[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 148 (Monday, November 15, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7872-S7873]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          EARMARKS MORATORIUM

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I have seen a lot of elections in my 
life, but I have never seen an election like the one we had earlier 
this month. The 2010 midterm election was a ``change'' election, the 
likes of which I have never seen, and the change that people want, 
above all, is right here in Washington.
  Most Americans are deeply unhappy with their government, more so than 
at any other time in decades. And after the way lawmakers have done 
business up here over the last couple of years, it is easy to see why. 
But it is not enough to point out the faults of the party in power. 
Americans want change, not mere criticism. And that means that all of 
us in Washington need to get serious about changing the way we do 
business, even on things we have defended in the past, perhaps for good 
reason.
  If the voters express themselves clearly and unequivocally on an 
issue, it is not enough to persist in doing the opposite on the grounds 
that ``that's the way we've always done it.'' That is what elections 
are all about, after all. And if this election has shown us anything, 
it is that Americans know the difference between talking about change, 
and actually delivering on it.
  Bringing about real change is hard work. It requires elected 
officials, whether they are in their first week or their 50th year in 
office, to challenge others and, above all, to challenge themselves to 
do things differently from time to time, to question, and then to 
actually shake up the status quo in pursuit of a goal or a vision that 
the voters have set for the good of our country.
  I have thought about these things long and hard over the past few 
weeks. I have talked with my Members. I have listened to them. Above 
all, I have listened to my constituents. And what I have concluded is 
that on the issue of congressional earmarks, as the leader of my party 
in the Senate, I have to lead first by example. Nearly every day that 
the Senate's been in session for the past 2 years, I have come down to 
this spot and said that Democrats are ignoring the wishes of the 
American people. When it comes to earmarks, I will not be guilty of the 
same thing.
  Make no mistake. I know the good that has come from the projects I 
have helped support throughout my State. I don't apologize for them. 
But there is simply no doubt that the abuse of this practice has caused 
Americans to view it as a symbol of the waste and the out-of-control 
spending that every Republican in Washington is determined to fight. 
And unless people like me show the American people that we are willing 
to follow through on small or even symbolic things, we risk losing them 
on our broader efforts to cut spending and rein in government.
  That is why today I am announcing that I will join the Republican 
leadership in the House in support of a moratorium on earmarks in the 
112th Congress.
  Over the years, I have seen Presidents of both parties seek to 
acquire total discretion over appropriations. And I have seen 
Presidents of both parties waste more taxpayer dollars on meritless 
projects, commissions, and programs than every congressional earmark 
put together. Look no further than the stimulus, which Congress passed 
without any earmarks, only to have the current administration load it 
up with earmarks for everything from turtle tunnels to tennis courts.
  Contrast this with truly vital projects I have supported back home in 
Kentucky, such as the work we have done in relation to the Paducah 
Gaseous Diffusion Plant in western Kentucky.
  Here was a facility at which workers, for years, were unaware of the 
dangers that the uranium at the plant posed to their health or how to 
safely dispose of the hazardous materials that were used there. Thanks 
to an expose about the plant in the nineties by the Washington Post, 
the danger was made known and I set about forcing the government to put 
a cleanup plan in place and to treat the people who had worked there. 
Through the earmark process, we were able to force reluctant 
administrations of both parties to do what was needed to clean up this 
site and to screen the people who had worked there for cancer. These 
screenings saved lives, and they would not have happened if Congress 
had not directed the funds to pay for them.
  Another success story is the Bluegrass Army Depot, which houses some 
of the deadliest materials and chemical weapons on Earth. As a Nation 
we had decided that we would not use the kind of weapons that were 
stored at this site; and yet the Federal Government was slow to follow 
through on safely dismantling and removing them, even after we had 
signed an international treaty that required it. But thanks to 
congressional appropriations we are on the way to destroying the 
chemical weapons at this site safely and thus protect the community 
that surrounds it.
  Administrations of both parties have failed to see the full merit in 
either of these projects, which is one of the reasons I have been 
reluctant to cede responsibility for continuing the good work that is 
being done on them and on others to the executive branch.
  So I am not wild about turning over more spending authority to the 
executive branch, but I have come to share the view of most Americans 
that our Nation is at a crossroads; that we will not be able to secure 
the kind of future we want for our children and grandchildren unless we 
act, and act quickly; and that the only way we will be able to turn the 
corner and save our future is if elected leaders like me make the kinds 
of difficult decisions voters are clearly asking us to make.
  Republicans in and out of Washington have argued strenuously for 2 
years that spending and debt are at crisis levels. And we have 
demonstrated our seriousness about cutting spending and reining in 
government. Every Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, 
for instance, voted against every appropriations bill in committee this 
year because they simply cost too much. Most included funding for 
projects in our home States. We voted against them anyway.
  Banning earmarks is another small but important symbolic step we can 
take to show that we are serious, another step on the way to serious 
and sustained cuts in spending and to the debt.
  Earlier this month voters across the country said they are counting 
on Republicans to make tough decisions. They gave us a second chance. 
With this decision, I am telling them that they were right to put their 
trust in us. And it is my fervent hope that it will help demonstrate to 
the American people in some way just how serious Republicans are about 
not letting them down.
  Republican leaders in the House and Senate are now united on this 
issue, united in hearing what the voters have

[[Page S7873]]

been telling us for 2 years, and acting on it.
  This is no small thing. Old habits are not easy to break, but 
sometimes they must be. And now is such a time. With a $14 trillion 
debt and an administration that talks about cost-cutting but then sends 
over a budget that triples the national debt in 10 years and creates a 
massive new entitlement program, it is time for some of us in 
Washington to show in every way possible that we mean what we say about 
spending.
  With Republican leaders in Congress united, the attention now turns 
to the President. We have said we are willing to give up discretion; 
now we will see how he handles spending decisions.
  And if the President ends up with total discretion over spending, we 
will see even more clearly where his priorities lie. We already saw the 
administration's priorities in a stimulus bill that has become 
synonymous with wasteful spending, that borrowed nearly $1 trillion for 
administration earmarks like turtle tunnels, a sidewalk that lead to a 
ditch, and research on voter perceptions of the bill.
  Congressional Republicans uncovered much of this waste. Through 
congressional oversight, we will continue to monitor how the money 
taxpayers send to the administration is actually spent. It is now up to 
the President and his party leaders in Congress to show their own 
seriousness on this issue, to say whether they will join Republican 
leaders in this effort and then, after that, in significantly reducing 
the size and cost and reach of government. The people have spoken. They 
have said as clearly as they can that this is what they want us to do.
  They will be watching.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________