[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 182 (Thursday, November 16, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H13140-H13141]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS ARE DETERMINED TO BALANCE THE FEDERAL BUDGET

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fox of Pennsylvania). Under a previous 
order of the House, the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays] is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I was elected to the State House in 1974, and 
began to serve office in 1975. At that time the national debt was about 
$375 billion. I periodically would pay attention to the spending habits 
of Congress and note that it would spend more than it raised in 
revenues.
  In the State House, I wondered how Congress could do this, because in 
the State legislatures, we of course have to balance our budgets. 
Obviously, a Congress, when times are difficult, during times of war 
and so on, during times of recession, it is logical that Congress would 
want to generate economic activity and help bring the economy out of 
its recession, but Congresses and Presidents collectively, Republicans 
and Democrats, allowed for deficit spending.
  The national debt since that time has grown to $4,900 billion, or 
$4.9 trillion. When I was elected to Congress in 1987, I joined with a 
group of Republicans, primarily, and a few Democrats who wanted to end 
this. At the time our group was about 35 Members. Each year it kept 
growing, with each election it kept growing more and more and larger 
and larger, until last year our number was about 160.
  Finally, with the election of 1994, we got a bulk of Members, 
Republicans and Democrats, who voted for the balanced budget amendment, 
as the gentleman from Maine [Mr. Longley] pointed out, 72 Members on 
the other side, and every Republican except 1, I think, or 2 in the 
House. What are we trying to do? The first thing we are trying to do is 
get our financial House in order and balance our budget.
  The second thing we are trying to do is save our trust funds, 
particularly Medicare, from bankruptcy. The third 

[[Page H 13141]]
thing, and it is equally as important, we are trying to transform the 
social and corporate welfare state into an opportunity society.
  This is not easy; if it was easy, it would have been done a long time 
ago. It is not popular, or it would have been done a long time ago. We 
are determined to balance our Federal budget, but we are doing it, in 
many cases, by slowing the growth of spending. We are still allowing 
programs to grow.
  The earned income tax credit, which some of my colleagues on the 
other side accuse us of wanting to cut, we are going to have it grow 
from $19.8 billion to $27.5 billion. The school lunch program we are 
going to have grow from $6.3 billion to over $8 billion. The student 
loan program is going to grow from $24.5 billion to $36 billion, a 50-
percent increase in the student loan. Students are going to grow in the 
next 5 years from 6.7 million students to 8.4 million. It is a growing 
program. Medicaid is going to grow from $89.2 billion to $124.3 
billion, and Medicare is going to grow from $178 billion to $273 
billion. Only in this Chamber and in Washington, when you spend so much 
more money, do people call it a cut. We are spending more money.

  I really appreciate and I really want to thank the Washington Post. 
It is nice to have a paper that has been pretty hard on us recognizing 
that the real default is not in this Chamber, it is by the White House, 
in failing to want to participate in this effort.
  When Leon Panetta was a Member of this Chamber, he said, ``The only 
way you are going to control the spending in Congress and our Federal 
budget is to control the growth of entitlements.'' We are taking on 
entitlements. It is not an easy thing to do. No complaints. I am proud 
of it. I am happy to go to my constituents and explain what we are 
doing. For instance, with Medicare, we have no copayment increase, no 
deduction increase. We are allowing the premium to stay at 31.5 
percent. The taxpayers will continue to pay 68.5 percent.
  We are allowing individuals to stay in their private fee-for-service 
system that has gone from the 1960's on up, this Blue Cross-Blue Shield 
program. We are allowing them to stay there, but we are also going to 
give them a Medi-Plus program. They can get better service if they get 
into private care. If they leave and get private care and it turns out 
they do not like it, they have the opportunity every month for the next 
24 months to get back into the traditional Medicare program. My point 
is, I am so proud of what this Republican majority is doing when it 
comes to dealing with the budget.
  Now, would I like the President to weigh in? Yes. I want him to agree 
to a 7-year balanced budget. But I am not saying he has to agree to our 
priorities. If he wants to put more money in urban areas, frankly, I 
hope he does. I would like to join him in that effort. If he thinks 
that our tax cut should be slightly different, then I hope he does. I 
would be happy to assist him in that effort.
  The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is that we are going to get our 
financial house in order, with or without the President's help, but it 
would be a lot easier with his help.

                          ____________________