[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 23, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S297]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             FRESHMAN TOUR

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I rise to follow my friend, the Senator 
from Minnesota, in noting what I thought was useful, and that was the 
tour of freshman Senators throughout the country, actually, starting 
here in Washington, on through the Midwest, and ending up in Cheyenne, 
WY.
  It seemed to me to be a very useful kind of an activity. Our theme 
was ``Promises Made, Promises Kept.'' I think it was appropriate that 9 
of the 11 new freshmen in this body participated. We made 10 stops in 9 
States to talk about this kind of commitment to the things that had 
brought us to the Senate in 1994. I think we all agreed in general that 
there was a message in 1994, and that message basically was the Federal 
Government is too big and costs too much and we need to change the 
regulatory restrictions on the opportunities in this country.
  That has been the effort of this freshman class, and to a large 
extent this body during that year. We have felt some kinship in that we 
have come here together, we did share this commitment, and we were 
committed to change. We had just come from an election where, I think, 
that message perhaps permeates a bit more than those who have been here 
before, perhaps.
  There has been a great deal of success, I think, in that message. We 
have not accomplished specifically all the things that we would like to 
but the major change has been the turn of the debate. I think most 
anyone who has watched the Congress over the last 25 years would have 
to say that the conversation has basically been centered around those 
programs that have been in place for 25 years. They largely came in the 
Lyndon Johnson Great Society time, and each year most of the time has 
been spent saying, ``How much more money do we put into the program? If 
it has not worked as well as it should, we will put more money in.''
  Now that debate has changed somewhat. The debate has change markedly. 
We are talking for the first time in 25 years about a balanced budget. 
We are talking for the first time in 25 years about how you spend less 
rather than more. That is a significant change in the framing of the 
debate in this country, a significant change in the direction that this 
Congress would take, and hopefully that this country would take.
  We have talked about things like reducing spending as opposed to 
continuing to add more to the deficit, to add more to a $5 trillion 
debt. We talked about a balanced budget. We have not had a balanced 
budget in almost 30 years. This is the first time that a balanced 
budget has been presented to the President of the United States. 
Unfortunately, he saw fit to veto it.

  We have talked about entitlement changes. Most anybody who looks at 
our financial situation fairly has to see that we have to do something 
about entitlements. You cannot change the direction of spending by 
simply talking about those things that are discretionary. Two-thirds of 
the spending is in entitlements. You have to change that. Of course it 
is difficult. But we have set about to do that. We have talked about 
welfare reform, to make welfare the kind of program that most everyone 
believes it ought to be, where you help people who need help, but help 
them get back into the system, back into the workplace.
  Middle-income tax reform--instead of the largest tax increase in the 
history, which is what we had 2 years ago, we are talking about middle-
income tax relief. Also line-item veto, term limits, regulatory reform.
  That is what has happened. We are very pleased about that and we took 
that message to the country. In addition to that message, I think we 
took some facts. We sort of evolved into politics by posturing and to a 
situation of policy by perception rather than facts. It is ironic. We 
have the ability to present facts to the whole world in a second. Fifty 
years ago it was months after something was done here before people 
even knew about it. Now we have this great opportunity, but 
unfortunately we are doing governing by advertising, doing governing by 
spinning.
  We talk about gutting Medicare. Nobody in this place is interested in 
gutting Medicare. In fact, when you look of course at the numbers, why, 
obviously, it is not. That is what we talked about.
  We talked about fundamental change. We heard a great deal of positive 
response to that. People who are aware of the benefits that come from 
balancing the budget, the fact that we can lower interest rates, reduce 
the cost of mortgages, and reduce the cost of loans to send your kids 
to school, and we can talk about being responsible for going into a new 
century without continuing to add costs to the debt for our kids to 
pay.
  I want to say that I think this trip was very useful and I am pleased 
that my colleagues were willing to take their time to go. I am 
particularly pleased they went to Cheyenne, WY. We had the largest town 
meeting we have ever had there. Not everyone is in agreement how to do 
it, but the preponderance of people say we need to be responsible. We 
need to look to the future. One little guy in the audience had a 
computer. We talked about $5 trillion debt, he divided it by the number 
of people and announced we each owe $17,000, and we were dazzled a 
little by the technology, but the answer is right, we do.

  Mr. President, what we need here is leadership. We need to provide 
for the direction of this country. We do not need obstructionism. We do 
not need insistence on the status quo. This is a great country with a 
great future. We have the best opportunity that we have ever had to 
strengthen that future and make it a land of responsibility and the 
land of opportunity.

                          ____________________