[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 101 (Friday, July 24, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8988-S8989]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN PREVENTION ACT

  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise today to express my deep 
disappointment and frustration about the Senate's inaction to consider 
and pass the Government Shutdown Act.
  Mr. President, this week I sought to offer S. 547, the Government 
Shutdown Prevention Act, as an amendment to the Legislative Branch 
Appropriations. This amendment, originally sponsored by Senator McCain, 
would create an automatic procedure for a CR at the end of each fiscal 
year. The essence of the amendment is that we cannot and will not allow 
a Government shutdown, we will not allow disruption of the services we 
rely on from the Government, and we will simplify and facilitate the 
process of passing a continuing resolution.
  What issue is more relevant to the legislative branch than acting 
responsibly to keep the Government in business? This amendment would 
have ended the annual battle we have each year on what is included in a 
CR and at what level of spending. It would end the last-minute mischief 
of adding new pork and new spending into a CR because everybody wants 
to avoid a shutdown. So you are blackmailed into doing something you do 
not want to do.
  Unfortunately, I was unable to offer this amendment due to 
germaneness concerns and lack of leadership support.
  In May of 1997, during the debate on the Supplemental Appropriation 
bill--this was covering the flood disasters that occurred in Minnesota 
and the Dakotas of that year, and others around the country--Senators 
McCain and Hutchison offered this amendment, but later withdrew it 
based on a commitment made by both Senate majority and minority leaders 
that the Government Shutdown Prevention Act would be allowed to be 
considered as a separate measure in the near future. The leaders 
specifically promised a full debate on the legislation with one 
relevant amendment for each leader.
  Mr. President, I would remind my colleagues of the word of the 
Minority Leader at a news conference he held back on June 11, 1997. I 
am quoting here from a transcript of the news conference:

       Senator Rod Grams sent a letter to all leadership yesterday 
     which offers a very simple, yet I think extraordinarily 
     acceptable solution: strip out the legislation that is the 
     source of the controversy.

  So back again to why the President vetoed the emergency supplemental, 
it was because of this very part.
  The minority leader went on to say:

       Have an up or down vote on the census, have an up or down 
     vote on the CR, have an up or down vote on the disaster bill. 
     I cannot think of anything more simple than that. I think it 
     is the right thing to do. I have indicated to Senator Lott 
     this morning that I think it is the right thing to do.

  In a news conference the following day, the Minority Leader repeated 
his support again:

       We would be willing to set a time certain for each of the 
     pieces of legislation, very short time limits for debate 
     ended. I think it is an excellent proposal, and I am hopeful 
     that that is ultimately what we agree to.

  Mr. President, that was indeed what we ultimately agreed to.
  It has been over a year now since that debate ended. The Senate never 
had an opportunity to consider this as a separate measure, so I have 
chosen to again raise this as a non-controversial measure that will 
force the Congress to act responsibly to avoid a government shutdown, 
and also for those who made those promises to live up to their word.
  During last year's debate, some of my colleagues argued that since a 
budget agreement was reached between the White House and Congress, 
there was no need for this amendment anymore. I argued at the time that 
the budget agreement made the amendment even more crucial for a 
responsible government. And here we are again, with just a few weeks 
left in this session to consider 10 appropriations bills and all 13 
conference reports.
  My major concerns were, and still are, that the many economic 
assumptions and spending priorities within the budget agreement make 
our budget and appropriation process uncertain. The current budget 
disagreements have again clearly proved my point.
  Mr. President, as you know, during this year's budget debate, some 
members are calling for more spending for their favorite programs. 
Others, like myself, prefer larger tax cuts and larger spending 
reductions. As a result, the House and the Senate have approved a 
budget resolution with significantly different tax and spending 
priorities. Those differences have prevented us from completing the 
budget resolution conference report, which is long overdue in 
accordance with our budgetary rules. It is possible that Congress may 
not be able to produce a budget this year at all, or finish the regular 
appropriations legislation before the fiscal year ends on September 30 
of 1998.
  What would this mean, Mr. President? This means the American people 
will have once again been held hostage to a government shutdown simply 
because Congress and the White House, or the House and the Senate, do 
not agree on tax cuts and spending priorities, or seek to slow down the 
appropriations process by offering controversial or non-germane 
amendments.
  In 1995, we witnessed the longest federal government shutdown in 
history, which caused financial damages and inconvenience to millions 
of Americans simply because of disagreements between the Congress and 
the President in our budget process.
  That was a very costly shutdown. The shutdown disrupted the lives of

[[Page S8989]]

hundreds of thousands of Americans. Some retirees and veterans could 
not promptly receive their social services, such as Medicare benefits. 
Families could not obtain passports, or visit national parks and 
museums. Millions of dollars were lost to small business owners and 
local communities. Federal employees were furloughed with a fear of not 
getting paid, although they were--at again, a loss to the taxpayer. 
Even our troops stationed overseas were affected by the shutdown. The 
interruption caused immeasurable financial damage to the American 
people and to this country, bottom line.
  The most serious damage done by the 27-day shutdown was that it shook 
the American people's confidence in their government and in their 
elected officials. Even today, we have not yet undone this damage. We 
need to restore the public's faith in its leaders by showing that we 
have learned from our mistakes. Passage of this good-government 
contingency plan will send a clear message to the American people that 
we will no longer allow them to be held hostage in budget disputes 
between Congress and the White House or among ourselves.
  We all have different philosophies and policies on budget priorities, 
and of course we will not always agree. But there are essential 
functions and services of the federal government we must continue 
regardless of our differences in budget priorities.
  More often, without a good-government contingency plan, the 
continuing resolution has become impossible as we argue over funding 
levels and whether pork project ``A'' or pork project ``B'' deserves 
our support. Debate on program funding is not based on merits but on 
political leverage. As a result, billions of the taxpayers' hard-earned 
dollars are wasted in this process.
  The virtue of this amendment is that it would allow us to debate 
issues about our spending policy and the merits of budget priorities 
while we continue to keep essential government functions operating. The 
American people will no longer be held hostage to a government 
shutdown. So, as I said earlier, there are still plenty of 
uncertainties involved in our budget and appropriations process, 
particularly this year. If we continue on our current course and the 
government again shuts down as it did three years ago, it will be 
another devastating blow to the American people, from senior citizens 
to disaster victims.
  We must ensure that a good-government contingency plan is in place to 
keep the government up and running in the event that a budget agreement 
is not reached.
  Mr. President, this good-government contingency plan is sound policy, 
I believe it is wise policy, and it is responsible policy. With a 
dwindling number of legislative days left in this Congress, I strongly 
believe that it is vitally important to immediately consider and pass 
this overdue measure to end the annual shutdown battle we face every 
year. This should be non-controversial legislation we can all support. 
I therefore strongly urge the Senate leadership to bring this 
legislation up for a full debate and vote as earlier agreed.
  Is there any time remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 7 minutes and 19 seconds 
remaining.
  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I yield back my remaining time, and I 
suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The distinguished Senator from Tennessee is recognized.

                          ____________________