[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 2 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H140-H141]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 REASONS FOR LACK OF PROGRESS ON BUDGET

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Weldon] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise to take this 5-minute 
special order to discuss the budget and my concerns with the lack of 
progress and really the lack of response from the administration.
  We have heard continuously from some of those Members on the minority 
side that this really has been caused by a group of so-called radical 
freshmen Republican Members. Well, I rise as a five-term Republican who 
over the 10 years I have been in Congress have supported and worked 
with my colleagues on the other side on labor issues, even opposing 
NAFTA when my party and this President supported NAFTA; working with 
Members of the other side on issues like family and medical leave; 
issues involving reform of Davis-Bacon that is acceptable to the labor 
unions and the working people of this country; and working on 
environmental issues and environmental legislation, opposing the riders 
that were attempted to be inserted in the bill. So I am not someone who 
rises as someone who has always been against the President. To the 
contrary, I have been supportive of some of the issues that this 
administration has supported.
  But, Mr. Speaker, that is not what this debate is about. This debate 
really is about this President finally being called to task to live up 
to commitments that he has made publicly. He has gotten away with 
saying one thing and doing something else on numerous occasions that I 
cannot cite here today. But in this instance, Members on our side, even 
those of us who have worked with the President on key issues, are 
saying ``We want to see this President simply come forward and do what 
he said he would do, and that is to provide for us a detailed seven-
year plan to balance the budget.''
  Now, why has he not done that? It is because he is reading the 
political tea leaves and polls. He knows if he comes out with a 7-year 
plan in detail, he is either going to offend senior citizens or offend 
those business groups where he told them he would support a capital 
gains tax cut, or he is going to offend those veterans who he has told 
he will not have any changes in the way we fund veterans programs, or 
he is going to offend those defense workers by having to say we need 
additional cuts in defense, even though he was out in California last 
week and even made the case, and I cannot believe this, as the 
Republican who opposed the B-2 bomber, this. He even went so far as to 
say ``Yes, we may need more than 20 B-2 bombers.'' Talk about ultimate 
irony, for this President to make that statement.

  You see, if this President comes out with a detailed 7-year plan that 
lays out specifics like we have, he is going to take some heat, and 
this President does not like to take heat.
   Mr. Speaker, the time for this rhetoric and demagoguery has ended. 
As I said earlier today, the Philadelphia Enquirer, no bastion of 
conservative politics in this country, said it best today in one of 
their lead editorials. The headline is, ``Your turn, Bill. Clinton must 
offer the serious budget he promised.''
  I will insert this editorial in the Record, Mr. Speaker, but let me 
read the final paragraph of the editorial.

       Congress should pass stopgap funding as soon as the 
     President provides the missing ingredient of serious 
     bargaining: A credible White House plan to balance the budget 
     in seven years.

  Even the Philadelphia Enquirer has now read through the demagoguery 
of this President.

[[Page H141]]

  Now, Mr. Speaker, we hear opponents on the other side say ``You are 
offending the American people. They do not buy what you are doing. It 
is wrong.'' That may be the case. But let me just remind them of one 
plain and simple fact: Since Bill Clinton took office 3 years ago, 
there have now been as of today 182 publicly elected officials switch 
parties in this country; 182, Mr. Speaker. All 182 who switched 
parties, from Maine to Washington State, to the southern States, were 
Democrats who switched to the Republican Party. All 182 publicly 
elected officials, including 7 Members of the U.S. Congress, have now 
distanced themselves from this President.

                              {time}  1630

  So my colleagues on the other side may be right. Maybe the President 
has it all right and in the end this game of smoke and mirrors and 
images and perceptions will win. I think not. I think the American 
people are smarter than that, and these 182 elected officials who have 
switched parties and joined the Republican Party agree with us that 
this President must finally do what he said that he wants to do, and 
that is give us a detailed plan. If he does that, I will join with the 
Philadelphia Enquirer tomorrow, or tonight, and I will vote for a CR to 
get the Federal employees back to work, but I want to see the 
President's detailed plan.
  Where is it and when will we see it? Now is the time, Mr. President. 
Provide us your detailed plan for balancing the Federal budget.

                          ____________________