[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 30 (Thursday, March 7, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1643-S1645]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS OF THOMAS JEFFERSON ARE RELEVANT TODAY
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, I recently came upon some statements
offered by Thomas Jefferson, which, I think, appear to bear some
remarkable relevance to our current predicament. To quote from one of
them from 1816, in a letter to Governor Plumer, he said: ``I place
economy among the first and most important of republican virtues, and
public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared.''
On another occasion, he made the same point, perhaps even more
dramatically, in a letter to Samuel Kerchival, also in 1816: ``We must
make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and
servitude.''
It is when we are having the most difficulty attending to and
resolving the most vexing issues of the day that we can profit most
from such reminders and that much of what confronts us today has been
dealt with by so many of our greatest public servants who came before
us.
One simply cannot read many of the statements of our third President,
Thomas Jefferson, without coming upon repeated, potent references to
the necessity of eliminating public debt. I suggest that he would be
horrified to learn that we would ever consider allowing our current
impasse to stand and to leave deficits and mandatory spending to spiral
upward unabated.
It is all very well, politically, to say that we will--our two
parties--take our respective cases to the electorate in November to
``let the people decide'' as to who failed who in the realm of public
responsibility. But, in the meantime, I think we do a tremendous
disservice to our citizens for as long as we leave this situation
unresolved.
Here is another quote from Thomas Jefferson, stated to Thomas Cooper
in 1802, which says it perhaps more vividly and relevantly even than
the others: ``If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors
of the people, under the pretense of taking care of them, they must
become happy.''
Well, I think that is the nub of it. ``If we can prevent the
government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretense of
taking care of them, they must become happy.''
I certainly agree with that. I can think of few things more dangerous
and more cruelly deceptive than to suggest that we must continue to
pile debt and misery upon our children's heads because we dare not slow
down, in any way, the current engines of spending growth, which churn
out funding for various beneficiaries of Government largess. We do not
``take care of'' anybody when we do this. We do not take care of
anyone's children by forcing tomorrow's children to pay lifetime tax
rates of 80 percent. That will, I assure my colleagues, lead to more
misery, more poverty, more hunger and need and deprivation, and more
intergenerational hostility than anything ever contemplated in any
balanced budget agreement.
Mr. Jefferson was fully acquainted with the dangers of mounting
public debt. Indeed, one might say that the principal challenge of the
young republic was how to discharge the massive debts compiled by the
individual States in the course of the American Revolution.
Alexander Hamilton was, of course, instrumental in diagnosing the
severity and nationality of this problem, arguing that the Federal
Government must bear the burden of lifting the national debt burden
because we would all collapse together anyway if this was not properly
done.
That brings to mind Daniel Webster's remark about Alexander Hamilton.
If you think of rhetoric today and the emotion and passion of speech,
Webster said this about Hamilton: ``He smote the rock of the national
resources, and abundant streams of revenue gushed forth. He touched the
dead corpse of Public Credit, and it sprung upon his feet.'' Now, you
can see that quote etched at the base of the Hamilton statue at the
Department of the Treasury, if you so desire to check it.
Mr. Jefferson, again in a letter to Governor Plumer, stated his
recognition of the necessity of reducing public indebtedness. Mr.
Jefferson did not always agree with Alexander Hamilton's solutions and
methods, to be sure. But they were certainly in agreement as to the
necessity of eliminating the poison of mounting public debt.
To Governor Plumer, Jefferson wrote: ``We see in England the
consequences of the want of economy; their laborers reduced to live on
a penny in the shilling of their earnings, to give up bread, and resort
to oatmeal and potatoes for food; and their landholders exiling
themselves to live in penury and obscurity abroad, because at home the
government must have all the clear profits of their land.''
That sounds like a pretty fair description of what is going to happen
to us. Our own Government continues to increase its share of the
Nation's ``profits''--the savings and investment--which it must absorb
in order to finance the massive spending increases we have programmed
into our laws. Indeed, the burden of paying for that irresponsibility
falls ultimately on the taxpayers, our taxpayers, our citizens, and
cuts into the share of their own pay, which they would otherwise be
able to use to provide for themselves.
I fully recognize there are many Senators here on both sides of the
aisle who are equally committed to confronting and resolving these woes
resulting from our debt. There are sincere disagreements as to how to
accomplish that goal. I do believe there is now widespread recognition
that the goal must be met.
I, therefore, close by reiterating my belief that we must not give up
on this process. We must not give up on coming to agreement merely
because of the disagreements which have divided us to this point. I do
not find any reason to ``give up'' to be a convincing one. Give up
because we believe we might hold political advantage if the impasse
persists, or because we cannot agree on
[[Page S1644]]
the size of a tax cut? When ``our cause'' is the elimination of
increases in the public debt, these are simply not sufficient reasons.
As a member of the bipartisan Senate group headed by Senators Chafee
and Breaux, I have joined approximately two dozen Senators, from both
sides of the aisle, in putting forward our best hope of ``splitting the
difference'' between the two sides in order to get this job done. It
might not be the only way and might not be the magic formula which
produces an agreement, but it is certainly better than ``packing it
in'' and, instead, morosely retreating to consult with our political
advisers as to how best to cope with the public anger in the wake of
our failure to complete our work--sitting with our gurus saying, ``How
do we get around this if we do not do anything?'' Well, you do this and
do that. We all know what that is.
So I suggest to my colleagues that they pay heed to these words of
Thomas Jefferson and be reminded that we are truly facing a choice
between ``liberty'' and ``servitude'' when we choose between a balanced
budget and mounting debt. That is very much the choice that confronts
our children and grandchildren, and we have now to make the choice for
them. I do hope and pray that recognition of this will spur all of us
on to renewed efforts to reach an agreement and to defer any further
thoughts of simply extracting political advantage from failure. That
would be terrible.
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, I have a comment on a rather elusive
matter. We work in an arena where truth is always a rather elusive
entity. Many statements in this place seem to be repeated ad hominem
and ad nauseam, however inadvertently, without regard to any basis in
fact. A mischievous speaker may do this because he or she believes
that, as has often been said, ``A falsehood repeated often enough will
be believed.'' Equally often, this happens because this is simply what
the individual has been told, perhaps several times, and thus the rash
assumption is made that a statement made so often ``must be true.''
Thus, often, in good faith, speakers perpetuate ideas and statements
which are simply and totally at complete variance with the facts.
To cite one specific case, I wish I could count how many times it has
been stated as an article of pure faith by those on the other side that
we have had however many hours of hearings on Whitewater and
Travelgate, but only one, or none, on Medicare. The Democratic policy
channel on the televisions in our offices also plays this old and tired
tune. Many speakers on the other side of the aisle have repeated it in
old and tired phrases. The only problem is, it is just simply not
true. It is not even close to being true. It is one of those myths
which has developed, somehow directly, in the teeth of the facts. I did
a little checking of the record. I know that is not what we are
supposed to do. I did a little checking of the record on this matter. I
ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a listing of all of
the hearings held in the last year in the Senate Finance Committee
alone on the subject of reforming Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, the
Consumer Price Index, and any number of other related matters.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Senate Finance Committee Hearings & Meetings 104th Congress (Organized
by Issue)
total hearings & meetings: 101
Full Committee Hearings: 62.
Subcommittee Hearings: 13.
Total Hearings: 75.
Executive Sessions including 3 Conferences: 22.
Private Meetings: 4.
Total Meetings: 26.
consumer price index--3 full committee hearings
3/13/95--Consumer Price Index.
4/6/95--Consumer Price Index.
6/6/95--Overstatement of Consumer Price Index.
medicaid--6 hearings (5 Full Committee, 1 Subcommittee)
3/23/95--Medicaid Subcommittee--1115 waivers.
6/28/95--Medicaid, Opinions of the Governors.
6/29/95--Medicaid, Historical Background.
7/12/95--Medicaid, State Flexibility.
7/13/95--Medicaid, Interest Groups.
7/27/95--Medicaid, Formula Calculation.
medicare--10 Full Committee hearings
2/28/95--Medicare Perspectives.
5/11/95--Medicare Solvency, part 1.
5/16/95--Medicare Solvency, part 2.
5/17/95--Medicare Solvency, part 3.
7/19/95--Medicare Payment Policies, part 1.
7/20/95--Medicare Payment Policies, part 2.
7/25/95--New Directions in Medicare, part 1.
7/26/95--New Directions in Medicare, part 2.
7/31/95--Medicare Fraud and Abuse.
8/30/95--Medicare: The Next Thirty Years.
Miscellaneous--5 hearings (2 Full Committee, 3 Subcommittee)
5/4/95--Vaccines for Children Program.
6/13/95--SS Subcommittee--AARP, part 1.
6/20/95--SS Subcommittee--AARP, part 2.
7/20/95--SS Subcommittee--Population Control.
7/28/95--Debt Limit.
Nominations--7 Full Committee hearings
1/10/95--Rubin Confirmation Hearing.
2/16/95--Chater, Vasquez, Foley Confirmation Hearing.
5/10/95--Lang Confirmation Hearing.
6/8/95--Shapiro, Hawke, Robertson, Moon, Kellison
Confirmation Hearing.
7/21/95--Callahan, Schloss, and Summers Confirmation
Hearing.
11/30/95--Bradbury, Gale, Lipton, Skolfield, Shafer and
Williams Confirmation Hearing.
12/5/95--Gotbaum Confirmation Hearing.
Social Security--7 hearings (3 Full Committee, 4 Subcommittee)
3/1/95--Social Security Earnings Limit.
3/22/95--SS Subcommittee--Social Security Costs.
4/7/95--SS Subcommittee--Annual Report of Trustees.
5/9/95--1995 Annual Report of Trustees, part 1.
6/6/95--1995 Annual Report of Trustees, part 2.
6/27/95--SS Subcommittee--Solvency of the Trust Funds.
8/2/95--SS Subcommittee--Social Security privatization.
tax--22 hearings (19 full committee, 3 subcommittee)
1/24/95--Estimating Revenue.
1/25/95--Economic Outlook.
1/26/95--Federal Budget Outlook.
1/31/95--Savings in our Economy.
2/2/95--Savings as Incentives.
2/8/95--FY 1996 Budget with Secretary Rubin.
2/9/95--IRAs 401K's & Savings.
2/15/95--Capital Gains.
2/16/95--Indexation of Assets.
3/2/95--Middle Income Tax Proposal.
3/7/95--FCC Tax Certificates.
3/21/95--Tax Subcommittee--Expatriation.
4/3/95--Tax Subcommittee--Research tax.
4/5/95--Flat Tax, hearing 1.
5/3/95--Alternative Minimum Tax.
5/18/95--Flat Tax, hearing 2.
6/7/95--Small Business issues.
6/8/95--Earned Income Tax Credit.
6/19/95--Tax Subcommittee--S corp reform.
7/11/95--Expatriation Tax.
7/18/95--Deficit Reduction Fuel Tax.
7/21/95--Foreign Tax Issues.
trade--5 hearings (3 full committee, 2 subcommittee)
4/4/95--Trade Policy Agenda.
5/10/95--World Trade Organization.
5/15/95--Caribbean Basin Initiative.
8/1/95--Trade Subcommittee--various issues.
12/5/95--OECD Shipbuilding Subsidies Agreement.
welfare--10 full committee hearings
3/8/95--Welfare Reform--States Perspective.
3/9/95--Broad Goals of Welfare.
3/10/95--Administration's Views on Welfare.
3/14/95--Teen Parents & Welfare.
3/20/95--Welfare to Work Programs.
3/27/95--SSI Program.
3/28/95--Child Support Programs.
3/29/95--Welfare, Views of Interested Organizations.
4/26/95--Child Welfare Programs.
4/27/95--Welfare Reform Wrap Up.
Exec Sessions--21 meetings including 3 conferences
1/10/95--Organization Meeting & Vote on Rubin Nomination.
2/2/95--Executive Session appointing Joint Tax Members.
2/8/95--Executive Session appointing Subcommittees.
3/8/95--Vote on Foley & Vasquez Nominations.
3/15/95--Tax Markup on HR 831.
3/28/95--Conference on HR 831.
5/10/95--Vote on Lang Nomination.
5/24/95--Welfare Markup.
5/26/95--Welfare Markup.
6/8/95--Vote on Shapiro, Hawke, Robertson, Moon & Kellison
nominations.
6/22/95--Conference on H.R. 483--Medicare Select.
7/21/95--Vote on Callahan, Schloss and Summers Nominations.
9/26/95--Medicare/Medicaid Markup.
9/27/95--Medicare/Medicaid Markup.
9/28/95--Medicare/Medicaid Markup.
9/29/95--Medicare/Medicaid Markup.
10/18/95--Tax Markup.
10/19/95--Tax Markup.
10/24/95--Conference on H.R. 4--Welfare.
11/2/95--Markup on revenue provisions of S. 1318.
11/30/95--Vote on Bradbury, Gale, Lipton, Skolfield and
Williams Nominations.
12/14/95--Mark up of Social Security Earnings Limit
Legislation and vote on the Gotbaum and Shafer nominations.
[[Page S1645]]
Private Meetings--4 meetings
5/4/95--Meeting with Secretary Shalala.
8/2/95--Meeting on the Budget.
8/4/95--Meeting on the Budget.
8/10/95--Meeting on the Budget.
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, I am now a member of that committee and I
sat in on those hearings. They were often held at 9:30, 10 o'clock in
the morning. Had I been chairman I might also have sought to have them
in the afternoon. I was there for almost all of them, usually arriving
after some haste ill-attained in getting through the D.C.'s fabled rush
hour traffic from my home in Virginia.
We held 10 full Finance Committee hearings last year on Medicare
alone--10. They were not about abstract, philosophical topics, but
subjects directly related to the solutions presented in our budget
proposal. On May 11, 16 and 17 we had hearings specifically on the
question of how to restore solvency to the Medicare Program. We tackled
the issue of payment policies in hearings on July 19 and 20. We
explored more comprehensive reforms on July 25 and July 26. On August
30 we dealt with the subject which I personally think requires much
more, much more attention--the 30-year future of Medicare. That is when
the real problems all coalesce. This is only part of the list, as the
record will show.
We also had multiple hearings on Medicaid. The proposals which we
made in the course of budget reconciliation were all explored in depth
at those hearings. The opinions of the Governors regarding our plan was
heard on June 28. The importance of flexibility for the State
Governments in administering Medicaid was explored July 12. The proper
way to calculate the distribution of funds under the Medicaid formula
was explored on July 27. Again this is only a partial list.
Even the issue of the Consumer Price Index reform, which so many have
said we should ``not rush to do,'' especially not rush to do in budget
reconciliation, the CPI reform was the subject of several full
committee hearings on March 16, April 6, and June 6. When somebody
tells you we have not done anything--and looked into CPI; we do not
want to rush into it--cite those, please. Having been right there
personally I can tell you few experts believe we are acting with any
sense at all on either side of the aisle in allowing the expensive
errors in the CPI calculation to persist. That is absurd. It is out of
whack either .5 or up to 2.2. Everybody that testified said that. If
you dealt with it, knocked off a half percent or full percent in the
outyears, in 10 years, at 1 percent, it is $680 billion bucks--billion
bucks--and we do not even play with it.
The senior groups all seem to flunk the saliva test when we begin to
talk about the CPI. ``Oh, break the contract, break the contract.'' I
am telling you, they will break America. We are not talking about them
or to them. None of them will be hurt in anything we are doing. No one
over 60 is even affected by the things we have in mind, but people
between 18 and 40 will indeed be on a destructive path.
Mr. President, I do not know what to make of these assertions that we
have not had hearings on Medicare or Medicaid. We have had many. The
record speaks clearly. On Medicare alone, 10 full committee hearings.
It seems to me be a trend in Washington saying that what has happened
has not happened and vice versa. The media plays that well in their
recountings of these things. Perhaps the assertions will be revised to
state that we only had a minimal look at Medicare. That would probably
be the result of the response to my remarks.
I do not know how many dozens of hours were needed to spend on that
to escape the application of that term. I also note that this work
continues on in the current year. We had another remarkable hearing on
Medicaid last week with six of our Nation's Governors testifying--three
Republicans, three Democrats--in describing the desires of the State
governments with regard to Medicaid.
So I ask these items be printed, and I ask my colleagues to perhaps
refrain from repeating the charge that we have not thoroughly explored
Medicare in committee hearings. The facts are exactly otherwise, and I
wish my good colleagues to know that.
____________________