[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 41 (Monday, March 6, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3518-S3519]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     THE BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, last Thursday at the end of the dramatic 
vote on the balanced budget amendment and its rejection by a single 
vote, there were many who felt that this was a tragedy with respect to 
dealing with the problems facing the United States and its huge budget 
deficits now and during the course of this year.
  While I was a strong supporter of that amendment, and while I hope 
that the majority leader is able to bring it back up for another and 
more successful vote sometime in future, I believe that its rejection 
not only did not reduce the pressure on Members of the U.S. Senate, 
House of Representatives or the President of the United States to work 
toward a balanced budget, but I believe that in fact it increased that 
pressure.
  On several occasions during the 5-week long debate on that 
proposition, I observed, as did others, that this body was divided 
essentially into three groups of Members with respect to the balanced 
budget and the balanced budget amendment:
  First, the rather large majority, those who believe that the present 
system was broken and needed to be fixed by radical and dramatic 
action, the imposition of an outside discipline on all of us to see to 
it that we did what we know needs to be done, but against which 
political pressures have for some 30 years been invariably successful;
  A smaller group of Members, who not only thought that a balanced 
budget amendment was undesirable but thought that a balanced budget 
itself was undesirable, who favor the status quo, not only with respect 
to the Constitution, but with respect to our own fiscal actions;
  And a third group who were very prominent in the debate who agreed 
with the proposition that we need a more responsible fiscal policy, 
that we need to work toward a balanced budget, but that we did not need 
the discipline of a constitutional amendment to cause that to take 
place.
  It is in one sense to that group, but also those who supported the 
constitutional amendment, that I speak here this evening. I believe 
that all of us are under the gun at this point.
  I think it behooves the party on this side of the aisle, the 
conservatives in this body, to seriously attempt to pass a budget 
resolution which, if followed for a 7-year period, would lead to a 
balanced budget in the year 2002, and to do that without touching 
Social Security and to do it with at least a modest tax cut on the 
level proposed by the President of the United States.
  I think that Members on this side will undertake that very, very 
difficult task. I believe that, if anything, the great majority of 
those who voted for the constitutional amendment find themselves even 
more determined today than they were a week ago to follow in fact the 
discipline they wanted to set for the indefinite future, even without 
that constitutional discipline. But I believe that goal encompasses not 
just those on this side of the aisle, not just the chairman of the 
Senate Budget Committee, but his distinguished ranking Democratic 
member, who also voted for the constitutional amendment, and the 
majority of the members of the Senate Budget Committee.
  More important, however, Mr. President, I hope that that goal, in 
reality, will be shown to be the goal of all of those Members who said 
that they believe in a balanced budget but not in the amendment. If 
they will join with us, if they will express their support for a course 
of action bringing us to a 
[[Page S3519]] balanced budget within 7 years, without any reductions 
in Social Security benefits, and with some reduction in taxes, they 
will have done in fact what they claim to support in theory. And if 
they will join with the 66 Members who voted for the constitutional 
amendment, we should have upward of 80 votes in this body for a 
responsible budget resolution, for the actions in reconciliation and 
outside of reconciliation necessary, to meet that goal this year, right 
now.
  I am optimistic, Mr. President. I think that determination is there, 
and I hope that the leadership of this body will be able to see to it 
that we start working toward it in fact, not just in theory, very soon, 
in the course of the next few weeks.
  We have all had our say. Those of us for the constitutional amendment 
should remain committed. Those against it, who claim to believe in a 
balanced budget, should be even more dedicated to the proposition that 
we do the job. If that is the result of last week's debate, our loss 
will not have been in vain.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________