[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 14 (Friday, February 11, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 11, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
       GOVERNMENT DOWNSIZING, PERFORMANCE, AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, I rise to speak with reference to the 
Government Downsizing Performance, and Accountability Act that was 
introduced yesterday by Senator Dole as S. 1843.
  I am a cosponsor of this legislation, and I want to express my hope 
that it will receive favorable consideration by the Senate in due time.
  Mr. President, we work here at a time of growing awareness of the 
manner in which runaway entitlement spending is gnawing away at our 
fiscal future. That is a reality that Government policymakers are 
finding ever more difficult to avoid.
  I suppose each of us who has spoken on the issue of entitlement 
reform has been greeted with some derision and hostility from our 
audiences--they want to know--by God--how we can even dream about 
cutting benefits for the elderly, the sick, the veterans, the 
children--when there is so much Government ``waste'' that needs to be 
cut.
  In fact, Mr. President, there are many bloated discretionary spending 
budgets that can and should be cut. This legislation would cut some of 
that Federal spending by more than $50 billion over the next 5 years. 
It is certainly not the solution to our deficit problems--but it does 
attempt to eliminate many forms of discretionary spending that are 
difficult to justify in light of existing deficit pressures.
  The first point I would stress about this legislation is that it 
would reduce the spending caps by more than $50 billion. This locks in 
projected savings from our cuts--guarantees them. We are often in the 
habit around here of proposing ``spending cuts'' that sound good--of 
``killing programs,'' and then turning around and spending the money on 
something else. We voted to kill the superconducting 
supercollider--did we save the money? We did not--the 
spending caps remained unchanged. But in this legislation, we prevent 
money from being spent elsewhere--by locking in the savings through a 
reduction of the discretionary spending caps.
  We have also done our best to engage in honest accounting of our 
projected savings. Most of the savings credited to these provisions 
represent our best indication of how they will be scored by the 
congressional budget office. There are many provisions that we wished 
to include but did not--because it was unclear how they would be 
``scored'' by CBO in light of recent legislative actions. We were 
scrupulous about avoiding ``double-counting'' of savings in the way 
that has been done in other rescission bills.
  We have also included many provisions in here that clearly improve 
the efficiency of the Government--establishing performance goals for 
Federal programs, eliminating congressionally mandated employment 
floors, and increasing the importance of performance ratings when 
considering reductions in force. These proposals can and should save 
the Government money; but, we have not credited ourselves with savings 
even though we know that some should materialize. This is part of our 
effort to be as conservative in our bookkeeping as possible.
  We have made every effort in this legislation to avoid ``smoke and 
mirrors'' and to ensure that these cuts produce real, substantial 
savings--savings at least as large as the $50 billion we will shave off 
the discretionary spending caps.
  It is my hope that the Senate will give due consideration to these 
proposals. They demonstrate our sincerity in rooting out Government 
waste wherever it exists; we take money from legislative branch 
expenses, from the Executive Office of the President, and from all 
administrative expenses of the Federal Government. We get rid of small 
yet unnecessary Government programs. We reduce funding for the World 
Bank and for U.S. contributions to U.N. peacekeeping--to Senate-passed 
levels in each case.
  I would repeat that none of these measures will slow runaway Federal 
deficits so long as Federal entitlement spending remains out of 
control. But they are overdue and helpful steps that we should take to 
signify that we mean to get our house in order before asking other 
Americans to sacrifice.

                          ____________________