[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 10 (Thursday, January 25, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H856-H857]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             BUDGET IMPASSE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Smith] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I also say, let us stay here, let 
us resolve the issue. It seems to me that again we need a review of 
what is happening with this budget process.
  The Democrats criticize the Republicans for probably biting off more 
than they can chew in terms of spending cuts. As it turned out, those 
Democrats were probably right. We had a lot of ideas that we wanted to 
accomplish to bring spending under control. But, Mr. Speaker, I say to 
the American citizens, wake up, America.
  Anybody under 50 years old better start putting in some studying time 
on what is happening to this Federal budget, what is happening to 
overspending, overtaxing and over- borrowing, because it is going to 
affect your lives. It is going to affect your kids' lives. We have now 
mounted a huge Federal debt of $4.9 trillion, plus the extra $100 
billion that Secretary Rubin has creatively come up with that is no 
less an obligation of this country to pay back.
  We are looking at a situation now where we have made such huge 
promises in social programs that we cannot afford to pay for them. 
Civil service retirement has an unfunded liability or a so-called 
actuary debt of a half a trillion dollars; Medicare, $5 trillion 
actuary debt; Social Security, $3.2 trillion actuary debt.
  Mr. HEFNER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

                              {time}  1230

  Mr. HEFNER. Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to be argumentative. I will 
not speak about the CR as such. I want to speak just a minute about the 
debt limit. I would like to make a point. The gentleman is a man of 
real intelligence and very well respected here.
  On the extension of the debt limit, absolutely we have no choices, it 
has to be done. We have spent the money in my district, in your 
district, in 435 districts around this country. Every Member of this 
Congress has something in his district that calls for Federal funds. We 
have to do that. Why are we making such a production and tying this up? 
Because it has to be done. It is just like death and taxes.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, it is a moral 
obligation to pay the bills we owe. Why it is reasonable to attach the 
debt limit to the consideration of an overhaul of spending is because 
Congress has lost its control over spending for 50 percent of what this 
Government spends. those are now on automatic pilot in the so-called 
welfare and entitlement programs. Those programs are the biggest reason 
that we need additional debt limit in the future. So it is reasonable 
to tie these two together.

  I mentioned earlier today, Mr. Speaker, in a 1-minute, all of the 
previous debt limit extensions forcing Presidents to do things that 
they did not otherwise want to do by increasing taxes. The most recent, 
of course, was the 1993 bill, where we had the largest tax increase in 
history, but also George Bush in 1990, where the large tax increase was 
tied to that debt limit extension.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Chrysler].
  Mr. CHRYSLER. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to make the point, the question is really 
this: Mr. President, why did you not submit the balanced budget that 
you submitted on January 6 on December 15, and then the Federal 
Government would not have been shut down? It was available to them 
since last July, because it was the budget of Senator Daschle. We would 
have been able to keep the Government employees working and we would 
have kept the Government going.
  So whose fault is it that this Government shutdown happened? Clearly, 
the President could have submitted that budget. Clearly, he could have 
kept the Government running. Most importantly, he could have kept his 
word to the American people.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I think it is 
absolutely correct. The eastern media do not say it, but it takes two 
to tango. We need to bring both sides to this table. If we are serious 
about a balanced budget, we can do it. The fact is that it is much 
easier to say you want a balanced budget than to come up with the 
spending cuts to do it. It is too easy for the other side to demagog 
every spending cut, to go to that interest group and say, Look at these 
mean-spirited Republicans and what they are doing to you.
  Mr. Speaker, we have overcommitted ourselves. We are no longer the 
rich Nation we were. If people under 50 years old want anything left in 
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the kinds of programs that we 
should be 

[[Page H857]]
running, it is important that we start being reasonable. We not only 
reduce spending and stop deficit overspending, but we start paying back 
some of that huge, huge debt that we already owe.
  Mr. CHRYSLER. If the gentleman will continue to yield, Mr. Speaker, 
we have put forth a bipartisan budget. Every budget that we have 
submitted in this Congress has had bipartisan support, where the 
President, who has now submitted five budgets, has yet to receive the 
first Democrat and/or Republican and/or independent vote for any of the 
budgets that he has supported.
  So, certainly, we have a good, strong bipartisan effort, and I think 
that is what we are going to see come to the floor in the next few 
weeks, and the President has yet to get his first vote for anything.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. There are two numbers that I think the 
American people and all of us should remember about the President's 
budget. One number is $300 billion, one number is $200 billion. He 
spends $300 billion more than Republicans. He increases or has higher 
taxes, $200 billion more, than the Republican proposal.

                          ____________________