[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 63 (Wednesday, May 14, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H2665-H2667]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            BALANCED BUDGET

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 7, 1997, the gentleman from South Dakota [Mr. Thune] is 
recognized for the remainder of the time as the designee of the 
majority leader.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. Speaker, I too want to this evening touch, if I might, 
on what I believe is an historic event in this country; and that is 
what we have seen and witnessed in the last few weeks, the agreement 
between a divided Government, a White House that is in control of the 
Democrats, the

[[Page H2666]]

Congress that is in control of the Republicans, on a balanced budget, 
something that has not happened since 1969.
  If I can take you back just a little bit to 1969 for those who 
perhaps were not around and I was a small child in a little town of 600 
people in western South Dakota at that time, but in 1969, the last time 
we balanced the budget, believe it or not, the Mets won the World 
Series. And it was at that time on my grandmother's black and white 
screen that I was watching Neal Armstrong take a giant step forward for 
mankind on the Moon.
  Yet, since that time, we, as a country and as a Congress and as those 
who are guardians of the public trust and guardians of the next 
generation, the future of our kids and grandkids, have been taking a 
step backward in the way that we manage our fiscal affairs. I would 
suggest that it is high time that we took a step forward. I believe 
that the agreement that has been reached, the plan that has been 
presented, does just that.
  Most of us would agree that this is not a perfect thing. I think that 
if you look at the plan, and all of us are going to find its flaws, but 
I think you have to look on it on balance. As I walked up and down the 
main streets of my home State of South Dakota last year campaigning for 
this office, for this position, I heard repeatedly, ``Why cannot you in 
Washington, DC, why cannot the Republicans and Democrats, the White 
House and the Congress, work together in a fashion that will benefit 
the future of this country?''
  As I listened and commented, it was my observation at the time that 
this is really true. As I campaigned last fall, I think that, in spite 
of the fact that the people of this country elected a divided 
Government, they essentially elected the same message, because I think 
many of the things that the President campaigned on and many of the 
things that those of us who were campaigning for Congress were talking 
about were essentially the same issue.

                              {time}  1815

  I maintained at that time that, if we were willing to govern like we 
campaigned, we had some enormous opportunities to accomplish some good 
things for the future of this country. I think it is a testament as 
well to the way that the debate has moved in the past few years. Bob 
Dole reminded us last evening of something that was said sometime back 
by former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. That is that the measure of 
success of a political party is how much you change the opposing party.
  Today we are here talking about things that I think we have had a 
part in bringing about a dialog on issues that previously were not a 
part of this debate. Today when we talk about a balanced budget, when 
we talk about tax relief for American families and individuals, 
businesses, we talk about a smaller government that is more efficient, 
that works better and costs less. Those are all themes that I believe 
in the course of the debate of the last several years we have moved 
that discussion.
  Mr. Speaker, I think that this budget is a product of that movement. 
Granted, it may not be everything and we have to make steps a little at 
a time, but it certainly is a step forward for the future of this 
country. For those who would argue that it does not do enough in one 
area or another, and I recognize full well that there are things, if 
this were a dictatorship, there are things in that budget that I would 
change. There are things that I would like to do differently. But we 
have to accept on balance the fact that we are working in a process 
that constitutionally provides for a White House, executive branch, and 
a legislative branch. And whether they are in control of different 
political parties, those two parties and those two branches of 
government have to work together in a way that is constructive and that 
benefits the future of this country.
  So as I have listened to the discussion and those who would say that 
this is not good enough, it probably is not good enough by a lot of 
people's standards, but it is, I believe, a step in the right 
direction. It takes us down the road to addressing many of the issues 
that certainly I campaigned for, many of those who came in with me as 
freshman Members of this body campaigned in favor of, one being a 
balanced budget, two being a smaller government, three being lower 
taxes. And then finally, something that I think we are all very 
concerned about, and that is the future of programs that are important 
in this country, programs like Social Security and Medicare. And in 
agreement we have for the first time, I think, addressed what is going 
to be a shortfall in the Medicare trust fund, something that we are 
consistently reminded by the trustees is in desperate need of 
attention.
  So I think that this balanced budget agreement, the plan that has 
been laid out and is now in the process of hopefully in the course of 
the next few weeks and months we will be implementing that in the form 
of legislation, but I do believe that it takes us in the right 
direction. I think the effect, we have to remember that this discussion 
really is not about the Republicans or the Democrats, the Congress or 
the White House or any one personality. It is really about the future 
of this country. It is about our kids and our grandkids, what are we 
doing to make this a better place for the next generation.
  As I think about how this balanced budget agreement applies to those 
whom we are responsible for in making this a better place for them, I 
think about my children first and foremost. The fact, as has been 
alluded to earlier, that we in this country over the course of the last 
30 years, since we last balanced our budget, have accumulated a debt of 
over $5 trillion, which amounts, as was mentioned earlier by the 
gentleman from Ohio, to $20,000 for every man, woman, and child in 
America.
  Mr. Speaker, I can give a perfect example of why we have to do 
something and we have to do it now that gets us moving in the right 
direction with respect to balancing this budget. That is $250 billion 
annually in interest on the debt, 250 billion that cannot be used for 
any other good purpose like roads or bridges or education or any other 
national priority. It simply goes to pay the interest on the amount of 
money that we have borrowed and that someday has to be repaid. Every 
year we put off, and I think it is important, too, because sometimes we 
do not make a distinction between the deficit and the debt. A lot of 
people think that they are one and the same, and they really are not.
  Inasmuch as we are making progress on reducing the deficit, every 
year that we spend more than we take in, we add to the national debt. 
So every year our debt continues to grow. As it continues to grow, the 
amount of interest that we have to pay to service that debt continues 
to grow.
  At $250 billion today I would argue over the course of the next few 
years, if nothing is done it will continue to go up to $300 billion and 
$250 billion today, just to put it in terms everybody can understand, 
is the amount of tax dollars that are generated to the personal income 
tax by every taxpayer west of the Mississippi River. That is an 
enormous amount of money that goes toward no good purpose other than to 
pay interest on the debt.
  Now, it is somewhat important, I believe, too, in the context of what 
we have seen this last week, because last week we recognized, as we do 
annually in this country, tax freedom day. May 9 was tax freedom day in 
America. That is the average in this country today on which people quit 
paying Federal taxes, local taxes, State taxes; and actually start 
paying themselves in the jobs, in the income that they generate in 
those jobs.
  In my State of South Dakota, for example, we are a little bit better 
off because we have a low tax structure at the State level. Our tax 
freedom day comes on April 30. But if we look at the average, across 
this country, May 9, or 129 days into the year, before the average 
individual, the average family actually starts working for themselves 
and quits working for different levels of government.
  That is a staggering, staggering thought, when we think about how 
much time in this country each on a daily, you reduce that to the per 
day, the per week, and then the number of days in the year that we 
actually spend just to pay the Government. I think it is a staggering 
fact that something that should alarm us and hopefully that we will 
become more cognizant of as we evaluate the kind of return that

[[Page H2667]]

we are getting on our tax dollar in this country. So 129 days into the 
year this year.
  It might interest my colleagues to note that since 1939 that has 
increased by about 6 days. The last time that we raised taxes in this 
country in 1993, we saw the tax burden go up, taxpayers in this country 
and the tax freedom day continues to move further and further out. So 
it is very important that we address that issue and that we address the 
uncontrollable rate at which Government in this country continues to 
grow.
  Now, just a final thought, if I might, and I see my distinguished 
friend here, I believe, has some comments to make, the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Hastert]. But I would say in closing that as we evaluate 
this plan and we listen to all the rhetoric that is out there, it is 
important to remember, I think, to try and personalize the effect that 
it has not only on each individual taxpayer in this country but on 
their families, grandparents, on their grandkids. And as I look at it 
myself, I think about my kids and the fact that for the first time we 
are doing something that will help make this a better place for them, 
will give them a brighter future where they are not saddled with and 
burdened with a debt that will deprive them of access to the American 
dream, something for which my grandfather moved to this country back 
around the turn of the century from Norway.

  If we can get to where we have done something that is meaningful and 
significant for their future, we will have accomplished something in 
this debate and in this process. Think of yourself, if you are like I 
am and you are raising kids, trying to think about how to pay the 
bills, and the average person in this, in America, who is trying to put 
aside a little bit for retirement, thinking about college education, a 
lower tax burden. The fact that there is incorporated in this plan a 
per child tax credit will put more money in the pockets of working men 
and women in America who are trying to make ends meet for their 
families.
  If you think about our parents, and my parents happen to be in their 
late seventies, approaching 80 years old, they depend very heavily upon 
programs like Social Security and Medicare. This plan will in fact add 
10 years to the lifespan of Medicare, and it gets us into a position 
where we start making the structural changes, the adjustments in these 
entitlement programs that will put us on a track to fiscal 
responsibility in this country and to making those programs workable, 
not just for those who are currently depending upon them like my 
parents are but also for those in the next generation, for our kids and 
grandkids.
  I would suggest as well that for those who would say that, again, it 
does not incorporate everything we would like to have in it, that, and 
I heard this statement the other day and I think it is very 
significant, that change is not an event, it is a process. We are 
making progress in this body by working in a bipartisan way to arrive 
at an agreement which is historic in terms that we have not done 
something like this since 1969 that brings about profound and 
fundamental changes in the way that we do business, that shrinks the 
size of the Federal Government, that saves Medicare, and that lowers 
the tax burden on American families and individuals.
  Mr. Speaker, I would close by saying, and I will yield the balance of 
my time, whatever that might be, by simply saying again that I believe 
that we need to get behind this. We need to have the support of the 
Members of this body and the American public. For those who are 
interested and have been following this debate, this is something that 
is definitely a step forward. And in going back 30 years to 1969, when 
we took a giant step forward for mankind, this, again, is a step 
forward for mankind and for the next generation.

                          ____________________