[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 74 (Tuesday, June 3, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1096]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET, FISCAL YEAR 1998

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. VINCE SNOWBARGER

                               of kansas

                    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. SNOWBARGER. Mr. Chairman, during my campaign for Congress last 
year I said that my primary goals were a balanced budget as scored by 
the Congressional Budget Office and permanent tax relief for hard-
working families. I stressed that these two goals were not mutually 
exclusive and that both were desperately needed by the American people. 
Tonight, I have the opportunity to vote for a budget plan that meets 
both those goals, and will by 2002--for the first time since 1974--
reduce the Federal Government's share of the fruits of our labors to 
less than 20 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product.
  This plan was not my first choice. I first supported a better budget, 
one introduced by Mr. Doolittle, that would have allowed the American 
people to retain more of their hard-earned money and significantly 
reduced the bloated Federal Government. Unfortunately, that budget 
failed. My choice then, is between the balanced budget agreement and 
the status quo.
  The plan currently contains many things that I gladly support--$135 
billion in tax relief for families and investors over 5 years--$85 
billion net; $600 billion in entitlement reform over 10 years; reforms 
to ensure the solvency of Medicare for the next decade; and less 
Government spending than the President would have us spend.
  Of course, since the Republican Congress does not have enough of a 
majority to override President Clinton's vetoes, the plan also includes 
his own initiatives, many of which I oppose. These include a new 
taxpayer-financed health insurance entitlement, college tax credits 
that I, as a former college teacher, believe will only go to fund 
tuition increases and grade inflation; and reinstating SSI benefits to 
certain immigrants. However, the most disappointing aspect of this plan 
is that it doesn't really deflate the bloated Federal Government. The 
reduction in the share of the Nation's wealth consumed by the 
Government is based primarily on the assumption that the Nation's 
economy will grow a little faster than Government spending. But it is 
the best we can get with this President in the White House.
  The other important thing this plan will do is that it should prevent 
the President from shutting down the Government again. The President 
has already signaled his willingness to shut the Government down--just 
as he did 2 years ago to prevent spending cuts, and blackmailed 
Congress into higher spending to avoid a shutdown last year. As long as 
this agreement is followed in good faith, this option should not be 
available to him.
  I think we will be able to fill out the details of the plan in a way 
that is acceptable to both parties. I will watch carefully as Congress 
begins to shape the tax relief package and finalize other areas of the 
plan. As long as the Congressional Budget Office continues to certify 
that the plan will balance the budget and provide significant tax 
relief, I will support it.

                          ____________________