[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 88 (Friday, June 14, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S6260]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               THE BUDGET

  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, if I could have just a minute or so more, 
I want to mention the budget resolution that was passed yesterday. I 
did not like it. I did not say anything about it at the time. I have to 
say publicly, on the record, now, the only reason I did support it is I 
think that is the only way we could have anything at all for defense.
  There is a very distinguished House Member from Oklahoma, Congressman 
Watts. I think he feels the same way, that this is the only way we can 
do it. It is not a lean enough budget. It is not one that is as good as 
I would like. But, nonetheless, we went ahead and passed it.
  I think that brings up the other point, and that is our discussion 
last week on the balanced budget amendment. I do not know how people 
can have such a change of heart. I think there are six Democrat U.S. 
Senators who openly supported the balanced budget amendment to the 
Constitution in 1994, and they voted for it. This is the resolution 
that they voted for in 1994, Senate Joint Resolution 41, and they 
turned right around and actively opposed the same exact language in a 
balanced budget amendment that failed to pass by a couple of votes last 
week. They tried to say it was different. They said this had the Nunn 
amendment that addressed judicial review.
  I would like to read something into the Record, just to make sure no 
one tries to use that to make people think this is not the same 
resolution that they voted for 2 years ago and then voted against this 
last week. This is right out of the Record, Senator Nunn speaking. He 
said:

       Mr. President, as I noted last Thursday, adoption of the 
     balanced budget amendment to me is very important, but I also 
     noted that without a limitation on judicial review, a 
     limitation which was accepted during our 1994 debate, when 
     offered by Senator Danforth of Missouri, we could radically 
     alter the balance of powers among the three branches of 
     government that is fundamental to our democracy.

  So those Senators that we actively debated with, those very honorable 
Senators from West Virginia and North Dakota and Kentucky--these are 
exactly the same thing. I think maybe it was a mistake that was made. A 
better way to approach this would be to come up and say, ``We did make 
a mistake, I did not know it was the same thing,'' and perhaps we would 
have a chance, still, of passing a balanced budget amendment to the 
Constitution. Because until we do this, until it is in the Constitution 
so we do not have any choice, we are going to continue to play this 
game where we are going to put all of our cuts in the outyears and we 
are not going to be able to pass a balanced budget.
  A balanced budget amendment is the only other way, and I hope those 
six Senators who voted for and supported a balanced budget amendment in 
1994 would reconsider. With those votes, we would be able to pass one 
and send it to the States for three-fourths of the States to ratify. I 
have no doubt in my mind they would ratify it in a very short period of 
time.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Inhofe). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I commend the Senator from Oklahoma for bringing up 
the issue of Bosnia creep. I am not going to talk about it, but I am 
sure we are going to hear a lot about that in the near term. Not only 
is the time in which the troops are there being expanded, but the 
mission is being expanded as well.
  If you remember, during all the testimony when that decision was 
being made, it was a very narrow mission. Now we are talking about 
chasing down war criminals, expanding the mission significantly, as 
well as the time.
  I have to tell you that I never felt it possible that you could have 
a 12-month commitment, moving a division like that into an area. It 
sounded like you would spend the first 6 months getting there and the 
second 6 months leaving. So I am not surprised by this dilemma that we 
found ourselves in.

                          ____________________