[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 85 (Tuesday, June 11, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6076-S6077]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997--CONFERENCE 
                                 REPORT

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Madam President, if I may now take the time allotted 
to me by the Senator from Nebraska, I want to talk about the conference 
report on the budget resolution, this budget that makes such deep cuts 
in Medicare, Medicaid, education, and the environment. My view is we 
ought to reject it and start over.
  Before I make specific comments about the budget, I want to frame it 
in terms of the historical perspective. The Federal budget over the 
last 15 years, what has happened with it? The fiscal records of 
Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Reagan could not be more different. Over 
a 12-year-period, the Reagan and Bush administrations incurred $2.3 
trillion of debt. In fact, if we did not have to pay the interest on 
the debt racked up in these 12 years, the budget would be in balance 
this year. Not once did President Reagan or President Bush propose a 
balanced budget.
  Fortunately, President Clinton's 4-year record is much different. 
President Clinton promised change in 1992 and he has produced it. 
Consider the following: The deficit has gone down for 4 straight years. 
The revised deficit figure for the fiscal 1996 year is now $130 
billion--by no means a modest figure, but substantially down from where 
it was 4 years ago. It is 1.8 percent of our gross domestic product. 
That is the lowest percentage of any industrialized country. For 
example, Japan's deficit is more than 3 percent of its GDP; Britain, 
the U.K., is 7 percent of its GDP; Italy's percentage of debt is 9 
percent of GDP.
  Finally, President Clinton is the first President to put forward a 
balanced budget proposal in a full generation. Madam President, budgets 
are more than just numbers. A budget is a statement of values. We are 
not accountants sent to Washington to only crunch numbers. We are here 
to respond to our people's needs for health security, for seniors on 
Medicare, and Medicaid for those who have only that program to provide 
for their health needs.

  We are here to encourage educational opportunities for our young 
people. We are here to be stewards of the environment so that the next 
generation can enjoy clean water, clean air, my grandchildren will know 
about fish in the water, and not be afraid to go to a tap to take a 
drink of water, or will not have to be told to stay out of the air when 
playing games or exercising.
  We are here to provide help and vision for our people in the next 
century. Simply, we are here to protect our citizens' life quality, to 
protect our economy, to protect our Nation, to protect our society. 
This budget does not accomplish those objectives. It will hurt those 
aspirations.
  Madam President, unfortunately, some in the other party believe 
Government is evil. I say this because a very distinguished Republican, 
a Republican House Member told a very distinguished Congressman, 
Congressman Henry Hyde, as I read from the report, ``I trust Hamas,'' 
this person said, ``more than I trust my own Government.'' Hamas--a 
terrorist organization with programs designed to kill innocent people, 
men, women, and children. What an odious comparison. Madam President, 
what government is this person talking about? Could it be the American 
Government? Our democratically elected Government?
  Excluding net interest, two-thirds of the Federal Government is 
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans benefits, and national 
defense. These are the major programs of our Federal Government. I 
repeat, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans, national 
defense. Are these evil programs? Are they equivalent to Hamas 
terrorist attacks? I do not get the connection, but I resent, terribly, 
the words that are used. Whatever one thinks about mistakes or poor 
performance of our Government, this Government and this country can 
never be compared to a terrorist organization.
  Madam President, the question is no longer whether we will balance 
the budget. The question is, how? Who will win in programs that are in 
place? Who will lose if programs are canceled? Finally, whose side is 
Government on?
  President Clinton has laid out the right way to balance the budget. 
His budget reaches balance within 6 years, as documented by CBO, but 
unlike the Republican version the President's budget, protects 
Medicare, Medicaid, education, and the environment, and it does not 
increase taxes on working families. The President's budget not only 
protects 37 million senior citizens from deep Medicare cuts contained 
in this budget, but it will also, despite reports to the contrary in 
recent days, it will also make the Medicare trust fund solvent until 
the year 2005. It preserves the guarantee of Medicaid for 36 million 
seniors and disabled persons who rely on those programs. It protects 
our Nation's environment by ensuring full funding for the 
implementation of the major environmental programs like clean air, 
clean water, and toxic waste cleanups. It makes critical investments in 
education and training, it provides increased funding for programs like 
Head Start, title I, and safe and drug-free schools.
  Finally, the President's budget maintains the earned-income tax 
credit, which provides tax relief for working families who earn less 
than $28,000 a

[[Page S6077]]

year. It allows them to maintain their family needs for basic 
essentials, for sustenance.
  The Republican budget is much different. It is punitive to working 
families and senior citizens. In reality, this budget resolution ought 
to be entitled ``Extremist Budget, Part II.'' The huge Medicare cuts in 
this budget, combined with the proposed structural changes will truly 
make Medicare wither on the vine. If the Republican budget is enacted, 
Medicare will become a second-class health care system. The Republican 
budget also eliminates the guarantees of Medicaid coverage for seniors, 
disabled, children, and pregnant women.
  This budget contains a Republican assault on education. Over 7 years 
this budget cuts $60 billion in education and training, compared to the 
President's budget. This budget continues the Republican tragedy of the 
environment. The budget will cut environmental programs by 19 percent 
in the year 2002 and it will slow down toxic waste cleanups.
  Finally, this budget continues the Republican war on working 
families. At the same time the GOP leadership is opposing an increase 
in the minimum wage, they are proposing to increase taxes on working 
families who earn under $28,000 a year--harsh and unfair. That is why 
this budget resolution ought to be called the extremist budget part II.

  Last year, the President vetoed the Republican budget because it 
contained huge cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, education, and the 
environment. This budget does very much the same, and President Clinton 
will veto this budget as well.
  So as soon as our Republican friends show that they can put forth a 
balanced budget like the President's, one that protects our priorities, 
we will have a balanced budget--but not until then.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
  Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (By unanimous consent, the remarks of Mr. Specter are printed at an 
earlier point in today's Record.)

                          ____________________