[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 65 (Friday, May 16, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4655-S4656]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     THE BALANCED BUDGET AGREEMENT

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I would like to talk about one other topic 
today. It is a subject that is in the paper this morning--the balanced 
budget agreement.
  Mr. President, I do not know all of the details of the agreement. I 
know the outline and the skeleton of the balanced budget agreement that 
has been reached through a substantial amount of negotiation. I expect, 
were I to negotiate a balanced budget agreement, it might be different 
than that which was negotiated and that which I read about this 
morning. I have been party to many briefings, including the most 
substantial briefing yet on what has been negotiated, but I confess, 
like most Members of the Senate who have not been in the room during 
all the negotiations, I may not know all the provisions of this 
agreement.
  However, I have said repeatedly during the debates that we have had 
on a constitutional amendment to balance the budget, and in many other 
circumstances, that I support balancing the budget. I think there is 
merit in fiscal discipline. I think we should balance the budget. And I 
think we should work together to do that.
  In 1993 I voted for a deficit reduction act that was a very 
controversial piece of legislation. And we passed that by one vote. It 
happened to be the Vice President's vote. My party voted for it, the 
other party didn't. I am not going to make judgments about that today. 
I suppose that's the time for a political discussion.
  We paid, in my party, a significant price for that vote in 1993, 
because it was not popular. I said at the time, and I have said 
repeatedly since, I am glad I voted the way I did. It wasn't easy. It 
cut some spending. It raised some taxes. It wasn't a very easy vote, 
but I am glad I voted the way I did because I believe that it was the 
first significant step in deciding we are going to do the tough thing 
to reduce the budget deficit.
  What happened since that time? We have had year after year of 
declining budget deficits. The unified deficit has come down, way 
down--not just down a bit, but way down, by 75 percent. But the job is 
not yet done. And that is why there have been negotiations between the 
President and Members of Congress about how to finish the job.
  I think we will find that the agreement that has been negotiated will 
receive fairly substantial support in the Senate and the House. I want 
to vote to finish the job. I voted to start the job and I want to vote 
to finish it. I think we ought to tell the American people there is 
fiscal discipline in this place. There is merit in a balanced budget. 
And there is no difference in desire on either side of the aisle about 
wanting to live within our means. That is not a political question 
between the two parties. I think that is demonstrated by what we did in 
1993. I hope it will be demonstrated by what we all do this year.
  Now, is part of this agreement smoke? I think so. I mean, I can 
describe certain areas of it where I think it is a fair amount of 
smoke, or fog.

  But is some of it real? Is it moving us in a bipartisan way in the 
right direction? I think so. Importantly, it does it the right way. 
What we have said for a long time is there is a right way to do things 
and a wrong way to do things. I have said on the floor there is a big 
difference between deciding to invest in star wars or star schools. I 
am not saying one is all right and one is all wrong, but I am saying 
they are very different. Because it suggests one believes education is 
critically important and the other says no, the priority is over here 
in defense.
  My point is what we have done, I think, in these negotiations is to 
decide, yes, let us balance the budget, but let us preserve the 
priorities that are important. Let us as a nation decide that education 
is still at top of the national agenda and there is not anything much 
more important in our country than making sure all our kids in this 
country, every young boy, every young girl, have the opportunity to be 
everything they can be. And that we will invest in their lives, 
starting, yes, at Head Start, and going all the way through college. We 
will invest in their lives, to decide that all of our children should 
become whatever their talents will allow them to become; whatever hard 
work and opportunity will allow them to be, as Americans. A major part 
of that is our decision to make a significant investment and attachment 
to education as a priority. And this budget agreement does that.
  This President said I will not be a part of the budget agreement and 
I won't sign a budget bill unless it retains the priority of education. 
And this budget agreement contains room for new investments in 
education, which is critically important.
  The agreement also has room for new investments in health care. It 
says that 5 million kids, about half of the population of kids without 
health care, 5 million can be insured. There is room here so we can 
insure you, provide insurance for health care for 5 million kids.
  There is room here to continue to make progress on issues in the 
environment. The President said, ``I won't sign

[[Page S4656]]

a bill unless it meets these priorities.'' And he negotiated and 
negotiated, and we negotiated, and we have a piece of legislation that 
is going to balance the budget but does preserve those priorities.
  On the environment, just as an aside, I'll bet there is not a person 
serving in the Congress today who, 20 years ago, would have said this: 
We can double the use of energy in America in the next 20 years and we 
will end up with cleaner air and cleaner water. I'll bet there is not 
one person who would have predicted that, because all the experts 
predicted we would increase dramatically our use of energy and have 
dirtier air and dirtier water as a result.
  But it did not happen. We doubled our use of energy as a nation, and 
our air is cleaner and our water is cleaner. Why? Because the 
Government said those who continue to pollute our air and water are 
going to be penalized. Congress said it will no longer be business as 
usual. The environment is important. We are going to insist that those 
who are polluters in our country are going to stop polluting.
  We don't have a perfect situation, but I am saying we are moving in 
the right direction, we have cleaner air and cleaner water, even as we 
have doubled the use of energy.
  So, what the President was saying is, on education, on health care, 
on the environment, there are certain things that must be in this 
legislation. Even as we balance the budget we must make room to invest 
and continue to make progress in those areas. This piece of legislation 
does that.
  I know there are some who have heartburn because it does it. But I 
think it is the right impulse, for us to decide what is important for 
all of us, Republicans and Democrats, to do in this country to advance 
the interests of America.
  One of them is to help to invest in our future by investing in our 
kids' education.
  One of those is to say to those in this country who do not have the 
opportunity and do not have the resources to have health care coverage, 
especially for kids, that we want to help get health care coverage. 
This agreement will provide it for 5 million kids.

  And one of those is to say the environment is important. We should 
not back up or retreat on the environment. What we should do is 
continue to move forward and make progress to clean up our Earth and 
clean our water and say to polluters it is not appropriate to pollute 
this country. Part of the cost of production is to clean up as you 
produce. Fortunately, that is not so controversial anymore, because we 
have made so much progress and the American people so value living in a 
clean environment that now, most all politicians, I think, understand 
the value of that.
  But I wanted to simply come today to say that we have made a lot of 
progress. In 1993 we took the first flight of stairs, and I am pleased 
I made that vote. It was a long flight of stairs. It was a tough vote 
to make. Now we are climbing the second flight of stairs. I think this 
is going to be a bipartisan effort and I am pleased that is the case.
  No, this bill is probably not perfect. But I would say this. We are 
moving in the right direction in this country. The fact is, our economy 
is better than it was. Unemployment is down. Inflation is down. More 
people are working. We are moving in the right direction, largely 
because, I think, going from a period when we had Federal deficits of 
$300 billion a year, everyone in this country now sees that the 
President is serious and the Congress is serious about getting our 
fiscal house in order. That gives people more confidence about the 
future.
  If people, yes, even the market--especially the market, I suppose--if 
they have confidence about the future and about the fiscal discipline 
that can come from a President and a Congress working together, we will 
see them making the investments in the future because they have more 
confidence in the future. That is what this is all about.
  So, I wanted to say, when I got up this morning and read the 
newspaper, I was pleased to see that we are taking another step toward 
agreement.
  I don't happen to view bipartisanship as something that is bad for 
this country. I think it is something that is good for this country. 
There are some, incidentally, who think being bipartisan is inherently 
bad, because both sides ought to fight like the devil for whatever it 
is they believe and whatever is the outcome is the outcome.
  I do not believe that. That is not the way we did most things in this 
country. We have an interstate highway that goes from Fargo, ND, to 
Beach, ND. It was not one group of people out there who said, ``Let's 
have a big fight about an interstate highway.'' It was a bipartisan 
approach in the 1950's, to say, ``Let's create an interstate highway in 
this country.''
  The interesting part about it is I don't suppose, when Dwight 
Eisenhower, then President, and Sam Rayburn, Speaker of the House, sat 
down at the White House and reminisced about what they were going to do 
here, I don't suppose they actually stopped to think how do we justify 
to the American people the cost of building a 4-lane interstate highway 
from Beach, ND, to Fargo, ND, where 600,000 people live?
  I suppose Citizens Against Government Waste and the National 
Taxpayers Union, or some other group these days--if someone were to try 
to do that--would say, ``What on Earth are you doing?'' How on Earth 
can you justify that expenditure, going across sparsely populated 
states?
  Of course we now know it was one of the great achievements in the 
middle of this century, building an interstate highway system that 
opened up vistas of commerce and opportunity.
  My point is, I think bipartisanship is a wonderful thing. I think 
there ought to be more opportunities for us to work together. And I 
hope, if this budget agreement is as we are to understand it to be and 
is a bipartisan effort, that in the coming weeks, we can demonstrate to 
the American people we do care about fiscal responsibility, we do want 
to abolish the Federal budget deficit, and we do want to provide 
greater hope and opportunity to the American people by doing so.
  With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor and 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. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Bennett). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________