[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 13 (Wednesday, January 31, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E120-E121]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           THE 1O4TH CONGRESS

                                 ______


                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, January 31, 1996

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert my Washington 
Report for Wednesday, 

[[Page E121]]
January 10, 1996, into the Congressional Record:

                The First Session of the 104th Congress

       It is hard to remember a busier session of Congress than 
     the first year of the 104th Congress in 1995. The House was 
     in session through Christmas, and cast over 880 votes. But is 
     also true that the achievements of the first session are 
     meager. Even the strongest champions of the first session 
     admit the sparse results and say the session made history but 
     not laws.


                          congressional agenda

       The new congressional leadership certainly defined the 
     debate during 1995 and they deserve credit for making a start 
     on the central question of balancing the federal budget by 
     the year 2002. Major progress was made in reducing the 
     deficit and trimming the size of government in the first two 
     years of the Clinton Administration, and the new 
     congressional leadership is building on those achievements. 
     The issue now is not whether the budget should be balanced, 
     but how; and not whether federal responsibilities should be 
     devolved to the states, but which ones. I voted for a seven-
     year balanced budget, a balanced budget amendment to the 
     Constitution, and a line-item veto.
       Some of the major achievements of the session came on 
     issues that transcended partisan politics. Congress, with my 
     support, passed long delayed legislation to tighten 
     registration and disclosure rules for lobbyists; banned 
     virtually all gifts to lawmakers, including expensive paid 
     trips to resorts; required Congress to abide by federal 
     workplace laws; and limited the imposition of unfunded 
     mandates on states and localities.
       The congressional leadership has brought about major 
     changes in the manner Congress operates. Speaker Gingrich has 
     centralized power in his office, at the expense of the 
     committee system. For the most part, he has simply bypassed 
     the slow process of congressional hearings and committee 
     work, and attempted to use spending bills to make changes in 
     policy. He has succeeded in keeping a remarkable level of 
     discipline in his caucus.


                                failures

       Even so, the ambitions of the new House leadership have 
     outstripped its achievements and left one of the least 
     productive sessions in modern history in terms of the number 
     of laws enacted. The most important piece of legislation--a 
     huge omnibus bill calling for reform of hundreds of programs 
     and a seven year plan to balance the budget--remains stalled 
     in negotiations with the White House. In all, 67 bills were 
     enacted into law in 1995, by far the lowest number for a 
     first session of Congress since the end of World War II. 
     Among them are six of the 13 annual appropriations bills 
     funding the operations of the government that should have 
     been passed by October 1, 1995.
       The list of items under the Contract with America not 
     passed is extensive. It includes a balanced budget amendment, 
     a line item veto, crime bill, welfare reform, tax cuts, 
     national security measures, deregulation, litigation 
     restraints, and term limits. Speaker Gingrich was able to get 
     most of his Contract through the House with ease, but came up 
     hard against the unique role that the Constitution gives to 
     the Senate. The Senate traditionally serves as a break on the 
     excesses of the House. The revolutionary zeal that has often 
     marked the Republicans in the House still courses through the 
     House, but the Senate has proved to be far more cautious and 
     skeptical, slowing some measures and blocking others.
       This has been a special-interest driven Congress. I suppose 
     that's always true to some extent, but the new Republican 
     leadership, while vowing to end it, just came up with a new 
     list of political winners and losers. The working poor have 
     certainly been on the wrong side of their list; the wealthy 
     on the right side. It is one thing to run on a promise of 
     curbing all government entitlements to everyone but quite 
     another to target lower income working Americans for a 
     disproportionate share of the cuts. Many members came to 
     Congress this year to shake up Washington, but they have 
     become among the leaders in campaign contributions from 
     special interests. As a remedy, I support sweeping campaign 
     finance reform, and will urge its consideration this year.


                            lack of civility

       The congressional session was as contentious as I 
     can remember, epitomized by the bitter fight over the 
     budget that closed the government for 21 days--a record--
     and kept Congress in session over Christmas for the first 
     time in 15 years, and reached new heights for vituperative 
     debate.
       I have seen more flat-our partisanship in the House this 
     year than ever before. It spreads from the floor to the 
     committees, which were once largely free of it, and certainly 
     to the television cameras. There have been shouting and 
     shoving matches on and off the House floor and harsh partisan 
     and personal attacks.


                              retirements

       There's not much doubt that Congress is going through a 
     real shakeout. So far, 24 members of the House and 12 members 
     of the Senate have announced their retirements, with another 
     10 House members running for higher office. Many have talked 
     about the very long hours and demanding schedule. Others have 
     cited the extreme partisanship. Still others have said they 
     simply want to pursue other career opportunities, and spend 
     more time with their families.
       Change and turnover can be beneficial as new members bring 
     fresh energy and new ideas to the institution. Congress, 
     however, also benefits from the leadership and experience of 
     veteran legislators, who know how to build consensus and make 
     the legislative process work. My concern is that so many 
     retirements come from the political center of both parties. 
     Moderates are where most of the American people are on 
     issues. What we need in Congress and government today is a 
     dynamic center that represents and responds to the needs and 
     concerns of the average American, not special interests on 
     the right and left.


                               conclusion

       My own guess is that, under the present balance of forces 
     in the White House and Congress, all of the questions on the 
     budget and the role of government will not be resolved 
     completely. We can reasonably expect incremental changes, 
     rather than revolution. Nobody knows, of course, what happens 
     to the Republican proposals in the days ahead. Many of the 
     questions, unsettled in 1995, may be resolved in 1996.

                          ____________________