Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
VOTE:
VOTE:
DOES
ANY SENATOR STILL WISH TO CAST A
VOTE OR CHANGE A VOTE?
IF NOT, ON THE MOTION TO TABLE,
THE YEAS ARE 69.
THE NAYS ARE 30.
AND THE MOTION TO TABLE IS
AGREED TO.
THE SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT AS
AMENDED IS AGREED TO.
THE CLERK WILL READ THE BILL FOR
THE THIRD TIME.
CALENDAR NUMBER 91,
H.R. 2055, AN ACT MAKING
APPROPRIATIONS FOR MILITARY
FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
THE
QUESTION IS ON THE PASSAGE OF
THE BILL.
MR. PRESIDENT,
I'D LIKE TO YIELD TO SENATOR
KIRK FOR ANY REMARKS HE MAY
THE
SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS.
WOULD THE SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS
SUSPEND FOR ONE MOMENT WHILE WE
GET ORDER IN THE CHAMBER, SO
THAT HE CAN BE HEARD.
A SENATOR WISHES TO BE HEARD,
AND I WOULD APPRECIATE THE
COURTESY OF ORDER IN THE SENATE
CHAMBER SO THAT THE SENATOR MAY
BE HEARD.
PLEASE PROCEED.
I JUST REMIND
MEMBERS WE'RE NOW MOVING TO
FINAL PASSAGE ON OUR FIRST
CONGRESS.
IT HAS BEEN TWO YEARS SINCE THE
SENATE HAS PASSED A SEPARATE
FREE-STANDING APPROPRIATIONS
BUT THIS IS A BIPARTISAN
MEASURE.
IT IS MARKED TO THE HOUSE BUDGET
LEVEL, THE PAUL RYAN BUDGET.
WE MADE DIFFICULT DECISIONS,
CUTTING 24 SEPARATE MILITARY
WE DENIED THE VETERAN COURT OF
APPEALS NEW BUILDING, AND WE
CAME IN BELOW THE PRESIDENT,
ABOUT $1.2 BILLION BLOAT
PRESIDENT, $620 MILLION BELOW
LAST YEAR AND EVEN $2.6 MILLION
BELOW THE HOUSE-PASSED BILL.
THIS IS THE BILL THAT TAKES CARE
OF OVER 22 MILLION VETERANS AND
OUR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION NEEDS.
I WANT TO THANK CHAIRMAN JOHNSON
FOR HIS WORK AS WE GET THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE GOING
AGAIN IN A BIPARTISAN WAY.
WITH THAT, I YIELD BACK TO THE
MR. PRESIDENT,
SHORTLY WE WILL BE VOTING ON
FINAL PASSAGE OF THE MILCON V.A.
APPROPRIATIONS BILL.
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK LEADERS
REID AND McCONNELL AND
CHAIRMAN INOUYE AND VICE
CHAIRMAN COCHRAN FOR LEADERSHIP
THIS POINT.
I ESPECIALLY WOULD LIKE TO THANK
MY RANKING MEMBER, SENATOR KIRK,
FOR HIS COOPERATION AND SUPPORT
THE SENATE.
I'M CONFIDENT THAT WE WOULD NOT
BE WHERE WE ARE TODAY WITHOUT
HIS HELP AND HARD WORK ON THIS
I ALSO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR
HELPING US TO MOVE THIS BILL
FORWARD, FOR REJECTING DILATORY
AMENDMENTS AND SHOWING RESTRAINT
IN OFFERING AMENDMENTS TO THIS
A NUMBER OF SENATORS HAVE FILED
AMENDMENTS THAT ARE VERY
IMPORTANT TO THEM BUT ALSO
CONTROVERSIAL OR NOT RELEVANT TO
THE BILL.
I APPRECIATE THEIR WILLINGNESS
TO POSTPONE DEBATE ON SOME OF
THOSE ISSUES SO AS NOT TO BOG
DOWN THIS BILL.
FOR EXAMPLE, I KNOW THAT
SENATORS WYDEN AND WARNER FEEL
IN ORDER.
JOHNS JOHNS I KNOW --
I KNOW SENATORS
WYDEN AND WARNER FEEL STRONG
ABOUT THEIR AMENDMENTS REGARDING
A NAVY CARRIER ON THE EAST
COAST.
I KNOW OTHER SENATORS HAVE
EQUALLY STRONG FEELINGS ON THIS
SUBJECT.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE DEFENSE
AUTHORIZATION BILL INCLUDES A
PROVISION IN THE REPORT ON THIS
ISSUE, AND I APPRECIATE THE
WILLINGNESS OF BOTH DELEGATIONS
TO POSTPONE THE DEBATE SO WE CAN
FOCUS ON TIMELY PASSAGE OF THIS
APPROPRIATIONS BILL.
MR. PRESIDENT, I ALSO THANK THE
SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF WHO DO THE
HEAVY LIFTING AND THE DRAFTING
AND MANAGING OF THE BILL ON THE
FLOOR.
AS I HAVE SAID MANY TIMES, THIS
IS A GOOD BILL.
RESPONSIBLE.
I URGE ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES TO
SUPPORT IT.
I WANT TO THANK DAVE
SCHIAPO ON THE FLOOR FOR GUIDING
THIS, VICE CHAIRMAN COCHRAN AND
HIS STAFF DIRECTOR BRUCE EVANS.
I WANT TO THANK TINA REFERENCE
EVANS, DENNIS BALKAM AND PATRICK
MAGNUSON WHO BROUGHT THIS FIRST
APPROPRIATIONS BILL OF THIS
CONGRESS THROUGH.
WITH THAT I THANK THE CHAIR.
I ASK FOR THE
YEAS AND NAYS ON THIS BILL.
IS
THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND?
THERE APPEARS TO BE A SUFFICIENT
THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
VOTE:
VOTE:
VOTE:
DOES ANY
SENATOR STILL WISH TO VOTE?
IF NOT, ON THIS VOTE, THE YEAS
ARE 97, THE NAYS ARE 2 AND THE
BILL, AS AMENDED, IS PASSED.
THE SENATE INSISTS ON ITS
AMENDMENT AND REQUESTS A
CONFERENCE WITH THE HOUSE ON THE
DISAGREEING VOTES OF THE TWO
HOUSES.
THE CHAIR APPOINTS CONFEREES,
WHICH THE CLERK WILL REPORT.
SENATORS JOHNSON OF
SOUTH DAKOTA, INOUYE, LANDRIEU,
MURRAY, REED OF RHODE ISLAND,
NELSON OF NEBRASKA, PRYOR,
TESTER, LEAHY, KIRK, HUTCHISON,
McCONNELL, MURKOWSKI, BLUNT,
HOEVEN, COATS, COCHRAN.
MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
MAJORITY LEADER.
FIRST OF ALL, I WANT
TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO
THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE,
THE RANKING MEMBER OF THE
COMMITTEE, SUBCOMMITTEE, FOR THE
WORK THEY DID ON THIS BILL.
IT TOOK A LITTLE LONGER THAN WE
WANTED BUT WE GOT IT DONE AND
THEY HAVE BEEN EXCELLENT
MANAGERS OF THIS MOST IMPORTANT
PIECE OF LEGISLATION.
IT'S OUR FIRST APPROPRIATION
BILL.
SENATOR McCONNELL AND I WANT
TO DO OTHER APPROPRIATION BILLS.
IT WOULD BE A NEW DAY HERE TO
GET THESE BILLS RATHER THAN
HAVING SOME BIG OMNIBUS BILL.
SO THIS IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION.
AGAIN, I EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION
TO THE TWO MANAGERS OF THIS
LEGISLATION.
AS INDICATED, THERE WILL BE NO
ROLL CALL VOTES TODAY.
MORE ROLL CALL VOTES TODAY.
TOMORROW I'M GOING TO MOVE TO
PROCEED TO THE BILL THAT WE CALL
THE CUT, CAP BILL RECEIVED FROM
THE HOUSE TODAY.
UNDER THE RULES OF THE SENATE, A
CLOTURE VOTE ON THE MOTION TO
PROCEED TO THE BILL WILL OCCUR
ON SATURDAY.
I EXPECT A CLOTURE VOTE SOMETIME
SATURDAY BEFORE LUNCH TIME.
I'M COMMITTED TO ALLOWING A FAIR
AND FULL DEBATE ON THIS BILL.
I WANT THE PROPONENTS AND
THEIR VIEWS.
IF PROPONENTS OF THE BILL DECIDE
THEY WOULD LIKE TO VOTE SOONER,
IF THEY WOULD LET ME KNOW, I
WOULD APPRECIATE THAT AND WE'LL
TRY TO WORK SOMETHING OUT.
THERE MAY BE EFFORTS MADE TO TRY
TO ADVANCE THAT VOTE BY OTHERS
BUT AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, WE
SHOULD HAVE A FULL AND FAIR
DEBATE ON THIS MATTER AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO THAT.
IF I MAY?
REPUBLICAN LEADER.
LET ME JUST
ECHO THE REMARKS OF THE MAJORITY
LEADER WITH REGARD TO THE
CHAIRMAN AND THE RANKING MEMBERS
OF THIS SUBCOMMITTEE.
THEY'VE DONE A FINE JOB ON THIS.
I PARTICULARLY WANT TO COMMEND
SENATOR KIRK, WHO SERVED AROUND
HERE THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
IT'S TRULY REMARKABLE, WE'VE
ACTUALLY PASSED AN APPROPRIATION
BILL.
WE PASSED IT AT A LEVEL WHERE
IT'S LIKELY TO BE CONFERENCED
SUCCESSFULLY WITH THE HOUSE OF
SO I CONGRATULATE BOTH SENATORS
AND IN PARTICULAR OUR NEW
SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS.
I ALSO SHARE THE VIEW OF THE
MAJORITY LEADER, WE SHOULD HAVE
A VIGOROUS DEBATE OVER CUT, CAP
AND BALANCE.
AND LOOK FORWARD TO BEING HERE
SATURDAY TO VOTE TO PROCEED TO
THAT BILL.
MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD
NOTE THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.
THE CLERK
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
I ASK THEMR. REID: MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK
THE CALL OF THE QUORUM,
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
REID: MR. PRESIDENT I ASK
UNANIMOUS CONSENT WE PROCEED TO
MORNING BUSINESS WITH SENATORS
ALLOWED TO SPEAK THEREIN FOR UP
TO TEN MINUTES EACH.
OBJECTION.
I NOW NOTE THE ABSENCE
OF A QUORUM.
THE CLERK
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS.
MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK
TO SUSPEND THE QUORUM CALL AND
SPEAK AS IF IN MORNING BUSINESS.
OBJECTION.
MR. PRESIDENT, I JUST
WANT TO ONCE AGAIN EXTEND MY
THANKS TO CHAIRMAN JOHNSON.
THIS BILL PASSED NOW BY A VOTE
OF 97-2.
IT IS THE FIRST APPROPRIATIONS
BILL SEPARATELY PASSED BY THE
SENATE SINCE NOVEMBER OF 2009.
IT REPRESENTS A SUBSTANTIAL
ACHIEVEMENT OF BIPARTISAN
COOPERATION BETWEEN THE MAJORITY
AND MINORITY.
IT MEETS THE NEEDS OF OUR OVER
22 MILLION VETERANS AND THE
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION NEEDS OF
THE ARMY, NAVY, AIR FORCE AND
WORLD.
I'M VERY HAPPY THAT THE SENATE
HAS BEGUN WORKING AGAIN ON
SEPARATE APPROPRIATIONS BILLS.
I REALLY WANT TO COMMEND OUR
CHAIRMAN, CHAIRMAN INOUYE, AND
OUR VICE CHAIRMAN, CHAIRMAN
COCHRAN, FOR GETTING THIS MOVING
LEADERSHIP STAFF.
AND MY ONLY HOPE IS THAT FURTHER
SUBCOMMITTEES CAN BRING OTHER
BILLS, AND SO AS CHAIRMAN
JOHNSON AND I HAVE DONE, TO
RETURN REGULAR ORDER TO THE
SENATE AND ITS APPROPRIATIONS
AND WITH THAT, I YIELD BACK AND
WOULD SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A
QUORUM.
THE CLERK
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA.
IN A QUORUM CALL?
THE
SENATE PRESENTLY IS IN A QUORUM
I WOULD ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT THE QUORUM CALL BE
DISPENSED WITH.
OBJECTION.
MR. PRESIDENT, I ALSO
ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ENGAGE
IN A COLLOQUY WITH THE SENATOR
FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE.
OBJECTION.
MR. PRESIDENT, I'VE
BEEN COMING DOWN TO THE FLOOR
TO -- NOW FOR SEVERAL WEEKS TO
TALK ABOUT THE NEED TO RESTRAIN
SPENDING AND TO CUT OUR DEFICIT,
AND AS WE LOOK AT THE NEXT FEW
DAYS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO DEBATE -- TO
DEBATE SOMETHING THAT DOES THAT.
WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT
THE CUT, CAP AND BALANCE PLAN.
THE THIRD PART OF THIS PLAN, THE
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT,
SOMETHING I'VE SUPPORTED SINCE I
FIRST RAN FOR THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES ABOUT 15 YEARS
AGO.
THIS PAST WEEK, THOUGH, I
RECEIVED A LETTER FROM A BOY
SCOUT IN SOUTH DAKOTA WHO WAS
WRITING IN TO EARN A MERIT
AND I'D LIKE TO READ AN EXCERPT
FROM THAT LETTER.
THIS IS WHAT HE SAID,
MR. PRESIDENT -- AND I QUOTE --
"I FEEL THAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT NEEDS A BALANCED
BUDGET.
LARGER EACH YEAR.
I FEEL THAT THERE ARE TWO
SOLUTIONS FOR THIS.
IN OUR HOUSE, WE ARE CAREFUL TO
ONLY SPEND WHAT MY MOM AND DAD
THE NEEDS COME FIRST AND WHAT IS
LEFT IS FOR WANTS.
MANY TIMES WE WERE TOLD "NO"
WHEN WE ASKED FOR SOMETHING.
WITH MY ALLOWANCE AND LAWN
MOWING MONEY, I DIVIDED BETWEEN
DONATIONS, SAVING AND SPENDING.
I CAN'T SPEND MORE THAN I MAKE."
AND I THINK THERE ARE TWO VERY
POWERFUL THINGS IN THIS
STATEMENT, MR. PRESIDENT.
THE FIRST IS THAT THE NEED FOR A
BALANCED BUDGET IS OBVIOUS, EVEN
TO THIS YOUNG MAN.
BECAUSE, LIKE HIM, WE CANNOT
SPEND MORE THAN WE MAKE.
THE SECOND IS THAT THIS HAS A
PROFOUND IMPACT ON THE YOUNGER
GENERATION.
THE DEBTS THAT WE'RE RUNNING UP
NOW WILL HAVE PROFOUND IMPACTS
ON OUR CHILDREN AND OUR
GRANDCHILDREN.
I HAVE -- THE SENATOR FROM NEW
HAMPSHIRE IS ON THE FLOOR TODAY
AND SHE IS SOMEONE WHO IS FAIRLY
NEW TO THE SENATE BUT HAS
ALREADY HAD AN IMMEDIATE IMPACT
ON MANY OF THESE BUDGET AND
SPENDING DEBATES.
SHE IS ALSO THE MOTHER OF TWO
YOUNG CHILDREN, EACH OF WHOM IS
CARRYING A $46,000 DEBT.
AND I WOULD JUST ASK THE SENATOR
FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE ABOUT THOSE
TWO YOUNG CHILDREN AND THE
$46,000 BURDEN THAT HAS BEEN
PLACED ON THEM BY THIS
THAT WE HAVE.
DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE HAVING
YOUR CHILDREN OWNING ESSENTIALLY
$46,000 OF THIS MASSIVE NATIONAL
DEBT THAT WE'VE ACCUMULATED NOW
FOR THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS?
WELL, I THANK MY
COLLEAGUE FROM SOUTH DAKOTA.
THIS IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT ISSUE,
AS YOU POINTED OUT, AS YOUR
CONSTITUENT HAS WRITTEN YOU.
THIS -- AS THE MOTHER OF TWO
CHILDREN, I'M DEEPLY CONCERNED
WITH WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO
THE NEXT GENERATION IF WE
CONTINUE TO KICK THIS CAN DOWN
THE ROAD AND IF WE DON'T USE
COMMON SENSE TO BALANCE OUR
BUDGET.
UN, IT'S FUNNY, WHEN YOU GO BACK
HOME, YOU HEAR FROM PEOPLE.
I KNOW I'VE HEARD FROM MY
CONSTITUENTS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.
I'M SURE YOU HEAR THE SAME IN
SOUTH DAKOTA THAT BASICALLY ONLY
IN WASHINGTON WOULD THE NOTION
OF BALANCING YOUR BUDGET BE
CALLED EXTREME OR SOMETHING ELSE
ELSE.
I MEAN, IT'S COMMON SENSE THAT
YOU CAN'T SPEND MORE MONEY THAN
YOU HAVE.
AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE PASS THIS CUT, CAP
AND BALANCE PLAN BECAUSE IT'S A
COMMONSENSE PLAN FOR HOW WE
COULD RAISE THE DEBT CEILING AND
ENSURE THAT WE DON'T CONTINUE
ALONG THIS CYCLE OF CONTINUING
TO INCREASE OUR CREDIT AND NOT
HAVE A PLAN TO PAY OUR BILLS.
AND BORROWING MONEY FROM CHINA?
THAT'S GOT TO STOP.
WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT ALL THE
MONEY WE'VE BORROWED FROM A
COUNTRY LIKE CHINA, THAT DOESN'T
SHARE OUR VALUES.
WELL, THIS CUT, CAP AND BALANCE
PLAN IS RIGHT -- RIGHT NOW,
THERE IS NO OTHER PLAN THAT HAS
BEEN PRESENTED.
IT WAS JUST PASSED BY THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES ON A
BIPARTISAN BASIS AND WE COULD DO
THIS NOW AND PUT OURSELVES ON A
PATH TO A BALANCED BUDGET AND
MAKE SURE THAT YOUR
CONSTITUENT -- I KNOW THAT
YOU'RE A FATHER AS WELL -- THAT
OUR CHILDREN DON'T BEAR THE
BURDEN OF OUR FAILURE TO MAKE
THE REAL DECISIONS TODAY AND
CONTINUE TO KICK THIS CAN DOWN
THE ROAD.
WE OWE IT NOT ONLY TO EVERYONE
IN OUR GENERATION BUT TO OUR
CHILDREN AND OUR GRANDCHILDREN.
I WANTED TO ASK THE SENATOR FROM
SOUTH DAKOTA, THE CUT, CAP AND
BALANCE PLAN PUTS AN EMPHASIS ON
CUTTING SPENDING INSTEAD OF
RAISING TAXES TO BRING DOWN OUR
DEFICITS AND OUR $14 TRILLION
DEBT.
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT'S THE RIGHT
APPROACH FOR AMERICA?
WELL, ABSOLUTELY, AND
I WOULD SAY TO MY -- MY
COLLEAGUE FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE
THAT THE CUT, CAP AND BALANCE
APPROACH IS THE CORRECT WAY TO
APPROACH THIS PROBLEM BECAUSE IT
FOCUSES ON SPENDING.
IT MAKES CUTS TO SPENDING TODAY,
REAL CUTS THIS YEAR TO THIS
YEAR'S BUDGET.
IT CAPS SPENDING IN THE NEAR
TERM AND THEN IT PUTS IN PLACE A
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT
WOULD REQUIRE CONGRESS TO
BALANCE ITS BUDGET IN THE FUTURE
YEARS.
NOW, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S A --
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MANY
STATES HAVE.
MY STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA HAS
THAT.
I KNOW THAT THE LIVE FREE OR DIE
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE HAS A
VERY -- HAD SOME VERY DISTINCT
VIEWS AND DIRECT VIEWS ABOUT THE
ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN MAKING
GOVERNMENT'S ROLE LIMITED AND
KEEPING SPENDING UNDER CONTROL,
LIVING WITHIN YOUR MEANS.
AND THIS CUT, CAP AND BALANCE
APPROACH TO THAT, IN MY VIEW, IS
THE CORRECT APPROACH BECAUSE IT
DOES PUT THE -- THE EMPHASIS ON
GETTING SPENDING UNDER CONTROL.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIVE
TIMES THAT OUR COUNTRY'S
BALANCED THE BUDGET SINCE 1969,
THE AVERAGE AMOUNT THAT WE SPENT
WAS JUST UNDER 18.7% OF OUR
IN OTHER WORDS, OF OUR ENTIRE
ECONOMY.
THIS
THIS YEAR, WE'RE SET TO SPEND
24.3% OF OUR G.D.P.
THAT'S JUST ON THE FEDERAL
AND HISTORIC HIGHS.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE PRESIDENT'S
BUDGET, HE SPENDS SUBSTANTIALLY
ABOVE THIS AVERAGE FOR EVERY
YEAR IN HIS BUDGET.
YOU LITERALLY HAVE TO GO BACK TO
THE END OF WORLD WAR II TO FIND
A TIME WHEN WE SPENT THIS AMOUNT
AS A PERCENTAGE OF OUR G.D.P. ON
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
A PART OF THE REASON FOR THIS IS
THE HUGE INCREASE WE HAVE SEEN
IN NONDEFENSE DISCRETIONARY
SPENDING BETWEEN 2008-2010.
IN FACT, THOSE TWO YEARS IN
WHICH THE ECONOMY WAS HURTING
AND FAMILIES EVERYWHERE WERE
HAVING TO CUT BACK, THESE
ACCOUNTS INCREASED BY A
MIND-BOGGLING 24%.
NOW, THIS YEAR, PART OF OUR
DEFICIT IS ALSO CAUSED BY LOW
TAX RECEIPTS WHICH ARE CAUSED BY
A SLOW ECONOMIC RECOVERY, BUT IF
YOU LOOK AT THE TAX REVENUE THAT
WE BROUGHT IN IN 2006 AND 2007,
WE BROUGHT IN OVER 18% OF G.D.P.
IN BOTH YEARS.
SO IF WE'RE ABLE TO CONSTRAIN
SPENDING, WE KNOW THAT WE'RE
GOING TO BE ABLE TO BALANCE OUR
BUDGET ONCE OUR ECONOMY
IMPROVES, AND I WOULD ARGUE ONE
OF THE WAYS THAT WE HELP OUR
ECONOMY IMPROVE AND GET BACK ON
TRACK IS TO GET FEDERAL SPENDING
UNDER CONTROL.
2006 AND 2007, THE INCOME TAX
CODE, THE WAY THAT WE COLLECT
TAXES, IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT
WE HAVE TODAY.
WE BROUGHT IN OVER 18% OF G.D.P.
IN BOTH OF THOSE YEARS, SO WHEN
WE GET BACK TO A MORE NORMAL, I
THINK, FOOTING IN TERMS OF THE
ECONOMY, WE WILL SEE REVENUES
START TO COME BACK BUT WE HAVE
GOT TO GET SPENDING CONTROLLED
AND ACTUALLY START TO REIN IN
THE OUT-OF-CONTROL SPENDING THAT
WE'RE SEEING HERE IN WASHINGTON,
D.C.
IF THERE IS STILL A GAP, EVEN IF
WE GET BACK TO 18% OF G.D.P. IN
TERMS OF WHAT WE COLLECT IN THE
FORM OF TAX RECEIPTS, THERE ARE
STILL 23%, 24%, 25% OF G.D.P.
THAT THE PRESIDENT WANTS TO BE
COMPROMISED OF FEDERAL SPENDING.
THE GAP CANNOT BE MET THROUGH
TAX INCREASES.
IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE DEALT
WITH THROUGH SPENDING RESTRAINT.
NOW, A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO -- I
WANT TO GET BACK TO MY COLLEAGUE
FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE IN JUST A
MOMENT, BUT I WANT -- HER
PREDECESSOR IN THIS JOB, SENATOR
GREGG FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE WHO WAS
A -- WHO HAS A GREAT FISCAL MIND
AROUND HERE, SOMEBODY WHO IS
VERY FOCUSED ON SPENDING AND
DEBT, HE AND CONGRESSMAN RYAN
ASKED THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET
OFFICE TO ESTIMATE HOW HIGH TAX
RATES WOULD HAVE TO RISE TO PAY
FOR OUR PROJECTED SPENDING.
C.B.O.'S RESPONSE HAD TWO PARTS.
FIRST, THEY SAID THAT MARGINAL
RATES WOULD HAVE TO MORE THAN
DOUBLE TO COVER THE EXPECTED
EXPENDITURES OF OUR GOVERNMENT.
THEY SAID AND I QUOTE -- "THE
TAX RATE FOR THE LOWEST TAX
BRACKET WOULD HAVE TO BE
INCREASED FROM 10% TO 25%.
THE TAX RATE ON INCOMES IN THE
CURRENT 25% BRACKET WOULD HAVE
TO BE INCREASED TO 63%, AND THE
TAX RATE AT THE HIGHEST BRACKET
WOULD HAVE TO BE RAISED FROM 35%
TO 88%.
THE TOP CORPORATE TAX RATE WOULD
ALSO INCREASE FROM 45% TO 88%."
THAT'S IN RESPONSE TO AN INQUIRY
FROM SENATOR GREGG AND
CONGRESSMAN RYAN ABOUT WHAT TAX
RATES WOULD HAVE TO DO IN ORDER
TO GET OUR BUDGET BACK INTO
NOW, THE OTHER THING THAT THE
C.B.O. ALSO SAID THAT
PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, THIS IS
IMPOSSIBLE.
YOU CANNOT INCREASE TAX RATES
AND CREATE THIS HUGE
DISINCENTIVE THAT WOULD HAVE A
PROFOUND IMPACT ON OUR ECONOMY
AND OUR ABILITY TO CREATE JOBS.
AND SO WE KNOW THAT THAT AMOUNT
OF REVENUE WOULD NEVER BE
COLLECTED WHEN YOU RAISE TAX
RATES THAT HIGH.
WE KNOW THAT THE REAL WAY TO
DEAL WITH THE BUDGET AND TO GET
SPENDING -- TO GET THE BUDGET
BALANCED AND UNDER CONTROL IN
THIS COUNTRY IS TO GET SPENDING
UNDER CONTROL.
AND SO THE CUT, CAP AND BALANCE
APPROACH IS SOMETHING THAT I
THINK IS THE CORRECT WAY IN
WHICH TO PROCEED BECAUSE IT PUTS
THAT FOCUS ON SPENDING.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE
CONSTRAIN SPENDING, WE NEED TO
BE SURE WE BEGIN LIVING WITHIN
OUR MEANS.
THE CUT, CAP AND BALANCE
APPROACH DOES THAT.
I WANT TO MAKE ONE OBSERVATION
THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SAID
THE BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT
THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED BY THE
WON'T WORK.
WHAT THE CUT, CAP AND BALANCE
PLAN SAYS, IT DOESN'T SPECIFY OR
PRESCRIBE A SPECIFIC BALANCED
IT SAYS A BALANCED BUDGET
AND I THINK THAT MY COLLEAGUES
ON THIS SIDE WOULD HAVE BEEN
MORE THAN HAPPY TO WORK WITH OUR
COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE TO
COME UP WITH A BALANCED BUDGET
AMENDMENT THAT ACTUALLY WOULD
WORK THAT WOULD ENSURE THAT WE
DON'T SPEND MORE THAN WE TAKE IN
EACH AND EVERY YEAR, WHICH IS
WHAT EVERY -- ALMOST EVERY STATE
IN THE COUNTRY HAS IN THEIR
CONSTITUTION AND THAT'S WHY THEY
MEANS.
I WOULD SAY TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM
NEW HAMPSHIRE, YOU RECENTLY
HELD, I'M TOLD, A TOWN HALL
MEETING BACK IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.
I'M INTERESTED IN KNOWING WHAT
YOUR CONSTITUENTS HAD TO SAY
BECAUSE I THINK NEW HAMPSHIRE
HAS ALWAYS BEEN A GOOD BAROMETER
WHEN IT COMES TO FISCAL ISSUES.
WHAT DO THEY THINK ABOUT THIS
CRISIS THAT WE'RE FACING AND DO
THEY -- DO THEY BELIEVE THAT THE
WAY THAT WE OUGHT TO DEAL WITH
THIS WOULD BE TO -- TO CONSTRAIN
SPENDING AND TO GET OUR BUDGET
BALANCED IN THAT WAY AS OPPOSED
TO MOVING TOWARD RAISING TAXES,
WHICH IS WHAT MANY OF OUR
COLLEAGUES ON THE DEMOCRAT SIDE
AND THE PRESIDENT HAVE SUGGESTED
DOING?
WELL, I THANK YOU.
WHAT I HAVE CERTAINLY HEARD FROM
MY CONSTITUENTS, IN NEW
HAMPSHIRE WE DO HAVE A
REQUIREMENT THAT WE BALANCE OUR
IT'S NOT EASY TO MAKE THOSE
TOUGH CHOICES, BUT THAT IS WHAT
I HAVE HEARD FROM MY
THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IN
WASHINGTON THERE IS CONTROVERSY
OVER THE NOTION OF BALANCING
YOUR BUDGET BECAUSE AT HOME
PEOPLE ARE BALANCING THEIR
BUDGET, FAMILIES BALANCE THEIR
BUDGET, BUSINESSES BALANCE THEIR
BUDGETS.
I MEET WITH BUSINESS PEOPLE AND
THEY JUST LOOK AT ME IN
DISBELIEF WHEN THEY SAY I DON'T
UNDERSTAND WHY IN WASHINGTON
THEY DON'T LOOK AT WHAT YOU HAVE
TO SPEND AND BASE THAT -- BASE
YOUR -- WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO
MONEY YOU HAVE.
SENSE.
AND ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES I
HAVE HEARD FROM MY CONSTITUENTS
THAT THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IS
THAT IT'S BEEN ALMOST OVER TWO
YEARS, 800 DAYS, OVER 800 DAYS
SINCE WE HAVE PASSED A BUDGET IN
THE UNITED STATES SENATE, AND
THE NOTION THAT WE HAVE BEEN
OPERATING WITHOUT A BUDGET AND
RUNNING WELL OVER TRILLION
DOLLAR DEFICITS AND HAVEN'T SAT
DOWN AND DONE THE HARD WORK OF
ROLLING UP OUR SLEEVES, ALLOWING
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO DO ITS
WORK, I THINK PEOPLE ARE
ASTOUNDED BY THAT IN NEW
HAMPSHIRE BECAUSE THEY
UNDERSTAND THAT IF YOU DON'T
HAVE A BASIC BLUEPRINT FOR OUR
COUNTRY ON HOW THEY ARE GOING TO
SPEND MONEY, THE END RESULT IS
WHAT WE HAVE GOTTEN, IS
CONTINUING TO RUN UP DEFICITS,
IT IS CONTINUING TO SPEND MONEY
THAT WE DON'T HAVE, CONTINUING
TO BORROW FROM COUNTRIES LIKE
VALUES.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS
VERY IMPORTANT ABOUT THIS CUT,
CAP AND BALANCE PLAN IS THAT IT
CUTS $111 BILLION IN FISCAL YEAR
2012, AND IT PLACES FIRM CAPS ON
FUTURE SPENDING CONTINGENT UPON
THE HOUSE AND SENATE PASSING A
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT WHICH
IS SO IMPORTANT, AS WE HAVE
TALKED ABOUT, TO LET'S LET THE
STATES DECIDE.
REALLY, THIS IS ABOUT SENDING IT
TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY
AND ALLOWING THEM TO SAY WHETHER
OR NOT WE SHOULD BALANCE OUR
I KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER WILL BE
IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.
THEY WILL SAY YES, PLEASE
BALANCE THE BUDGET.
THIS ALSO, IF YOU LOOK AT WHERE
WE ARE WITH, AS YOU HAVE
SPENDING IN TERMS OF THE SIZE OF
OUR ECONOMY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE
OVER 24% OF OUR G.D.P. THAT WE
ARE SPENDING RIGHT NOW, WELL
ABOVE OUR HISTORICAL LEVEL, WELL
ABOVE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT
WE'RE BRINGING IN, AND YET THE
ONLY FISCAL PLAN THAT THE
PRESIDENT BROUGHT FORWARD WOULD
MASSIVELY INCREASE OUR DEBT OVER
THE NEXT DECADE, SO MUCH SO THAT
NOT EVEN ONE PERSON, ONE MEMBER
OF HIS OWN PARTY IN THE UNITED
STATES SENATE WOULD VOTE FOR
THAT BUDGET, AND SO WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT REAL PLAN TO GET AMERICA
BACK ON TRACK, THIS CUT, CAP AND
BALANCE HAS A VERY COMMONSENSE
APPROACH.
WE WILL CUT SPENDING RIGHT AWAY,
PUT TOGETHER A RESPONSIBLE
FISCAL PLAN FOR AMERICA, THEN
MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THOSE
CAPS IN PLACE SO THAT WE DON'T
CONTINUE TO SPEND CLOSE TO 24%,
25% OF OUR ECONOMY KNOWING THAT
THIS IS WELL BEYOND -- I MEAN,
THE PRESIDENT HAS INCREASED OUR
OFFICE.
AND THEN FINALLY, LET'S PUT TO
THE STATES THE QUESTION OF
WHETHER THEY THINK IT MAKES
SENSE TO BALANCE OUR BUDGET
BECAUSE I THINK WE KNOW WHAT THE
ANSWER WILL BE THERE, THAT THEY
WILL SAY YES, PLEASE BALANCE
YOUR BUDGET LIKE WE HAVE TO DO
AT HOME, LIKE WE DO IN STATE
GOVERNMENT.
THE OTHER ISSUE THAT WE'RE
FACING RIGHT NOW IS, OF COURSE,
WHAT THE RATING AGENCIES HAVE
SAID ABOUT OUR FAILURE TO HANDLE
THIS FISCAL CRISIS.
WE HAVE HEARD ABOUT THE CONCERNS
THAT IF WE DO NOT COME UP WITH A
CREDIBLE PLAN THAT REALLY CUTS
SPENDING RIGHT NOW, THAT WE HAVE
OUR RATINGS THREATENED, THAT
THIS WILL FURTHER IMPACT OUR
ECONOMY, AND THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T
OFF.
AND THIS CUT, CAP AND BALANCE
RIGHT NOW WILL PUT FORWARD
FORWARD $6 TRILLION OF CUTS OVER
THE NEXT DECADE THAT WILL MAKE
SURE THAT WE PRESERVE OUR
RATING, CREDIT RATINGS FOR THIS
COUNTRY, WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE
FOCUS ON ECONOMIC GROWTH TO GET
PEOPLE BACK TO WORK, BECAUSE IF
WE RAISE TAXES THE WAY THAT
C.B.O. HAS SUGGESTED BASED ON
THE QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR GREGG
AND CONGRESSMAN RYAN, WE KNOW
THAT THAT'S GOING TO HURT THE
AMERICAN TAXPAYER, IT'S GOING TO
HURT OUR JOB CREATORS IN THIS
COUNTRY.
I ALSO HAPPEN TO COME FROM A
SMALL BUSINESS FAMILY, AND I
KNOW THAT THE IMPACT ON RAISING
TAXES AND THE WAY IT WAS
DESCRIBED IF WE HAD TO RAISE
TAXES TO ADDRESS THE SPENDING
PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE IN
WASHINGTON, IT IS GOING TO HURT
OUR SMALL BUSINESSES WHO CREATE
THE JOBS IN THIS COUNTRY, AND
THAT'S THE LAST THING WE SHOULD
BE DOING WHEN WE HAVE OVER A 9%
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE.
SO I HOPE THAT MY COLLEAGUES
WILL PASS THIS CUT, CAP AND
BALANCE PLAN RIGHT AWAY.
THE HOUSE HAS PASSED IT, AND WE
CAN RAISE THE DEBT CEILING WITH
A RESPONSIBLE PLAN TO CUT
SPENDING RIGHT AWAY, SPENDING
CAPS AND A BALANCED BUDGET
AMENDMENT GOING TO THE STATES.
I WOULD ASK MY COLLEAGUE FROM
SOUTH DAKOTA, WHEN YOU WERE
FIRST ELECTED BEFORE YOU SERVED
IN THE SENATE, I KNOW THAT YOU
HAD A CAREER IN THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES AND SERVED THE
PEOPLE OF SOUTH DAKOTA THERE.
THERE WAS A VOTE ON THE BALANCED
BUDGET AMENDMENT AT THE TIME IN
THE SENATE, AND IT ONLY FAILED
BY ONE VOTE.
WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE OUR CURRENT
THE BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT
PASSED THE SENATE AT THAT TIME?
YOU KNOW, WHAT'S
REMARKABLE ABOUT THAT IS WHEN I
FIRST GOT HERE -- AND WE DID --
THERE WAS A VOTE IN THE UNITED
WE DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY
TO VOTE ON IT IN THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES, ALTHOUGH I
THINK WE COULD HAVE PASSED IT
WITH A TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY THERE
AT THE TIME BECAUSE IT FAILED IN
THE SENATE BY ONE VOTE.
IT GOT 66 VOTES IN THE SENATE OF
THE UNITED STATES, IT NEEDED 67.
I CAN'T HELP BUT THINK HOW
DIFFERENT THINGS WOULD BE TODAY
HAD WE PASSED THE BALANCED
BUDGET AMENDMENT THEN, SENT IT
TO THE STATES.
I PRESUME AS YOU DO -- AND I'M
SURE NEW HAMPSHIRE IS NOT UNLIKE
SOUTH DAKOTA -- WOULD CERTAINLY
YOU NEED 38 STATES TO RATIFY IT,
BUT IT WOULD HAVE PUT US ON A
PATH THAT IS FISCALLY
SUSTAINABLE.
AND IRONICALLY, AT THAT TIME THE
DEBT WAS ABOUT $5 TRILLION.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $14 TRILLION
TODAY.
THEN.
SO THAT'S A $9 TRILLION
IF WE HAD HAD A BALANCED BUDGET
UP THIS DEBT.
NOW, IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE I
WOULD POINT OUT TO MY COLLEAGUE
FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE, TOO, THAT IF
YOU GO BACK 29 YEARS AGO THIS
WEEK, PRESIDENT REAGAN LED A
RALLY OF PEOPLE, THOUSANDS OF
PEOPLE ON THE -- ON THE CAPITOL
CALLING FOR A BALANCED BUDGET
AMENDMENT, AND HE SAID, AND I
QUOTE -- "CRISIS IS A
MUCH-ABUSED WORD TODAY, BUT CAN
WE DENY THAT WE FACE A CRISIS?
I WOULD SAY TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM
NEW HAMPSHIRE THAT THE FEDERAL
DEBT AT THAT TIME WAS
WAS $1 TRILLION, AND PRESIDENT
REAGAN THOUGHT THAT WAS A CRISIS
AT THAT TIME, AND OBVIOUSLY
WE'RE IN A SITUATION NOW WHERE
THE DEBT IS 14 TIMES THAT
AMOUNT, $14 TRILLION SINCE
PRESIDENT REAGAN 29 YEARS AGO
SUGGESTED THAT WE NEED A
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT
BECAUSE OF THE DEBT CRISIS THAT
WE FACED THEN.
NOW, A LOT OF OUR DEMOCRAT
COLLEAGUES SAY WE JUST NEED TO
BALANCE OUR BUDGET, WE DON'T
NEED A BALANCED BUDGET
AMENDMENT.
MY RESPONSE TO THEM IS THAT AS
THE SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE
HAS POINTED OUT WHERE IS YOUR
PLAN.
WE HAVE BEEN SITTING HERE NOW
FOR 812 CASE SINCE THE DEMOCRATS
PASSED A BUDGET IN THE SENATE
AND EVEN THEN THAT WAS A BUDGET
THAT DIDN'T BALANCE.
TNTS BUDGET AS HE SUBMITTED
EARLIER THIS YEAR WAS REJECTED
BY THE SENATE 97-0.
WHEN THE PRESIDENT SENT A BUDGET
UP HERE, IT WAS ACTUALLY VOTED
ON IN THE SENATE, IT DIDN'T GET
A SINGLE VOTE IN THE UNITED
STATES SENATE, EITHER DEMOCRAT
OR REPUBLICAN, SO THE PRESIDENT
TOOK A MULLIGAN ON THAT BUDGET,
GAVE A SPEECH OUTLINING THE
THE DEFICIT.
THAT DIDN'T BALANCE EITHER.
SO IT'S CLEAR THAT THE DEMOCRATS
DON'T HAVE THE WILL TO BALANCE
THE BUDGET NOW, BUT IF WE HAD A
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT, THEY
ALONG WITH ALL OF US,
REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS HAVE
ALL CONTRIBUTED TO WHERE WE ARE
TODAY, BUT THEY WOULD BE
REQUIRED TO BALANCE THE BUDGET
EVERY SINGLE YEAR, AND THAT
WOULD HAVE A HUGE IMPACT ON WHAT
OUR FUTURE IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE
AND WHAT THE FUTURE FOR YOUR TWO
CHILDREN, MY TWO CHILDREN IS
GOING TO BE.
NOW, THE RATING AGENCIES ARE
CONSIDERING, AS THE SENATOR FROM
NEW HAMPSHIRE MENTIONED,
DOWNGRADING US IF WE DON'T TAKE
DEFICITS.
IT WOULD HAVE A TREMENDOUS
IMPACT ON INTEREST RATES IF THAT
HAPPENED.
NOW, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER
TODAY, THE THREE-YEAR GOVERNMENT
BOND INTEREST RATES FOR PORTUGAL
ARE 19.4%, FOR GREECE 28.9% AND
FOR IRELAND 12.9%.
AND WE ARE ALREADY SUFFERING
FROM SLOWER ECONOMIC GROWTH
DEFICITS.
THERE IS A STUDY BY ECONOMISTS
REINHART AND ROGOFF THAT FOUND
THAT DEBT LEVELS ABOVE 90% OF
G.D.P. WERE ASSOCIATED WITH
ECONOMIC GROWTH THAT WERE ONE
PERCENTAGE POINT THAN IT WOULD
BE OTHERWISE AND WE KNOW FROM
THE PRESIDENT'S OWN ECONOMIC
ADVISORS THAT THAT TRANSLATES
INTO THE LOSS OF ABOUT A MILLION
JOBS EVERY YEAR.
AND SO IT'S CLEAR THAT WE NEED
TO CUT SPENDING NOW, WE NEED TO
BALANCE OUR BUDGET, WE NEED A
DISCIPLINE IMPOSED ON CONGRESS.
A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT
WOULD DO THAT LIKE IT HAS DONE
FOR SO MANY STATES AROUND THE
COUNTRY, BUT THE CUT, CAP AND
BALANCE APPROACH, CUTTING
SPENDING, AS THE SENATOR FROM
NEW HAMPSHIRE MENTIONED NOW,
TODAY, BY OVER $100 BILLION THIS
YEAR, CUTTING SPENDING OVER THE
NEXT DECADE BY ALMOST
PUTTING IN PLACE A BALANCED
BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT WOULD
ENSURE THAT GOING FORWARD INTO
THE FUTURE THAT WE LEARN TO LIVE
WITHIN OUR MEANS, THAT WE DON'T
CONTINUE TO SPEND MONEY THAT WE
DON'T HAVE.
AN
AND SO I APPRECIATE THE
OBSERVATIONS OF MY COLLEAGUE
AS IS, YOU REPRESENT A --
AS I SAID, YOU REPRESENT A STATE
THAT HAS A GREAT TRADITION WHEN
IT COMES TO KEEPING SPENDING AND
GOVERNMENT UNDER CONTROL.
WE NEED THAT TRADITION HERE IN
WASHINGTON, D.C., AND I WOULD
SIMPLY SAY TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM
NEW HAMPSHIRE, I HOPE THAT WE
CAN FIND THE SUPPORT AMONG OUR
COLLEAGUES HERE IN THE UNITED
STATES SENATE WHEN WE HAVE THIS
VOTE AND IT SOUNDS LIKE NOW IT'S
GOING TO BE SCHEDULED FOR
SOMETIME ON SATURDAY, TO GET A
BIG BIPARTISAN VOTE IN SUPPORT
OF CUT, CAP AND BALANCE.
I KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT MY
COLLEAGUE FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE
HOPES AS WELL BECAUSE I DO
BELIEVE IT IS THE PATHWAY THAT
WILL GET US TOWARD FISCAL
SUSTAINABILITY FOR THE FUTURE OF
THIS COUNTRY AND PUT US ON A
TRAJECTORY THAT IS GOOD FOR OUR
CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN,
DOESN'T PUT THIS NATION ON THE
VERGE OF BANKRUPTCY, DOESN'T
HAVE THE -- THE ADVERSE ECONOMIC
IMPACTS THAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING
IN REAL TIMES -- REALTIME, BOTH
IN TERMS OF JOBS LOSS, POTENTIAL
FOR MUCH HIGHER INTEREST RATES
THAT WOULD AFFECT HOMEOWNERS,
PEOPLE TRYING TO GET STUDENT
LOANS, AUTO LOANS, PEOPLE WHO
ARE TRYING TO START BUSINESSES.
IT WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY
DEVASTATING TO THIS ECONOMY IF
THAT HAPPENED, IF WE DON'T GET
OUR FISCAL HOUSE IN ORDER, THAT
IS THE TRAIN WRECK THAT WE ARE
HEADED FOR.
I THANK MY COLLEAGUE
FROM SOUTH DAKOTA, AND I, TOO,
HOPE THAT WE WILL HAVE
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR THIS CUT,
CAP AND BALANCE PLAN.