Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
THAT WILL CONTINUE THE FEDERAL
FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM.
AND AT 5:30 P.M. EACH AND I'M A
VOTE SCHEDULED TO MOVE FORWARD
ON AN FTA USER FEE.
IT LETS THE AGENCY COLLECT FEES
TO PAY FOR ITS APPROVAL PROCESS
ON PRESCRIPTION DRUGS AND
ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE
CAPITAL, THE HOUSE IS NOT IN
LEGISLATIVE SESSION TODAY.
THEY WILL BE IN FOR BRIEF PRO
FORMA SESSION AND RETURN TO
LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS TOMORROW.
NOW LIVE COVERAGE FOR YOU NOW
FROM THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE
HERE ON C-SPAN2.
THE
SENATE WILL COME TO ORDER.
THE CHAPLAIN, DR. BARRY BLACK,
WILL LEAD THE SENATE IN PRAYER.
PRAY.
ETERNAL SPIRIT, WE ARE
OVERWHELMED BY YOUR MAJESTY AND
LOVE.
BUT WE ARE ALSO OVERWHELMED BY
OUR INADEQUACIES, OUR FAILURES,
AND OUR MISTAKES.
FORGIVE US FOR THE MISUSING OF
THE TALENTS AND ABILITIES YOU
HAVE GIVEN US.
HELP US TO CUT THROUGH OUR
PREOCCUPATION WITH OURSELVES AND
BECOME MORE FULLY INVOLVED IN
FULFILLING YOUR PURPOSES.
TODAY, SET THE HEARTS OF OUR
SENATORS UPON NEW PATHS, AS THEY
IS
POSSIBLE OUTSIDE OF YOUR WILL.
LORD,
GUIDE THEM TO PRODUCE CREATIVE
LEGISLATION THAT WILL FULFILL
YOUR WILL ON EARTH.
WE PRAY IN YOUR SACRED NAME.
AMEN.
PLEASE
JOIN ME IN RECITING THE PLEDGE
OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO
THE FLAG OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
AND TO THE REPUBLIC
FOR WHICH IT STANDS,
ONE NATION UNDER GOD,
INDIVISIBLE,
WITH LIBERTY AND
JUSTICE FOR ALL.
THE
CLERK WILL READ A COMMUNICATION
TO THE SENATE.
WASHINGTON, D.C,
JUNE 25, 2012.
TO THE SENATE:
UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 1,
PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STANDING
RULES OF THE SENATE, I HEREBY
APPOINT THE HONORABLE
CHRISTOPHER A. ***, A SENATOR
FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE, TO
PERFORM THE DUTIES OF THE CHAIR.
SIGNED: DANIEL K. INOUYE,
PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE.
MR. PRESIDENT?
MAJORITY LEADER.
WE'RE NOW
CONSIDERING THE MOTION TO
PROCEED TO THE FLOOD INSURANCE.
THAT'S POSTCLOTURE.
WE'LL BEGIN CONSIDERATION OF
AT 5:30 THERE WILL BE A CLOTURE
VOTE ON THE MOTION TO CONCUR IN
THE HOUSE MESSAGE WITH RESPECT
TO S. 3187, WHICH IS THE FOOD
AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION,
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT BILL.
THAT.
WE SHOULD BE OKAY TONIGHT AND
HAVE THAT AS SOMETHING WE CAN
LOOK TO AS HAVING ACCOMPLISHED
THIS WEEK.
WE ALSO NEED TO COMPLETE WORK ON
STUDENT LOANS, FLOOD INSURANCE,
AND TRANSPORTATION THIS WEEK.
WE HAVE LOTS TO DO AND A VERY
SHORT TIME TO DO T
MR. PRESIDENT, TODAY THE SUPREME
COURT CORRECTLY STRUCK DOWN THE
VAST MAJORITY OF THE
MEAN-SPIRITED ARIZONA LAW.
THAT'S OF COURSE THE IMMIGRATION
LAW.
WHILE I AGREE WITH THE COURT'S
PROVISION TO ELIMINATE THREE
TROUBLING PROVISIONS OF
ARIZONA'S FLAWED LAW, THERE WERE
ACTUALLY FOUR PROVISIONS PROVISIONS BEFORE
THEY WERE HELD UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
ONE WAS HUNDRED HELD.
I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE SECTION
THEY UPHELD THAT I'M SURPRISED
THEY DID, BUT THEY DID.
THEY JUST UPHELD A MEASURE TO
HOLD PAY FROM CHECKS IF THEY
SUCCESS EXPECT.
KEEP ITS PAPERS PLACE AND SYSTEM
PROFILING.
IT GIVES ARIZONA OFFICIALS FREE
REIN -- ANYONE THEY SUSPECT OF
BEING IN ARIZONA WITHOUT
DOCUMENTATION.
AS LONG AS THIS PROVISION
REMAINS, INNOCENT AMERICAN
CITIZENS ARE IN DANGER OF BEING
DETAINED BY FRILLS THEY CARRY
IMMIGRATION PAPERS WITH THEM AT
ALL TIMES.
IT IS REASSURING THAT THE COURT
LEFT THE DOOR OPEN.
I JUST SAY TO YOU,
MR. PRESIDENT, AND ANYONE WITHIN
THE SOUND OF MY VOICE, SOMEONE
WITH MY SKIN COLOR OR YOURS, I
DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE
CARRYING YOUR IMMIGRATION PAPERS
WITH YOU EVERY PLACE YOU GO.
BUT IF YOU'RE IN ARIZONA AND YOU
SPEAK WITH A LITTLE BIT OF AN
ACCENT OUR YOUR SKIN COLOR IS
BROWN, YOU BETTER HAVE YOUR
PAPERS WITH YOU.
THAT'S UNFORTUNATE.
IT'S REASSURING THAT THE COURT,
THOUGH, LEFT THE DOOR HOPE TO
FURTHER COURT CHALLENGES OF THIS
VERY UNSOUND PROVISION.
I'M OPTIMISTIC THAT ONCE THAT
PORTION OF THE LAW IS
IMPLEMENTED, IT WILL BE
DISCARDED.
LAWS THAT LEGALIZE
DISCRIMINATION ARE NOT
COMPATIBLE WITH LAWS AND
TRADITIONS OF EQUAL RIGHTS.
SO IT IS DISTURBING,
MR. PRESIDENT, THAT MITT ROMNEY
HAS CALLED THE CONSTITUTION OF
THE ARIZONA LAW -- SORRY,
MR. PRESIDENT.
IS DISTURBING THAT MITT
ROMNEY THAT IS CALLED THE
UNCONSTITUTIONAL ARIZONA LAW A
MODEL FOR IMMIGRATION REFORM.
ANYONE WHO THINKS SUCH AN
UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW SHOULD
SERVE AS A MODEL, THEIR NATIONAL
REFORM IS CLEARLY OUTSIDE THE
MAINSTREAM AND THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT AGREED WITH THAT
TODAY.
TODAY'S PARTIAL VICTORY AFFIRMS
THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION RAS
RIGHT TO CHALLENGE THIS LAW.
AND IT IS A RADIO MINDER THAT
THE FIX RESTS WITH CONGRESS.
INSTEAD OF ALLOWING 50 STATES TO
HAVE 50 DIFFERENT ENFORCEMENT
MECHANISMS, WE NEED A NATIONAL
SOLUTION THAT CONTINUES TO
SECURE THE BORDER, PUNISHES
UNSCRUPULOUS EMPLOYERS WHO
EXPLOIT IMMIGRANTS AND UNDERCUT
AMERICAN WAGES, AND REQUIRES 11
MILLION PEOPLE WHO ARE
UNDOCUMENTED REGISTER WITH THE
GOVERNMENT, PAY FINES AND TAXES,
LEARN ENGLISH, WORK, PAY TAXES,
STAY OUT OF TROUBLE AND ABOUT TO
THE END OF THE LINE TO LEGALIZE
THEIR STATUS.
DEMOCRATS ARE READY FOR THAT
CHALLENGE AND WE HAVE BEEN
WILLING TO CRAFT A COMMONSENSE
LEGAL SOLUTION TO THIS FOR A
LONG TIME, ONE THAT'S FAIR,
TOUGH, AND PRACTICAL.
AS I'VE INDICATED,
MR. PRESIDENT, WE HAVE BEEN
READY DO THIS FOR YEARS.
WE HAVE TRIED ON A FEW
THE PROBLEM NOW AND HAS BEEN
REPUBLICANS WON'T VOTE FOR
IMMIGRATION REFORM.
SIMPLE AS THAT.
WE'VE TRIED.
THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE TO PASS
THE DREAM ACT, WHICH WOULD
CREATE A PATHWAY TO CITIZEN
HISPANIC FOR CHILDREN BROUGHT TO
THE COUNTRY THROUGH NO FAULT OF
THEIR OWN.
IF UPSTANDING YOUNG PEOPLE STAY
OUST TROUBLE AND WORK HARD IN
HIGH SCHOOL, THEY SHOULD HAVE
THE CHANCE TO SERVE THEIR
COUNTRY IN THE MILITARY GO TO
COLLEGE AND WORK TOWARD
CITIZENSHIP.
UNFORTUNATELY, MITT ROMNEY SAID
HE WOULD VETO THAT.
THAT'S THE DREAM ACT.
PRESIDENT OBAMA TOOK DECISIVE
ACTION.
HIS DIRECTIVE WILL PROTECT
800,000 YOUNG PEOPLE AND FOCUS
LAW ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES WHERE
THEY BELONG -- ON DEPORTING
CRIMINALS.
AS WE ALL KNOW, IT IS NOT A
PERMANENT SOLUTION.
BUT PRESIDENT OBAMA'S DECISION
WAS NECESSARY, PRECISELY BECAUSE
REPUBLICANS HAVE SO FAR REFUSED
TO WORK WITH DEMOCRATS ON A
SOLUTION.
CONGRESS MUST CONSIDER A
LONG-TERM RESOLUTION TO PROTECT
THE DREAMERS AND TACKLE COMPLEX
IMMIGRATION REFORM THAT
ADDRESSES ALL 11 MILLION
UNDOCUMENTED PEOPLE LIVING IN
THIS COUNTRY.
BUT THAT WILL TAKE COOPERATION
FROM OUR REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES,
AND THAT HASN'T BEEN
FORTHCOMING.
MR. PRESIDENT, THIS WEEK WE HAVE
A LOT TO ACCOMPLISH.
GETTING IT ALL *** BEFORE THE
JULY 4 HOLIDAY WILL ALSO TAKE
BY FRIDAY, THE SENATE MUST PASS
FLOOD INSURANCE LEGISLATION,
ALLOW MILLIONS OF AMERICANS TO
CLOSE ON NEW PROPERTIES; WE MUST
SEND TO PRESIDENT OBAMA A BILL
TO EASE DRUG SHORTAGES.
THE F.D.A. BILL.
WE NEED TO PROTECT 3 MILLION
JOBS.
AND THE DEADLINE TO STOP STUDENT
LOAN RATES FROM TROUBLING FOR 7
MILLION STUDENTS LOOMS AT THE
END OF THIS WEEK AS WELL.
I'M PUTTING MY COLLEAGUES ON
NOTICE, MR. PRESIDENT, THE
SENATE WILL STAY AS LONG AS WE
NEXT TO COMPLETE THIS
SUBSTANTIAL WORKLOAD.
WE HOPE THERE WILL BE
COOPERATION, NOT ONLY IN THIS
BODY BUT ALSO IN THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES.
I ALERT EVERYONE, THAT WE HAVE A
LOT TO DO.
EXSTEAMLY IMPORTANT PIECES OF
LEGISLATION, AND WE'VE GOT TO
COMPLETE THEM BEFORE WE LEAVE
HERE THIS WEEK.
WHAT IS THE BUSINESS OF THE DAY,
UNDER
THE PREVIOUS ORDER, THE
LEADERSHIP IS TIME IS RESERVED.
UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER, THE
OF THE MOTION TO PROCEED TO
S. 1940, WHICH THE CLERK WILL
REPORT.
MOTION TO PROCEED
TO S. 1940, A GILL TO AMEND THE
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE ACT OF
1968, AND SO FORTH AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES.
THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
CALL:
QUORUM CALL:
CALL:
QUORUM CALL:
THE
SENATOR FROM IOWA.
I ASK THAT THE
QUORUM CALL BE SUSPENDED.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. PRESIDENT,
SINCE THE VICTORY OF THE
SOCIALIST CANDIDATE FOR THE
PRESIDENT OF FRANCE, OPPONENTS
OF FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY HAVE
FOUND RENEWED VIGOR FOR
IDEOLOGY, MORE
STIMULUS, AS WE CALL IT MERE IN
THIS COUNTRY, AND THERE IS
INTEREST IN THIS COUNTRY ALSO
MAYBE IN MORE FISCAL STIMULUS.
THE NEW FRENCH PRESIDENT TALKED
ABOUT CHOOSING GROWTH OVER
AUSTERITY.
MANY LIBERAL PUNDITS AND
POLITICIANS ON THIS SIDE OF THE
ATLANTIC HAVE NOW BEGUN TO ECHO
THIS CALL.
WHEN YOU PUT IT THAT WAY, IT
BARELY SOUNDS LIKE A CHOICE AT
THE TERM "AUSTERITY" SOUNDS SO
SEVERE, BUT ALMOST EVERYBODY
GOOD.
JUST WHAT IS THIS AUSTERITY ALL
IN EUROPE, AUSTERITY IS OFTEN
USED TO DESCRIBE AN ATTEMPT TO
REDUCE BUDGET DEFICITS BY
REINING IN UNSUSTAINABLE
SPENDING.
IN IN THIS COUNTRY, WE MORE
OFTEN TALK ABOUT FISCAL
RESPONSIBILITY.
FOR EUROPEANS INTO OH HAVE GROWN
ACCUSTOMED TO GENERAL RAWS
SOCIAL BENEFITS, EVEN MODEST
REFORMS TO GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS
ARE APPARENTLY CAUSE TO TAKE TO
THE STREETS AND DEMONSTRATE.
BUT FOR THE MILLIONS OF
AMERICANS WHO STILL BELIEVE IN
LIMITED GOVERNMENT AND WHO DO
NOT FEEL ENTITLED TO PROGRAMS OR
BENEFITS PAID FOR BY THE
EARNINGS OF OTHERS, THERE'S
NOTHING AUSTERE ABOUT GOVERNMENT
SPENDING WITHIN ITS MEANS.
SO THEN WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER
ASPECT.
IT, GROWTH?
THE IMPLICATION OF THE SUPPOSED
CHOICE BETWEEN GROWTH AND US A
IS THAT WE MUST ACCEPT
IRRESPONSIBLE LEVELS OF SPENDING
IN ORDER TO HAVE THAT ECONOMIC
GROWTH.
OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS ABSURD, BUT
POLITICAL CONVENIENT ECONOMIC
UP BY MARKET
THATCHER AS -- QUOTE -- "THE
MORE YOU SPEND, THE RICHER YOU
GET."
THAT DOESN'T MEET THE
COMMONSENSE TEST IN THE MIDWEST
OF AMERICA.
IT WAS THE RATIONALE BEHIND
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S MASSIVE $800
BILLION STIMULUS BILL.
THE BILL LOOKED SUSPICIOUSLY
LIKE A GRAB BAG OF PENT-UP
DEMOCRAT SPENDING PRIORITIES BUT
WE WERE TOLD ALL OF THIS
SPENDING WAS NECESSARY TO KEEP
UNEMPLOYMENT BELOW 8%.
OF COURSE, AS WE ALL KNOW,
UNEMPLOYMENT SOON SOARED WELL
ABOVE 8% AND IT HAS NEVER DIPPED
BELOW 8% NOW THREE YEARS LATER.
I WOULD SAY TO ALL OF THOSE
ACROSS THE ATLANTIC IN A
EUROPE -- IN EUROPE CALLING FOR
NEW STIMULUS SPENDING, WE TRIED
IT, AND IT DIDN'T WORK.
NOT ONLY IT DIDN'T WORK, BUT IT
MADE THINGS WORSE.
OF THAT GOVERNMENT SPENDING
CROWDED OUT PRIVATE-SECTOR
ACTIVITY THAT WOULD HAVE HELPED
THE RECOVERY AND SETTLED OUR
ECONOMY -- SADDLED OUR ECONOMY
AND OUR CHILDREN WITH EVEN MORE
DEBT.
CONVERSELY, REINING IN
GOVERNMENT SPENDING WILL UNLEASH
THE POWER OF FREE ENTERPRISE TO
CREATE WEALTH AND GROW OUR
ECONOMY IN WAYS THAT NO
GOVERNMENT CENTRAL PLANNER CAN
EVER ACCOMPLISH.
DESPITE THE CLEAR RESULTS OF THE
MOST RECENT AMERICAN EXPERIENCE
WITH STIMULUS SPENDING, LIBERAL
PUNDITS ARE NOW BLAMING EUROPE'S
CURRENT ECONOMIC TROUBLES ON
EFFORTS TO REDUCE GOVERNMENT
SPENDING.
THEY SAY THAT SAVAGE CUTS BY
PRO-AUSTERITY GOVERNMENTS IN
COUNTRIES LIKE BRITAIN,
FRANCE, AND SPAIN HAVE ACTUALLY
DAMAGED THEIR ECONOMIES.
SO JUST HOW DEEP DID THESE
COUNTRIES OF EUROPE ACTUALLY
CUT?
SPAIN INCREASED SPENDING AFTER
THE RECESSION STARTED, THEN
IMPLEMENTED SOME MODEST CUTS,
BUT IS STILL SPENDING MORE THAN
IT DID BEFORE THE RECESSION.
BRITAIN AND FRANCE HAVE
CONTINUED TO INCREASE SPENDING.
SO MUCH, THEN, FOR SAVAGE
SPENDING CUTS.
IT DEFIES COMMON SENSE, BUT AS
YOU KNOW IN THIS TOWN SMALLER
INCREASES IN SPENDING THAN
PREVIOUSLY PLANNED CAN QUALIFY
SOMEHOW AS A CUT IN SPENDING.
HOWEVER, TO MOST AMERICANS
CUTTING SPENDING ACTUALLY MEANS
SPENDING LESS THAN YOU WERE THE
YEAR BEFORE.
THERE HAVE BEEN NO
SERIOUS SPENDING CUTS IN THESE
SUPPOSEDLY PRO-AUSTERITY
COUNTRIES IS ENOUGH TO DISMISS
THE ACCUSATIONS THAT SPENDING
CUTS ARE THE CAUSE OF EUROPE'S
TROUBLES.
BUT THERE'S ANOTHER PART OF THE
STORY THAT IS TOO OFTEN IGNORED.
GOVERNMENTS THAT TALK ABOUT THE
NEEDS TO REDUCE DEFICITS BUT ARE
TOO TIMID TO ENACT NECESSARY
SPENDING CUTS INVARIABLY TURN TO
TAX INCREASES.
FOR INSTANCE, SINCE THE
RECESSION STARTED, BRITAIN HAS
RAISED THE TOP MARGINAL INCOME
TAX RATE AS WELL AS INCREASING
CAPITAL GAINS TAX, THE NATIONAL
INSURANCE TAX, AND THE VALUE
ADDED TAX.
SPAIN HAS ENACTED HIKES IN
PERSONAL INCOME TAX AND PROPERTY
TAXES AND SEEMS TO BE PLANNING
EVEN MORE TAXES.
THIS YEAR, THE SPANISH
LOOKING TO ADDRESS
ITS DEFICIT WITH A $19.2 BILLION
PACKAGE OF SPENDING REDUCTIONS
PAIRED WITH ANOTHER $16 BILLION
WORTH OF TAX INCREASES.
OF COURSE, TO US HERE IN THE
UNITED STATES THAT SOUNDS A LOT
LIKE WHAT DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN
CALLING A BALANCED APPROACH.
AND SO IT IS.
JUST LIKE GIVING A PATIENT AN
EQUAL DOSE OF MEDICINE AND
POISON WOULD BE A BALANCED
APPROACH.
HOWEVER, ACROSS EUROPE THERE
HAS BEEN A LOT OF -- A LOT MORE
EMPHASIS ON THE POISON OF TAX
INCREASES THAN ON THE MEDICINE
OF SPENDING CUTS.
IN FACT, WHILE GOVERNMENT
SPENDING ACROSS THE ENTIRE
EUROPEAN UNION FELL BY JUST
C2.6 BILLION BETWEEN 2010 AND
2011, TAXES ROSE BY A
BILLION.
SO WHILE CRITICS OF AUSTERITY
ARE FLAT-OUT WRONG TO BLAME THE
LODGE MYTHICAL SPENDING CUTS FOR
EUROPE'S ECONOMIC TROUBLES,
THEY MAY HAVE STUMBLED ONTO
TO THE EXTENT THAT AS TERRITORY
REALLY MEANS BIG TAX INCREASES
RATHER THAN SERIOUS SPENDING
CUTS, I THINK IT IDENTIFIES A
BIG PART OF EUROPE'S FISCAL AND
ECONOMIC PROBLEMS.
THESE FACTS NOTWITHSTANDING, IF
I COULDN'T POINT TO AN EXAMPLE
WHERE ECONOMIC GROWTH RESULTED
FROM SPENDING RESTRAINT, MY
ARGUMENTS WOULD RING HOLLOW.
I WOULD SOUND LIKE THOSE RADICAL
INTELLECTUALS WHO STILL REFUSE
TO ACCEPT THAT MARXISM HAS BEEN
TOTALLY DISCREDITED MORALLY AND
ECONOMICALLY BY CLAIMING IT HAS
NEVER TRULY BEEN TRIED.
HOWEVER, WHAT I AM TALKING
ABOUT HAS BEEN TRIED.
THERE ARE PLENTY OF EXAMPLES
WHERE BOLD LEADERSHIP TO
DRAMATICALLY REIN IN GOVERNMENT
SPENDING HAS RESULTED IN
ECONOMIC GROWTH.
THERE'S ACTUALLY A PRIME EXAMPLE
RIGHT IN EUROPE AND IN THE EURO
AREA -- ESTONIA.
IN RESPONSE TO THE 2008 ECONOMIC
CRISIS, ESTONIA'S FREE
ENTERPRISE ORIENTED GOVERNMENT
FOCUSED ON REAL SPENDING CUTS,
INCLUDING MAJOR STRUCTURURAL
FORMS.
ASTONE WHY YA CUT PRIVATE-SECTOR
WAGES, RAISED THE PENINSULA AGE
AND REFORMED HEALTH BENEFITS.
WHEN IT COMES TO TAXES, ESTONIA
ALREADY HAD A LOW FLAT TAX AND
DIDN'T RAISE RATES.
WHILE THERE WAS AN INCREASE IN
THE VALUE ADDED TAX, THE
OVERWHELMING EMPHASIS WAS ON
SPENDING CUTS.
THE ESTONIAN ECONOMY
GREW AT 7.6% LAST YEAR, AND IT
HAPPENS THAT ESTONIA IS THE ONLY
COUNTRY IN THE EURO ZONE WITH AN
ACTUAL BUDGET SURPLUS AND THE
COUNTRY HAS A NATIONAL DEBT THAT
IS ONLY 6% OF G.D.P.
NOW, CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT?
A DEBT OF ONLY 6% G.D.P.
MOREOVER, ESTONIA HAD AN
ESPECIALLY DEEP HOLE TO CLIMB
OUT OF.
THE ESTONIAN ECONOMY WAS
DEVASTATED BY GLOBAL FINANCIAL
IT CONTRACTED BY 18%, WHICH IS
MORE THAN GREECE HAS.
NEVERTHELESS, ESTONIA'S ECONOMY
IS WELL ON THE WAY BACK TO
PRERECESSION LEVELS.
I SHOULD ADD THAT IN RESPONSE TO
THE SPENDING CUTS, ESTONIANS
DIDN'T RIOT IN THE STREETS.
INSTEAD, THEY REELECTED THEIR
ALSO WHILE ESTONIA IS THE MOST
IMPRESSIVE EXAMPLE, A SIMILAR
STORY ALSO HOLDS TRUE FOR OTHER
BALTIC COUNTRIES LIKE LATD HAVE
A AND LITH -- LATVIA AND
LITHUANIA.
PERHAPS THEIR UNHAPPY EXPERIENCE
OF SOVIET DOMINATION HAS MADE
THEM SKEPTICAL OF BIG-GOVERNMENT
IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE UNIQUE
HISTORY OF THE BALTIC COUNTRIES
MAKES IT EASIER FOR THEM TO
BREAK THE SPENDING ADDICTION,
BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT
CAN'T BE DONE HERE.
IN FACT, I'LL GIVE YOU AN
EXAMPLE THAT IS MUCH CLOSER TO
HOME -- CANADA.
IN THE 1990'S, CANADA WAS
FACING THE SAME PROBLEM THE
UNITED STATES IS NOW.
IT SUFFERED A RECESSION, HAD A
LOOMING DEBT CRISIS, THE
CANADIAN GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE
WAS TO DRAMATICALLY CUT
SPENDING.
AGAIN, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT
SLOWING THE RATE OF GROWTH BUT
ACTUAL SPENDING CUTS.
IN JUST TWO YEARS STARTING IN
1995, TOTAL NONINTEREST
SPENDING FELL 10%.
CANADIAN FEDERAL SPENDING AS A
SHARE OF G.D.P. DROPPED FROM 22%
IN 1995 TO 15% TEN YEARS, 11
YEARS LATER.
CANADA'S FEDERAL DEBT WAS AT 68%
OF G.D.P. IN 1995, AND IT'S
DOWN TO JUST 34% TODAY.
NOW, A LESSON FOR AMERICA,
COMPARE THAT TO OUR NATIONAL
DEBT, WHICH IS MORE THAN 70% OF
G.D.P.
LIKE ESTONIA, THE OVERWHELMING
EMPHASIS IN CANADA WAS ON
SPENDING CUTS RATHER THAN TAX
INCREASES.
MOREOVER, THESE CUTS INCLUDED
STRUCTURAL REFORMS.
CANADA'S GOVERNMENT FIXED ITS
VERSION OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
WHICH IS THE THIRD RAIL OF
AMERICAN POLITICS, AS WE SAY
HERE.
UNLIKE SOCIAL SECURITY, THE
CANADIAN PENSION PLAN IS SOLVENT
FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE.
NOW, WHAT'S REALLY INTERESTING
IS THAT THESE REFORMS WERE NOT
IMPLEMENTED BY SOME RIGHT-WINGED
IDEOLOGUES.
THESE REFORMS ALL IMPLEMENTED BY
THE CANADIAN LIBERAL PARTY WHICH
IS A CENTER-LEFT PARTY LIKE
AMERICA'S DPEMS.
HOWEVER, WHEN PRESIDENT
BUSH -- DEMOCRATS.
HOWEVER, WHEN PRESIDENT BUSH
SUGGESTED FIXING SOCIAL SECURITY
UPON HIS REELECTION, THE ISSUE
WAS RELENTLESSLY DEMAGOGUED BY
DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS.
MORE RECENTLY, WHEN PAUL RYAN
UNVEILED A PLAN TO SAVE MEDICARE
RATHER THAN PRESENT ALTERNATIVE
IDEAS, LIBERAL GROUPS DEPICTED
HIM IN POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENTS
PUSHING GRANDMOTHER OFF OF A
CLIFF.
IF OUR DEMOCRATS HAD SHOWN THE
SAME LEADERSHIP THE CANADIAN
LIBERALS DID, WE WOULD BE IN A
LOT BETTER ECONOMIC SHAPE RIGHT
NOW.
INSTEAD,
WHAT WE GET FROM THE OTHER SIDE
OF THE AISLE IS DEMANDS FOR MORE
STIMULUS SPENDING ABOUT AND
HEAD-IN-THE-STAND DENIAL ABOUT
THE IMPENDING --
ECONOMIC RECOVERY AFTER A
DOWNTURN.
IN FACT, A 2009 PAPER BY TWO
HARVARD ECONOMISTS ALBERTO
ALICIA AND SYLVIA ARDENIA
REVIEWED 107 EXAMPLES OF FISCAL
ADJUSTMENTS IN INDUSTRIALIZED
COUNTRIES BETWEEN 1970 AND THE
2007.
THEY FOUND THAT STATISTICALLY
TAXTAX CUTS ARE MORE LIKELY TO
INCREASE GROWTH THAN SPENDING.
THEY ALSO FOUND THAT SPENDING
CUTS WITHOUT TAX INCREASES ARE
MORE LIKELY TO REDUCE DEFENDANT
AND DEBT THAN INCREASE TAXES.
THE HISTORICAL RECORD IS CLEAR.
WE KNOW WHAT PATH LEADS TO
ECONOMIC GROWTH AND PROSPERITY.
HOWEVER, THAT IS NOT AN EASY
PATH TO FOLLOW.
UNLIKE THE
HAVE-YOUR-CAKE-AND-EAT-IT-TOO
PHILOSOPHY, THAT SAYS MORE
GOVERNMENT SPENDING WILL SOMEHOW
MAKE US ALL RICHER YOU THE REAL
ROAD TO RECOVERY REQUIRES REAL
LEADERSHIP AND LESS SPENDING.
EARLIER IN MY COMMENTS, I
MENTIONED A STATEMENT BY
THATCHER'S CONTEMPT FOR
STIMULUS IDEOLOGY.
WHEN SHE TOOK OF COURSE, BRITAIN
WAS IN DEEP DEBT AND KNOWN AS
"THE SICK MAN OF EUROPE."
IN FACT, BRITAIN HAD BEEN FORCED
TO GO TO THE I.M.F. FOR A
BAILOUT AND WAS REGULARLY ROCKED
BY MASSIVE STRIKES.
IN MANY WAYS IT WAS THE GREECE
OF THE 1970'S.
WHEN THATCHER BEGAN MAKE THE
DIFFICULT DECISIONS NECESSARY TO
REDUCE AND RESCUE THE BRITISH
ECONOMY, MANY PEOPLE, INCLUDING
SOME OF HER OWN PARTY, PLEADED
FOR HER TO RETURN TO THE BIG
SPENDING POLICIES OF PREVIOUS
BRITISH GOVERNMENTS.
HER RESPONSE IS APPLICABLE TO
OUR COUNTRY TODAY AS IT WAS TO
BRITAIN BACK THEN.
I'D LIKE TO QUOTE MARGARET
THATCHER.
QUOTE:
"IF SPENDING MONEY LIKE WATER
WAS THE ANSWER TO OUR COUNTRY'S
PROBLEMS, WE WOULD HAVE NO
IF EVER A NATION HAD SPENT,
SPENT, SPENT AND SPENT AGAIN,
OURS HAS.
TODAY THAT DREAM IS OVER.
ALL OF THAT MONEY HAS GOT US
NOWHERE, BUT IT STILL HAS TO
COME FROM SOMEWHERE.
THOSE WHO URGE US TO RELAX THE
SQUEEZE, TO SPEND YET MORE MONEY
INDISCRIMINATELY IN THE BELIEF
THAT IT WILL HELP THE UNEMPLOYED
AND THE SMALL BUSINESSMAN ARE
NOT BEING KIND OR COMPASSIONATE
OR CARING.
THEY ARE NOT THE FRIENDS OF THE
UNEMPLOYED OR THE SMALL
THEY ARE ASKING US TO DO AGAIN
THE VERY THING THAT CAUSED THE
PROBLEM IN THE FIRST PLACE."
END OF MARGARET THATCHER QUOTE.
LEAVE WITH THIS PROPOSITION
CHINA, CAN CONGRESS LEARN FROM
THE EXPERIENCES OF ESTONIA,
CANADA, AND BRITAIN'S THATCHER?
IF WE CAN, WE CAN TURN THIS U.S.
ECONOMY AROUND, AND THE ECONOMY
AND YOBS JOBS IS THE ISSUE OF
THIS PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN
SEASON.
MR. PRESIDENT, LET ME ASK
SOMEBODY IF THEY CAN SHAKE THEIR
HEAD, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE
WAITING TO GET THE FLOOR?
BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO TAKE ANOTHER
THREE MINUTES IF IF I COULD ON
ANOTHER ISSUE.
MR. PRESIDENT, SKILLED THAT MY
REMARKS THAT I'M GOING TO MAKE
NOW BE PLACED IN THE RECORD WHEN
WE -- WHERE WE DO THE DEBATE ON
THE F.D.A. BILL.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. PRESIDENT,
TWO YEARS AGO A CONSTITUENT OF