[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 86 (Tuesday, May 23, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S7240]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 THE PRESIDENTS ``SECRET'' BUDGET PLAN

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I thank the kind Senator from Texas for 
yielding.
  I want to commend the Senator for her leadership in shepherding the 
services tonight, of making sure that the other point of view, the 
responsible financial point of view, is expressed here tonight, when 
elsewhere in this town we know there is a very antipeople pro-big 
Government point of view being expressed at a fundraising party for the 
Democratic Party.
  There was a story this morning on the front page of the Washington 
Post. I think it has a lot of Members on this side of the aisle, and 
probably people across the country, just simply scratching their heads. 
The report says that President Clinton now has a secret budget counter-
proposal. Do you know what? It will balance the budget within 10 years.
  Mr. President, if this is true--and I suppose I ought to hope it is 
true because I have been praying for a balanced budget from this White 
House for a long time--it is truly an amazing story. First of all, it 
undercuts all the wailing we have been hearing from the White House 
about the effect on the economy and the public of setting an arbitrary 
date for a balanced budget. That is making fun of us Republicans for 
trying to balance the budget by the year 2002.
  It seems that all we have heard for the last month out of the White 
House is, ``What is magic about a certain date to balance the budget?'' 
If you balance the budget you would ruin the economy. If you balance 
the budget you would do this to that group, or that to another group. 
Now, all of a sudden in the Washington Post, the President says that he 
wants to balance the budget--albeit in 10 years.
  I think even members of the President's own party and members of the 
President's party in both chambers of the Congress had earlier 
disagreed openly with the White House on this point. There was 
disagreement on what to do. Do you know what? The Members of the 
Democratic Party up here on the hill, they look to the President for 
leadership.
  The message they got was to stay the course. The President said just 
keep to it, stay the course. That is, offer nothing in rebuttal to the 
Republican attempt to balance the budget. No vision from the White 
House; no alternative from the White House.
  And, do you know what? The Members up here on the Hill were very 
obedient, listening to their President. So they refrained from offering 
their own balanced budget alternative, or any other comprehensive 
alternative to the Republican efforts to balance the budget.
  So, the members of the Democratic Party stood idly by during this 
budget debate and risked their credibility because they wanted to 
follow their leader, our President of the United States. Now, with this 
new development that the President is for a balanced budget, albeit in 
10 years, they, the members of the Democratic Party in the Congress of 
the United States in both Houses of the Congress, also are undercut by 
their President just like members of the White House staff have been. 
Just like he undercut the recent arguments of everybody on his staff 
that was trying to defend his position of just stay the course. Do not 
offer an alternative.
  Second, this also says that the Republican vision of a balanced 
budget is right after all, and it is filling a very enormous political 
void. The American people know where we stand and they do not know 
where the other side stands. The American people know what the 
Republican Party stands for. They do not know what the Democratic Party 
stands for. They do not know because for several months, until this 
very day, they were told a balanced budget did not matter. They were 
told that we should not have an alternative, as Democrats, to what the 
Republicans were trying to do.
  Also, there is a third aspect to this. Because, in filling that void 
and because the President is now coming around to accepting the premise 
of the Republican vision for the future, this new development is a 
powerful demonstration of the President's lack of leadership. Because, 
you know what? The lack of leadership demonstrates followership. It 
leaves a perception of a desperate move to be included. The President 
of the United States wants to be relevant, finally, in the debate for a 
balanced budget.
  It shows that our Republican call for the other side to put up or be 
silent has had an effect. It shows that we have opened up a big 
weakness in the other side's flank, namely its very own credibility. 
Because you cannot talk the talk until you walk the walk. Everyone 
knows that. Everyone outside of Washington.
  Now, obviously the President knows it as well. The time to show 
relevance and to show leadership on the part of the President was last 
February. That is when the President proposed. The Congress is now 
disposing. The process has passed the President by. The ship of state 
has left the dock.
  It is as if the President is trying to rush ahead to the next port to 
catch up with the ship. The problem is the ship is not scheduled to 
stop there. And it will not.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON assumed the Chair.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I think it is clear that the 
leadership, the vision, and the direction for this ship of state are 
coming from this side, the Republican side of the aisle. It all happens 
to be reflected in the budget debate of the last 4 days, the amendments 
offered by the other side, the absence of a comprehensive balanced 
budget alternative from the other side. And I think it will be 
demonstrated by the overwhelming vote for a balanced budget tomorrow.
  Now, the President of the United States, on the other hand, missed 
the boat. His party is still standing on the dock. He stranded them 
there. He asked them to wait there until he could catch up with the 
ship out at sea, but it is too late. We Republicans have a vision and 
we have a plan to steer this country to the safe waters.
  I ask, where is theirs? Where is their comprehensive alternative plan 
to balance the budget? Where is their coherent vision? Where is theirs?
  It is lacking. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.

                          ____________________