[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 126 (Tuesday, October 1, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9679-S9680]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         NEW FISCAL YEAR--2003

  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, Happy New Fiscal Year.
  Mr. President, the new fiscal year began at midnight last night and 
none of the 13 regular appropriation bills has been enacted. Over the 
last decade, this has happened only two other times--in 1996 and last 
year.
  Now, one could make a good argument that the failure to complete any 
of the regular appropriations bills last year was completely 
understandable given the events of last September.
  But I think the failure this year to complete any appropriations 
bills before the beginning of this fiscal year today lies squarely at 
the foot of the Congress for not adopting a congressional budget 
resolution last spring.
  There is a reason why we have a congressional budget process! And I 
think if ever we needed an example of why we must not let this process 
atrophy and die on the vine, this year is a good example of why we need 
this process.
  For the first time in the 27-year history of the Congressional Budget 
and Impoundment Control Act, the U.S. Senate did not consider and did 
not adopt its own budget plan for this year.
  To be completely accurate, we do have in place a congressional budget 
resolution but it is the one that I helped to have enacted in the 
spring of 2001. And that Fiscal Year 2002 budget resolution remains in 
effect until replaced with a new one, but I think we all know that the 
economic downturn that became clear after that resolution was adopted 
and the attacks of last September have made many of the numbers in that 
resolution outdated for guiding fiscal policy here in the Congress.
  Further, let us remember that many of the Budget Enforcement Act 
provisions that were enacted in 1990 and extended in the negotiated 
1997 Balanced Budget agreement, expired at midnight last night.
  I am talking about no appropriation spending caps for this year or 
beyond. This will be the first time since 1987 that we have not had 
these spending caps to help guide our budgeting and appropriation 
process.
  I am talking bout no 60-vote points of order for violation of some of 
the major points of order in the Budget Act. As I said, until replaced 
the FY 2002 Budget Resolution with its 10 year numbers is still the 
enforceable resolution in the Senate even if the numbers in it are 
outdated. But as of today we can not even enforce that resolution with 
our normal 60-vote points of order.
  We do not have our normal 60-vote point of order for pay-as-you-go 
violations.
  My colleagues will remember that the Senate has operated since the 
1990's with this deficit-neutral requirement and they will also know 
that it was one of our most effective tools in our quest for balanced 
budgets. In the absence of this pay-as-you-go enforcement provision 
today, any major tax or entitlement spending program could be 
considered without addressing the fiscal impact that legislation will 
have on surpluses or deficits in the future.
  Just for the record, in this 107th Congress alone, budgetary points 
of order have been raised in the Senate over 65 times. And on only 8 
occasions did the matter receive sufficient votes--that is 60 or more--
to waive the point of order.
  I have helped draft with the Chairman of the Budget Committee, 
Leaders Daschle and Lott, and with the support of President Bush, a 
simple Senate

[[Page S9680]]

resolution to extend these pay-go and other enforcement provisions that 
expired at midnight last night.
  We should adopt this resolution without delay; it is the least we can 
do to keep some hope alive that the budget process will survive the set 
backs this last year.
  I think, as Chairman Greenspan--maybe I should say Sir Chairman 
Greenspan in recognition of his knighting last week--that we need to do 
at least this small resolution to send a signal to the markets and the 
public that fiscal discipline has not been totally abandoned.
  Again, today is the first day of a new year. October 1 is the first 
day of the new year under our budgets and it has been so for quite some 
time. It used to be July 1. Everybody thought it was too soon, so they 
moved it to October so there would be plenty of time. So it is the 
first day, but we don't have a budget resolution.
  Today, we start a budget and start spending money--if we ever get 
around to it--under a budget that doesn't exist. I think it is time we 
do that. Seeing the majority leader on the floor, I want to ask in a 
forthright way--because I know he is aware of this--when does he think 
we might be able to take up the resolution I am going to introduce with 
the ranking member of the Budget Committee, the so-called pay-go 
resolution? I ask the leader, is that on his agenda somewhere? I would 
be here to help him if there is anything I could do to move the time.
  Mr. DASCHLE. If the Senator will yield, I will be happy to respond.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Yes.
  Mr. DASCHLE. As he knows, we have attempted to bring debate on 
homeland security to a close now on 5 separate occasions. We failed to 
do that again this morning. It was my expectation we were going to take 
up the budget enforcement mechanism prior to the time we moved to the 
Iraqi resolution. That may be complicated now, in part, because I think 
we need to get started on the resolution on Iraq prior to the end of 
this week. But without any doubt, we will address the budget 
enforcement resolution the Senator has addressed prior to the time we 
depart, prior to adjournment.
  I have made that commitment to the budget chair and I have said it on 
the floor on several occasions. I think it is essential. I have not 
heard all of his remarks, but I assume the Senator from New Mexico made 
a similar statement. So we will make that effort. I am quite confident 
when we do, it will be successful.
  Mr. DOMENICI. That means before we recess, is that correct?
  Mr. DASCHLE. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. DOMENICI. It only has to be passed by the Senate, and we will 
have extended the pay-go provisions.

                          ____________________