[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 8, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E549]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page E549]]
      REINTRODUCTION OF THE BIPARTISAN DEFICIT REDUCTION LOCK-BOX

                                 ______


                         HON. MICHAEL D. CRAPO

                                of idaho

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, March 8, 1995
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with Representative Jane Harman 
and 35 of our colleagues in favor of a critical budget process reform 
in the 103d Congress. As you know, the Nation finds itself saddled with 
ever more Federal debt. If the debt were to be paid off today, some 
estimate that each person's share would be over $17,000. Addressing 
this debt, and exploring ways of cutting this debt through budget 
process reform, has been one of my primary goals as a Member of 
Congress.
  Today, I would like to speak on a budget process reform that is 
included in a bill which I am pleased to have engineered with my 
colleagues from both sides of the aisle: The Deficit Reduction Lock-Box 
Act. In the 103d Congress, this legislation (H.R. 4057) garnered the 
support of over 150 cosponsors almost evenly divided between party 
affiliation.
  Congress debates on numerous amendments that are designed to reduce 
spending for specific Federal programs or agencies. Unfortunately, 
passage of these amendments does not guarantee or mandate real spending 
cuts.
  We need to begin the process of bringing truth to the budget process 
and make our cuts count. When Congress votes for cuts they should be 
just that--cuts. Only by finding a method to reduce the spending caps 
and the related subcommittee allocations will we be certain that 
spending cuts to appropriations bills will ever be realized. This is 
what the deficit reduction lock-box addresses. And these spending cuts 
would be self-initiating, unless otherwise specifically designated or 
transferred.
  Endorsing this legislation since the 103d Congress are several 
national groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Citizens 
Against Government Waste, the National Taxpayers Union, and Citizens 
for a Sound Economy. It should be stressed that this bill is a truly 
bi-partisan product that would lead the way to making discretionary 
cuts count.
  I have a strong interest in proposals to require appropriations bill 
cuts to be translated into actual budget reductions. The lock-box must 
be considered as a stand-alone budget process reform measure, and a 
first-step in passing other necessary budget
 process reforms. It is an independent effort that does not seek to 
block other worthy budget process reforms. If anything, this budget 
process reform would complement other necessary efforts in this arena. 
Based on its proven bi-partisan in Congress since its introduction 
early this year, I feel it deserves a vote this year on the House 
floor.

  As I mentioned already, the House and Senate do not save money when 
they vote against approval of a specific program. What this means is 
that the whole Congress has no way to cut discretionary spending 
without the cooperation of the committees that appropriate Federal 
funds. Even when both Houses of Congress vote to defund a program, the 
committees that control appropriations are free to design new ways to 
spend the Federal money that they control.
  After repeated exhortations on the necessity for thrift in an age of 
deficit financing by, for example, the space station's political 
opponents, defenders like myself argued that its elimination is not 
going to give one penny of deficit reduction. The spending that has 
already been appropriated would merely be plowed back into other 
programs.
  The lock-box bill is geared toward finally doing what we constantly 
tell the American people that we're supposedly doing. Many people think 
that when we vote to make cuts and when we have success, that cuts are 
actually going to take place. Under present law, these dollars are 
reallocated. This proposal would ensure that we an actually address the 
deficit, which the American people want us to do.
  When Congress votes to cut Federal spending but the Treasury doesn't 
really save any money, it harms both American taxpayers and 
representative democracy. Congress should reform spending procedures to 
make its cuts count. When it votes against Federal spending, there 
should be a way to create opportunities for savings that are both 
substantial and mandatory. That way, money would in effect be deposited 
in the Federal treasury for deficit reduction, not just retreat a step 
back in the spending pipeline. Until Congress changes the way it 
approves Federal spending so cuts can really count, even if rank-and-
file Members vote to cut every program in the world, conference 
committees can simply reallocate the money.
  Ensuring real spending cuts through this lock-box bill is a necessary 
first step in this process of spending reform. Members of Congress must 
seriously consider listening to their constituents about spending cuts 
and place good government over the self-interest of specific projects 
by indicating their support for this lock-box bill. Only through budget 
process reforms like this will Members be able to vote for cuts and be 
able to communicate the authenticity of these cuts honestly to the 
public. I am proud to reintroduce this key legislation today.


                          ____________________