[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 1 (Wednesday, January 3, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H74-H76]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               REPUBLICAN VIEW OF BALANCED BUDGET BATTLE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. White). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of May 12, 1995, the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth] is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. I thank the Speaker and I thank my colleague from 
Kentucky for joining me this evening.
  Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my friends from the 
minority just a few moments prior offer a variety of opinions. And 
indeed as we stand in this Chamber tonight, surrounded by the great law 
givers of history, in a Chamber that resounds with the echoes of 
history, again we acknowledge the right of Americans to disagree and at 
times to disagree profoundly. At this juncture in our history, we have 
come, once again, to a fundamental argument as to the philosophy and 
purpose of government.
  In the preceding presentation from the minority party, I listened 
with great interest as time and again well-meaning Members of this 
House mentioned that they stood for a balanced budget but--and therein 
is the rub--but.
  There is always something that seems to get in the way, and 
regrettably a quarter century has passed since this government faced up 
to the notion of balancing the budget. So it is always simple, in terms 
of rhetorical excess, to divert one's attention from the central goal, 
and in the midst of a cacophonous presentation, unfurl the venom and 
vitriol of name calling and things that just do not square with the 
facts.
  Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentleman of this House, and those who join 
us tonight, there is one central and inescapable fact of our recent 
time here in this historic 104th Congress. Because once you get past 
the rhetoric and the apologists for those who would continue to promote 
a tax-and-spend agenda, once you would get past the rhetoric of 
victimization that spews forth like unto a flood from the other side, 
we are faced with one indisputable fact. This government would not face 
this partial shutdown if the President of the United States would have 
exercised his constitutional responsibility to sign the appropriations 
bills.
  Indeed, Mr. Speaker, in all candor, in all sincerity, the straight 
talk, the inescapable fact is this: Only one man stands between 
Government employees and their jobs, and he resides at the other end of 
Pennsylvania Avenue. Oh, to be sure, those who would continually look 
for excuses and ways to spend more of your money will tell you it is 
not so. They will continue to label people with unfair epithets, and 
that is their right in a free society.
  But understand that this President failed to sign those 
appropriations bills, and understand further, and this is the 
distressing fact, this President did more than make an agreement. He 
signed a public law in November saying that he agreed with the notion 
of balancing the budget within 7 years using honest, nonpartisan 
numbers as offered by the Congressional Budget Office. And the tragedy 
of this situation is that this President again abdicates his 
responsibility. Believe me, there is no joy in having the situation 
come to this.
  Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HAYWORTH. I would gladly yield to my friend from Kentucky and 
again I thank him for joining us during the course of this hour.
  Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. The President not only signed his name to that 
continuing resolution that the gentleman voted for, I believe, and I 
voted for to allow Government workers to go back to work, with a 
promise from the President that he by the end of the year would come up 
with a balanced budget, scored by CBO, that would balance over the next 
7 years, buy the end of the year.
  Where are we?

                              {time}  2045

  We are past the end of the year. Where is the President? Four budgets 
that he has offered later that did not balance. You are right. He is 
the gentleman that stands in the way of the Government workers from 
going back to work.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. I thank the gentleman for making his point.
  Reclaiming my time, it is vital that we move forward. But it is also 
worth 

[[Page H75]]
noting that, in the words ironically of the gentleman who now resides 
at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, to quote him from his campaign 
in 1992, ``Change is hard, change is difficult.'' How unintentionally 
prophetic the candidate's words were and how tragically cynical that 
candidate's words were when he said, ``I believe we can balance the 
budget in 5 years.''
  I yield to my friend, the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. KINGSTON. One of the things we have to remember as we hear, and 
the gentleman is a freshman, and I understand, I was listening to some 
of my Democrat colleagues calling your group a bunch of extremists and 
so forth. You know, what is interesting is the freshman class has voted 
on a balanced budget, and that budget has passed both Houses, and it 
passed.
  With the majority of votes in both Houses, and yet the President was 
the one who vetoed that.
  Now, the Democrats who are calling you guys extremists have not 
submitted a budget or have not voted on a budget. In fact, the 
President's budget did not get one single vote, Democrat or Republican, 
including our colleagues who we were entertained by earlier tonight. 
They have not submitted a balanced budget. They have not voted on a 
balanced budget.
  I think what is so important is, you know, all of this apportioning 
the blame seems to be going on in a real fervency. It takes our eye off 
what is important. A balanced budget is what is important. It will 
lower interest rates. It will create jobs. It will bring down the cost 
of home mortgages, the cost of automobile payments, student loans and 
so forth. Even more importantly than that, it will save our country 
from economic disaster.
  You cannot live in a country that has a $4.9 trillion debt and 
rising. And that debt was brought about by Republicans Democrats. We 
all know that. Anybody who starts blaming that on one President or one 
party or the other is fooling themselves. It is a bipartisan part.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KINGSTON. I do not control the time. I would be happy to yield.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Reclaiming my time, while I certainly appreciate the 
fact my good friend from Florida is here tonight, I will be happy to 
answer his questions here later tonight.
  However, with the deference we showed the minority side, let us first 
make our points. I will be happy to yield time them.
  Seeing my friend from Florida reminds me of a couple of questions he 
brought up.
  First, this morning, in the well of the House with, I guess, a 
valiant effort to do some stagecraft with the wastepaper basket and 
simulated checks, but I applaud the gentleman for this: At long last in 
some perhaps passing way he chose to embrace a tentative economic 
conservatism and fiscal soundness. I appreciate that in the gentleman 
from Florida.
  But even as he decried in his words the fact that visas were not 
being issued by this Government, I would respectfully point out to my 
friends from the minority one of the reasons those visas are not being 
issued is because members of the minority, when they served as the 
majority of this House, used this voting card as a Visa card, trying to 
charge up debt upon debt upon debt on future generations, and, yes, 
change is difficult, and answers may at times be imperfect.

  I wish there could be a straight line. I wish there could be a 
cogency to this to wrap it up in a neat little package. But the fact is 
this: As painful and at times confusing as these days may be, to change 
the culture so pervasive in this town, it is so easy to say tax and 
spend and spend and spend and spend some more. We have to take measures 
to do so.
  I yield to my friend, the gentleman from Kentucky.
  Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. You know, this is the bottom line: 40 years of 
tax and spend with no offer of a balanced budget, and we are continuing 
to hear from the other side that we are extremists, that we are mean-
spirited, that, as one gentleman said this evening, that we were 
lunatics, that we are completely out of control.
  This Government is $5 trillion out of control because liberals in 
this House for 40 years spent money that they did not have, and they 
want to continue to do that even though they talk about a balanced 
budget, and that, you know, that is not fiscal responsibility. That is 
not common sense.
  Where will the Interior workers be in the year 2012 when every tax 
dollar will be consumed by entitlements and interest on the debt?
  Mr. KINGSTON. If the gentleman will yield further, I have a lot of 
Federal employees in my district. I am concerned about them. That is 
why I supported the Interior bill when it passed. That is why I 
supported today the veto override on the Commerce, State, Justice bill, 
which would have allowed the Federal prison employees to be paid, and 
what I do not quite understand is why our friends who want the 
Government reopened voted against these bills.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HAYWORTH. I would be happy to yield to the gentlewoman from New 
York.
  Mrs. LOWEY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding to me, because I will 
be delighted to answer the question.
  I think you raise, as do all the gentlemen raise, some very important 
issues, and in fact I think it would be important that we continue this 
debate on the priorities of our Nation. We serve on the Committee on 
Appropriations, and you and I know that there are differences of 
opinions. There are differences of opinion between Democrats and 
Democrats and Republicans and Republicans.
  So I would suggest to the gentleman, and I certainly appreciate the 
gentleman yielding, that we continue this debate on the priorities of 
our Nation, but let us open the Government.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Reclaiming my time, I yield to the gentleman from 
Georgia.
  Mr. KINGSTON. I think what is so important here is let us not go 
around saying that the Newt Gingrich freshmen Republicans have closed 
down the Government when you know, and the learned distinguished 
gentlewoman from New York knows, that is not the case. The fact is that 
when you voted against that bill, you helped close down the Government, 
just a wee bit. Now, maybe, as an author of the bill, I may be accused 
of saying well, his bill reached too far, but there is plenty of, in 
the spirit of reopening the Government and in the spirit of balancing 
the budget, I would say there is plenty of room for both parties to 
come to the table, but do not sit over there and vote against the bills 
and have a President who vetoes the bill and then vote to support his 
veto and tell us we are closing down the Government.

  You know, it is too important to the Federal employees, to the 
National Park employees, to the prison guard employees in my district, 
for them to be hearing the games. This is their job. This is real 
people, real mortgages, real grocery bills, real problems, real jobs, 
and let us not say that, oh, well, I am going to vote against this bill 
but it is the Republicans that just did this.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Reclaiming my time, I would simply like to make this 
point: I find it especially objectionable, indeed, the gentleman from 
Florida, a fellow freshman, I suppose who is guilty of showing 
extremely good sense, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Weldon], pointed 
out the fact that Federal Government, the executive branch, went to 
great expense to send out letters with paychecks attempting to play the 
blame game and politicize the entire crisis, even with Federal 
paychecks. I decry that whole notion we should play the blame game.
  I am also happy, however, to point out that in the best tradition of 
the truth will out, in the best tradition of people having all the 
facts, we are joined by one tonight who fought off the blame game, who 
gave straight talk to the people of his district in California. It is 
an honor to welcome back to this Chamber and to this special order my 
good friend, the gentleman from California [Mr. Campbell]. I thank the 
gentleman and welcome him as the newest member of the extremely good-
sense bunch. We are happy to have you here. I yield to the gentleman 
from California.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. I thank the gentleman.
  I am proud to be part of this special order tonight and proud to be 
your colleague in this remarkably historic 104th Congress. 

[[Page H76]]

  I asked to speak tonight as part of the special order on two issues, 
one, a bit more general, as to why it is so important to be talking the 
balanced budget and, then, second, this issue of the continuing 
resolution.
  It may well be these points were covered far better by speakers prior 
to me, in which case you may reclaim the time. So indicate.
  Let me just take a moment because we correctly have focused upon the 
hardship to the Federal employees, the hardship to those with contracts 
with the Federal Government, to those who depend upon the Federal 
Government at least in part for necessities of life. It is appropriate 
that we do.
  But it is even more appropriate to focus upon the hardship to the 
next generation who are not here to vote, whose money we spend every 
year, that we deal with a budget that is not balanced. It is really the 
worst form of democratic misrepresentation where people who do not have 
the vote are taxed by people who do.
  Democrats and Republicans alike have participated in building the 
budget debt to where it is today, and the deficit each year being out 
of balance adds to it.
  When I had the honor to serve here before, we did not balance the 
budget, and the President at that time was Republican. So let us just 
put that issue to one side.
  What is critical for the American people to understand, and what I 
hope I have some effect in raising, is the unethical, immoral nature of 
our spending the next generation's money. That is the No. 1 and 
principal reason why we need to focus upon a balanced budget.
  Second, the baby-boomers are going to be in their retirement years in 
15 years. Now, every actuarial assumption about Medicare and Social 
Security falls through the cracks when you have that huge influx of 
retirees coming into their Social Security and Medicare recipient 
years. We have got 15 years.

  If we spend 7 of those getting to a zero deficit, we then ought to 
spend the remaining 8 to build up a surplus. If we go into those 
retirement years of the baby-boomers without a surplus, God help us, 
God help us. We will not have the funds to treat them fairly. There 
will not be a Medicare for those who would be retiring 15 years from 
now, a second reason for the appropriate focus on this budget.
  Third, the debt of the United States is unlike the debt of almost 
every other developed economy. It is not predominantly financed at the 
present auctions the way other countries do. We rely upon foreign 
investment to purchase our Treasury bonds for the new auctions, and 
every time we do that, we put our economic future in the hands of 
others, and that is a tremendous risk when you contemplate the amount 
of debt that we add up and the claims upon that debt by those who are 
not citizens, participants in the United States.
  Now, that is why it is appropriate for us to consider the deficit, 
the debt, and the unfairness that it brings to the next generation. 
What about the continuing resolution that brings us to the floor 
tonight?
  I thank the gentleman for yielding and pointing out that I was 
recently elected to this body, and it was an honor to be selected by 
the people of the 15th District of California.
  I had one message, one message in my campaign. It was, ``If you elect 
me, I will do my utmost to vote to balance the budget.''
  And I will stay here as long as it takes, if that means giving up 
vacation, which it did, if it means giving up my paycheck, which it 
does, I and a number of others, I understand, have voluntarily given 
back our paychecks to show the seriousness of our resolve on this 
matter.
  Thirty days ago, roughly speaking the President agreed that he would 
put forward a plan. It would not necessarily be one that you or I, Mr. 
Speaker, would agree to, but he agreed to a plan, and it would balance 
the budget in 7 years, using honest methods of measuring, and the 
Republicans were going to put forward their plan, and then we would sit 
down and hash it out between the two, and in return we agreed to keep 
the Government operating through continuing resolution.
  The President did not put forward that plan, and instead negotiations 
are of a one-sided nature. To have a continuing resolution tonight, 
therefore, is to invite similar response. If we were to concede to 
business as usual, we would say ``yes'' to a continuing resolution, and 
if we did that, we would be postponing yet again the time when we 
actually balance our Federal budget.
  But critically to the present context, we would be saying it is all 
right if you go back on what you pledged you would do; put your own 
proposal forward.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask the President to come forward with his proposal 
that balances the budget in 7 years using honest scoring. It can have 
no tax cut at all; that would be all right with me. It might have 
totally different numbers for Medicare and Medicaid; that would be all 
right with me. But we have to have something from which to deal, and I 
am very worried if we say all right to a continuing resolution before 
we have that, that we will never have that.
  The last point I want to raise draws from my previous experience in 
this body, 1988 to 1992. I remember we came upon those years coming out 
of the years of President Reagan, and there had been a continuing 
resolution for a substantial part of the time that President Reagan was 
in office for his first term and the deficit grew.

                              {time}  2100

  If you want to postpone what we must do, business as usual says 
``continuing resolution.''
  Mr. Speaker, I was not elected to do business as usual. If we miss 
this chance, we miss the last chance, the best opportunity, to be fair 
to the next generation. I urge my colleagues not to give up on that 
opportunity; not to be unfair to the next generation, as previous 
generations have been by building up debt upon them. but to say to them 
``We will give you something better. We will give you at least a chance 
at a balance, a clean slate in financial terms.'' To do that, the 
sacrifices that must be made, which I believe my constituents are 
willing to sustain.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. I thank the gentleman for his remarks.

                          ____________________