[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 1 (Wednesday, January 3, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S22-S24]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               THE 1995 BUDGET AND APPROPRIATIONS PROCESS

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, as 1996 begins, and the 2d session of the 
104th Congress convenes, we need to take a close look at the record of 
this Congress' first year. In reviewing that record, one stunning 
failure stands out above all others. The majority in 1995 presided over 
perhaps the most bungled budget and appropriations process ever seen in 
Congress. The majority failed to meet every budget deadline set by law, 
and every deadline they set for themselves.
  Rather than react responsibly to bring order to this process, 
Republicans instead chose to shut down the government twice. The most 
recent shutdown, now in its 19th day, is by far the longest in history. 
Both of these shutdowns have been unnecessary, wasteful of taxpayer 
funds, and have inconvenienced thousands of Americans who paid their 
taxes only to have basic services denied them.
  Let there be no mistake: Despite some of the rhetoric we have heard, 
the responsibility for the shutdown falls squarely on the shoulders of 
Republicans in the House of Representatives. Nothing makes that clearer 
than the action by the Senate on January 2 to approve a continuing 
resolution that would fund the Government until January 12. The other 
body could take up and enact that legislation in a matter of minutes. 
Yet because of objections by self-proclaimed revolutionaries in the 
other body, the shutdown continues. These extremists plan to hold the 
Government and its workers hostage to force the administration to 
accept a budget that has already been rejected by the President and the 
American people.
  A brief review of the botched budget process this year explains how 
Congress got into this mess. The Budget Act requires the Senate Budget 
Committee to report a resolution by April 1. The majority missed that 
deadline. The Budget Act requires Congress to complete a budget 
resolution by April 15. Again, the majority missed that legal deadline. 
By June 15, the Budget Act requires Congress to complete action on a 
final budget reconciliation bill. Today, over 6 months later, we are 
still discussing that legislation at the White House. In fact, they did 
not even complete work on the budget resolution until June 29.
  The majority has missed every legal deadline for the appropriations 
process, as well. By June 10, the Budget Act requires the House 
Appropriations Committee to report all 13 appropriations bills. The 
majority failed to report even one of them by that date. By June 30, 
the Budget Act requires the House to complete action on all 13 
appropriations bills. They had completed only two. By October 1, the 
beginning of the fiscal year, all 13 appropriations bills are supposed 
to be enacted. On October 1, 1995, Congress had sent only two of them 
to the President.
  Not only has Congress failed to meet its legal responsibilities. It 
is now failing to meet its constitutional responsibilities to properly 
fund the Government. Last year was not the first time the President 
differed with Congress on appropriations bills. When Democrats 
controlled Congress and Republicans controlled the White House, 
Democrats handled Presidential vetoes very differently than the 
majority does today. In 1990, President Bush vetoed the District of 
Columbia bill twice, and he also vetoed the foreign operations and 
Labor/Health and Human Services bills. He again vetoed the District of 
Columbia bills in 1992 and 1993, and the Labor/HHS bill in 1992. In 
each of these cases, Congress approved a continuing resolution to avoid 
a shutdown while Congress and the President worked out differences over 
these bills.
  There is no reason that Congress cannot again this year approve 
stopgap funding while Congress and the President negotiate differences 
over outstanding appropriations bills that should have been completed 
long ago. In fact, the President has indicated that, with relatively 
minor changes, he would quickly sign the bills he has vetoed, and the 
Government could be put back to work.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of my 
statement, the veto messages of the President regarding the VA/HUD, 
Commerce/State/Justice, and the Interior appropriations bills be 
printed in the Record.
  As these messages make clear, agreement is within reach if extremist 
riders are removed and limited funding for high-priority programs is 
restored. The only reason that this has not been done already is that 
certain leaders in the 

[[Page S23]]
other body seek to impose their radical agenda on America by holding 
these bills hostage. The Founding Fathers, in writing the Constitution, 
expected more responsible behavior from leaders in Congress, and did 
not anticipate that Congress would renege on its basic obligation to 
maintain the functioning of Government because one faction expected to 
gain partisan advantage.
  Mr. President, I would ask my colleagues to review these veto 
messages, and begin working to bridge the differences by negotiating in 
good faith, and stop using coercive tactics to extract advantage. I 
hope very much that the House will act today on the clean continuing 
resolution approved by the Senate yesterday. Ending the irresponsible 
shutdown would be a good demonstration of leadership, and would clearly 
add a positive note to the bipartisan negotiations over balancing the 
budget that are now taking place.
  There being no objection, the messages were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

     To the House of Representatives:
       I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 2099, the 
     ``Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
     Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 
     1996.''
       H.R. 2099 would threaten public health and the environment, 
     end programs that are helping communities help themselves, 
     close the door on college for thousands of young people, and 
     leave veterans seeking medical care with fewer treatment 
     options.
       The bill includes no funds for the highly successful 
     National Service program. If such funding were eliminated, 
     the bill would cost nearly 50,000 young Americans the 
     opportunity to help their community, through AmeriCorps, to 
     address vital local needs such as health care, crime 
     prevention, and education while earning a monetary award to 
     help them pursue additional education or training. I will not 
     sign any version of this appropriations bill that does not 
     restore funds for this vital program.
       This bill includes a 22 percent cut in requested funding 
     for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), including a 25 
     percent cut in enforcement that would cripple EPA efforts to 
     enforce laws against polluters. Particularly objectionable 
     are the bill's 25 percent cut in Superfund, which would 
     continue to expose hundreds of thousands of citizens to 
     dangerous chemicals and cuts, which would hamper efforts to 
     train workers in hazardous waste cleanup.
       In addition to severe funding cuts for EPA, the bill also 
     includes legislative riders that were tacked onto the bill 
     without any hearings or adequate public input, including one 
     that would prevent EPA from exercising its authority under 
     the Clean Water Act to prevent wetlands losses.
       I am concerned about the bill's $762 million reduction to 
     my request for funds that would go directly to States and 
     needy cities for clean water and drinking water needs, such 
     as assistance to clean up Boston Harbor. I also object to 
     cuts the Congress has made in environmental technology, the 
     climate change action plan, and other environmental programs.
       The bill would reduce funding for the Council for 
     Environmental Quality by more than half. Such a reduction 
     would severely hamper the Council's ability to provide me 
     with advice on environmental policy and carry out its 
     responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act.
       The bill provides no new funding for the Community 
     Development Financial Institutions program, an important 
     initiative for bringing credit and growth to communities long 
     left behind.
       While the bill provides spending authority for several 
     important initiatives of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development (HUD), including Community Development Block 
     Grants, homeless assistance and the sale of HUD-owned 
     properties, it lacks funding for others. For example, the 
     bill provides no funds to support economic development 
     initiatives; it has insufficient funds for incremental rental 
     vouchers; and it cuts nearly in half my request for tearing 
     down the most severely distressed housing projects. Also, the 
     bill contains harmful riders that would transfer HUD's Fair 
     Housing activities to the Justice Department and eliminate 
     Federal preferences in the section 8, tenant-based program.
       The bill provides less than I requested for the medical 
     care of this Nation's veterans. It includes significant 
     restrictions on funding for the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
     that appear designed to impede him from carrying out his 
     duties as an advocate for veterans. Further, the bill does 
     not provide necessary funding for VA hospital construction.
       For these reasons and others my Administration has 
     converyed to the Congress in earlier communications, I cannot 
     accept this bill. This bill does not reflect the values that 
     Americans hold dear. I urge the Congress to send me an 
     appropriations bill for these important priorities that truly 
     serves the American people.
                                               William J. Clinton.
       The White House, December 18, 1995.
                                                                    ____

     To the House of Representatives:
       I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 1977, the 
     ``Department of the Interior and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 1996.''
       This bill is unacceptable because it would unduly restrict 
     our ability to protect America's natural resources and 
     cultural heritage, promote the technology we need for long-
     term energy conservation and economic growth, and provide 
     adequate health, educational, and other services to Native 
     Americans.
       First, the bill makes wrong-headed choices with regard to 
     the management and preservation of some of our most precious 
     assets. In the Tongass National Forest in Alaska, it would 
     allow harmful clear-cutting, require the sale of timber at 
     unsustainable levels, and dictate the use of an outdated 
     forest plan for the next 2 fiscal years.
       In the Columbia River basin in the Pacific Northwest, the 
     bill would impede implementation of our comprehensive plan 
     for managing public lands--the Columbia River Basin Ecosystem 
     Management Project. It would do this by prohibiting 
     publication of a final Environmental Impact Statement or 
     Record of Decision and requiring the exclusion of information 
     on fisheries and watersheds. The result: a potential return 
     to legal gridlock on timber harvesting, grazing, mining, and 
     other economically important activities.
       And in the California desert, the bill undermines our 
     designation of the Mojave National Preserve by cutting 
     funding for the Preserve and shifting responsibility for its 
     management from the National Park Service to the Bureau of 
     Land Management. The Mojave is our newest national park and 
     part of the 1994 California Desert Protection Act--the 
     largest addition to our park system in the lower 48 States. 
     It deserves our support.
       Moreover, the bill would impose a misguided moratorium on 
     future listings and critical habitat designations under the 
     Endangered Species Act. And in the case of one endangered 
     species, the marbled murrelet, it would eliminate the normal 
     flexibility for both the Departments of the Interior and 
     Agriculture to use new scientific information in managing our 
     forests.
       Second, the bill slashes funding for the Department of 
     Energy's energy conservation programs. This is short-sighted 
     and unwise. Investment in the technology of energy 
     conservation is important for our Nation's long-term economic 
     strength and environmental health. We should be doing all we 
     can to maintain and sharpen our competitive edge, not back 
     off.
       Third, this bill fails to honor our historic obligations 
     toward Native Americans. It provides inadequate funding for 
     the Indian Health Service and our Indian Education programs. 
     And the cuts targeted at key programs in the Bureau of Indian 
     Affairs' are crippling--including programs that support child 
     welfare; adult vocational training; law enforcement and 
     detention services; community fire protection; and general 
     assistance to low-income Indian individuals and families.
       Moreover, the bill would unfairly single out certain self-
     governance tribes in Washington State for punitive treatment. 
     Specifically, it would penalize these tribes financially for 
     using legal remedies in disputes with non-tribal owners of 
     land within reservations.
       Finally, the bill represents a dramatic departure from our 
     commitment to support for the arts and the humanities. It 
     cuts funding of the National Endowments for the Arts and 
     Humanities so deeply as to jeopardize their capacity to keep 
     providing the cultural, educational, and artistic programs 
     that enrich America's communitties large and small.
       For these reasons and others my Administration has conveyed 
     to the Congress in earlier communications, I cannot accept 
     this bill. It does not reflect my priorities or the values of 
     the American people. I urge the Congress to send me a bill 
     that truly serves the interests of our Nation and our 
     citizens.
                                               William J. Clinton.
       The White House, December 18, 1995.
                                                                    ____

     To the House of Representatives:
       I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 2076, the 
     ``Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996.''
       This bill does not meet the priorities and needs of our 
     Nation and people. It would undermine our ability to fight 
     the war on crime; decimate technology programs that are 
     critical to building a strong U.S. economy; and weaken our 
     leadership in the world by drastically cutting funding for 
     international organizations, peacekeeping, and other 
     international affairs activities.
       First, the bill represents an unacceptable retreat in our 
     fight against crime and drugs. It eliminates my COPS 
     initiative (Community Oriented Policing Services) to put 
     100,000 more police officers on the street. Already, this 
     initiative has put thousands of police on the street, working 
     hand-in-hand with their communities to fight crime. The block 
     grant that H.R. 2076 would offer instead would not guarantee 
     a single new police officer. That's not what the American 
     people want, and I won't accept it. As I have said, I will 
     not sign any version of this bill that does not fund the COPS 
     initiative as a free-standing, discretionary grant program, 
     as authorized.
       The bill also eliminates my ``drug courts'' initiative. And 
     it unwisely abandons crime prevention efforts such as the 
     Ounce of Prevention Council and the Community Relations 
     Service. I am also disappointed that the funding levels in 
     the bill fall short of my request for the Drug Enforcement 
     Administration, and OCDETF (Organized Crime Drug 

[[Page S24]]
     Enforcement Task Force). This is no time to let down our guard in the 
     fight against drugs.
       Second, the bill constitutes a short-sighted assault on the 
     Commerce Department's technology programs that work 
     effectively with business to expand our economy, help 
     Americans compete in the global marketplace, and create high 
     quality jobs. As we approach a new, technology-driven 
     century, it makes no sense to eliminate an industry-driven, 
     highly competitive, cost-shared initiative like our Advanced 
     Technology Program (ATP), which fosters technology 
     development, promotes industrial alliances, and creates jobs. 
     Nor does it make sense to sharply cut funding for measures 
     that will help assure our long-term growth and 
     competitiveness--such as our National Information 
     Infrastructure grants program, which helps connect schools, 
     hospitals, and libraries to the information superhighway; the 
     GLOBE program, which promotes the study of science and the 
     environment in our schools; the Manufacturing Extension 
     Partnership, which helps small manufacturers meet the hi-tech 
     demands of the new marketplace; Defense Conversion; or the 
     Technology Administration. And I oppose the bill's harmful 
     cuts for the Census Bureau and for economic and statistical 
     analysis.
       Third, I am deeply concerned that this bill would undermine 
     our global leadership and impair our ability to protect and 
     defend important U.S. interests around the world--both by 
     making unwise cuts in funding for international organizations 
     and peacekeeping activities, and by cutting programs of the 
     State Department, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 
     and the United States Information Agency. These cuts would 
     impair our ability to support important activities such as 
     the nonproliferation of weapons, the promotion of human 
     rights, and the control of infectious disease like the Ebola 
     virus.
       Moreover, sections of the bill include inappropriate 
     restrictive language, including language limiting the conduct 
     of U.S. diplomatic relations with Vietnam, that I believe 
     infringe on Presidential prerogatives. And I cannot accept 
     the provision that would cut off all funding for these 
     agencies on April 1, 1996, unless the State Department 
     Authorization Act and related legislation had been signed 
     into law.
       Fourth, the bill includes three additional provisions that 
     I cannot accept.
       It cripples the capacity of the Legal Services Corporation 
     (LSC) to fulfill its historic mission of serving people in 
     need--slashing its overall funding, sharply limiting the 
     administrative funds LSC needs to conduct its business, and 
     imposing excessive restrictions on LSC's operations. LSC 
     should be allowed to carry on its work in an appropriate 
     manner, both in its basic programs and in special initiatives 
     like the migrant legal services program.
       Section 103 of the bill would prohibit the use of funds for 
     performing abortions, except in cases involving rape or 
     danger to the life of the mother. The Justice Department has 
     advised that there is a substantial risk that this provision 
     would be held unconstitutional as applied to female prison 
     inmates.
       The bill also includes an ill-considered legislative rider 
     that would impose a moratorium on future listings under the 
     Endangered Species Act by the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration and other agencies. That rider not 
     only would make bad policy, it also has no place in this 
     bill.
       Finally, I would urge the Congress to continue the 
     Associate Attorney General's office.
       For these reasons and others my Administration has conveyed 
     to the Congress in earlier communications, I cannot accept 
     this bill. H.R. 2076 does not reflect my priorities or the 
     values of the American people. I urge the Congress to send me 
     an appropriations bill that truly serves this Nation and its 
     people.
                                             William J. Clinton.  
       The White House, December 19, 1995.

  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________