[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 23, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S295]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS

  Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I believe we are closer to a balanced 
budget than we have been in many years. I think the public 
overwhelmingly wants a balanced budget. I think we are moving in that 
direction. But there are little problems here and there that seem to 
prevent us from getting together in being able to shake hands on a 
balanced budget.
  The President and the Republican leadership I think all realize that 
we need a balanced budget for it will certainly directly affect 
virtually every segment of the Government and every citizen of the 
country. I feel that lost in the political rhetoric over the budget is 
the fact that we have reached substantial agreements at this stage.
  We have agreed that the budget ought to be balanced in 7 years. We 
have agreed that CBO figures ought be controlling. We have agreed that 
there ought to be less Government. We have agreed that there ought to 
be a tax cut. And while both sides still have some major differences to 
work out, I feel that good-faith negotiations on these issues can yield 
a budget that is fair and equitable to all segments of society, and 
each party can claim victory.
  When the recess occurred, there was a statement to the effect that we 
were going to stop the negotiations and then come back again.
  There have been three or four efforts that have been made recently to 
try to get the parties together to start negotiating again. But for 
some reason or other they have been called off. Now that the recess is 
over, and the recess from the negotiations is over, it is time to begin 
again and for each side to meet and come to an agreement. The longer 
the negotiators avoid constructive negotiations the greater the chances 
for each side to become reentrenched in their policy positions.
  Compromise is an art that appears to have somehow been forgotten. It 
is apparent that in order for an agreement to be reached, both 
Democrats and Republicans are going to have to give and take. Each side 
is going to have to have some wins and each side is going to have to 
have some losses. If the Israelis and the Palestinians can get together 
and negotiate in good faith, there is no reason why the Democrats and 
the Republicans cannot do likewise. If the Croats, Moslems, and Serbs 
can agree on a cease-fire, why cannot both parties put their verbal 
pistols back in their holsters?
  I do not know exactly what the solution is. But it may well be that 
we may have to go to Camp David and tell them to stay there until they 
reach an agreement. Maybe Dayton is the place. Maybe Norway. But 
whatever it takes in regards to getting together and finding a location 
and staying with it until we reach an agreement, it seems to me to be 
the proper course to follow. When you add it up, the current Democratic 
proposals and the Republican proposals are less than $100 billion 
apart. Taking into account $12 trillion over a 7-year period, this 
figure amounts to less than .8 of 1 percent. With this in mind, it 
seems to me that the negotiations should proceed with an emphasis on 
what each side is willing to give and take in order to reach a long 
overdue budget agreement.

  The State of the Union Address will have a significant impact on the 
negotiations. It is a good opportunity for the President to demonstrate 
his willingness to reach an accord. However, if his speech is overly 
partisan, it can harm the negotiating atmosphere by having a hardening 
effect on the Republican negotiators. Likewise, the Republican response 
can also either help or hurt the negotiating process.
  Hopefully, the President will extend a hand of conciliation, and if 
he does, I hope the Republicans will not slap it, but instead shake it. 
I hope that each Senator will keep this in mind when determining 
exactly what he or she wants to convey, when commenting on the content 
of the President's speech. Each Senator must be aware that their 
responses may affect the overall negotiations pertaining to the budget.
  We need to adopt a continuing resolution--hopefully a clean one--by 
January 26. The expiration of the current continuing resolution, of 
course, runs out on that date. Despite all the heated rhetoric, I do 
not believe it is in the best interest of our citizens to have the 
remaining portion of Government closed down. A great number of the 
various Agencies and Departments will stay open under the legislation 
that has already been adopted.
  Taxpayers and Federal employees should not be punished, because 
Congress and the administration have not fulfilled their obligation to 
reach a budget.
  Mr. President, as I have stated before, I think it is imperative that 
we reach an agreement on the budget, and I am optimistic that when 
reasonable people sit down together an agreement can be worked out.
  It seems to me we have made a great deal of progress. We have agreed 
on some fundamentals: A 7-year period for a balanced budget; CBO 
figures; a tax cut; and a cut in Government. We just need to get 
together. Perhaps we need a mediator. But I hope that we will let 
reason prevail, and we will not let this opportunity pass to achieve a 
balanced budget.
  Mr. GRAMS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kyl). The Senator from Minnesota.

                          ____________________