[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 161 (Wednesday, October 18, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S15273]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          BALANCING THE BUDGET

  Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from North Dakota for 
yielding to me.
  Senator Boxer, whose work I have come to appreciate more and more in 
this body, and I had a press conference in which we had some senior 
citizens and some students, senior citizens talking about the need for 
student aid, students talking about how we have to protect our 
grandparents. The reality is this should not be a partisan fight.
  I am sure the Presiding Officer has heard me mention before we have 
become excessively partisan. It is one of the changes that has happened 
in my years in Congress, and it is not a good change. I think, frankly, 
the Republican Party is going to get hurt somewhat in the course of all 
this. But there is too much partisanship in all of this. I do not 
believe it makes sense when we have huge deficits--and the Washington 
Post had an editorial about this this morning--to be saying we are 
going to have a tax cut.
  It is like saying you are having a New Year's resolution of going on 
a diet, and you are going to start it off by having a great big 
dessert. That is what we are doing now. We are going to balance the 
budget, but we are going to have a $245 billion tax cut.
  If we want to use that $245 billion for reducing the deficit, I would 
understand that. But that is not what is happening, and I do not think 
there is any question about what we are going to impose on seniors. 
Also--and it has not received as much attention as Medicare has--
Medicaid is also going to really be hurt. Who receives Medicaid? The 
majority of those who receive it are children, poor children--24 
percent of our young people live in poverty--and senior citizens, those 
who are in nursing homes. They are basically the primary recipients.
  But it is part of a pattern of not being as responsive as we should 
be. Let me just tie in with what those grandparents said out in front 
of the Capitol just a few minutes ago at the press conference on 
student aid.
  The Presiding Officer will forgive me to say he is old enough, along 
with me, to remember the GI bill. It is interesting how the GI bill 
emerged. The GI bill, which we look back to with great pride and say 
what a great thing it was for our country, was a matter of controversy. 
There were those who said we ought to give a cash bonus to veterans, 
and the American Legion, to their great credit, said we ought to have 
the GI bill which will provide education to veterans. That was the 
fight.
  Today we have almost a similar fight. Cash bonus--we do not call it a 
cash bonus, we call it a tax cut. Like the cash bonus, it will be 
frittered away and will not do much for our country. But if we put 
money into student aid, we are going to do something for our country.
  Direct lending is under attack, and this is not a Democratic program. 
Tom Petri, a Republican from Wisconsin, was the first one to suggest 
it. My colleague, Senator Dave Durenberger, was a cosponsor with me of 
direct lending when it was introduced. Senator David Durenberger has 
properly said, in regard to the role of banks and the guarantee 
agencies, ``This is not free enterprise, it is a free lunch.'' That is 
why the banks and the guarantee agencies are fighting for this.
  The commission that looked into how we ought to have student aid, 
headed by our former Republican colleague Senator Paula Hawkins, 
recommended direct lending. Larry Lindsey, a Bush appointee to the 
Federal Reserve Board, has said we should have direct lending, it makes 
more sense, in a letter to our colleague, Senator Spencer Abraham.
  We have to be looking out for the interest of the young and the 
old, for everyone in our society. We have to reach out. And I hope we 
use some common sense. We are going to be in this battle the middle of 
next week. And to say we are going to have tax cuts for people at the 
same time we deprive elderly and students of the help that they need, I 
do not think is in the national interest.

  I simply ask the Presiding Officer--and I know he cannot answer this 
from the chair--I have not yet had one person with an income over 
$100,000 come up to me and say, ``I ought to have a tax cut.'' I have 
had a lot of people come to me and say, ``We should not be cutting back 
on Medicare, we should not be cutting back on Medicaid, we should not 
be cutting back to assistance to students.'' Those are the choices that 
we have, and I hope we do the responsible thing here.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from 
Washington, Senator Murray.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from the 
State of Washington.

                          ____________________