[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 206 (Thursday, December 21, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H15553-H15554]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                BALANCING THE BUDGET IS FOR THE CHILDREN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Kingston] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, as I listened to the debate today and this 
week, and I think many of the Members in the House and across the 
country have listened to it, there is a lot of blame going on. Some 
people are blaming Mr. Dole; others are blaming Speaker Gingrich. Some 
are blaming the freshman class. Others are blaming the President. 
Others are blaming--and I understand the President actually got mad at 
the moderates tonight--and then there is a Democrat coalition that is 
getting some of the blame. And so there seems to be plenty of blame and 
plenty of theories as to who is the problem here. But whatever the 
excuse is, whatever group you blame it on, the fact is we still have 
not resolved this budget impasse.
  There is an old World War II saying of the veterans that said that 
the difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little bit 
longer. And it would appear that it is impossible right now in 1995 
America for us to settle this budget quickly or easily. But I am 
confident, Mr. Speaker, that we will be able to resolve it. I say that 
because of a great confidence and belief in the American people, in the 
American system. Sure, we are having a very difficult debate. It is 
extremely hard. Democrats are coming, every day they are saying the 
Republicans hate children, the Republicans hate the elderly, it is the 
book deal, it is one thing or the other.
  I know on their side that the Republicans are accusing Democrats of 
wanting to spend all the money in the world and yet, when you look at 
it, Democrats have something to say in this argument. When you look at 
it, the Republicans have something to say.
  I think what the American people really want is a balanced budget and 
we are the folks who have been elected to do the job. I believe that we 
can get together and resolve this. Dwight D. Eisenhower said, I am 
paraphrasing, that once the American people have made up their mind to 
do something, there is little that can be done to stop it from 
happening. I think the American people have made up their mind about 
the balanced budget and I believe in that context this debate is, I 
say, fortunately beyond Washington. We will get a balanced budget.
  What is it that we are fighting about? The Republican plan, for all 
the cries about the deep cuts, the Republican plan does not even freeze 
spending. It increases it $3 trillion over the next 7 years. The 
President wants to increase it $4 trillion over the next 7 years.

  As I talk one to one to my Democrat friends and Republican friends, 
we are all confident that we could resolve it. People from urban areas, 
people from rural areas, people from the West Coast, East Coast, it 
does not matter, we believe on an individual basis we can resolve it.
  I am seeing a little bit more movement this last week in that 
direction, informal talks, nothing big, nothing that has picked up in 
the media, nothing that some of the leadership has even recognized. Yet 
there is a lot more talking going on than the media would have the 
American people believe.
  So I say with a great optimism, yes, it is too bad we are going to be 
going home and folks are still out of work and so forth. I think it is 
important for us to all realize, these are real people, real paychecks, 
real jobs. They want to be working. They want to know that the security 
of that paycheck coming in twice a month is going to be there. At the 
same time, though, I am confident that we are going to get this thing 
resolved because, and to quote another great leader, Ronald Reagan, we 
are Americans. We will do the right thing. We will get this thing done, 
Democrats and Republicans alike.
  People are using the children as their shield a lot around here. We 
are doing this for the kids. What if kids could vote? What if the 
American children, what if that average 10-year old out there could 
suddenly vote and, realizing the issues as the rest of us do, and that 
10-year old, like my son John, would look up and say, wait a minute, 
Dad, you mean to tell me that all that spending that you are doing 
today, all that money that you act like it is yours when it is not, you 
mean to tell me that you are borrowing money that I am going to have to 
be paying back and my friends are going to be paying back. Dad, I think 
you all better so some serious cutting or do some serious spending 
reductions or do whatever it takes so that my generation is not 
strapped hopelessly with this $5 trillion debt that you are bumping 
against right now.
  I would say, we bring kids in the argument, what would happen, Mr. 
Speaker, if children were allowed to vote? I think this whole formula 
would change and I can promise you, we could balance that budget in a 
hurry because it is not fair what we are leaving our children in the 
way of debt.

[[Page H15554]]


                          A TEST FOR DEMOCRATS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia [Ms. Norton] is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor this evening to appeal 
to good sense and good government and accommodation consistent with 
principle on my side and on the other side. Today there have been 
requests to the GOP leadership to consider that AFDC checks are due to 
go out with no one to send them out, to consider that the District of 
Columbia Government is up and running without the necessary authority. 
One of the leaders offered that in the State of California it was not 
clear that Medicaid bills could be paid.
  On the Democratic side, occasionally I have heard what the other side 
has become more closely identified with. That is a kind of all or 
nothing response. I must tell you, Mr. Speaker, my heart is with the 
all or nothing response, because my largest employer is the Federal 
Government and its Federal employees in my own district who are being 
penalized as they sit home waiting to be called back to work on an 
involuntary furlough. But at least my Federal employees have been 
promised by the majority that they will be paid.
  What promise has been made to children on AFDC that they will be paid 
before Christmas or that those on Medicaid will be paid before 
Christmas and, God help us, that the Nation's Capital will be standing 
before Christmas?
  It is time for cool and mature heads to consider what is at stake. 
This is a real test for my side of the aisle, I must say, for we have 
gotten up consistently this year to speak for the poor, to speak for 
those who cannot speak for themselves. I do not see how it would be 
possible for us to go home for Christmas and tell people that we had 
said that, if it all does not come through, then no way AFDC will come 
through, no D.C. will come through, no Medicaid will come through. In 
that case we have adopted the tactics of the other side.
  Both sides need to step back. I appreciate, frankly, that the 
majority is willing to consider relieving those most in need of relief 
by some kind of special CR and have only said that this should not be 
the subject of great contention. This is a test for my side. Do you 
mean it or not, or is it only the Members of Congressional Black Caucus 
who mean it or the Hispanic Caucus who mean it, or the women who mean 
it, or do all the Democrats mean it? Do the Republicans mean it? Can we 
put aside as Christmas dawns our rancor to say we do not want to go 
home, and say to poor children on welfare, I am sorry, your check will 
come sometime in the future?
  For us, a missed check may get us over. For people on welfare, a 
missed check means no food and no shelter for far too many. For the 
District of Columbia, it is a shameful day when we have abandoned our 
constitutional responsibility and said to the District, well, we will 
reach out and get you when we can. Meanwhile, you are on your own.
  Eighty-five percent of the money up here that we cannot get out 
because no appropriation has been passed is money raised in the 
District of Columbia from District taxpayers. There is a moral 
obligation, especially on these three issues, not to say all or 
nothing, not to get up and make some kind of vein motion knowing it 
will lose and, therefore, toss us all out.
  There is a moral obligation on this side and this side to say, at the 
very least, we will call a truce when it comes to poor children on 
welfare who will not be fed and might be put out on the street before 
Christmas. We will call a truce when it comes to whether or not 600,000 
people in the District of Columbia will have a government that is open 
and collecting trash and doing what government must do for people to 
keep going. We will call a truce when it comes to Medicaid. Is that 
what we want? It is not what we want. But if we have gotten the 
majority to understand that they must consider that, how can we pull 
back now?
  It is a test and we must look at each and every one of us to see 
whether any of us causes this test to be failed. We must take it into 
account. If, after all, we have had to say about children and about the 
poor, we are willing, we are willing to stand here and allow checks to 
be missed for them, it is a test. Either we mean it or we do not. Whose 
principles are these? Who do we speak for? Can we pass the test?

                          ____________________