[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 27, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13-S15]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  SECOND SESSION OF THE 105TH CONGRESS

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, as we begin a new year in the U.S. 
Congress, the second session of this Congress, I look forward with 
anticipation to a number of issues we must address. I hope we can do 
that in a bipartisan way, and I hope we will not be distracted by a lot 
of other things that come up during the year and that we will actually 
accomplish some good things for the country.
  I recognize that outside this Chamber there is now a scandal that 
exists in this country. We will undoubtedly learn the facts about the 
allegations that have been made, and the American people will make a 
judgment based upon those facts. That is the way it should be. To make 
judgments about allegations and about rumors and about planted stories, 
and so on, before the facts are known is not a proper way to deal with 
them.
  But notwithstanding what is happening outside this Chamber, we have 
responsibilities here. I was interested to learn that in the first hour 
and a half of this second session, we had people come to the Chamber of 
the Senate, once again, and tell us about how our country works and 
what is wrong with our country. It was interesting to me that the 
Chamber lights had hardly become warm when we had Members come to the 
floor to, once again, talk about who the big spenders are. ``Oh, the 
big spenders on this side'' and ``the big spenders on''--it is 
interesting that nothing ever changes.
  I watched the American music awards show on television last night. I 
thought to myself as I listened to a bit of this this morning that, had 
this discussion taken place yesterday, we could have entered some of 
this dialog for best rap artist or best presentation in rap music. It 
certainly is a rap. There is no tune there, but they never miss a 
lyric. It is that this side represents the big spenders.
  I just want to begin for a moment today to talk about where we are 
and how we got here and what our need is this year to address critical 
issues for this country.
  First of all, where are we? We are in a country that is blessed with 
a very strong economy. Things are going well in this country. 
Unemployment is down. Welfare is down. Crime is down. Inflation is 
down. Economic growth is up. More people are working. Things are better 
in this country.
  I heard not too many minutes ago someone say, ``But none of that has 
anything to do with Congress; it has to do with a good economy.'' I 
remind Members of Congress that in 1993, this President and this 
Congress decided to take a tough vote. Are we going to put this country 
back on track? Are we going to tell the American people that we are 
serious about wrestling this crippling budget deficit to the ground? 
Are we going to cast a hard vote, an unpopular vote, a tough vote? The 
answer was yes. We did, by one vote in the U.S. Senate and one vote in 
the U.S. House of Representatives, cut spending. Yes, we increased some 
taxes, and we said to the American people we are serious about getting 
this country's fiscal house in order. We are going to wrestle that 
Federal deficit to the ground. And the fact is, it gave the American 
people confidence. They said, ``These folks are serious; they 
understand this is a serious problem for this country and they are 
willing to make tough votes.''
  I went home to my State and said, ``I voted yes. I voted yes because 
I believe it is the best thing for this country to send a signal to the 
markets, the American citizens and everyone in this world that this 
country cares about these issues and we intend, this President intends 
and this Congress intends, to get our fiscal house in order.'' And by 
one vote we passed a plan in 1993 that set this economy off into a 
universe of economic growth and economic opportunity--by one vote.
  This economy rests on people's confidence. If people are confident 
about the future, they do things that reflect that confidence: They buy 
cars; they buy houses; they invest; they do things that reflect their 
confidence about the future. If they are not confident, they make 
different decisions. Based on people's confidence or lack of it, this 
economy moves forward or lurches backward.
  My point is, for someone to say this is all accidental is to ignore 
history. This is not accidental. This President deserves some credit 
for a fiscal policy that was tough and no nonsense and said we care 
about wrestling this Federal budget deficit to the ground. And this 
Congress, those of us in it who voted yes on that, participated in it.
  I might add, while people are pointing across aisles, as I heard 
earlier, about big spending in the Congress, we did not even get one 
vote by accident from the other side of the aisle for a fiscal policy 
that says we are going to solve this deficit  problem.

  We come to today with a good economy and, I think, some good news 
ahead of us. I hope all of us, reaching across the aisle, can decide we 
have a common agenda. When people sit around their homes in the evening 
and have supper together and talk about their lives, what do they talk 
about? They talk about these things: Are our kids going to a good 
school, getting a good education? Do we have a good job or opportunity 
for a decent job that pays well with decent benefits? Do our children 
or grandparents have an opportunity for health care that is good? Can 
they afford it? Are our streets safe, our neighborhoods safe? Is the 
air clean, the water we drink safe, the food we eat safe? What about 
our roads? In what condition are our roads and bridges? And what about 
family farms and those who produce our food? Those are the issues that 
people care about and want us to do something about.

[[Page S14]]

  Let me tick off about four areas that we have to grapple with 
quickly. We just heard two discussions a moment ago about surplus. One 
said we are not spending enough money; we need to spend more on 
defense. The second one said it is the other folks over here on this 
side of the aisle who are the big spenders, and so forth, and talked 
about the surplus. There is no surplus.
  The only basis on which anyone can claim they balanced the budget is 
to take nearly $100 billion out of Social Security trust funds and use 
it over in the budget to claim there is a surplus. There is no surplus, 
and no one in this room ought to be persuaded to spend the surplus that 
doesn't exist. To the extent we will have a surplus after we have made 
whole the Social Security funds and used those trust funds for the 
purpose for which they were intended, when we get to that point, and 
only when we get to that point, will we have a surplus. And when we do, 
I think at least a part of that surplus ought to be used to pay down 
just a part of the Federal debt. In good times, you ought to be able to 
reduce indebtedness. But no one ought to rush around talking about a 
surplus that doesn't exist.
  I believe that President Clinton will call tonight to use the 
accumulated revenues that come from a better economy to make good on 
those trust fund bonds, and that is exactly what we ought to do. No one 
ought to claim a surplus as long as those who are using those trust 
funds are using them as operating revenues.
  Let me tell the Presiding Officer that, if you look at the 
Congressional Budget Office, which puts out byzantine reports, their 
most recent report shows that if a budget which they claim is in 
balance at some point--next year, I guess--they claim that the debt 
won't continue to grow. Why will they claim that? Because they don't 
include all the debt. I have just written them a letter saying you 
can't give us half-answers and half-truths. The answer is, when they 
claim the budget is in balance, the Federal debt will continue to 
increase, which is prima facie evidence that this notion of a budget 
being in balance when you are misusing Social Security trust funds is a 
fraud.
  Campaign finance reform. We must address it and do it quickly. We had 
a little house race in New York State. In the middle of that race for 
one house seat in New York State, $800,000 of out-of-State money came 
in under the notion of express issue advocacy, brought in against a 
candidate--I understand that was not money accountable to anybody; it 
could be soft money, corporate money--brought in precisely to defeat a 
congressional candidate, but essentially laundered through a system 
that now permits that kind of laundering so that no one in that 
district will ever know whose money it was. Is it unlimited corporate 
money that goes into this system and then is washed up through some 
congressional district someplace to defeat a specific candidate and, 
therefore, it is not accountable? It is polluting the political system. 
It is wrong, and anyone in this Chamber who stands up and defends that, 
in my judgment, doesn't understand what the Founding Fathers decided 
about this political system of ours.
  That ought not be the case, and we ought to take steps to change it. 
We are going to push and push in this Chamber to get a vote on these 
issues and get campaign finance reform done. Some will continue to 
filibuster. They have a right to filibuster, but the American people 
have a right to expect us to clean up this mess, and the sooner the 
better.
  Health care. We ought to deal with health care. We ought to do that 
soon. I read in the New York Times about a woman who had fallen in an 
accident. Her brain was swelling. She was in an ambulance being rushed 
to the hospital. She had the presence of mind to say to the ambulance 
drivers, ``I don't want to go to the nearest hospital,'' and she named 
it by name. ``I want to be taken to a hospital farther away.'' This is 
a woman with a brain injury, in the back of an ambulance, speeding down 
the street. She said that because she knew by reputation that when you 
are wheeled into that nearest hospital, your health is a matter of 
their bottom line--dollars and cents. She said, ``I want to go to a 
hospital where I am wheeled into an emergency room where they are not 
going to look at me with respect to dollars and cents.''
  Managed care. What does it mean to quality of care all across this 
country? We ought to address that. Do patients have rights? If so, what 
are the rights? Do they have a right to find out from their doctors in 
this country what the treatment options are? If not, why not? Who is 
withholding that information from patients and why? Which patient 
doesn't get it? Is it some function of a bottom line in some company 
that is making money off health care? Is it some 24-year-old accountant 
in some office 200 miles away that is telling a doctor what kind of 
health care that doctor can perform on that patient and what the doctor 
can tell that patient about the patient's options? This Congress has a 
right and a responsibility to deal with those health care issues, and 
we ought to do it soon in this session.
  Mr. President, the issue of education is also critically important. 
There isn't a country that shortchanges education and remains a strong 
world-class power. Thomas Jefferson, at the start of this system, said 
anyone who believes this country can be ignorant and free believes in 
something that never was and never will be.
  We can do things to improve education in the country, but I am not 
one who believes it is bankrupt. How did we get to where we are? Does 
anyone want to leave this country to find better health care somewhere 
else? Do you know anybody who wants to go to a world-class university 
who looks overseas? Most of them are here in this country.
  I am not one who says it is a bankrupt system, but we can improve it. 
We ought to get reports on our schools. We get reports about our kids. 
As parents and taxpayers, we deserve a report card about how our 
schools are doing in educating our kids.
  Finally, Mr. President, we need to deal with the highway bill, and we 
need to do that quickly. On our agenda, we ought to decide tomorrow the 
highway bill ought to be brought to the floor of the Senate. We were 
supposed to have done it last year and didn't. And we were told now it 
will be the first item on the agenda this year.

  I am told it may wait until the budget bill. I appeared on a 
television program this morning with the chairman of the relevant 
committee in the House of Representatives. He says, well, he is ready 
to bring up the bill in the House, but he has an agreement with the 
Speaker not to bring it up until the budget bill. That means 2, 3, or 4 
months from now. That cannot happen.
  We cannot wait 3 or 4 months for a highway bill that was supposed to 
have been passed last year. You do that and you have contractors in 
States that cannot do bid lettings, you have people being laid off of 
projects where the project should go forward to build and repair roads 
and bridges. So we cannot do that.
  We need to expect, in the next day or two, that the majority leader 
will do what he told us he would do; that is, bring the highway bill to 
the floor of the Senate. Let us debate it and let us move it out.
  Oh, they are worried about an amendment that is going to be offered 
to it. I understand that. But, you know, you can worry about amendments 
forever. Bring the bill to the floor, let us have a vote on the 
amendments and send the bill to conference --and let us put some 
pressure on the Speaker to do the same on the House side--and get a 
highway bill out so the American people can have some certainty about 
what kind of investment we are going to make in bridges and roads and 
repairs and the building of that infrastructure.
  People pay taxes. It goes into a trust fund to do it. And I think 
they should be able to expect that we are going to do what is 
necessary.
  Finally, Mr. President--and I know the Senator from Minnesota is 
waiting to speak so I will finish--I want to say, in the midst of all 
that is happening in this country now, there are some who perhaps get 
discouraged about this process of ours. And I understand why that can 
be the case. It is an unusual process.
  A free and open democratic society is in some cases a society that 
does not look good from time to time. And yet, if you look at our 
system through a couple hundred years of very successful democracy, you 
see as democracies

[[Page S15]]

pass through angst and anxiety and pain and suffering and all the other 
things, it tends to make an open and democratic society make tough, 
thoughtful decisions about its future.
  We have abolished slavery. We have survived depressions. We have 
defeated Hitler. We have cured polio. We have sent people to the Moon. 
I mean, we can talk a lot about what this country has endured and what 
this country has done.
  My only point is, I do not think any of us ought to at this point in 
time be discouraged about democracy and about Congress and about our 
Government and about the press and about all the institutions in our 
lives. It is a good place to be. I do not know of anybody who wants to 
go elsewhere. I do not know of anybody who wants to exchange it for 
some other location in the world.
  We should not be discouraged. Our job, it seems to me, is to do our 
work for the American people. And there is plenty of work to do. I have 
mentioned some--education, health care, finish the job on fiscal 
policy, deal with highways, deal with campaign finance reform, and 
more. And that is just a start.
  I am here and I am ready, and I hope my colleagues feel the same. We 
ought to join hands and say there are things that Democrats and 
Republicans believe in and can do together. And we will be persuaded to 
do that if we can just turn off the rap music, turn off the rap that 
one side is all wrong and the other side is all right, one side is big 
spenders and the other side is not.
  I finally say this. I do not think there is a plugged nickel's worth 
of difference between the two aisles in the U.S. Senate--Republicans 
and Democrats--in terms of how much they want to spend. Is there a 
difference on what they want to spend money for? Absolutely. But I will 
guarantee you, for everybody who stands up on one side of the aisle 
wanting to spend money on one program, there is somebody on the other 
side standing there saying, ``No. I want it spent on my priorities.'' 
What we need to do is join together and, through this process, find the 
right priorities for this country's future.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. WELLSTONE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.

                          ____________________