[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 188 (Tuesday, November 28, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S17549-S17550]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          BALANCING THE BUDGET

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, the Senator from North Dakota spoke just a 
few minutes ago about balancing the budget. And I was interested and 
pleased with his remarks. Certainly I agree with him that probably one 
of the most important issues that we have before us, and have had for 
this entire year, is the notion of becoming financially and fiscally 
responsible in this body and in this country, and doing so by balancing 
the budget.
  It seems to me that there is a great deal involved with balancing the 
budget. It is more than a function of arithmetic; it is a function of 
determining the direction we take in this Government.
  It is a function of dealing with spending. There are a number of ways 
to balance the budget. One of them, which President Clinton choose last 
year, was to raise taxes and continue to spend, and I suppose you could 
do that. You could balance the budget by continuing to spend and 
increasing taxes.
  I think that is not what the American people said in 1994. They said 
we have too much Government, the Government is too large, it costs too 
much, and we need to balance the budget, but we need to balance the 
budget by reducing the growth in spending. Therein lies one of the 
differences.
  The Senator said we ought to balance the budget. I agree with that. 
We have not done it in 30 years. It is fairly easy to say we ought to 
balance the budget. The evidence is that it is very easy to say that 
and more difficult to do it. 

[[Page S 17550]]

  He said we ought to balance the budget in the right way. I agree. I 
have the right way; he does not have the right way. That is the 
problem. The right way hardly gets to it. But I do agree we need to get 
together. There are differences--there are significant differences--in 
how we do it, and I think it is our responsibility, as trustees for 
this Government, to find a way to get the kind of agreement that is 
necessary to balance the budget. We should do that, and we should do it 
soon.
  I think we made great advances the week before last by getting an 
agreement with the White House, getting an agreement in this Congress 
that we will balance the budget in 7 years, using real figures, CBO 
figures.
  There are some other words there: We are going to protect the 
environment, protect Medicare, protect education. I do not know quite 
what that means. We may have a different view of what ``protect'' 
means. None of us wants to do away with those things.
  It seems to me one of the real challenges we have, as we move forward 
with this idea of balancing the budget, which we must do, is we need to 
start dealing with some facts. It is too easy to roll over into scare 
tactics in the political response by saying, ``Yes, I'm going to 
protect Medicare.'' The fact is, you have to make some changes in 
Medicare if you want it to continue. If you want to have a health 
program for the elderly over time, you cannot continue to do what we 
have been doing. So you have to change it. But it is too easy to go to 
the country and say, ``Those Republicans want to do away with 
Medicare.'' It is not true. It is just not true.
  ``We are going to do away with education.'' Do you know how much the 
Federal Government contributes to elementary and secondary education? 
About 5 percent of the total spending. The Senator from New Mexico, who 
is more knowledgeable than anyone else about the budget, indicated that 
this budget would have reduced in his State Federal aid by six-tenths 
of 1 percent, and yet here we are going to gut education.

  I was pleased to hear that the Senator wants to balance the budget. 
The unfortunate part is we hear that all the time and then we go on for 
another 30 minutes indicating why we cannot do it. The time has come. 
We have come to the snubbing post. It is time to make the decisions, 
and I think we will.
  I wish we would have passed a balanced budget amendment to the 
Constitution. The principal sponsor and advocate is right here on the 
floor, the Senator from Illinois. I wish we had done that for the 
discipline that is involved in doing it. It would have said, ``Yes, you 
can argue about how it is done, but you are going to balance the budget 
because that is the Constitution.'' It is in the Constitution in my 
State of Wyoming, and we do it. We do it. We do not talk about it, we 
do it.
  So, Mr. President, I look forward to that. I hope we get with the 
program in the next 3 weeks. We need to do that. We need to pass the 
appropriations bills. We need to get this balanced budget bill out. We 
do not need another delay of Government on the 15th of December. We 
need to get at the task, and I hope that we do it very soon.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. SIMON addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, I confess I just got in on the tail end of 
Senator Thomas' remarks. From what I heard, I agree. I hope we can move 
quickly, and it illustrates why Senator Thomas is going to be an asset 
to the Senate. I was told by a House Member from Illinois, Congressman 
Dick Durbin, he said, ``You are really going to like the new Senator 
from Wyoming.'' I hope I do not get him in trouble in Wyoming saying 
this now, but I have found that to be the case.

                          ____________________