[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 32 (Friday, March 12, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2766-S2768]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            S. CON. RES. 95

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, earlier this morning, an amendment offered 
by the senior Senator from Ohio was accepted by voice vote. At the 
time, I withheld from speaking on this amendment in order to expedite 
consideration of the budget resolution, but I would now like to take a 
moment to give my full statement.
  This amendment addresses a serious shortfall in the President's 
foreign affairs budget: funding for international health programs.
  I commend Senator DeWine for his leadership on these key humanitarian 
issues. Compared to some of the other amendments offered today, it is 
not a large amount of money. But, it means life and death to literally 
millions of people.
  This amendment provides $330 million for the Child Survival and 
Health Programs Fund. It is fully offset by reducing the amount that 
the Federal Government spends on administrative expenses by $330 
million.
  This reduction will not be painful. We do not micro-manage the 
process, and leave it to the administration to determine where to make 
these cuts. But, I can think of some places that the Administration 
might want to start.
  For example, next year the administration plans to spend $5.5 billion 
on ``transportation of things''; $21.1 billion on ``supplies and 
materials'' for federal agencies--not including the Department of 
Defense, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security; and about a billion 
dollars on printing costs.

[[Page S2767]]

  If you want specifics on how to pay for this, one could come up with 
this scenario.
  The administration is planning to increase the amount spent on 
``supplies and materials'' for the Departments of Agriculture, 
Commerce, Education, Energy, and Interior and the FDIC. Simply 
maintaining the FY04 levels for these agencies yields $158 million. 
Freezing certain non-defense agencies' budgets for printing costs at 
the FY04 levels, which would otherwise be increased, brings the total 
amount of offsets to $173 million.
  To get the remaining $157 million, one can freeze a number of 
combinations of proposed FY04 increases for ``other services'' of non-
defense agencies. This includes, but is not limited to, increases to 
the Departments of Commerce, Energy, the Judicial Branch, and the FDIC. 
The portions of the government that I just listed total $365 million so 
this is more than enough. When added to the ones listed above, this is 
$538 million in offsets.
  The use of Function 920 to pay for these offsets, which are spread 
over a range of different functions, is appropriate in this case. This 
is the type of offset that Function 920 was established to accommodate.
  These are not my numbers they are OMB's. I encourage my colleagues to 
read the Object Class Analysis documents for further information.
  I could go on, but we get the point. There is enough flexibility in 
this budget to do a tiny bit of belt tightening in order to save lives 
overseas, build goodwill towards the United States, and reduce the 
conditions--poverty, sickness, and despair--that help terrorists gather 
fresh recruits.
  It may mean a few less paper clips or a few less glossy brochures, 
but the savings will be well worth it.
  The President's national security strategy recognizes the essential 
role of foreign aid. But while we read about the importance of foreign 
aid, we don't see it throughout the President's budget request.
  Most of us have praised the President's budget for significant 
increases for the Millennium Challenge Account--MCA--and to combat HIV/
AIDS. However, I have serious concerns because a portion of these 
increases are paid for by robbing other essential programs, like health 
care and food aid. Our amendment would restore some of these cuts.
  Putting AIDS aside, the President's budget cuts essential 
international health programs by 11.4 percent.
  It would cut programs to combat other infectious diseases like 
measles, which kills 1 million children--not 100,000 or 200,000--but 1 
million children each year. Measles can be prevented with a simple 
vaccine that costs pennies. Yet in many poor countries they cannot get 
it.
  The President's budget would cut programs to combat measles and other 
infectious diseases like SARS, ebola and malaria, by 24 percent.
  The President's budget would cut programs for vulnerable children by 
64 percent. These programs help provide the basic necessities of life 
to orphans, street children, and children whose lives have been turned 
upside down by war.
  Child survival and maternal health programs are also cut. These are 
the programs that provide lifesaving child immunizations. They also 
help to reduce needless pregnancy-related deaths each year. Six hundred 
thousand women die from pregnancy related causes. Almost all of these 
deaths could be prevented.
  We should be moving aggressively to increase funding for these 
successful programs--not reduce funding.
  This is not a partisan issue. Over the past 6 years, Democrats and 
Republicans have worked side-by-side to increase funding for 
international health. Funding for AIDS is going up, but it is going up 
at the expense of programs to combat other diseases which also cause 
millions of deaths. Preventable deaths. And curable diseases. This is 
unacceptable.
  We cannot save every life. Our international health budget is less 
than the health budget of my own tiny State of Vermont. The President's 
budget would cut it even more. Our amendment would at least protect 
these programs from further cuts.
  Less than 1 percent of the Federal budget is used to combat the 
conditions that cause poverty around the world. This is woefully 
inadequate. It shortchanges America's future. It invites insecurity.
  One would have thought that if September 11 taught us anything, it 
was that business as usual is no longer tolerable. As I have said 
before, the President deserves credit for the Millennium Challenge 
Account and for increasing funding for HIV/AIDS.
  But, I ask Senators to look behind the curtain to see these are 
funded. Some is new money. Sadly, some is from cuts to other essential 
humanitarian programs.
  If we are going to lead, and especially if we are going to ask others 
to do more, we are going to have to stop playing shell games with the 
foreign aid budget. Leadership is good policy. Leadership means 
resources.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, securing this nation's borders and keeping 
Americans safe from terrorist threats is of the utmost importance to 
this body. That is why I support the men and women who serve this 
country. Thousands of men and women are currently deployed in Iraq, 
Afghanistan and other parts of the world. We count on so many of these 
brave men and women to protect our communities at a moment's notice and 
for that, too, we thank them. We want them to come home safe to their 
families, and to find good jobs and good healthcare waiting for them.
  The State of Montana, known affectionately for its ``big sky'' and 
small population, plays a key role in protecting this nation. At the 
core of this country's national defense is the ICBM program maintained 
by Malmstrom Air Force Base. This program must be fully modernized and 
I support Malmstrom's mission 100 percent.
  Montana also shoulders a unique responsibility to protect this nation 
due to the 600-mile land border--the equivalent distance of Washington, 
DC, to Chicago--we share with Canada. This border is porous and 
topographically diverse and it constitutes the front line in the war on 
terrorism. We have to make sure we not only have enough agents at the 
border, but that we get them the equipment and technology they need to 
secure Montana's borders, and to head off any threats directed toward 
populations and infrastructure anywhere else in the country.
  Though not every state has an international land border it must 
secure, every state has the sacred duty to protect the people who call 
it home. In the past 2\1/2\ years, the states, with federal assistance, 
have made strides in emergency planning and terrorism preparedness. We 
need to give our first responders the training, equipment, personnel 
and resources that they need. But we're not there yet and we've got to 
stay the course. That's why I joined 22 of my colleagues in the Senate 
in urging the Budget Committee to find a way to restore $1 billion 
dollars to the State Homeland Security Grant program that was cut from 
the fiscal year 2005 budget. Montana's first responders rely almost 
entirely on this assistance for their terrorism preparedness efforts.
  But that's not enough. We need to make sure that our state and local 
law enforcement get the funding they need if we expect them to protect 
our communities and prevent the threat of terrorism. How can we expect 
our communities to fight the war on terrorism if we aren't willing to 
fund it well enough to win?
  The same people who prepare for the unthinkable terrorist plot must 
also plan for nature's devastation, which our state knows all too well. 
These brave people serve their communities and their nation without 
regard for the risks they take. We ought to be thanking them. We ought 
to get them the personnel and resources they need and I am committed to 
finding the way to do that. The money needs to be there for coordinated 
communications for state, local and federal agencies, for fire fighters 
and emergency managers, so that they can save time and save lives in 
the event of any disaster we'd rather not imagine.
  Security in Montana is more than knowing our borders and communities 
are protected. It is also knowing that our children are receiving the 
top notch education we have come to expect. Montana schools have made 
do with too little for too long. It is access to affordable health 
care. Unfortunately, access to health care remains a

[[Page S2768]]

challenge for many, particularly Native Americans and Veterans. It is 
critical that the necessary resources are provided in Indian Health 
Services and Veterans Administration.
  Unfortunatley, it is commonplace for Native Americans seeking care 
from Indian Health Service to be denied essential services that most of 
us simply take for granted. This is a problem.
  I believe we also owe it to our veterans to better attend to their 
medical needs. Surely the greatest nation in the world should be able 
to keep their promise to the veterans who have fought for and protected 
our nation.
  There are many challenges that face us now. By working together, we 
will make America stronger.
  This week throughout the Senate's debate on the budget several very 
good amendments, including several on issues I just mentioned, were 
offered that I, unfortunately, could not support. I do not believe that 
we need to roll back tax relief that Congress enacted in 2001 to fund 
this amendment. I supported those 2001 tax cuts. Congress enacted them 
in a time of massive surpluses. Returning some of those surpluses to 
the taxpayer was the right thing to do.
  We can find other offsets to pay for the spending in this amendment. 
Offsets like the closing of corporate tax shelters currently pending in 
the JOBS bill come readily to mind. Before we start rolling back the 
tax relief that we enacted in 2001, we should ensure that we have taken 
all reasonable steps to obtain revenues through closing down abusive 
tax shelters.
  I shall look forward to working with my colleagues to find other 
offsets for their amendments--offsets that as much as possible avoid 
rolling back the tax relief that we enacted in 2001.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, first, I want to offer my 
congratulations to our Budget Committee Chairman, Senator Don Nickles, 
for his efforts to craft a budget. He has announced that he will retire 
from this body at the end of his current term, and so this will be his 
last budget resolution, and his work on the Budget Committee and in 
this body deserve recognition. Though I oppose the budget resolution he 
produced in committee, and that was approved by this body, I have 
nothing but the greatest respect for the author of that document.
  Let me also note that the resolution passed by the Senate is an 
improvement on the disastrous budget the President proposed, and I 
credit Chairman Nickles with a great deal of that improvement. In 
particular, I want to commend him for including at least some of the 
expected cost of our military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan in his 
mark. Though it is still far short of what our best estimates tell us 
will be needed, it is a great improvement to the ``head in the sand'' 
approach adopted in the President's fiscal year 2005 budget proposal. I 
regret the committee did not support my amendment to more adequately 
and honestly budget for our operations, and I very much hope that as it 
comes out of conference, the final version of the budget resolution 
will adopt the approach I have advocated--forthright budgeting that 
pays for our operations instead of shoving the cost onto future 
generations.
  I regret that this theme of ``buy now pay later'' pervades this 
budget, as it has for the past 3 years. This resolution heads our 
budget in the wrong direction. As our distinguished Ranking Member, 
Senator Conrad, has noted, when compared with current policies as 
represented in the CBO baseline and as adjusted by taking out last 
year's supplemental appropriation for our operations in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. this budget resolution further worsens the budget bottom 
line. Budget deficits will be greater, and Government debt will be 
larger under this budget.
  That means that this budget further adds to the burden our children 
and grandchildren already bear because of the fiscal recklessness of 
the past three years.
  In one important respect, this resolution is a significant 
improvement over the version reported out of committee, because it 
restores some of the budget enforcement we so desperately need as we 
face massive budget deficits for years to come. I was pleased that the 
Senate approved my amendment to reinstate the discipline of the PAYGO 
rule which requires that all new mandatory spending and all new tax 
cuts be offset or be subject to a point of order. As it came out of 
committee, this resolution maintained the far weaker rules embedded in 
last year's budget resolution, inviting further damage to the budget, 
and further debt to be heaped on the backs of future generations. With 
the adoption of my amendment, the Senate has taken an important step 
toward turning around the rapidly deteriorating budget position.

  This resolution is also an improvement over the original mark offered 
by the chairman because of an amendment adopted in committee that 
facilitates the reimportation of FDA-approved prescription medicines 
that I was proud to join with Senator Stabenow in offering. Our 
amendment will not only save money for those who rely on those 
medicines, but it also will reduce our budget deficits and save 
taxpayers billions of dollars.
  And I should note that this resolution does not rely on revenues 
raised by drilling for oil in the Alaska National Wildlife Reserve, and 
I want to express my thanks to the chairman for responding to the 
appeal a number of us made with respect to this issue. I was prepared 
to fight to remove such language, and I think the chairman was wise not 
to rely on revenue assumptions that have always been questionable, and 
that were at risk of being removed from the resolution.
  The resolution was also improved on the floor when the body adopted 
an amendment offered by Senator Baucus which stripped the 
reconciliation instruction that would have severely limited 
consideration of the issues surrounding the proposed significant 
reshaping of Medicaid. The President's proposed changes to that program 
would put thousands of Wisconsin's most vulnerable residents at risk, 
and the Baucus amendment will make it harder for Congress and the White 
House to gut this essential safety net.
  I regret the body did not adopt amendments offered by the Senator 
from Maryland, Mr. Sarbanes, and by the Senator from North Dakota, Mr. 
Dorgan, that would have provided needed support for our first 
responders, who are on the front lines in our fight against terrorism. 
The administration did not include adequate support in its budget, nor 
did the resolution as it came out of committee, and the Senate failed 
to correct that defect when it rejected those amendments. This is an 
area of funding as critical to the security of our country as any 
other, and while I was pleased to support another amendment in this 
area, offered by the Senator from Maine, Ms. Collins, and the Senator 
from Michigan, Mr. Levin, to provide a portion of the resources that 
are needed, I very much hope further improvement can be made before 
Congress takes final action on the resolution.
  I was also disappointed that the Senate did not act to improve the 
measure by returning to the ``polluter pays'' policy that served us so 
well for many years. I was pleased to join with the Senator from New 
Jersey, Mr. Lautenberg, in offering an amendment to do just that, and I 
regret that this sensible policy was rejected.
  While the Senate failed to add that provision, it did adopt an 
amendment I strongly supported, to increase funding to support state 
compliance with Federal clean water standards. The goal of that deficit 
neutral amendment is to provide $3.2 billion for the Clean Water State 
Revolving Fund and $2.0 billion for the Safe Drinking Water Act 
Revolving Fund, both vitally important programs that were not 
adequately funded by the President in his budget submission.
  As I noted earlier, this budget heads us down the wrong fiscal path. 
If we are ever to climb out of the deficit ditch again, we need to 
start now. Unfortunately, this resolution, though an improvement on 
what the President proposed, still leaves us worse off than merely 
extending current policies.
  We must do better than that if we are to avoid heaping even more debt 
onto the already enormous burden our children and grandchildren must 
bear.

                          ____________________