[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 91 (Wednesday, June 4, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5005-S5008]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR
2009--CONFERENCE REPORT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will now be a
period of 15 minutes of debate equally divided with respect to the
conference report to accompany S. Con. Res. 70.
Who yields time?
The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, as we begin the debate, first I thank my
colleague, the ranking member of the Budget Committee, Senator Gregg,
for his continuing graciousness and his professionalism as we have
sought to find a way to conclude our work on the budget for this year.
I also thank his staff. We appreciate very much the relationship we
have and the very constructive dialog between us as we have searched to
find a way to bring this debate to a close.
With that, I wish to describe the conference agreement in general
terms. This agreement, we believe, will strengthen the economy and
create jobs. It will do that by investing in energy, in education, in
infrastructure. It
[[Page S5006]]
will expand health coverage for our kids. It will provide tax cuts for
the middle class. It will restore fiscal responsibility by balancing
the books by 2012 and maintaining balance in 2013. It also seeks to
make America safer by supporting our troops, by providing for our
veterans' health care, and by protecting the homeland and rejecting the
President's proposals for deep cuts in law enforcement, the COPS
program, and for our first responders.
The tax relief in this budget is significant. This conference
agreement extends the middle-class tax relief, provides for marriage
penalty relief, the extension of the child tax credit, the 10-percent
bracket. It also provides for alternative minimum tax relief so more
than 20 million people in this country don't get caught up with
additional tax obligations. It provides estate tax reform, it allows
energy and education tax cuts as incentives to reduce our dependence on
foreign oil, and it provides assistance for families who are struggling
to pay college costs. It also provides for significant property tax
relief and, of course, for the important extenders package.
The record under this administration has been a record of debt and
deficits as far as the eye can see. This chart shows very clearly what
has happened to the debt under this administration. This President, at
the end of his first year, had a debt of $5.8 trillion. We don't hold
him responsible for the first year because he inherited that budget.
But over the 8 years he is responsible for, the debt has gone from $5.8
trillion to $10.4 trillion--almost a doubling of the debt in this
country. This President's fiscal failures are manifest. They are
written across the pages of the economic history of this country.
This budget seeks to take the country in a different direction. Under
this budget, we reduce the debt as a share of the gross domestic
product each and every year, from 69.3 percent of GDP to 65.6 percent
by the end of the fifth year. The same is true of the deficit picture
under this budget. I am proud to report that we balance the books by
the fourth year of the budget. We maintain balance in the fifth year.
While the President's budget balances in the fourth year, it swings
right out of balance once again in the fifth year. We don't believe
that is a responsible course.
Under this conference report, spending goes down as a share of gross
domestic product, from 20.8 percent of gross domestic product in 2009
to 19.1 percent of GDP in 2012 and 2013.
We will hear a lot from the other side about spending in this budget
and we will hear claims that this takes spending through the roof.
Let's compare the spending in this conference report with what the
President proposed. In this conference report, total spending is $3.07
trillion in 2009. The President has $3.04 trillion. That is a
difference of 1 percent. Again, the conference report shows spending of
$3.07 trillion, the President proposed $3.04 trillion, a difference of
1 percent. Where did the difference go? Well, it went in those areas I
have discussed: energy, education, and infrastructure, all of them
critical needs.
On the revenue side, the President proposed $15.2 trillion of revenue
over the 5 years of this budget. We have $15.6 trillion of revenue--a
modest difference, a 2.9 percent difference in revenue. We believe that
can be accommodated without any tax increase. There is no assumption of
a tax increase in this budget. In fact, as I have identified, there are
substantial middle-class tax cuts in this budget. In addition, we
believe this modest increase in revenue over what the President has
proposed can be provided by aggressively going after the tax gap--the
difference between what is owed and what is paid--by going after the
offshore tax havens, as well as closing down abusive tax shelters. We
believe that difference can be easily accommodated in those ways.
Now, I predict that my colleague, for whom I have great respect and
real affection, will stand up here momentarily and he will tell all of
us this is the biggest tax increase in the history of the United
States. He may even say that is the biggest tax increase----
Mr. GREGG. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. CONRAD. Momentarily.
Mr. GREGG. I was going to say: in the world.
Mr. CONRAD. We have agreement on that. My friend is going to stand up
here and say: ``The biggest tax increase in the history of the world.''
I wish to recall his words from last year. Last year he said about
our budget: It includes, at a minimum, a $736 billion tax hike on
American families and businesses over the next 5 years--the biggest in
U.S. history.
Here is what happened. There was no tax increase.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. CONRAD. Let me conclude on this thought. Here is the record. We
had tax cuts of $194 billion. That is the record. That is what
happened. No tax increase; tax reductions. If anybody wonders, go to
your mailbox and look at the checks you have received from the United
States Government. That was passed by a Democratic Congress.
I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my brief
statement not take away from the 15 minutes that has been allotted to
the two managers of this budget conference report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I wish to have the record spread with how we
work together here, not as much as we should, but we do it often.
As everyone knows, Senator Kennedy is ill. He has had brain surgery.
He is now in a hospital in North Carolina. Senator Byrd has taken ill.
He is in a hospital in Virginia. My Republican colleagues stepped
forward. Senator Warner said: I will pair with Senator Kennedy. That is
something we used to do a lot. We don't do it as much as we used to.
But I will pair, said Senator Warner, with Senator Kennedy. That way he
is recorded as if Senator Kennedy were here, he would vote opposite of
Senator Warner and therefore it cancels out the votes.
I called Pete Domenici at home last night and said: Pete, as you
know, Senator Byrd is sick. Would you pair with him? He didn't hesitate
a half a second. He said: Of course I will.
Now, I want everyone to understand how much I personally, as do we
all, appreciate these men stepping forward and doing this in a time of
need. It would be easy for them to say wait until we get everybody here
and we will have a vote.
But in addition to that, Judd Gregg last night said: I would be happy
to pair with someone if that is necessary. This is above and beyond the
call of duty. Senator Conrad has spoken many times about his affection
for Judd Gregg. They have worked so closely together for so long. I
also feel he is one of America's very good Senators. Very few people
are as well prepared as he is to come to the Senate. He has been a
Member of the House of Representatives, he has been Governor of his
State, and now a Senator. He and I don't agree with a lot of the votes
we do here, but as far as him being a good legislator, he is truly a
good legislator.
So Senator Gregg, Senator Domenici, and Senator Warner I would
acknowledge are very outstanding not only Senators but human beings.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, on a point of personal privilege, I thank
the leader for coming and making the statement he has. People see this
body and sometimes they see it at its worst. This, in many ways, is the
Senate at its best: Senator Domenici agreeing to withhold his vote to
pair with Senator Byrd who could not be here because of illness;
Senator Warner, whom I asked yesterday to pair and who readily agreed
he will pair with Senator Kennedy who could not be here. This is to me
an act of graciousness, it is thoughtful, it is respectful, and it is
exactly what one would expect of Senator Domenici and of Senator
Warner.
I wish to say a special note about Senator Gregg who told me
yesterday if we couldn't find someone else to pair with Senator Kennedy
or Senator Byrd, he would be willing to do that. When I told my staff,
I told them that is class. I wish to say publicly what I said to my
staff privately, that Senator Gregg has demonstrated the highest
example of what the Senate should be about and I thank him for it.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my statement
and that of Senator Conrad's not take away from the time of Senator
Gregg because he needs all the time he can get to show that this is the
biggest tax increase in the history of the world.
[[Page S5007]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire is recognized.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, let me thank the majority leader and the
chairman for their kind words. They would have done the same thing were
they in my position, if somebody on our side were ill. I know they
would have, because I know the type of people they are, and I thank
them for their generous comments relative to my willingness to help on
that issue.
I especially want to acknowledge, as they have, Senator Warner and
Senator Domenici. This is Senator Domenici's last vote on the budget,
and Senator Domenici and the budget are inextricably identified
together. He basically wrote the Budget Act along with Senator Byrd,
who regrettably can't be here and whom he is pairing with, and for 30-
plus hours now, he has been overseeing the budget as the godfather of
it. For him to pair on this matter on this last vote on the budget is a
very gracious act, as Senator Conrad has pointed out.
I also thank Senator Conrad and his staff for their courtesy and
their professionalism. It is always afforded to us as Republicans by
the majority staff and we very much appreciate it. We obviously
disagree fundamentally on where this budget is going, but that doesn't
mean we can't proceed in an orderly manner. As I have said before,
although I strongly disagree with this budget, I feel equally strongly
that this Nation needs a budget, even though in this instance it is
something I will point to as a mistake. But we could have done a lot
better.
As a practical matter, I respect the efforts put in by the majority
and the majority staff, and especially the chairman of the committee
who worked tirelessly on this and defends it very effectively. He has
said I will say this is the largest tax increase in the history of the
world. Let me confirm that, and let there be no mistake about it--there
is the largest tax increase in the history of the world in this budget.
We are talking trillions here, which is hard to understand for anyone.
It is a concept that is alien to all of us. But this budget talks in
the trillions.
This will be the first budget that pushes debt over $10 trillion.
That is a lot of money. Two trillion dollars will be added to the debt
as a result of this budget. This will be the first budget that takes
non-emergency discretionary spending over $1 trillion. I suggested we
draw the line and say, at least for 1 year, we will hold back and not
go over $1 trillion. That idea was rejected.
This budget has buried in it a $1.2 trillion tax increase. Yes, it
would not occur this year, but it is assumed in the budget. That is how
they get to balance in the budget. It is assumed in the outyears. That
tax increase will translate, when it kicks in, in 2011, into real
increases in taxes for Americans. Although most of us cannot understand
$1 trillion, we can understand the fact that for families earning
$50,000, with two children, their taxes, under this proposal, over the
next 5 years will go up $2,300. For retired people--and there are 18
million of them--their taxes will go up over $2,000. For 47 million
small businesses in America today--the engines of the economy, of
economic growth, the people who create the jobs in this economy--their
taxes will go up $4,000. That is a lot of money. That is money they
should be able to keep, and it should not come to the Federal
Government. That tax increase should not go into place.
This bill has taxes in it that presume that the capital gains tax
will essentially double for many Americans. The dividends tax will
definitely double. Rates will jump dramatically. The 10-percent rate
will be repealed. The estate tax will jump dramatically.
This bill essentially assumes a major tax increase on working
Americans and on small business. In my opinion, that is a huge mistake.
The other huge mistake that this budget has in it is it makes no effort
at all to control the accounts that are going to essentially bankrupt
our Nation for our children, which are the entitlement accounts. We
know we are sending this Nation over a fiscal cliff. We know that if we
don't act, our children and grandchildren will not be able to afford
this Government because of the cost and burdens of Medicare, Medicaid,
and Social Security.
We know the baby boom generation is alive and is going to be moving
into retirement. Yet this bill takes no action--no action at all--to
try to remedy this very serious fiscal problem, which is going to occur
on the watch of this bill. This is a 5-year budget. So this is a very
serious failure of taking responsibility on a key issue of fiscal
policy.
In addition, of course, we have strong differences over the amount of
spending in the bill. It crosses the trillion-dollar line. The Senator
from North Dakota named some of the important things to spend money on.
Yes, they are important, but we need to set priorities. Rather than
simply increasing spending, we ought to look at programs now on the
books, which are not as high a priority as we need, and move the money
from those programs into the programs we want to spend more money on.
This budget assumes that of all the Federal programs on the books--$1
trillion of discretionary spending--none will be eliminated, not one.
Let me tell you, there are programs we can eliminate, and we should
have made that tough decision. So we have strong opinions that this
budget doesn't go where it should go. It fails in the issues of tax
policy, entitlement policy, and spending policy. Obviously, the other
side of the aisle is the majority--and, remember, they were in the
majority last year too--so they have the right to pass their budget. I
point out that last year they claimed they were going to give us a tax
cut, and they didn't do it. They took credit for the amendment that
said they were going to give a tax cut, but it was never passed. This
year, they are taking credit for the same amendment, and I suspect it
would not pass again.
What will pass is the tax increase of $1.2 trillion in this bill on
working Americans. That will come to fruition because the majority
assumes this budget event. This budget doesn't work without those new
revenues. It is a failure, in our opinion, and that is why we oppose
it.
I yield back the remainder of my time and ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the conference report to accompany S.
Con. Res. 70.
The yeas and nays are ordered and the clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, on this vote, I have a pair with the
Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd. If he were present and voting, he
would vote ``yea''. If I were permitted to vote, I would vote ``nay''.
I, therefore, withhold my vote.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, on this vote, I have a pair with the
Senator from Massachusetts, Mr. Kennedy. If he were present and voting,
he would vote ``yea.'' If I were permitted to vote, I would vote
``nay.'' I, therefore, withhold my vote.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Biden) and
the Senator from New York (Mrs. Clinton) are necessarily absent.
I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from
Delaware (Mr. Biden) would vote ``yea.''
Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 48, nays 45, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 142 Leg.]
YEAS--48
Akaka
Baucus
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
NAYS--45
Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bayh
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
[[Page S5008]]
Dole
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Wicker
PRESENT AND GIVING A LIVE PAIR, AS
PREVIOUSLY RECORDED--2
Domenici, against
Warner, against
NOT VOTING--5
Biden
Byrd
Clinton
Kennedy
McCain
The conference report was agreed to.
Mr. CONRAD. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I again thank all our colleagues. This is
a significant vote because this is the first time in an election year
since 2000 that we have been able to pass a budget. That sets a good
example for the future.
I, again, especially thank Senator Domenici. This is his last vote on
a budget. He, out of respect for this institution, respect for Senator
Byrd, respect for the budget process, agreed to pair with Senator Byrd.
We thank Senator Domenici for that gracious act.
And Senator Warner, I deeply appreciate your willingness to pair with
Senator Kennedy, who, as we all know, is ill and recovering. You are a
pro's pro, and we deeply appreciate the respect that you have shown for
our colleague, Senator Kennedy.
Again, I thank all of the staff who have worked so hard. I again want
to conclude by thanking the ranking member, Senator Gregg, for all he
did to allow us to complete work today.
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, we are all familiar with the phrase ``all
you can eat.'' There are restaurants everywhere that specialize in
feeding us until we burst. Needless to say, that isn't a good idea.
Eating until you just can't eat any more isn't just a waste of
resources, it is likely to have a severe impact on your future health--
and your current waistline!
We are in a similar fix here in the Congress. Our country is in a
sinkhole of debt and it's almost as if we have adopted a philosophy of
``all you can spend'' around here. Spending is out of control and we
are doing more than just wasting resources--we are destroying the
future of our children and our grandchildren. Our friends on the other
side of the aisle don't seem to see what a terrible problem we face.
Just like that all you can eat line, our colleagues are heading back to
the buffet for one more full plate and leaving the bill for our
children to pay. As the old adage says so well, you can pay me now, or
pay me later--and our colleagues have chosen to leave the bills for
later. We ought to know better.
This week the Senate is considering the conference report for the
fiscal year 2009 budget resolution, a blueprint that is supposed to
provide us with guidance for spending that reflects the priorities of
the Congress. As stewards of the public trust, the Congress needs to
make responsible choices that leave a fiscally sound country to our
children and our grandchildren. Unfortunately, the budget resolution
conference agreement we are debating this week doesn't confront any of
the tough choices that face our country.
I will say once again that we cannot sustain the current level of
spending without inflicting grave damage on the fiscal health of our
country. This conference agreement rejects the President's proposals
that slow the growth of spending in mandatory programs, as well as keep
a handle on discretionary spending.
It does nothing to shore up the government's fiscal house, and
instead leaves the tough choices to future Congresses and the next
administration. Yet every day, Americans sit at their kitchen tables
and tighten their own budgets to pay for gas, food and other necessary
expenses--while we can't even impose meaningful discipline on spending
here in Washington.
As stewards of the public trust, we owe it to all American taxpayers
to use the funds they provide us in the most efficient way possible. If
we do that, then we provide future generations with a strong economy.
As an accountant, I particularly welcome the opportunity to look at
the overall spending priorities of our Nation. Fiscal year 2009 ought
to be another tight year for spending. This year the Federal deficit is
projected to be close to $350 billion--under the Conference Agreement--
which will pale in the face of major demands on resources as the so-
called baby boom generation begins to reach eligibility for Social
Security and Medicare. We must realistically deal with issues like
increasing health care costs, tax policy, burgeoning energy costs, as
well as continuing national security obligations. Americans deserve
more than another ``pass the buck'' budget.
Mr. President, here is the truth about what the Democratic budget
resolution would do. It will: raise taxes by $1.2 trillion meaning that
43 million families with children will pay $2,300 more each year, and
18 million seniors will pay $2,200 more; increase spending by $210
billion over 5 years. For fiscal year 2009, exceed the President's
requested budget by $24 billion; would allow the gross debt to climb by
$2 trillion by 2013; last year's budget grew our national debt by $2.5
trillion. It ignores entitlement reform--there is no attempt to tackle
the $66 trillion in unsustainable long-term entitlement obligations
that face our country. The President's budget proposed to reduce the
rate of growth in one of our most expensive entitlements, Medicare.
This would not cut Medicare at all--it would simply reduce the rate of
growth. This conference report rejects even slowing the growth in
entitlements. For these reasons alone, the conference report ought to
be rejected.
Congress ought to be considering a budget that reduces the national
debt, promotes honest budgeting, and encourages true economic growth by
reducing energy costs, reducing taxes, and reducing health care costs
and increasing access for all Americans.
Last year, the majority also promised to abide by pay-go rules and
actually pay for all new spending. Well, as far as I can see this has
not happened, and in fact, pay-go enforcement rules have been weakened
through a variety of different mechanisms and smoke and mirrors that
taxpayers have ended up with billions in new spending.
Congress must take seriously the warnings from the General Accounting
Office and the Congressional Budget Office about Federal expenditures
spiraling out of control. We need to make procedural and process
changes to directly address these problems. One of the many procedural
reforms that I believe would promote fiscal responsibility is a 2-year
budget process, known as biennial budgeting.
In fact, in his budget for fiscal year 2009, the President once again
proposed commonsense budget reforms to restrain spending. He has
several recommendations, including earmark reforms and the adoption of
a 2-year budget for all executive branch agencies in order to give
Congress more time for program reviews. Implementing these overall
recommendations would be a step in the right direction.
The budget process takes up a considerable amount of time each year
and is drenched in partisan politics, while other important issues end
up on the back burner. The Federal budgeting and appropriations system
is broken, and lends itself to spending indulgences taxpayers cannot
afford. We only have to look to the mammoth spending bills that nobody
has time to fully read or understand before they are passed into law.
Last year's omnibus appropriations bill is an example of a system that
promotes fiscal recklessness.
This conference report is a missed opportunity. There is a crucial
need to enact procedural and process changes that will enable us to get
this country on the right budgetary track again. We simply cannot risk
the economic stability of future generations by continuing to ``get
by'' with the status quo. The risks are far too great.
The conference report we are debating today is a hollow, tax and
spend, big government budget. It makes no tough choices.
____________________