUDGET SINCE APRIL 29,
MORE THAN THREE YEARS HAVE
PASSED SINCE THE SENATE LAST
ADOPTED A BUDGET.
DURING THAT TIME, MORE THAN
$4 TRILLION HAS BEEN ADDED TO
OUR NATION'S DEBT, AND IN
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S PRESIDENCY, WE
HAVE ADDED $5 TRILLION TO THE
NATIONAL DEBT.
SO WE'RE IN THE MIDST OF THE
FOURTH CONSECUTIVE YEAR OF
TRILLION-DOLLAR DEFICITS.
ALL THE WHILE, THE SENATE
DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY HAS FAILED
TO PROPOSE A BUDGET BLUEPRINT
THAT WOULD LAY OUT THEIR
PRIORITIES FOR DEFICIT
REDUCTION, ECONOMIC GROWTH AND A
PATH TO BALANCE.
IT'S NO WONDER THEN OUR NATION
IS DRIVING TOWARDS A FISCAL
CLIFF OF DEFICITS AND DEBT.
THERE IS NO ONE IN THE
DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP WILLING TO
TAKE HOLD OF THE WHEEL OF THIS
VEHICLE.
PRESIDENT OBAMA
RELEASED HIS BUDGET, THE
PRESIDENT'S 2013 BUDGET WOULD
EXPAND THE SCOPE OF GOVERNMENT
BY SPENDING MORE MONEY,
INCREASING TAXES ON JOB CREATORS
AND CONTINUE ON THE PATH OF
ENORMOUS DEBT AND RECORD --
ENORMOUS DEFICIT AND RECORD
DEBT.
WHILE PRESIDENT OBAMA CLAIMS
THAT HIS BUDGET WILL CREATE AN
AMERICA BUILT TO LAST, THE ONLY
THING HIS BUDGET BUILDS, IT
SEEMS LIKE, ARE HIGHER DEFICITS
A BIGGER AND MORE INTRUSIVE
GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMIC DECLINE
FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS.
DURING THE PAST 60 YEARS,
SPENDING HAS AVERAGED ABOUT 21%
OF G.D.P.
OVER THE TEN-YEAR WINDOW OF
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S BUDGET,
SPENDING NEVER GETS BELOW 22%.
SPENDING GOES
UP FROM THE PRESENT
$3.8 TRILLION TO $5.8 TRILLION
IN THE YEAR 2022.
SO IT'S VERY CLEAR PRESIDENT
OBAMA IS BUILT TO SPEND.
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S BUDGET IS ALSO
HARMFUL TO OUR FRAGILE ECONOMY
BUS IT WOULD IMPOSE
$1.9 TRILLION TAX INCREASE.
MAYBE THE PRESIDENT'S PER-PERSON
IMPOSING THIS HUGE TAX INCREASE
IS AN EFFORT TO REDUCE THE
NATION'S DEBT.
UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S NOT WHAT
HE HAS PLANNED IN HIS BUDGET.
HE WANTS TO SPEND EVERY DOLLAR.
HIS BUDGET RUNS DEFICITS
TOTALING $6.4 TRILLION OVER THE
NEXT TEN YEARS.
DEBT HELD BY THE PUBLIC
INCREASES FROM 74.2% OF OUR
ECONOMY TODAY TO 76.3% IN 2022.
AND OF COURSE YOU NEED TO
REMEMBER THAT THE HISTORICAL
AVERAGE SINCE WORLD WAR II HAS
BEEN AROUND 43% OF THE ECONOMY.
IF PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT PRESIDENT
OBAMA IS PUTTING US ON A PATH TO
FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY, I'D
SUGGEST THAT THEY LOOK AT THE
ANNUAL DEFICITS OVER THE NEXT
TEN YEARS.
THEY NEVER DROPPED BELOW
$575 BILLION AND ACTUALLY GO UP
THE END OF HIS BUDGET, RISING TO
$704 BILLION IN 2022.
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S BUDGET PUTS
AMERICA ON THE COURSE OF
DEFICITS AND DEBTS AS FAR AS THE
EYE CAN SEE INTO THE FUTURE.
THE PRESIDENT ALSO TOOK A PASS
ON PROPOSING ANY REAL CHANGES TO
OUR ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS WHICH
ARE A REAL DRIVER OF FUTURE
DEFICITS AND DEBT.
AGAIN, HE IS ABSENT FROM THE
DISCUSSION.
HE HAS NO SOLUTION.
CHOSEN NOT TO LEAD.
BUT WHERE IS THE LEADERSHIP FROM
THE SENATE MAJORITY?
WHERE IS THEIR BUDGET?
WHY HAVE THEY NOT PREPARED A
BUDGET IN MORE THAN THREE YEARS?
THE BUDGET CHAIRMAN HAS SAID
REPEATEDLY THAT WE ALREADY HAVE
A BUDGET IN PLACE FOR THIS YEAR
AND EVEN FOR NEXT.
THE CHAIRMAN AND MAJORITY LEADER
FEEL THAT THE BUDGET CONTROL ACT
WAS A BUDGET RESOLUTION.
THE BUDGET CONTROL ACT IS NOT A
PRESIDENT OBAMA CLEARLY AGREED
WHEN HE PROPOSED HIS BUDGET.
HOUSE REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS
ALIKE AGREED WHEN THEY VOTED ON
SEVEN BUDGET RESOLUTIONS
AUTHORED BY BOTH REPUBLICANS AND
DEMOCRATS.
THE DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP IN THE
SENATE STANDS ALONE IN THEIR
BELIEF THAT THE BUDGET CONTROL
ACT WAS A BUDGET RESOLUTION.
IS IT -- IS IT BECAUSE THEY HAVE
NO IDEAS ON HOW TO BALANCE THE
CONTAIN OUT-OF-CONTROL
SPENDING, GROW THE ECONOMY OR
CREATE JOBS?
IF THE DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY CAN
MUSTER THE WILL TO PRESENT THEIR
OWN BUDGET, WHY DON'T THEY OFFER
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S BUDGET?
I'M SURE WE'LL HEAR THE ARGUMENT
THAT THE RESOLUTION ON OUR SIDE
IS OFFERING IS NOT A FAIR
DEPICTION OF PRESIDENT OBAMA'S
BUDGET.
THAT'S THE RHETORIC WE ARE
LIKELY TO HEAR SO THEY CAN VOTE
AGAINST IT.
THE FACT IS THEY ARE GOING TO
VOTE AGAINST IT FOR ONE REASON,
JUST LIKE A YEAR AGO, BECAUSE OF
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S BUDGET.
THEY DON'T WANT TO BE ON RECORD
VOTING FOR ANYBODY.
THEY WILL BE THE -- THAT WILL BE
TODAY'S EXERCISE.
WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON FIVE
DIFFERENT BUDGET PROPOSALS.
THREE ARE BEING OFFERED BY
SENATE REPUBLICANS.
ONE IS BUDGET CHAIRMAN RYAN'S
BUDGET.
AND THE FINAL RESOLUTION IS
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S BUDGET.
NOT ONLY HAVE SENATE DEMOCRATS
FAILED TO EVEN PROPOSE A BUDGET,
THEY WILL LIKELY VOTE IN LOCK
STEP AGAINST EACH OF THE
FIVE BUDGET PROPOSALS.
WE'RE LIKELY TO SEE THE SENATE
DEMOCRATS COME TO THE FLOOR AND
ONE BY ONE AND CAST ROUGHLY 265
VOTES AGAINST THE CONSIDERATION
OF ANY BUDGET.
IS THAT LEADERSHIP?
IS THAT CONVICTION?
THEY ARE IN THE MAJORITY, AND
WHEN IT COMES TO PROPOSING AND
SUPPORTING A BUDGET, THEY ARE
THE PARTY OF NO, AND I THINK THE
PARTY OF OBSTRUCTION.
DEMOCRATS ARE THE PARTY
FILIBUSTERING CONSIDERATION OF
BUBBLE BLUEPRINTS.
MY FRIEND, THE BUDGET CHAIRMAN,
WAS QUOTED RECENTLY AS SAYING --
QUOTE -- "THIS IS THE WRONG
TIME TO VOTE IN COMMITTEE.
THIS IS THE WRONG TIME TO VOTE
ON THE FLOOR.
I DON'T THINK WE WILL BE
PREPARED TO VOTE BEFORE THE
END OF QUOTE.
HOW MANY MORE TRILLIONS DO WE
NEED TO ADD TO THE NATIONAL DEBT
BEFORE IT'S TIME TO VOTE ON A
BUDGET RESOLUTION?
IF NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO LEAD,
PROPOSE BOLD SOLUTIONS AND TAKE
ACTION, WHEN IS?
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO
PAY A HEAVY PRICE FOR THE
UNWILLINGNESS AND THE INABILITY
OF THE SENATE MAJORITY TO LEAD
AND OFFER SOLUTIONS.
ONCE AGAIN, THE SENATE MAJORITY
AND ITS LEADERSHIP AND PRESIDENT
OBAMA ARE CONTENT TO BE ABSENT
FROM THE DISCUSSION.
THREE YEARS WITHOUT THIS SORT OF
DEBATE IS PROOF OF THAT.
THERE ARE NO SOLUTIONS.
THERE IS NO LEADERSHIP.
THERE IS ONLY FAILURE AND
PUNTING UNTIL AFTER THE NEXT
ELECTION.
WE HAVE A MORAL OBLIGATION TO
OFFER SERIOUS SOLUTIONS FOR
TODAY AND MOST IMPORTANTLY FOR
I YIELD THE FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT.
THE
SENATOR FROM MARYLAND IS
THANK YOU,
MR. PRESIDENT.
MR. PRESIDENT, THE BUDGET
DOCUMENT.