[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 70 (Friday, May 23, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1059]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET, FISCAL YEAR 1998

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. COLLIN C. PETERSON

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, May 20, 1997

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the concurrent resolution 
     (H. Con. Res. 84) establishing the congressional budget for 
     the U.S. Government for the fiscal year 1998 and setting 
     forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 1999, 
     2000, 2001, and 2002.

  Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I support the Balanced 
Budget Agreement of 1997. I want to commend the chairman of the Budget 
Committee, Mr. Kasich, and the ranking member, Mr. Spratt, Members on 
both sides of the aisle for their hard work in putting together this 
bipartisan agreement, and especially my ``Blue Dog'' colleagues in the 
coalition. Most everyone around here knows that this legislation 
couldn't have been developed without the centrist foundation we 
provided in the Blue Dogs' commonsense balanced budget plan.
  Mr. Chairman, the American people want this to get done, and I intend 
to lend my support to passing this resolution through the process. A 
balanced budget is long overdue. I'm not happy with all of the details, 
but the moment is at hand and we need to pass this now.
  I would rather be supporting the Blue Dog budget, but nobody got 
everything they wanted in this process, and I understand that. However, 
I am very disappointed by the Republican leadership's refusal to allow 
the coalition Democrats to offer the alternative resolution we wanted 
to offer, which was the Republican bill plus strong budget enforcement 
language. As it is, I am concerned that this resolution lacks the 
strong budget enforcement language necessary to ensure that the 
spending caps and deficit targets are met and that we do in fact reach 
balance by the year 2002. It's one thing to say you will balance the 
budget by 2002--it is clearly another thing to actually do it. A strong 
enforcement mechanism is necessary to require the Congress and the 
President to take action if this plan goes off course, and the budget 
fails to meet its targets for spending and revenues. We should have had 
the opportunity to strengthen the enforcement provisions of the 
resolution we are now supporting. I am sure a majority of Members would 
have voted for stronger enforcement if they had been given the chance. 
Hopefully, this shortcoming can be remedied by the conference 
committee.
  Two years ago when the Blue Dogs first offered their own alternative 
budget, I told people it was the sensible, middle ground and the 
foundation for a bipartisan agreement. Two years later, after a lot of 
hard work by all the Blue Dogs, as well as other Members and the 
President, we have essentially arrived right were the Blue Dogs 
started--on the sensible, middle ground, where compromise and 
bipartisanship have finally delivered what the American people have 
wanted for a long time--a balanced Federal budget.
  Again, I wish this Congress was going to get a chance to vote on the 
Blue Dog budget, but I recognize that democracy requires compromise, 
and that's what it will take from all of us to keep this process moving 
in the right direction.
  This budget resolution is only a broad outline, and I know the Blue 
Dogs will continue working with Members on both sides of the aisle when 
the real work begins on a Medicare bill, a Medicaid bill, a tax bill, a 
possible budget reconciliation bill, and all of the 13 appropriations 
bills.

                          ____________________