[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 2 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S40]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE SECOND SESSION OF THIS CONGRESS
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, let me speak about one other issue that
I am quite concerned about, and that is the implication of what is
going on now for the work of this Congress in the second session and in
future sessions. There has been a lot of talk about hostage-taking.
There was a very good editorial that has been referred to in the
Washington Post yesterday about how the current shutdown is an example
of hostage-taking. Yet, the editorial stated, I thought, very
eloquently:
Hostage-taking is an ugly business. It doesn't matter what
the cause. Innocent people are seized and used as pawns; they
become political trading stamps whose welfare is exchanged
for things the hostage-taker could not win by normal means.
Obviously, the most dramatic example of hostage-taking in recent
history in this country was the hostage-taking in Iran in November
1979. It could be debated whether the current Government shutdown rises
to the level of a hostage-taking. Perhaps this is just a using of
public servants, Federal employees, as pawns in a larger political
game, and I will leave to others the debate about whether this is, in
fact, a hostage-taking.
But, Mr. President, in my view, when each of us took our oath of
office, and that oath included the duty to protect and defend the
Constitution, implied in that was the responsibility to maintain a
functioning Government. Now, that is not written into the Constitution,
but I think it is clearly implied that those of us who seek public
office will take on that responsibility.
We can argue about what the Government ought to do, we can argue
about how large the Government ought to be, we can argue about how many
employees ought to be hired by the Federal Government, but the basic
responsibility to maintain a functioning Government is something about
which I think is very difficult for us to argue.
The Republican leadership in the House has taken a different view.
They are saying that as to the parts of the Government which today
remain closed, they do not share that responsibility to maintain those
parts of the Government functioning. They believe that is the
President's problem, it is not their problem.
Those who wrote our Constitution established a system of government
where power is shared, but also a system of government where
responsibility is shared, and part of that responsibility that is
shared is the responsibility to maintain a functioning Government.
Mr. SARBANES. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. BINGAMAN. I will be glad to yield to the Senator from Maryland
for a question.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. SARBANES. I say to the distinguished Senator from New Mexico,
given our constitutional arrangements of separation of powers and
checks and balances, if both branches do not act responsibly, how can
we meet our responsibilities under the Constitution?
We have a situation here, as I perceive it, in which a coercive
tactic is being employed which I understand has never been used
previously in our Nation's history. That is, a certain group, in order
to get its way on a substantive issue, is prepared to use as a tactic
the closing down of the Government with all of the harm that inflicts,
not only on the Federal employees but throughout the private sector.
This is a classic example of using any means to get to your end, even
though the means that are being used here result in a breakdown of our
constitutional system of democratic government. What is the Senator's
perception with respect to that?
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I appreciate the question very much, and
I agree entirely with what the Senator from Maryland is saying. I
believe it is a breakdown of our system. I believe the Founding Fathers
who set up our system of government intended that all of us in
Government, whether in the legislative branch or in the executive
branch, would work together to try to maintain a functioning Government
and to resolve disputes. That is not happening now.
I was particularly bothered by an article on December 2 in the
Washington Post where it talked about the impasse that was existing,
and it referred to the chairman of the Appropriations Committee in the
House, Mr. Livingston. It said:
Livingston and other Republicans yesterday boasted that
after weeks of standoff over spending issues, the momentum
had shifted in the Republicans' direction when the President
accepted the defense spending bill. ``I think that once the
defense bill was off the table, the administration lost the
leverage it really had planned on using,'' Livingston said.
He added that most of the remaining spending bills include
programs that ``are a greater concern to the President'' than
to many other Members of Congress.
To me, that does not bode well for the rest of our deliberations in
the second session of the Congress. If the President needed to keep the
Defense appropriations bill on the table in order to be able to bargain
with the House, then the obvious message is that he would keep it on
the table in a new session. I cannot conceive of the President this
fall, for example, when we send him appropriations bills, I cannot
conceive of him signing a legislative appropriations bill before all of
the executive branch appropriations bills have been completed. It would
not make any sense, if this is the new context in which we operate.
Mr. SARBANES. Will the Senator yield for a further question?
Mr. BINGAMAN. Yes, I will be glad to yield.
Mr. SARBANES. Representative Boehlert stated in mid-November, and I
quote him: ``You have a group in our conference who could not care less
if the Government shuts down. They will be cheering.''
I submit, shutting the Government down is a default in carrying out
your responsibilities as an elected Member of the legislative branch.
You have to separate out the matter of carrying forward the normal
functions of Government, on which millions of people across the country
depend, from disputes you may be having over particular issues.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. COCHRAN addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. COCHRAN addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi is recognized.
____________________