[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 29, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1908-S1909]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS

  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I rise to speak on the current state of 
partisan budget negotiations.
  For weeks now, the offices of the Senate majority leader, the House 
Speaker, and the White House have been engaged in serious talks seeking 
a long-term budget agreement. It has been a long hard process. There 
have been a lot of fits and starts in the negotiations. But it is no 
exaggeration to say that as of last week talks were on a smooth path 
toward a compromise. The Speaker's office was negotiating in good 
faith. The parties significantly narrowed the $51 billion gap on how 
much spending should be cut. House Republican leaders had agreed to 
come down from H.R. 1 and meet us halfway. We could begin to see light 
at the end of the tunnel.
  But suddenly, at the end of last week, House Republicans did a 
strange thing: They pulled back from the talks. They changed their 
minds about what level of spending cuts they could accept. We were on 
the verge of a potential breakthrough, and they suddenly moved the 
goalposts. We felt a little bit like we were left at the altar. Not 
only did they abandon the talks, they started denying that they were 
ever close to a deal in the first place. Majority Leader Cantor issued 
a statement Friday saying that reports that progress was being made 
were ``far-fetched.'' It was as if they decided that even the 
appearance of a looming compromise was a political liability. It was 
surreal.
  It is no surprise what happened. The headline of today's story in the 
National Journal says it all:

       With Revolt Brewing, GOP Backs Off Deal.

  Let me repeat that because that is really what is going on here and 
the news of the day in the last few days:

       With Revolt Brewing, GOP Backs Off Deal.

  The story reads:

       Concerned about a revolt by the conservative, tea party-
     wing of the party, GOP leaders have pulled back from a 
     tentative deal to cut roughly $30 billion in cuts from 
     current spending levels. The influence that tea-party 
     conservatives now exercise over the process put the chances 
     of a compromise seriously in doubt.

  The story continues:

       The GOP pulled back from that agreement last week after 
     House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., and Majority Whip 
     Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., warned House Speaker John Boehner, 
     R-Ohio, that the deal would trigger a revolt from tea-party 
     conservatives.

  In other words, as soon as House Republican leaders took one step 
toward compromise, the tea party rebelled, so they took two steps back.
  The National Journal story describes an offer that was put on the 
table by the White House that would have met House Republicans halfway. 
The offer falls squarely in the ballpark of Congressman Ryan's original 
budget proposal with roughly $70 billion in spending cuts compared to 
the President's budget request. This is a significant move in the 
Republicans' direction. These are more cuts than many on our side might 
support, but it shows how seriously the White House is about wanting a 
compromise to avert a shutdown. If they are planning to reject such an 
offer, it is clear they won't take ``yes'' for an answer and are 
seeking a shutdown. The Republican leadership in the House, with the 
tea party breathing down their back, won't take

[[Page S1909]]

``yes'' for an answer and won't support the original proposal made by 
Budget Chairman Ryan of roughly $70 billion in spending cuts. We know 
Congressman Ryan is hardly a liberal or a moderate. It shows how far to 
the right the Republican leadership is being forced to move by the tea 
party.
  This level of spending cuts was good enough for House Republicans 
earlier this year when Hal Rogers released his original proposal. But 
the tea party hollered, and House Republicans were forced to double 
their proposed spending cuts to an extreme level of $61 billion. When 
that happened, Hal Rogers said the House was moving beyond what was 
reasonable and into territory where they could never get a deal. Tom 
Latham of Iowa agreed that in forcing H.R. 1 to go from $30 billion to 
$60 billion in cuts, the tea party was forcing Republicans to go beyond 
what was ``enactable.'' These are conservative Republicans saying that 
the present House proposal is not enactable, cannot pass. Just as the 
tea party forced mainstream Republicans into extreme territory before, 
they are doing so again. Anyone who looks at this objectively sees that 
is what is happening.
  The Speaker has said all along that he wants to avoid a shutdown at 
all costs. I believe him. He is a good man. The problem is, a large 
percentage of those in his party don't feel the same way. They think 
``compromise'' is a dirty word. They think taking any steps to avert a 
shutdown would mean being the first to blink. So Speaker Boehner is 
caught between a shutdown and a hard place. He has caught a tiger by 
the tail in the form of the tea party. There is even a tea party rally 
planned for later this week to pressure the Speaker not to budge off 
H.R. 1.
  To try to mask the divisions on their own side, Republicans have 
resorted to lashing out in a knee-jerk way at Democrats. Their latest 
trick is trying to accuse Democrats of not having our own plan. That is 
a diversion. It rings hollow. The only proposals that have been made 
that would actually avoid a government shutdown are numerous 
compromises that Democrats have offered Republicans.
  I would like to remind my House friends, as they all know, the Senate 
needs 60 votes to pass a bill. We can't pass anything without 
Republican agreement. Yet our Senate Republican colleagues are nowhere 
to be found. Since the Senate rejected the Republican job-killing 
budget proposal that would cost Americans 700,000 jobs a month ago, 
Republicans have not moved an inch off their plan.
  Speaker Boehner knows, when it comes to averting a government 
shutdown on April 8, it is the tea party, not the Democrats, that is 
causing the trouble. At this point, the only hurdle left to a 
bipartisan deal, the only obstacle in the way is the tea party. But for 
the tea party, we could have an agreement that reduces spending by a 
historic amount. We could have a deal that keeps the government open.
  A tea party rebellion may hurt House Republican leadership 
politically, but a shutdown will hurt Americans, all Americans, much 
more. It is time for House Republican leaders to rip off the bandaid. 
Mr. Speaker, it is time to forget the tea party and take the deal. 
There are only 10 days left before the current CR expires. There is no 
new stopgap being prepared by House Republicans. It seems the only 
viable proposal is the one the Speaker walked away from. So the Speaker 
faces a choice: Return to the deal he was prepared to accept before the 
tea party rebelled last week or risk a shutdown on April 8. I think we 
know what the right answer is. It is clear. The Speaker has a choice: 
Appease the tea party and shut down the government or take the right 
and principled stand and move the government forward by coming to a 
reasonable compromise between both parties that cuts the budget 
significantly.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Nebraska.

                          ____________________