[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 92 (Friday, June 18, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5143-S5144]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           EXTENDERS PACKAGE

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, the legislation we have before us today 
and have been working on is problematic. It is just not healthy because 
it is going to increase the debt to a significant degree.
  According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Democrats' first 
draft of the extenders bill--that is what we are calling this 
legislation--presented this week would have added $78.6 billion to the 
debt--another $78 billion.
  Total spending in that bill was $126 billion. They claim that $47 
billion of this amount had been offset, meaning paid for. However, what 
we were not told is they were double counting many of the items. It was 
a manipulation. The numbers were worse than that. They were double 
counting some of the money and hiding the extent of the debt. There 
were just too many budget gimmicks, and the total impact of the bill, 
in truth, would have vastly exceeded the $78.6 billion that had been in 
the score.
  The Congressional Budget Office estimates the annual deficit for this 
fiscal year will be $1.5 trillion--$1,500 billion. This represents the 
largest annual deficit in the history of the American Republic.
  The CBO estimates that deficits will average--average--$1 trillion 
per year over the next 10 years under the budget as presented to us by 
President Obama. The lowest projected deficit in the 10-year period--
the lowest year--would be $724 billion. That is in 2014. The way the 
economy is moving, I have my doubts that would occur. In fact, a fair 
analysis of the entire amount would indicate those numbers are less 
than likely to occur, unless we make significant changes, which we 
should do.
  Last week, the gross public debt exceeded $13 trillion. This 
represents 89 percent of our GDP. So the debt of $13 trillion 
represents 89 percent of GDP. This is a serious matter. According to 
Carmen Reinhart's testimony before the Budget Committee--who studied 
this and has written a book about it--when gross debt exceeds 90 
percent of GDP, growth in your country is reduced. What otherwise would 
be an economic growth of 3 percent would be reduced to 2 percent. You 
would have, in their estimation--Ms. Reinhart's and her partner, Mr. 
Rogoff's, book--it would knock off 1 percent of growth, which is huge. 
One percent of growth dragged down as a result of debt and interest is 
a huge matter.
  Interest payments rise--interest payments on the debt we have to pay. 
We borrow the money, we have to pay interest on it in the form of T-
bills held by people. China and other places and individuals buy these 
T-bills. We pay them interest. Interest in 2010 will be $209 billion. 
As of September 30 of this year, when fiscal year 2010 ends, it will be 
$209 billion.
  The Federal highway bill is about $40 billion, the baseline highway 
bill. Just to give an indication, Alabama's general fund budget is less 
than $10 billion a year. We are an average-sized State, so $210 billion 
in interest is significant.
  Well, what happens at the rate we are going, with budget deficits 
averaging a trillion dollars a year for the next 10 years? According to 
the Congressional Budget Office, that calculates this out carefully, 
they estimate that interest in 2020--for that 1 year--just 10 years 
from now, would be $916 billion--the largest single expenditure in the 
Federal budget, and our debt will have tripled in 10 years under the 
President's budget.
  So this is clearly unsustainable; every witness, every economist, 
every

[[Page S5144]]

person on Wall Street, every talking head you see on television says it 
is unsustainable. But we have not seen any action to get us off this 
path. How much longer can we go before we do something? The bullet, as 
one person said a number of years ago about a bank that went bankrupt--
they found out the Atlanta housing market collapsed, and he said: It 
was too late. The bullet was in the heart. When will the bullet be in 
our heart? When will it be too late to fight back?
  On Wednesday of this week, the Democratic majority--after having 
brought up their bill that I have referred to; and the Senate rejected 
this excessive debt and spending by a vote of 45 to 52--a number of 
Democrats said: No, we are not going for that, Mr. Leader. A vast 
majority of the Democrats supported the bill, but a significant number 
said: No, we are not going to keep doing this. So they have now 
proposed yet another version of the extenders bill, on Thursday, 
yesterday. This version would add $55 billion to the deficit instead of 
$78 billion. But the number is a distortion, and it is done as a result 
of double counting certain funds and simply shortening the time some of 
the provisions would take effect--not fixing it in a significant way.
  To pay for some of this spending, the Democratic majority proposes to 
increase the oil excise tax that funds the Oil Spill Liability Trust 
Fund to 49 cents from its current 8 cents a barrel. So the Oil Spill 
Liability Trust Fund was created to have a fund to pay costs that might 
relate in the future to oil--
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator asked to be notified 
when 7 minutes had elapsed, and we are at about 7 minutes 15 seconds.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the Acting President pro tempore and will wrap 
up.
  There is so much to be said about this. But I just wish to point out 
how the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund is a complete shell game. It is 
an absolute double counting of money, and it adds to the debt, and the 
debt of the bill in the way it has been scored hides the real impact.
  The legislation would increase the tax on oil but does not set aside 
the increased revenue and save it in a fund to clean up the oil spill 
in the gulf or other such disasters as it is supposed to. Instead, it 
takes the money and creates a paper trust fund but sends the money 
directly over to the Treasury in order to pay some of the spending in 
this package and is used to reduce the amount of debt they say the bill 
will create.
  Do you follow me? They claim they are creating a trust fund but at 
the same time using the money to fund the spending in this bill and 
claiming this money as income to justify that. Well, what is going to 
happen when the fund needs money to clean up a spill, which is what it 
was created for? Well, it is not going to be there because it is going 
to already have been spent. There is no dispute about this. This is 
absolute fact, and it is just another example of the recklessness and 
irresponsibility of the spending that is going on here. It is time for 
the American people to rise up and say to Congress: We need to have 
honest spending and restraint in spending.
  I thank the Acting President pro tempore and yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent I be recognized 
for 20 minutes, to be followed by the Senator from Connecticut, Mr. 
Dodd.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, first of all, let me say it was my 
intention to come down and talk about the same subject my friend from 
Alabama has addressed, and I will do that if there is time at the 
conclusion of my first subject, which has to be said and addressed 
today, and if not, I may have to come back after my friend from 
Connecticut to address this subject. It has to do with the liability 
limits--something we need to think through. There is a gross 
misunderstanding and a lot of pandering going on of people demagoging 
that issue, and I want to address that.

                          ____________________