[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 179 (Monday, November 13, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H12169-H12170]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          CRUCIAL DEBATE ABOUT THE SURVIVAL OF SENIOR CITIZENS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I was in my office working and many of 
the staff members were there with me, because obviously, we are 
preparing for the onslaught of questions that will probably be coming 
from many of our constituents in the 18th Congressional District.
  I listened to the debate, particularly by the gentleman from North 
Carolina [Mr. Hefner], and I would like to yield to him, because I do 
not know about the plain facts that our colleague on the other side of 
the aisle was mentioning about Medicare part B.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not know about the gentleman from North Carolina, 
but I know the plain facts that today my senior citizens pay $43, and 
under the Republican plan in a few months, maybe just about 30 days, 
they will be paying $53.
  I have had my senior citizens tell me, I do not know where I am going 
to get the money from. This is not a battle of who is chicken and who 
is not, this is not a battle of who has one-upmanship; this is a 
crucial debate about the survival of my senior citizens and citizens 
across this Nation and the Medicare system.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. HEFNER. Mr. Speaker, people making $50,000 a year, which is 
certainly not rich, but people living in my district on a fixed income 
for an increased of $10 or $12 a month, many times depend on where they 
are going to buy their groceries or get their prescriptions filled and 
what have you, it is a tremendous burden.
  Also, I would like to have asked the gentleman the question that if 
we are going to put $270 billion, and make no mistake about it, it is a 
cut, $270 billion, then you cannot have the $240 billion tax cut unless 
that is scored by 

[[Page H 12170]]
CBO. You have to have the Medicare cuts before you can have the tax 
cuts. Everybody acknowledges that.
  So if you are going to make the $270 billion cuts in Medicare, why 
not apply them to make the Medicare fund more secure; either that, or 
reduce the deficit. This does not make any sense to burden our senior 
citizens with an increase in premiums simply to have a tax cut almost 
corresponding to the same dollar amounts, from the $270 billion you are 
going to make in Medicare to give a $240 billion tax cut.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman can talk about it all he wants, but there 
are going to be cuts and there are going to be cuts to supply the funds 
for a tax cut. It does not make any sense to put that burden on our 
senior citizens.

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I think that is an excellent 
explanation, and that is why I came over, because it concerns me when 
many of my constituents are raising the question of what is happening 
here in the U.S. Congress.
  I would like to just briefly relate to them the lack of progress that 
we have made. Frankly, under the Republican majority, they have not 
done their job. These appropriations bills were supposed to be passed 
in early September, and if they had been passed at that time period, we 
would not have reached this point, this time, this day.
  All that we are asking as a Congress, and particularly those of us on 
the Democratic side of the aisle, is that let us just deal with the 
issue at hand. The issue at hand simply allows us to have one, a 
continuing resolution to allow this discussion to go forth and the 
doors of the Government to stay open; and then second, allows the debt 
ceiling to increase so that this country does not default on its 
obligations.
  We have a philosophical difference, and that is understandable, but I 
do not think the American people should be misdirected and 
misrepresented that there is some reason that we have come to this, 
other than the fact that the appropriations bills that should have been 
passed in September were not passed. Why is that? Because there is some 
magic number to the number seven in terms of balancing the budget, when 
in actuality, we have looked at the President's budget, we may have 
wanted to improve that budget, but that is a 9-year budget. Is there 
some difference, something magic between 7 and 9?
  When you begin to look at the direction that the Republicans' 7-year 
budget takes, cuts in school lunches, cuts in Medicaid, children's 
programs, cuts in student loans, ending nursing home regulations where 
many of your parents are staying; a lack of worker safety regulations, 
curbing food and drug standards, forgetting the environment, 
criminalizing various procedures dealing with the question, the very 
private question of women to choose; ending the national service group, 
and of course, cutting science and research. All of these issues were 
part of the appropriations bills when we should have been able to 
discuss these separate and apart from that process.

                              {time}  2030

  Do you want nursing home regulations to be eliminated? Do you want to 
eliminate the progress we have made with respect to environmental 
protection? These debates should be separate and apart from the 
question of whether the doors of this Government stay open.
  Just this past weekend, I spent Veterans Day acknowledging the many 
veterans in our community and saluting them for the service they have 
given. In addition to saluting my veterans, many of them asked the 
questions, not only about themselves but about those who would come 
after them that would be denied benefits.
  I had Federal workers working with me on their day off to give 
constituency service in my congressional office, meaning those in 
Social Security and those working in other agencies. Those are the ones 
that are going to be counted out.
  Mr. Speaker, I would simply ask, let us be reasonable. Deal with the 
issue at hand so the American people can have faith in their Congress 
again, get back to the business that we have, and that is the business 
of running this Government properly, making sure that a budget is 
balanced but is not balanced on the least of those that we have in this 
country. Let us be realistic, both Republicans and Democrats. Keep 
doors open so that we can face this together, and make sure that we are 
having a budget that answers the concerns of all Americans, and not cut 
it on the backs of children and senior citizens.

                          ____________________