[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 3 (Friday, January 5, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S78-S79]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    COMMUNICATIONS FROM CONSTITUENTS

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the Senate hopefully will be hearing from 
the distinguished majority leader and Democratic leader, as they are 
now returning from the White House. I am continuing to review the 
actions taken by the House. I am hopeful that these actions will reach 
a compromise, a position whereby the Government can return to provide 
the services to the people of this Nation. But I am going to withhold 
my approval until I read each word and study every comma and period in 
it. I am still working through that. But I felt at this time it would 
be appropriate for me to have printed in the Record a number of 
communications, just a sampling of the communications that I have 
received throughout this day in my office, together with, I think, some 
very fine editorial review by the newspapers in my State.
  I will first include a letter written by a Mr. Paul T. Gernhardt, who 
writes:

       I know you and your staff are quite busy so I will keep 
     this short and to the point. I am not at all pleased with 
     your handling of the budget process. You are not helping 
     anyone's cause and are directly responsible for a great deal 
     of unnecessary harm. People are beginning to lose their 
     businesses, homes, and financial standing as you squabble 
     between yourselves. As a business owner I just cannot 
     understand your actions--there is no justification 
     whatsoever.
       As ``constitutional officers'' you have certain privileges, 
     benefits, and opportunities (including protecting your own 
     pay). However, you also have obligations. These include 
     conducting the business of government in a professional and 
     competent manner. At this point you are not fulfilling the 
     responsibilities you agreed to assume. One of your primary 
     duties is to pass a budget. This is not something that came 
     up suddenly--waiting until well past the last moment solely 
     for political gains is undignified and unprofessional.

  I have to accept my share, as a Member of this body, of such 
criticism. I 

[[Page S79]]
still believe, however, that this debate has focused the Nation's 
attention on the need to get a balanced budget within a period of 7 
years using certain criteria, namely the Congressional Budget Office 
figures in which the Congress of the United States places, I might say, 
a great deal of faith and credit. I am hopeful the final drafts, of 
what may be acted upon here momentarily, will make specific reference 
to that need, that the President should be forthcoming with such a 
budget using the 7-year criteria as well as CBO figures.
  I hope we can resolve this tragic situation which has impacted my 
State, the Commonwealth of Virginia, as severely certainly as any other 
State, and in my judgment probably more severely than any other State 
in the Union, given the fact that we are privileged--and I say that--we 
are privileged to provide a home for so many Federal employees, a 
working place and an infrastructure to accommodate their needs, not 
only here in the northern Virginia area but, indeed, throughout the 
Tidewater of Virginia where we have the largest naval base in the 
world, one of the largest Air Force bases, several of the large Army 
bases, and, indeed, the industrial base which supports so much of our 
national defense.
  As I have said here day after day on the floor, we are not only 
addressing the tragic plight of certain Government employees who have 
been furloughed, or others who are working but without pay. Also, the 
infrastructure that serves these Government employees--and vice versa, 
they serve the infrastructure, it works both ways--has been severely 
crippled. It has a ripple effect all throughout my State.
  To compound the tragedy of the private sector, many of these 
employees being laid off in the private sector do not have any 
certainty that their loss of pay and benefits or other job security 
will ever be the subject of restitution.
  Throughout this controversy I have worked with the distinguished 
majority leader. He has provided a letter to this Senator, as well as 
other Members of the House delegation from the greater metropolitan 
area of Washington, assuring us that he would fight very hard to see 
that all Federal pay is received eventually. As a matter of fact, S. 
1508, the legislation which I cosponsored with Senator Dole and the 
Presiding Officer, the senior Senator from Alaska, so provides 
specifically.
  So, Mr. President, I really take very seriously these many 
communications. I myself have gone to our phones and received a number 
of the calls from my constituents, coming in from all over the State.
  Let me mention another organization called Resource Applications, 
Inc. This is dated January 3, 1996.

       Dear Senator Warner: As the partial shutdown continues into 
     its third week, the economic damage is spreading fast, and 
     the situation is becoming painful. The Government shutdown is 
     having a ripple effect on people and is devastating their 
     lives. Yesterday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
     (EPA) sent home 2,400 of its Superfund workers and stopped 
     work at over 600 sites across the Nation, throwing tens of 
     thousands of contract employees out of work.

  The letter goes on to explain the impact on his particular firm, 
Resource Applications, Inc. It says:

       As President of RAI, an environmental firm, I am like a 
     father figure for our employees; they look to me for job 
     security. With the majority of RAI's business with EPA, I am 
     seriously concerned about the financial welfare of more than 
     100 people and their families. While I agree with your stand 
     on issues that are morally and ethically good for our people, 
     particularly the elderly, and the integrity of the 
     environment, I want to tell you, the situation is becoming 
     very difficult for the working people. An early resolution of 
     the budget impasse and Government shutdown issues would be in 
     the best interest of the country.

  Yesterday, I had the head of the Environmental Protection Agency in 
to see me on wide range of issues, Carol Browner. I serve on the 
committee which has oversight for that Agency, and I had to bring to 
her attention, among other issues, the fact that our State very proudly 
has a large manufacturing plant operated by the Ford Motor Company. 
They are turning out a brand-new pickup truck which is eagerly being 
awaited all across the United States. As a matter of fact, I purchased 
my pickup truck from the same plant in Norfolk in 1989. It has been 
very useful to me on my farm, and I have enjoyed it, and I am going to 
keep driving it. But I must say I am quite envious of this new model. 
But, Mr. President, the new model cannot go into circulation for the 
reason that the Environmental Protection Agency has not had the staff 
with which to make the proper certifications as to the fact that this 
truck, this particular new model, can meet the environmental standards. 
That is an important thing to do--to have the truck meet those 
standards before it goes on the road.
  So that is just another example of the many problems that the State 
of Virginia is facing.
  I ask unanimous consent that an editorial from the Roanoke Times of 
today be printed in the Record, a very balanced analysis of the 
problem.
  And, again, it concludes with the last paragraph:

       Dole was right, however, in judging the shutdown a poor 
     means of exacting concessions. The House should end it today.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                 [From the Roanoke Times, Jan. 5, 1996]

                        Time To End the Shutdown

       Political fault-lines underlying the partial shutdown of 
     government shifted and rose closer to the surface this week, 
     as the shutdown's effects began rippling more ominously 
     across the land.
       As if to confirm his reputation as one of Washington's 
     grown-ups, Majority Leader Bob Dole on Tuesday pushed 
     legislation through the Senate that would have reopened the 
     government until Jan. 12, while Congress and the White House 
     continued their budget talks.
       The Senate reasonably, overwhelmingly approved the measure. 
     Yet, egged on by a GOP vanguard of freshman militants, the 
     House on Wednesday turned it down.
       Now there's word the GOP leadership is changing its tune, 
     and none too soon.
       Keep in mind: Federal employees who were furloughed, as 
     well as those working without pay, in the end will be paid. 
     In the claimed pursuit of austerity, the shutdown is costing 
     taxpayers, on top of other costs, huge sums to pay employees 
     for work they weren't allowed to do.
       Give credit, therefore, to Reps. Rick Boucher and L.F. 
     Payne for their vote Wednesday to end the partial shutdown. 
     Rep. Bob Goodlatte unfortunately joined with the GOP's House 
     majority, initially refusing to consider the Senate-passed 
     measure.
       ``Bob Dole made a huge miscalculation,'' grumbled one of 
     the GOP tough guys, John Shadegg of Arizona. The partial 
     shutdown, he and other House Republicans argued, is their 
     best leverage for getting the White House to accept the 
     basics of their balanced-budget plan. Shadegg called Dole's 
     support for ending the shutdown ``an act of betrayal.''
       But if Dole betrayed his party's zealots, he hardly 
     betrayed his country--or his chances for the presidency. On 
     Thursday, House leaders were conceding theirs was the 
     miscalculation.
       The shutdown has gone on long enough. Indeed, it is more 
     likely getting in the way of, than moving along, the budget 
     talks. Clinton might have discerned a self-serving political 
     interest in continuing the standoff rather than try to end 
     it.
       ``It is wrong * * * to shut the government down while we 
     negotiate, under the illusion that somehow that will affect 
     the decisions that I would make on specific issues.'' Clinton 
     said. He's right.
       It is wrong to hold Americans hostage to budget bargaining 
     and partisan charade; Meals on Wheel clients, nursing-home 
     residents. Head Start youngsters, vendors waiting to be paid, 
     citizens wanting to visit national parks or to travel 
     overseas, Americans depending on unemployment assistance or 
     water-quality monitoring--not to mention 760,000 unpaid 
     federal workers.
       Congress has proposed measures that Clinton is right to 
     veto--mean-spirited, counterproductive measures. But House 
     Republicans are right when they criticize the president for 
     failing to specify how he would balance the budget in seven 
     years, given a common set of fiscal assumptions.
       To bargain in good faith--while still sticking to 
     principles that, in most cases rightly, he says he'll stand 
     by--Clinton needs to be more forthcoming.
       Dole was right, however, in judging the shutdown a poor 
     means of exacting concessions. The House should end it today.

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, let us hope that the relevant document 
delivered to the desk in the Senate by the Clerk of the House of 
Representatives contains the legislative initiatives that will enable 
us to resolve this.
  Mr. President, seeing the distinguished majority leader, I yield the 
floor.

                          ____________________