[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 140 (Friday, October 28, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12039-S12040]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RECONCILIATION
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, on Monday we begin consideration of the
deficit reduction bill, a bill that goes by the title of a
reconciliation bill. Indeed, it has been 8 years since we have
addressed spending on a reconciliation bill, a critically important
bill. It may well be the most important piece of fiscal legislation we
will debate. I fully expect it will be enacted this year. For those who
may watch this debate, I should be clear that the bill we will debate
is focused on one piece of the Federal budget, not the entire Federal
budget. It is, however, a major piece of the budget, mandatory
spending. That word ``mandatory,'' sometimes referred to as entitlement
spending, represents about $1.4 trillion or 56 percent of overall
Federal spending this year. It will continue to grow in the future,
particularly as that demographic shift occurs, as the baby boomers
begin to travel through our system in 2008.
Mandatory spending, entitlement spending, encompasses a whole range
of programs familiar to my colleagues--Social Security, Medicare,
Medicaid, Federal-civilian military retirement, student loans, TRICARE,
foster care, child nutrition, SSI, unemployment insurance, farm price
support programs, veterans disability, and the list goes on. If Federal
spending is to be controlled--and it absolutely must be controlled--
over time, these programs are going to have to be addressed. They are
going to have to be reformed.
Over the last 5 years, mandatory entitlement program spending has
grown at an annual rate of over 7.1 percent. That is three times faster
than the overall growth in our economy. It simply cannot be sustained.
The result is a greater share of our national economy's productive
capacity, that proportion of our productive capacity, is being shifted
toward those programs. We have to find a balance. It is incumbent upon
us to do so.
Under the procedures laid out by the Budget Act for considering this
deficit reduction legislation that we will have on the floor beginning
Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of next
[[Page S12040]]
week, Social Security, which is the largest of these mandatory
programs, is set aside. It cannot, nor should it be, considered in this
legislation. It cannot be. So realistically, the universe of Federal
spending that we will be dealing with over the next week is limited to
33 percent or about a third of all Federal spending. That is where the
focus will be.
The deficit reduction legislation we will be considering over the
week is the culmination of a process that began in February, when the
President gave us his budget. The President's budget included proposals
to reduce the Federal deficit over the next 5 years by slowing the
growth in Federal spending in this area of the Federal budget. Again,
of the overall Federal budget, we are talking about a third of it that
we will be addressing. The President's budget came over and said: We
are going to slow that spending growth by $26 billion.
The congressional budget resolution we adopted back in April
similarly agreed that slowing that growth--and there is still going to
be growth--in mandatory spending was an essential part of achieving not
only deficit reduction but, not unrelated, being able to sustain
economic growth. We want to achieve deficit reduction, but we want to
be able to sustain economic growth. So to accomplish that goal, our
2006 budget laid out a process that has not been used in about 8 years.
I believe it was in 1997 that we last had a spending deficit reduction
package, a reconciliation process used on the spending side of the
equation. It has been 8 years since we have used this process.
The budget we adopted directed eight authorizing committees in the
Senate and in the House to make changes in laws within their
jurisdiction to achieve a total of $34.7 billion in savings over the
next 5 years. That is what the budget told those eight authorizing
committees to come up with. Subsequent to passage of our budget in the
spring, we have had big, unanticipated spending demands that resulted
from the worst hurricane season in the Nation's history. All of that
placed added attention on spending and on Government spending. We
responded to that appropriately, in a bipartisan way, by agreeing to
delay consideration of the reconciliation process in early September so
that we could focus on hurricane response and on the demands and on
what the people who have been so directly affected by those hurricanes
deserve. We have addressed the needs of the gulf coast families
affected by the storms. We continue to address them. We did, indeed, in
legislation last night. We will continue to do so in the future.
Indeed, within this reconciliation legislation, while at the same
time meeting the goal of deficit reduction, we do so while also
providing the needed medical attention, the education attention, and
other Government benefits to the victims of those hurricanes. We also
recognize that because of the additional spending demands being placed
on the Federal Government, we needed to do more in terms of deficit
reduction itself, the deficit reduction we defined pre-Katrina, that we
did need to do more.
In late September, I, along with the chairman of the Budget
Committee, wrote to the chairmen and ranking members of the eight
reconciled committees, the committees that will be responding with
their proposals next week, asking them each to consider how they could
come up with increased savings.
I am proud of the effort put forth by each of these eight committees.
They have come forth with specific recommendations. Now that is what we
are bringing to the floor of the Senate. They increased deficit
reduction by nearly 13 percent so rather than $35 billion, as required
by our initial budget proposal from the early part of this year, the
legislation approaches about $40 billion, just under but almost $40
billion in savings. I thank and applaud members of the various
authorizing committees who have come forth with those increased
savings.
I would be remiss if I did not point out that in many instances, the
additional savings were accomplished on a bipartisan basis in many of
the committees. Forty billion dollars in savings over the next 5 years
is less than 2 percent of the $2.6 trillion in mandatory spending that
will occur over the next 5 years. It is tough to accomplish that. We
will be debating that over the course of the week. But in truth, it is
only 2 percent of the $2.6 trillion in mandatory spending that is going
to occur over the next 5 years.
There will be some who think this legislation does not go far enough
to reduce spending. I personally would not disagree. There will be
others who will come into my office saying it goes too far. I do
disagree with them. Both proponents will have an opportunity, over the
course of consideration of the bill, to amend the legislation to
achieve whatever their objectives might be. I will be laying out that
schedule later today.
Regardless of that debate, no one will deny that this is the first
real effort in 8 years to slow down growth in mandatory spending. The
chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Gregg, and the ranking
member, and the eight reconciled committees are to be congratulated for
making the tough and difficult decisions they had to in bringing this
bill to the Senate floor.
Finally, in balancing deficit reduction with all of the other demands
that come to this body, the committees were careful not to place the
burden of deficit reduction on the most vulnerable in our society. As a
member of the HELP Committee, I personally thank Chairman Enzi and
Ranking Member Kennedy for meeting their deficit reduction requirement,
while at the same time providing a 10-percent increase in average
grants to low-income students, with additional assistance for those
students working toward a degree in math, science, engineering, and
technology. While that committee achieved over $16 billion in deficit
reduction by eliminating banker and lender windfalls and special
payments, it redirected some of those savings toward needy students.
Similarly, the Finance Committee, in meeting its instruction to
achieve $10 billion in deficit reduction, was able to redirect
additional savings toward providing such things as $1.9 billion to
Medicaid recipients in the Gulf Coast States, nearly $1 billion to
expand Medicaid benefits to severely disabled children through the
Family Opportunity Act, nearly $100 million for the SCHIP program, and
extension of expiring provisions that will provide over $200 million to
rural hospitals and sole community centers.
Another committee, the Commerce Committee, was able to direct a
portion of its deficit reduction savings toward implementing E-9-1-1
emergency services as well as directing $200 million toward coastal
disaster assistance.
All of this is a first good positive step toward real mandatory
spending reduction. Additional steps are being taken and will be taken
to control the growth in the nonsecurity appropriations as we bring the
2006 appropriations process to a conclusion over the next couple of
weeks as well.
We will apply fiscal discipline through the actions we take these
coming weeks and we will continue to promote those policies that
protect the needy while at the same time creating jobs and ensuring a
growing economy.
Let us work together to keep America moving forward. I look forward
to the debate next week and doing just that, working together to keep
this country moving in a positive direction.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
____________________