[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 13 (Wednesday, January 31, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H1077-H1078]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             BUDGET MATTERS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Chrysler). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, in light of Ms. Norton's just-delivered 
remarks, I would like to say as someone coming from the last State to 
be admitted to the Union, the State of Hawaii, that I recognize only 
too fully what the implications are when you find yourself without 
representation, when you find yourself having to look to the good will 
of others.
  In this particular instance, Mr. Speaker, I think that we need to pay 
some final attention before we leave the building, before we leave the 
floor, and pay some particular attention to the proposition, is this 
actually what we should be doing?
  I do not mean tonight, Mr. Speaker. I think that the majority party, 
the Republican Party, and the House, have the opportunity to reconsider 
in the next day or two whether we want to go home, whether we need to 
go home bearing the burden of not having resolved the question of the 
debt limit.
  Now, we have had arguments made, we can show headlines and present 

[[Page H1078]]
  charts indicating that there was ostensibly a breakdown in the budget 
negotiations. The budget negotiations, I submit, Mr. Speaker, are 
separate and apart from those negotiations that might occur or should 
be occurring with respect to the extension of the debt limit.

  In that regard, Mr. Speaker, I do not think they should be connected.
  I have listened with care. I have listened with intensity today to 
the arguments being made. As you know, earlier today, in the absence of 
immediate legislative business, there was quite an extensive discussion 
of some hours' length on the floor by various Members with respect to 
the question of debt limitation, balancing of the budget, and the 
implications for tax credits or tax cuts.
  Mr. Speaker, you may recall that I finished a special order just the 
other day, if you will, paraphrasing the title of an editorial to which 
I was referring in the Washington Post, the title being ``Who won the 
budget battle?'' I finished by saying the real question, Mr. Speaker, 
was who might lose in the budget battle? That is what really counts.
  We do not want anybody to lose in that budget battle, because we are 
talking about not only the future, which has been brought up many times 
by speakers on both sides of the aisle, children, grandchildren, great 
grandchildren, who will pay, but, rather, what will be lost in terms of 
what has been referred to over and over again as the full faith and 
credit of the United States with respect to paying its debts.
  Mr. Speaker, I submit there are two separate issues here that you and 
I, either individually, as Members of this body, or as representatives 
of positions in both caucuses can have, of fruitful discussion on this 
floor and in the context of the House of Representatives, 
institutionally speaking, as to what the best course of action is or 
should be with respect either to the budget or the debt limit.
  But to argue or make the debt limit extension part of that discussion 
at the present time I think advances no one's agenda, Mr. Speaker. Not 
mine. I do not come down to the floor to try and make a political game, 
rhetorically or otherwise, over arguing this issue. It is much too 
important, bigger than you or I.
  So I would hope that there would be consideration in the Republican 
Conference in the hours and immediate days to come, or, if we do leave 
without resolving the issue, that there would be a consideration that 
at least as far as the debt limit is concerned, that for now we set 
that aside as not being relevant to resolving the very real differences 
that may be between us politically or otherwise in terms of policy, and 
that we put the health and welfare literally of the Nation ahead of or 
at the top of all our priority lists, of all political parties 
concerned; that we separate that out, and that we have a full and fair 
discussion, not about the credit standing of the United States, but 
what kind of credit we can bring to ourselves as Members of this body, 
and what kind of credibility we can bring to the arguments that we are 
able to make about the budget: How we balance it, what we do about 
that, what we do about tax credits, what we do about whether or not 
there should be tax cuts; and that we argue this thing in a manner and 
in a context that establishes for the people of the United States, our 
colleagues, and those who may be viewing or observing our 
deliberations, that we do it in such a manner and in a context that 
reflects well not just on us, but on the seriousness of the issues at 
hand.

  With that, Mr. Speaker, I close by reiterating my plea that we do not 
utilize the debt limit extension as one of the fundamental blocks in 
the building of whatever political stance we may take with respect to 
balancing the budget or any other aspect of the political discussion 
that has been under way in these last days.

                          ____________________