[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 36 (Monday, April 4, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3137-S3138]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                               THE BUDGET

  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, a Federal budget is about setting 
priorities, and the priorities contained in this budget are all wrong.
  About a year ago, Tom Friedman of the New York Times, described the 
President's budget as ``faith-based.'' Faith-based tax cuts were going 
to generate faith-based revenues, and we were all going to be better 
off. Well, the deficit is skyrocketing, interest rates are going up, 
and additional revenues haven't magically appeared.
  If the budget before us were to pass unchanged, the deficit would 
increase each and every year for the foreseeable future. Vermonters 
understand that this is a burden we don't want to pass on to our 
grandchildren. We have fallen into a borrowing pattern that makes this 
Yankee cringe.
  But let me emphasize that the deficits that we are now facing are 
primarily caused by a drop in revenues, not by wasteful spending on 
such things as education, veterans' benefits, and Amtrak. We could 
eliminate all of the Federal Government's discretionary spending 
outside of defense and we would still have a deficit.
  On the mandatory side of the budget, I agree that we need to get a 
handle on increases in Medicaid spending and the pressures on Social 
Security due to the aging baby boom generation. But this budget fails 
to confront these challenges and in the case of Social Security 
pretends there is no problem.
  How can we pass a budget that ignores the cost of the Iraq War after 
September 30? How can we pass a budget that includes more tax cuts for 
the few, but doesn't budget for the reform of the alternative minimum 
tax or the President's own Social Security proposal?
  How can we pass a budget that forces us to ``pay for'' any increases 
in programs for our neediest citizens but doesn't require us to ``pay 
for'' tax cuts for the well-to-do? If we are to reinstate the pay-as-
you-go rule, then it should, as it always has, include paying for both 
new spending and new tax cuts.
  Speaking of tax cuts, I have grown very tired of the economic 
doublespeak now in fashion. If tax cuts were the policy of choice when 
we had large surpluses, and they are still the policy of choice when we 
now have large deficits, when if ever are tax cuts not the appropriate 
policy? Perhaps the families in Vermont who used up their heating 
assistance funds before winter was over, or the veteran on a waiting 
list for a medical procedure at a VA hospital, would prefer an increase 
in government spending to a tax cut.
  Priorities, it is all about priorities.
  We are 2 years into a war. American service men and women continue to 
come home with horrific wounds, both physical and mental. While the 
Department of Defense is keeping wounded soldiers in its medical system 
for longer periods of time and is shouldering a greater share of the 
costs, the long-term costs of health care and rehabilitation still fall 
heaviest on the Veterans Administration.
  This budget responds by underfunding the VA by almost $16 billion 
over the next 5 years. How can we do this in the midst of a war? How 
can the President in good conscience insist on maintaining large 
numbers of troops in Iraq, and yet refuse to provide for the health 
care needs of veterans? This is unacceptable.
  This budget drastically cuts the Community Development Block Grant, 
CDBG, program and other programs that our communities rely on. These 
programs now benefit so many Vermonters who struggle to make ends meet. 
This budget would consolidate 18 programs, including the CDBG, and 
slashes their funding by 34 percent. In Vermont, this budget would most 
harshly affect middle and low-income citizens by making safe and 
affordable housing unattainable, ending quality childcare programs, and 
compromising nutrition assistance. Funding for these important economic 
development programs must be restored.
  I am very concerned that agriculture, conservation, and food 
assistance programs are faced with drastic cuts in funding. The Milk 
Income Loss Contract Program, MILC, which the President saw fit to 
include in his proposed budget, has been left out of this budget 
resolution. The MILC Program is necessary to help family farmers 
through tough times when milk prices are low.

[[Page S3138]]

  This budget would also seriously compromise conservation programs 
that are used to restore our land and clean our water. Perhaps most 
unsettling will be the cuts to food assistance and nutrition programs, 
including food stamps. In Vermont, 30 percent of children live in low-
income households that depend on food stamps for their basic needs and 
the medical safety net for their healthcare.
  Vermont, together with States throughout the Nation, is facing a 
serious budget shortfall in providing the most basic level of 
healthcare to our most vulnerable citizens. Instead of facing that fact 
and providing temporary fiscal assistance to the States, the President 
called for billions of dollars in cuts in the Medicaid program, which 
the Senate fortunately rejected.
  I am most disappointed that the Senate did not vote to provide 
additional funding for the Nation's water infrastructure. Spending on 
environmental programs from the national parks to programs that keep 
our water, land, and air clean will have to be reduced if this budget 
is enacted.
  Priorities, it is all about priorities.
  Even though education amendments passed, which I supported, that 
added money back to the Senate budget proposal, that is still 
insufficient to adequately fund important Federal education 
initiatives. I remain concerned that the budget resolution will 
eliminate funding for several key education programs, such as the $1.3 
billion Perkins Career and Technical Education Act. This is especially 
depressing since just last week the Senate, on a vote of 99-0, passed 
the Perkins bill. Then just a few days later, no funding is provided in 
the budget to carry out the program that was just passed.
  In addition, the budget proposal does not provide the meaningful 
increases necessary to carry out the 4-year-old No Child Left Behind 
Act and the updated IDEA law that was enacted last December.
  President Bush often mentions that education is a priority. He and I 
obviously define priority differently. To me, priority means you pay 
for the promises you make. I do not believe priority means you sign 
laws requiring more accountability to improve student performance, and 
then, in the next breath, send up a budget that doesn't provide the 
dollars needed to carry out the purposes of those laws.
  I have spent a substantial part of my career calling for the full 
funding of special education. When the Individuals with Disabilities 
Education Act was enacted in 1975, Congress promised to pay 40 percent 
of the cost. In the current fiscal year, Congress will finance only 19 
percent of the program, forcing States and localities to make up the 
difference.
  I have tried to fulfill this promise in each of the last few years by 
making IDEA funding mandatory. The President and his allies have said 
that mandatory funding is not necessary, that we can meet the promise 
of IDEA by increasing funding by $1 billion each year. In this budget, 
IDEA funding is increased by only half of that amount.
  This budget tells our children, their parents, and our local 
taxpayers that they are not a priority, and that we will not keep our 
word.
  There is no question we are living through difficult budgetary times 
and savings must be sought at every opportunity. But we must not delude 
the American people into thinking that we can cut taxes, fight wars 
overseas, improve education, take care of our environment, and repair 
the Nation's transportation and water infrastructure all at the same 
time.
  I could not support the budget resolution because it did not 
adequately fund important domestic programs and promote tax cuts to the 
detriment of other priorities. At the same time, it did little to put 
our Nation's fiscal house in order.

                          ____________________