[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 184 (Saturday, November 18, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S17431-S17432]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          THE BALANCED BUDGET

  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I have been listening with great care to the 
speeches that have been made here. I noticed on two occasions my 
Republican colleagues have brought the name of Thomas Jefferson into 
the discussions.
  It was somewhat amusing to me. I do not know what position Thomas 
Jefferson would take if he were on the floor of the U.S. Senate today, 
but as the founder of the Democratic Party I suspect that he might not 
appreciate too much the Republicans invoking his name in the support of 
the proposals that they are making.
  Facetiously, it kind of reminded me, Mr. President, of my own dad. As 
a very young lad, brought up in a very traditional Democratic household 
with Franklin Roosevelt the new President of the United States, whom my 
mother and father and grandfather thought was an outstanding 
individual, and I was thoroughly brought up in the Democratic 
traditions.
  After going to school one day, I came home and I told my dad we had 
studied a President by the name of Abraham Lincoln, and I asked my dad 
what he thought of Abraham Lincoln. I did not tell dad that I 
discovered that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.
  My dad said, ``Jim, Abraham Lincoln was one of the greatest 
Presidents that this Nation ever had or probably ever will have. He was 
a truly outstanding American.''
  I said, ``Yes, dad, but he was a Republican.''
  Dad paused for a moment, and he said, ``Well, yes, Jim, but if 
Abraham Lincoln were alive today he would be a Democrat.''
  Now, maybe that is the reverse of what my Republican colleagues are 
arguing today. But at least I loved my dad and my dad said that to me 
in jest.
  So when we start instituting the names of great leaders, Presidents, 
political leaders of the past, sometimes we take license that probably 
we are not entitled to.
  Mr. President, there has been a lot of talk about balancing the 
budget here. I hear the Republican cry today and I think they are 
talking about saving the children and saving the grandchildren. 

[[Page S 17432]]

  Mr. President, although there may be some that can top me, I have 
three children and I have eight grandchildren, and I am just as much 
concerned about their futures as any other Member in this body. But to 
indicate, by inference at least, that if I do not go along with their 
draconian budget proposals, that I think are unwise and unfair, I am 
not concerned about my children and grandchildren, is just a little bit 
too much for me to swallow.
  I was Governor of Nebraska for 8 years. As Governor, I balanced the 
budget each and every year, as did my colleague, Senator Kerrey, from 
Nebraska, who is on the floor, who followed me by a few years. He 
balanced the budget each and every year. So I simply say, probably, 
from the standpoint of history, I was balancing budgets in government 
before some people had ever been elected to public office.
  I follow that up by saying I think the record of this Senator has 
been very clear. All the time I have served the public of Nebraska and 
all the time I have had the opportunity to serve the people of Nebraska 
and the people of the Nation as a whole as a U.S. Senator, I have put 
forth many, many efforts, of which the latest was to vote for the 
Republican-sponsored constitutional amendment to balance the budget in 
7 years. While I agree with that principle, that does not mean, nor 
should anyone necessarily construe anything, just because I voted for a 
constitutional amendment to balance the budget that was primarily 
supported and advanced by the Republicans with the help of nearly 
enough Democrats to pass it. I think my credentials of being a 
dedicated conservative with regard to fiscal policy are well 
established.
  I, too, listened with great interest to the remarks made by the 
President of the United States today. I did not, strangely enough, come 
away from listening to those remarks with the same conclusions as my 
friend and colleague from Indiana. I thought the President of the 
United States today laid it on the line. I may concede that possibly he 
may have gone a little too far in his rhetoric, but compared with some 
of the rhetoric I have heard from the other side of the aisle on the 
Senate floor in the last few days, I would excuse the President for any 
oversteps that he had made in that regard.
  I think it is clear to say, though, that the President of the United 
States said today that during his term of office he has essentially cut 
the annual deficit in half. That is more than has been done for a long, 
long time. So, at least in our criticisms of the present President of 
the United States, for whatever reason, we should realize and recognize 
that, under his leadership, we have cut the deficit and not continued 
to raise it.

  I would simply point out, I want to share and be one of the 
workhorses in cooperation, in full cooperation, when I can, with my 
colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle to do something about 
the skyrocketing national debt of the United States of America. I am 
fearful all too few of our citizens fully understand the difference 
between the annual deficit and the national debt, the latter being, of 
course, with additions each and every year, the shortfall we have been 
going through here, unfortunately, for a long, long time with regard to 
spending more than we take in.
  In that regard, though, a little history might be in order. The last 
Democratic President of the United States that we had before the 
present occupant of that high office was former Governor Carter of the 
State of Georgia. I would cite--and I think the record will back me 
up--when President Carter left office the national debt of the United 
States was under $1 trillion.
  What happened in the intervening years when we had Republican 
Presidents of the United States? From 1980, when President Carter left 
office and the debt was under $1 trillion, some 12 years later, when 
President Clinton took office, the national debt had skyrocketed 
fivefold, from under $1 trillion to $4.5 trillion.
  Some would argue during most of that time there was Democratic 
control of both Houses of the Congress, and that is true. But the facts 
of the matter are, had those Republican Presidents in the years 1980 to 
1992 stood up and exercised their veto, as this President has stood up 
strongly and said he will exercise his veto, the national debt would 
not have taken the jump and be as troublesome as it is today.
  The problem we are in today is not all the responsibility of the 
Democrats or all the responsibility of the Republicans. Certainly, the 
Democrats, I think, are, by our traditions, by the record that we have 
established, as much concerned about the children of America in the 
future as anyone else. I happen to think you will see a growing portion 
of both Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Senate--and hopefully in 
the House of Representatives--anxious to come to some workable 
understanding, some framework where we can, indeed, balance the Federal 
budget in 7 years.
  I am continuing to work toward that end. Meanwhile, back at the 
ranch, I hope once again we can contain our rhetoric just a little bit 
and give the leadership of the House and Senate an opportunity to come 
to some resolution of the crisis which faces us today.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________