[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 80 (Tuesday, June 4, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S5756]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     THE BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT

  Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, once again I rise in support of the 
pending proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution to require a balanced 
Federal budget. The reason is quite simple. After all of the turmoil of 
this past year, after all of the posturing and the pandering and the 
promises and the Government shutdowns, Congress and the President have 
not come to an agreement to balance the Federal budget. Short of a 
constitutional requirement, I have serious doubts that the Congress and 
the President will do so.
  Admittedly, there is some political Presidential posturing going on 
with this impending vote. The majority leader, who is his party's 
presumptive Presidential nominee, is calling up this vote knowing full 
well that he does not have the necessary two-thirds majority. On the 
other hand, the President is proudly stating to the public that his 
efforts in his deficit reduction plan have resulted in reducing the 
annual deficit from when he took office from $294 billion to nearly 
$130 billion this year. He has invited the majority leader to the White 
House for further negotiations on balancing the budget.
  When the majority leader leaves, I hope that the new majority leader 
will be extended an invitation to go to the White House and to go 
through negotiations and settle the differences.
  In actual dollars and cents, I believe that over the 7-year period 
there is something in the neighborhood of $12 trillion involved in the 
budget process, and the difference between the White House's and the 
Republican Party's position is only $100 billion. That is less than 0.8 
of 1 percent. And that difference we ought to be able to resolve, get 
together and work out.
  However, this is a political year. We must recognize that. The Senate 
has just completed action on a $1.6 trillion budget resolution proposed 
by the majority party which seeks to balance the budget by 2002 with a 
combination of tax and spending cuts. I supported a proposal submitted 
by the President which also called for a balanced budget and would 
achieve a balanced budget, but contained fewer tax cuts and less 
cutting of the Medicare Program. However, this proposal was not 
adopted.
  The Senate and the House must settle their differences in regard to 
the budget figures, and then the Appropriations Committees must act, 
and a reconciliation bill must be passed. All of this must be signed by 
the President. It is going to be a long, hot summer here in Washington 
while the rest of the country simmers at our inaction.
  The budget process is not easy, as we have learned from last year. It 
does not guarantee that the President and the Congress will enact a 
balanced Federal budget. We have seen this, gone through Gramm-Rudman-
Hollings and other proposals which tried to achieve a balanced budget. 
But all of these have come up wanting. That is one of the reasons why I 
feel that we need the discipline which a constitutional amendment will 
provide.
  I believe that most of my colleagues are well intentioned and want to 
enact balanced budgets for the benefit of generations of Americans yet 
to be born. Unfortunately, I have seen in my Senate career--some 18 
years that I have been here--that we can often find an easy excuse for 
not fulfilling our commitment to deliver a balanced budget each year.

  There is a way out of the thicket right now in regard to the adoption 
of the constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. A handful 
of Senators, I think as many as eight, have indicated they would vote 
for the constitutional amendment if a compromise can be reached with 
regard to the Social Security issue.
  This compromise would not allow Social Security trust fund revenues 
to be used when calculating whether the budget is balanced. Admittedly, 
this will make balancing the Federal budget more difficult because the 
Social Security trust fund surpluses will no longer be used to mask the 
true size of the deficit.
  A constitutional amendment will remove all doubt, regardless of 
whether we reach any compromise pertaining to Social Security trust 
funds or not. A constitutional amendment will remove all doubt, and the 
Federal Government will have to balance its budget. The process will 
still be difficult, but it will be necessary to achieve the final goal 
as required by this proposed amendment to the Constitution.
  Amending the Constitution, in my judgment, is a last-resort method 
which should be utilized sparingly and only when the national interest 
so demands. I am often asked to cosponsor worthy proposals to amend the 
Constitution, but I rarely do so under the test that I have just 
mentioned.
  The balanced budget amendment meets that test. The national interest 
demands that we act to allow the States the opportunity to ratify the 
proposed amendment. They may not do so. And if that is the case, then 
the will of the American people will have been spoken. Therein is the 
genius of our Nation's organic document. Ultimately, the sovereign 
power of the Government rests with the people.
  These will perhaps be my last comments--or perhaps not my last 
comments on this, but among my last words on this great issue. Further, 
the first bill I introduced when I came to Congress was a bill calling 
for a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. I truly 
believe that on behalf of the generations of Americans yet unborn, this 
proposed amendment is necessary to prevent them from inheriting an even 
greater debt than they now most certainly will incur.
  Politics aside, now is the time to act, once and for all.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________