[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 157 (Tuesday, November 9, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S14413-S14414]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. GRAMS:
  S. 1889. A bill to amend the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to 
provide for joint resolutions on the budget, reserve funds for 
emergency spending, strengthened enforcement of budgetary decisions, 
increased accountability for Federal spending; accrual budgeting for 
Federal insurance programs, mitigation of the bias in the budget 
process toward higher spending, modifications in paygo requirements 
when there is an on-budget surplus, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on the Budget and the Committee on Governmental Affairs, 
jointly, pursuant to the order of August 4, 1977, with instructions 
that when one Committee reports, the other Committee have thirty days 
to report or be discharged.


            comprehensive budget process reform act of 1999

  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, we are now in the final stages of 
completing the FY 2000 Appropriation bills. We will soon end the first 
session of the 106th Congress. Looking back, I must say, we have had 
some successes, and I am proud of these achievements. However, the 
biggest failure, in my judgment, is that we have failed to learn the 
lessons from our past two years' experience and we have failed to 
maintain fiscal discipline due to our seriously flawed budget process.
  That's why I rise today to introduce legislation that would reform 
the federal budget process, strengthen fiscal discipline, and restore 
government accountability to ensure that taxpayers are fully 
represented in Washington.
  Mr. President, after last year's abuse of the budget/appropriation 
process, many of us realized that the federal budget process became a 
reckless game in which the team roster was limited to a handful of 
Washington politicians and technocrats while the taxpayers were 
relegated to the sidelines. This not only weakened the nation's fiscal 
discipline but also undermined the system of checks and balances 
established by the Constitution.
  At the beginning of the 106th Congress, I argued repeatedly in this 
chamber that the key to a successful Congress was to pursue 
comprehensive budget process reforms. I introduced legislation to 
achieve these goals. I was pleased that Senate leaders included budget 
process reform as one of the top five priorities in the 106th Congress. 
Unfortunately, that commitment has not yet materialized.
  As a result, this year's appropriation process is almost a play-by-
play of 1998. Congress over-used advanced appropriations, and used 
directed scoring, emergency spending and other budgetary techniques to 
dodge fiscal discipline and significantly increase government spending.
  Mr. President, our failure can be traced to our seriously flawed 
budget process. Twenty-five years ago, Congress tried to change its 
budget practices and get spending under control by passing the 
Congressional Budget Act. Yet, over these 25 years, our national debt 
has grown from $540 billion to $5.7 trillion.
  Spending is at an all-time high, and so are taxes. The budget process 
has become so complicated that most lawmakers have a hard time 
understanding it. Of course, that hasn't stopped the proliferation of 
budget smoke and mirrors to circumvent the intent of the Congress. The 
flawed process allows members to vote to control spending in the budget 
and then turn right around and vote for increased appropriations. The 
process encourages spending increases rather than spending control. It 
encourages continued fiscal abuse, waste, and irresponsibility.
  Clearly, we need to immediately pursue comprehensive reform to ensure 
the integrity of our budget and appropriations process and avoid 
repeating the same mistakes we made in the past two years. We must do 
this early in the year before we begin to face appropriation pressures.
  This is why I am introducing the Comprehensive Budget Process Reform 
Act. This legislation is the companion bill of HR 853, which was a 
bipartisan effort led by Congressmen Nussle and Cardin. It has been 
reported by the House Budget Committee. There are also a number of good 
budget reform proposals in the Senate I have earlier supported. Reforms 
introduced by our Budget Committee Chairman Senator Domenici are 
important and I strongly support his leadership in this area. My 
legislation is complementary to but broader than Senator Domenici's 
efforts.
  Mr. President, let me highlight my legislation. The legislation will 
force us to pass a legally-binding federal budget, set aside funds each 
year in the budget for true emergencies; strengthen the enforcement of 
budgetary controls; enhance accountability for Federal spending; 
display unfunded liabilities for Federal insurance programs; mitigate 
the bias toward higher spending, modify Pay-As-You-Go (PAYGO) 
procedures to accommodate budget surpluses; and ensure the Social 
Security surplus will be protected.
  The core of the legislation will provide for an annual joint budget 
resolution, rather than a concurrent resolution, thus making it a 
legally binding budget through a law requiring the President's 
signature.
  I believe this is a critical step in reforming the budget process. If 
Congress and the President agree on a Joint Budget Resolution at the 
beginning of the process, appropriators in Congress would be legally 
bound to stay within those spending limits. It forces confrontation at 
the earliest stages of the budget process, leaving adequate time for 
legislating detail and minimizing disputes at the end of the process 
which threaten to shutdown the government.
  The second component of the bill will redefine emergency spending and 
create a reserve fund to pay for emergencies. Emergency spending was 
traditionally used for unanticipated wars and natural disasters that 
took life and severely damaged property. Because emergency spending 
today is effectively exempt from congressional spending controls, 
Congress and the Administration have used this as an opportunity to 
bust the budget for a lot of spending that isn't emergency related at 
all.
  Last year alone, Congress appropriated $35 billion for so-called 
emergencies. This year again, over $24 billion of emergency spending is 
appropriated. Since 1991, emergency spending has totaled over $145 
billion. Most ``emergencies'' were used to fund regular government 
programs, not unanticipated events. Emergency spending is sought as a 
vehicle to add on even more spending priorities. This has gone too far. 
We need a better way to budget for emergencies. Most of this spending 
can be planned within our budget limits. Even natural disasters happen 
regularly--why not budget for them?
  My legislation will end this abuse of emergency spending. It requires 
both the President and the Congress to budget up front for emergencies 
by setting aside dollars in an emergency reserve fund. The reserve fund 
will contain an amount at least equal to the 5-year historical average 
of amounts provided for true emergencies. It includes a clear 
definition of ``emergencies.'' My legislation prohibits release of 
funds from the reserve pending Budget Committee certification that: (1) 
A situation has arisen that requires funding for ``the prevention or 
mitigation of, or response to, loss of life of property, or a threat to 
national security'', and (2) The situation is ``unanticipated''--with 
``unanticipated'' defined as sudden, urgent, unforeseen, and temporary.

[[Page S14414]]

  In the event that Congress and the President fail to agree on annual 
appropriation measures by October 1, my legislation will allow the 
budget resolution signed into law earlier in the year to automatically 
kick in. This will effectively prevent any future government shutdowns 
due to disagreements on spending priorities between Congress and the 
Administration.
  Mr. President, the 1995 federal government shutdown is still fresh in 
our minds. It was the longest shutdown in history and caused financial 
damage and inconvenience to millions of Americans when the President 
refused to support a Balanced Budget Act and tax relief for Americans. 
The shutdown shook the American people's confidence in their government 
and in their elected officials.
  Since 1997, I, along with Senator McCain, have been advocating an 
automatic continuing resolution, or CR, as we call it, to prevent a 
government shutdown. I was able to obtain a commitment from the Senate 
leadership of both parties to pursue this legislation separately in the 
near future. But no action has followed. If we had an automatic CR, we 
would not have to go through bitter battles at the end of every fiscal 
year.
  The virtue of an automatic CR is that it would allow us to debate 
issues concerning spending policy and the merits of budget priorities 
while we continue to keep essential government functions operating. The 
American taxpayer will no longer be held hostage to a government 
shutdown.
  Mr. President, there will always be plenty of uncertainties involved 
in our budget and appropriations process. The automatic kick-in of the 
budget resolution in the bill I introduce today will work the same as 
my automatic CR.
  Another flaw of the budget process is so-called budget baselines. 
When a government program is going to increase by 4.5 percent per year, 
anyone with common sense would think that is a budget increase, not a 
budget ``cut.'' But under baseline budgeting it could mean ``cut.'' Lee 
Iaccoca once stated that if business used baseline budgeting the way 
Congress does, ``they'd throw us in jail.''
  This is a typical budget gimmick. Any proposed spending levels below 
current baselines are perceived as program reductions, allowing some 
politicians to claim savings while permitting others to claim 
increases. Baseline budgeting is biased in favor of more spending. It 
is not honest budgeting but rather very misleading. My legislation 
would require Congress and the President to use this year's actual 
spending total as the baseline for the next year's budget. If we decide 
to spend more than the current year, we are increasing the budget. If 
we spend less, we are cutting it. Let's call a spade a spade.

  Mr. President, we have entered an era of budget surplus. It is 
estimated that in the next ten years, our strong economy will generate 
an over $1 trillion non-Social Security surplus. If we don't return 
this surplus to taxpayers in the form of tax relief and debt reduction, 
the government will spend it all. However, the current budget process 
limits our ability to provide tax relief for working Americans.
  The budget law requires that all tax cuts be offset with tax 
increases or cuts in entitlement programs such as Medicare. Tax cuts 
may not be paid for by cutting discretionary spending, such as wasteful 
government programs. This rule, called the PAYGO rule, applies 
regardless of whether there is a surplus or deficit. The PAYGO rule 
effectively limits options with respect to reducing taxes because it 
precludes using spending cuts in discretionary programs to offset tax 
cuts. Thus there is a built-in bias in favor of higher levels of 
spending and taxation in the current budget process.
  My legislation would amend Pay-As-You-Go requirements to permit any 
portion of the on-budget surplus, excluding Social Security, to be used 
for tax cuts.
  Related to the PAYGO rule reform, my legislation also creates a 
lockbox to lock in every penny that is saved from floor amendments to 
appropriations bills and use it to reduce federal government spending. 
Spending levels in the budget resolution and any caps on discretionary 
spending would be automatically reduced by the amount in the floor 
amendment.
  The bill requires committees to submit a plan for reauthorizing all 
programs within their jurisdictions in 10 years. It also prohibits the 
Congress from considering a bill that creates a new spending program 
unless it is sunset within 10 years. My legislation also guarantees 
Members the right to offer amendments subjecting proposed entitlements 
to the enhanced oversight of the appropriations process.
  Under the current budget process, we have over 20 budget functions, 
and a half dozen different committees with jurisdiction over one budget 
function. This has complicated the process greatly. To simplify the 
process, my bill collapses the 20 non-enforceable budget functions 
currently used into total (aggregate) spending and revenue levels, with 
separate categories for discretionary and mandatory spending. It is 
simple, and easy enough for everyone to understand.
  Mr. President, a number of the Federal insurance programs (excluding 
Social Security and Medicare) that have a looming impact on the federal 
budget are not included in our budget process. The liabilities caused 
by these programs could be enormous. Budgeting for these liabilities 
will give us better control over long-term programs. My legislation 
requires the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management 
and Budget to report periodically on long-term budgetary trends, to 
help make Members aware of the future budgetary implications of 
spending programs.
  Finally, Mr. President, it's vitally important that we save the 
entire Social Security surplus, not for government spending, not for 
tax relief, but exclusively for Social Security.
  I believe we need an enforcement mechanism to ensure that Congress 
and the President do not touch the Social Security surplus. My 
legislation requires that if any fiscal year's appropriations end up 
spending the Social Security surplus, a sequestration will be 
automatically triggered to reduce government spending across the board 
in the amount of the Social Security surplus that was used. Entitlement 
programs like Social Security and Medicare would not be cut. In 
addition, the bill reaffirms the protected status of Social Security 
under the current budgetary law.
  Mr. President, it is true that our short-term fiscal situation has 
improved greatly due to the continued growth of our economy. However, 
our long-term financial imbalance still poses a major threat to the 
health of our future economic security. Without budget process reform, 
we will find ourselves again and again making the same mistakes which 
result in bigger government, more spending and more abuse. We need to 
spend more time on oversight and reauthorizing expiring programs rather 
than on endless budget battle at the end of every fiscal year.
  President Reagan summed up the real problem of our budget process 
when he pointed out ``this budget process does not serve the best 
interests of the nation, it does not allow sufficient review of 
spending priorities, and it undermines the checks and balances 
established by the Constitution.''
  If the Congress adopts the Comprehensive Budget Process Reform Act, 
it will ensure a budget process that serves the best interests of the 
nation and allow for careful policy and spending deliberation. That's 
why I am introducing this legislation today. I urge my colleagues to 
support this measure.
                                 ______