[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 139 (Tuesday, October 1, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12118-S12119]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                OMNIBUS CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS BILL

  Mrs. FRAHM. Mr. President, I want to take just a moment to explain my 
vote in opposition to the omnibus consolidated appropriations bill. To 
me, the title of this bill goes a long way in explaining why I am 
skeptical about its content. When Congress delivers an omnibus spending 
bill, taxpayers should grab for their wallet. I wish to commend the 
tremendous effort of

[[Page S12119]]

Chairman Hatfield to bring together a bill that would satisfy the 
priorities of all of those involved. Indeed the chairman has been 
extremely generous to my State of Kansas. But I must protest a process 
and a final product that abdicates Congress' responsibilities to 
unselected officials who have no constitutional role in the power of 
the purse; a role relegated by Constitution solely to the Congress. I 
am speaking of President Clinton's Chief of Staff who sat in, with veto 
power over the deliberations of the house and Senate conferees.
  I am at a loss to explain why those who maintain such an abiding 
commitment to reforming Congress and to cutting wasteful spending have 
cast their vote in support for this bill. If nothing else this bill 
represents business as usual. It is 16 pounds, 2,000 pages, and has no 
accompanying report, making it impossible to determine exactly where 
the money is going. Eight billion to jump start the war on drugs is 
just one example. What does that mean? To what programs will that large 
sum be directed? It sounds like a positive move, but it has no 
accountability. We shouldn't be making political statements of that 
magnitude with the taxpayers' money. As I have noted, this bill 
represents a total abdication of our constitutional responsibility. In 
short, it is a cop-out in our responsibility to the taxpayer.
  I do not favor another Government shutdown. As Lieutenant Governor 
and secretary of administration with responsibility for the State 
employees of my State of Kansas, we were forced to furlough workers 
from their jobs, through no fault of their own because the President 
wanted to make political hay. Sadly, it was the Congress that received 
the blame. It seems that in Washington, if you lose the battle of the 
spin control, good policy and good Government don't matter. So cowed by 
the specter of another Government shutdown are Members of Congress that 
the political courage to get our job done, to make the tough calls and 
to provide a responsible spending package evaporated with the hint of 
misdirected public ire. Spin has once again won over responsible 
policy.
  Senator after Senator has come to this Chamber to express their 
concern over the process that cobbled this bill together. The pork and 
largess included have been decried. But I don't see much willingness to 
confront the problem and fix it. That is what troubles me. This is not 
a good bill and Members know it. They have said so. I am saying so.
  When I came to the U.S. Senate I pledged to the people of Kansas that 
I was prepared to make the tough calls. From my first vote, a vote to 
balance the budget and get the country's financial house in order, I 
have been committed to that pledge. So it is in keeping with my pledge 
that I cast my vote against this bill.

                          ____________________