[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 51 (Friday, April 8, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2314-S2319]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS

  Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a period for 
morning business for debate only be extended until 6 p.m., with 
Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the 
majority leader to be recognized at 6 p.m.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Hearing no objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BEGICH. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor today, as so many of 
my colleagues have, to discuss the situation we find ourselves in. Many 
ask: What has happened? Why are we here? Why is there so much coverage 
and concern about a potential shutdown of the United States Government?
  I was on a radio station report from Washington by phone to Wyoming 
earlier this morning with a friend of mine, and he was asking how we 
got into this situation and what we can do about it.
  Well, there are two different situations we are in. One is, we are in 
this situation because a budget, a responsible budget, that should have 
been passed 7 months ago--when the Democrats were in charge of the 
House, in charge of the Senate, and in the White House--was never 
passed. That is what we are dealing with today in one part.
  The bigger part of how we got into this situation is that we are a 
nation in significant debt. We owe a remarkably large amount of money--
$14 trillion is the number that is consistently discussed. Very few 
people have a concept of exactly how much money that is. Yet we owe 
that amount of money. People say: Who do we owe it to? I visited with a 
group of high school students from Douglas, WY, earlier this week, and 
I asked them: Do you know who we owe the money to? They said: Yeah, we 
owe a lot of it to China.
  That is of great concern to the people of America, people concerned 
about national security, our financial security, and how we as a nation 
are viewed in the world, as well as how we view ourselves.
  As families across this country, we live within our means. We balance 
our budgets every year. I am from Wyoming, where, according to our 
constitution, we must balance our budget every year, and we do. That is 
why we have money available for scholarships and other opportunities 
for young people, as we invest the money that we have saved from year 
to year in our people, in our future, in our communities, and in our 
land. Yet Washington doesn't seem to learn that lesson, even today.
  So here we are with this situation where we are looking at a 
potential shutdown of the government because this government has maxed 
out its credit card. Others may decide to no longer extend credit to 
us, and it has come down to the final hour.
  Every day this government spends $4 billion more than it takes in. 
Last month, Washington spent eight times as much money as it took in. 
Every American child is now born owing $45,000. This is a travesty. 
When I take a look at this and say, we know now how we got into this 
situation: We have overspent. Our problem is not that we are taxed too 
little, it is that we spend too much. The American people understand 
that. So what we need to do is get the spending under control. We need 
to spend less.
  We are in a situation where you say, what can we do about it right 
now, today? Well, for those same high school students who are here from 
Douglas, WY, they know a bill starts in the House and then goes to the 
Senate, and is passed by one body, passed by another body, goes to the 
President for his signature. So here we are. We do have a bill that has 
been passed by the House of Representatives to keep the government 
open, to keep the government functioning. I am ready right now to vote 
for that bill.
  What has the President of the United States said about that? The 
President has threatened to veto that bill. He said he would veto a 
bill that would temporarily extend and keep the government open for 1 
week. So apparently the President is not interested in keeping this 
government open for the next week through tonight at midnight.

[[Page S2315]]

  I would wish he would take a different tack and say, let's continue 
to work on the overall problem but keep the government functioning. You 
know, families all around this country--and I talk to people every 
weekend in Wyoming--are worried about the cost and the quality of their 
own lives. When they look at this incredible debt coming out of 
Washington, they say, how is this going to continue to impact us? The 
families all around Wyoming and around the country and the States are 
finding they are going to pay about $700 more for fuel this year than 
they did last year because of the pain at the pump.
  Of course, I believe that is made worse by the policies of this 
administration. But for families who have kids and with bills and a 
mortgage, $700 increased gasoline prices impacts them in the money they 
have available for other things. So it is a direct impact on the 
quality of their lives. They are looking back here to Washington 
saying, what are those people doing?
  I had a call yesterday in my office from a man in the military. He 
said, why are they not going to continue to fund the military? Well, 
that is part of the bill that has passed the House that will continue 
to keep the military funded, functioning. He said, you know, I am not 
worried about me. He said, I am worried about these younger guys, the 
newer ones in the military, the men and woman who may have a young 
family. I want to make sure they are taken care of. He said, do not 
worry about me. Worry about them. Think about each and every one of 
those young men and women who are in uniform defending our country.
  Why would the President say: If you pass what the House has passed--
which does cut some spending and keeps the military functioning--I will 
veto it? That is what the President of the United States said, he would 
veto it. Rather than keep everything functioning and fund the military, 
the President has said he would veto it because it was only a 1-week 
extension, so that all of the other issues could be worked out.
  Remember, all we are talking about is this year's budget. We are now 
at 7 months into the fiscal year. This is something that should have 
been done last year. But the Democrats have absolutely failed to live 
up to their obligations of passing a budget. Certainly failed the 
obligations of living within the budget. But there is a proposal today 
to keep the government open, to fund the troops, and yet I hear the 
President of the United States say no.
  There has been discussion on this floor about things that are called 
policy riders. It was interesting because today in Politico, there is a 
headline: ``Dems Embraced Policy Riders in the Past.''
  What sort of policy riders? When I hear on the floor: Oh, no, policy 
riders are all bad. Well, the repeal of a school voucher program in the 
District of Colombia. That was a policy rider in the past. Travel to 
Cuba, that was a policy that Democrats put in in the past. And it 
mentions a project--they call it a pet project--of the majority leader. 
It says: Delaying the development of Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste 
storage site, as part of a policy rider on a budget bill issue.
  So this is something that, to me is not new, to this body is not new. 
What is new is that the President of the United States has threatened 
to veto and to shut down the government of this country because he will 
not deal with a bill that will fund our troops, and will make cuts in 
spending because it is for a time-limited issue, and at a time when we 
ought to say, let's keep the government open and let us fund the 
military.
  Who, in fact, would be wanting for there to be a shutdown? I am not 
looking for that sort of thing. And then I see there is someone who has 
actually been rooting for a shutdown. It is the former chairman of the 
Democratic National Committee, Howard Dean. These are the things that 
he said about a shutdown. He said: ``If I was head of the Democratic 
National Committee, I would be quietly rooting for it.''
  He went on to say: ``From a partisan point of view, I think it would 
be best thing in the world to have a shutdown.'' Is that what we need, 
a partisan point of view? What we need are solutions for America.
  I see that there are colleagues on the floor ready to speak. So with 
that, I ask that we come to a solution, deal with the issues of the 
incredible amount of debt, keep the government going, pass what has 
passed the House, fund the troops, cut the spending and get this to the 
President to sign.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
  Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I wanted to take the floor for a few 
minutes to talk about where I was supposed to be today, which is 
Denver, CO, not on this floor, because we were hosting a townhall 
meeting in Denver, Mark Udall and I were, to discuss our long-term 
deficit and debt problems.
  We had invited Senator Simpson from Wyoming--my colleague from 
Wyoming just spoke--a great Republican Senator, the co-chair of the 
President's Deficit and Debt Commission, to Denver for this session. He 
agreed to come.
  The former head of the Office and Management and Budget got on a 
plane, flew to Denver, they agreed to come, and some others. More 
important than that, we put this out to the public, and it was almost 
immediately oversubscribed so many people wanted to get in, to have a 
real conversation, an authentic conversation, about what we were going 
to do finally to dig out from underneath this incredible deficit and 
debt we face.
  I inconvenienced a lot of people inviting them to Denver. But they 
are happy to do it anyway because they are so committed to this set of 
issues, and they think having a conversation in the center of our 
country, in our Rocky Mountain West about these issues may allow some 
common sense to prevail.
  But the inconvenience they suffered by traveling to Denver is 
nothing, nothing compared to the inconvenience, to say the least, that 
the American people are going to suffer if this government shuts down. 
It is not just 850,000 Federal employees. The fact that we have got 
troops deployed all across the globe, small businesses trying to get 
loans from the SBA, homeowners, or people who hope to become 
homeowners, trying to get a mortgage through the FHA, all of that will 
shut down if this government shuts down. Not to mention the fact we 
have been told that the shutdown will cost our economy at least $8 
billion a week, if this government is shut down, and .2 percent of GDP 
growth for every week this government is shut down, just at a time when 
our economy is starting to show some sign of life.
  I have said on the floor over the last couple of days that no local 
government official in my State, none, zero, Republican or Democrat, 
would ever say, we are going to close the government. We have decided 
that we cannot get along, we cannot agree, we cannot figure it out, so 
the city and County of Denver is going to close, the city of Grand 
Junction will close, or the school district is going to close. No one 
in Colorado would think to say that to their constituents and we should 
not think about it either. But some people say, wow, there must be some 
incredibly significant disagreement that is keeping the House and the 
Senate from working together to get this done, Republicans and 
Democrats from working together, to get this done.
  Last night I brought a slide to show what that disagreement looks 
like. This was yesterday. I have heard some people say that there is 
agreement on the number of cuts we are going to make today and last 
night. But yesterday, the parties were several billion dollars apart. 
That is what was said. So I made a chart that showed the American 
people what that meant, and $7 billion is what I assigned to the 
difference. That is probably more than the difference was. It is 
certainly more than it is today. That is a lot of money, by the way. 
But we have a $3.5 trillion operating budget, and a $1.6 trillion 
deficit.

  I wanted to show what the dispute looked like compared to our 
deficit, and compared to our operating budget. And, sorry, but I could 
not fit it on one chart. It actually is on two charts. I could not get 
it enough charts or hold them together, because this is the operating 
budget over here. I would need two more of these posters on top of this 
to be able to show you the relationship between the so-called dispute 
and our operating budget.

[[Page S2316]]

  I have spent half my life in business and half my life working in 
local government. I can tell you that this is a meaningless dispute, 
utterly meaningless. Look at it. It has nothing to do with our long-
term deficit and debt problem. It has nothing to do with what the good 
people in Colorado are talking about today at the forum that I am not 
going to be able to attend.
  So in view of that, it seems to me that taking the risk of closing 
our government down, charging our economy an $8 billion note every 
week, and concerning our troops, who should not be worried about 
whether they are going to get a paycheck, makes no sense at all.
  My hope is this--I see other colleagues on the floor--that the 
leadership of both parties in the Senate and the House and our 
President, in the next several hours, will seal a deal that makes sure 
our government stays open.
  But beyond that, to all of my colleagues in this body, looking 
forward to the negotiation we are going to have on the debt ceiling, 
looking forward to the negotiation we are going to have on our deficit 
and our debt, I hope we can come together and agree on a process and a 
structure that actually leads us to agreement rather than one that 
leads us in the direction we have been in over the last 2 or 3 weeks.
  Our country simply cannot afford for us not to get our job done and 
be distracted by disagreements that are meaningless to people in their 
daily lives. I know we can do better. I know we can do better as 
Democrats and Republicans. And once we get through this, I want to say, 
I will do absolutely everything I can to build bipartisan support for a 
solution to our fiscal problems.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Udall of New Mexico). The Senator from 
Alabama.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, if the differences are meaningless maybe 
our Democratic colleague would agree and we would have an agreement if 
it is so insignificant. But it is not totally insignificant.
  If you take $61 billion in spending down from the baseline as the 
House legislation that they have passed and sent here does, it reduces 
spending by $61 billion. If you do that, it reduces the baseline $61 
billion. My staff on the Budget Committee has calculated that would 
save $860 billion over 10 years. Those numbers have not been disputed.
  In fact, it does make a difference. We are on the wrong trajectory. 
We need to get on the right trajectory. Our Democratic colleagues, it 
seems, have to be dragged, kicking and screaming out of denial and into 
the reality that we are spending too much. We are running up too much 
debt.
  I am pleased to see they have agreed to consider these proposals and 
have passed a couple of continuing resolutions to fund the government 
at a slightly lower level. That is progress.
  We have avoided shutdowns to this date. Hopefully we can avoid 
another one. But if we have another short-term agreement today, it is 
nowhere close to what is needed to put our country on a sound financial 
course. We have been warned we are facing another recessions if we do 
not change. That is what we have got to do. This spasm has come about 
because our Democratic colleagues' failed to pass a budget last year. 
They did not even bring a budget to the floor.
  They passed not a single appropriations bill last year on the floor 
of the Senate and still have not brought to the floor any legislation 
to even begin to form a budget for this year and to propose any funding 
for the last 6 months of this fiscal year. We haven't seen legislation 
about that. They want to meet in secret and talk and negotiate.
  The House has passed legislation that funds the government, that 
funds the military through the end of the year, reduces $61 billion. 
They have also sent legislation over that says: OK, we will do 1 more 
week with a small reduction of $12 billion, and we will fund the 
military. And let's do that if you don't want to agree to the full 
agreement for the rest of the year.
  The lack of action is only in one Chamber; that is, this Chamber. Has 
the Senate proposed any new legislation? No. I am saying this really 
not quite as critically as it probably sounds; our colleagues just have 
not comprehended the plain fact that business as usual is over. They 
think this country can continue to spend the way we have been doing. 
They think these huge deficits can be funded out of thin air without 
consequence, that we can borrow unlimited amounts--$1.6 trillion to 
fund the government this year, borrow that without consequence. They 
think the American people will not support and will defeat Members of 
Congress who tell the truth about the condition we are in and who have 
the gumption to take real steps to reduce spending. They think it is 
inconceivable that our government spending levels can actually be 
reduced. They think if they plan a 3-percent increase in spending and 
it gets increased only 1 percent, the government has suffered a 2-
percent cut. That is the way they talk about it. That is why we are 
broke, that kind of accounting. They think the government can create 
money, create wealth out of nothing. We can just pass a law, and it 
becomes so. They ignore the fact that debts must be paid and interest 
on our debt has to be paid.
  Expert after expert has told the Congress, has written papers and 
articles and op-eds, that we are on an unsustainable path. There is not 
one expert I know of who would deny that the budget submitted to the 
Congress just a few weeks ago by the President is sound. Indeed, 
President Obama's choice to head the debt commission, Erskine Bowles, 
when the budget was first announced, said it is nowhere close to what 
is needed to avoid our fiscal nightmare. This is a man he appointed to 
head the debt commission who has spent weeks and months taking 
testimony about the financial condition of America, the man he asked to 
sum up the kind of problem we have and how to get out of it.
  The American people understand it. They have been shocked by the 
irresponsibility shown by Congress. They have been shocked by what we 
have been doing. Four years ago, our deficit was $162 billion. It 
jumped to 450. Then the next year it was $1.3 trillion; the next year, 
$1.2 trillion. The next year, this year, on September 30, it is 
projected to be $1.5 or $1.6 trillion. We are on a completely 
unsustainable course. President Obama's budget, as scored by the CBO, 
shows that in the 10th year the projected deficit would be $1.2 
trillion. This year, we take in $2.2 trillion and we spend $3.7 
trillion. Forty percent of what we are spending this year is borrowed. 
That is why this is an unsustainable course. There is no other 
alternative than to acknowledge that.
  The American people have sent letters, e-mails, telegrams, phone 
calls, attended town meetings, had conferences to try to save this 
country we love from the fiscal nightmare Chairman Bowles said awaits 
us if we don't take real action. Is there something wrong with that? 
Should they not be upset with Congress going down a path without any 
attempt to get off it, with the most reckless debts we have ever seen 
in the history of America and with no end in sight?
  These concerned Americans, many of whom have not been active 
politically before, did one more thing: They went to the polls and 
voted. They voted for new candidates they felt would take the action 
necessary to protect America from financial disaster and to defend the 
bedrock of our legal system--the Constitution. The result was a 
colossal and historic shellacking from the big spenders.
  Those who said: Things are fine. We in Washington will take care of 
you. Don't question us. We will pass a Federal takeover of health care. 
I know you don't want it, but we know better. Isn't that what they 
said? We are progressives. We are smart. We are educated, more than 
you. We know deficits don't really matter. Countries have deficits all 
the time. While you don't understand, we know we have to bail out these 
bankers and these financiers, these Wall Street big shots, because 
principles of responsibility and accountability don't really apply 
because we know better. We are smarter. Your old principles are fuddy-
duddy. Following the rules is not important. Rules don't have fixed 
meanings. The Constitution doesn't really apply. It is old. It is out 
of date. Just leave us alone with your money and the power to borrow, 
and we will take care of you. Trust us. That didn't sit well with the 
American people this last election.

[[Page S2317]]

They sent a message, in my opinion, that was crystal clear.
  So should anybody be surprised, should there be any surprise that 64 
new Members of Congress who had run and won elections promising to do 
something about reckless spending didn't rubberstamp the Senate and the 
President's proposal to fund increased funding for the rest of the 
fiscal year, that they insisted that reductions occur and sent over a 
$61 billion reduction, which, out of a $3,700 billion budget, is not 
much, about 1 percent? States are reducing spending far more than that.
  We have a choice, don't we? What is the choice? Business as usual or 
taking the tough steps like Governors, mayors, counties commissioners, 
and families are making this very moment. Our Governor in Alabama 
announced a 15-percent reduction in spending.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired.
  Mr. SESSIONS. This $61 billion doesn't come close to that. It is 1 or 
2 percent of total government spending.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise to speak about decisions we need to 
make about cutting spending, decisions we need to make now.
  The Congress and the White House have not agreed on how much spending 
needs to be cut or where the cuts need to come from, but at least we 
can all agree that spending does need to be cut. Republican and 
Democratic administrations and Congresses for decades have continually 
increased Federal spending. Change is hard. It can be painful. That is 
because we have lots of ideas for great programs that would really help 
people out. But it is absolutely essential that our spending habits 
take a 180-degree turn starting right now.
  Tonight at midnight, the government will shut down if Congress does 
not pass a continuing resolution. This situation can be avoided if 
decisions are made in the next several hours.
  The House approved a temporary plan yesterday to fund the government 
for another week while a longer term deal was worked out. That plan 
also funds our military through September. It includes language the 
Democrats have approved in the past and the President has signed. But 
the full Senate--all Senators, Democrats and Republicans alike--has not 
been allowed a chance to vote on it.
  In the Senate, we don't always agree on every line included in a 
given bill, and we don't get a chance to vote on every line included in 
a given bill, but I will venture to say most of us can agree on some of 
them. We can all agree that a government shutdown is not an outcome 
anyone wants.
  The bottom line is that talk is cheap, and it is time to stop talking 
about passing a continuing resolution and take action. Actually, it is 
action that should have happened last September. Then we could be 
working on the next year instead of the last year. The House-passed 
bill gives us such an opportunity. It is the only bill that provides 
funding for the troops, funds the government, and continues the 
practice of cutting spending.
  We are in this position because we do not have a budget from last 
year, and we do not have completed funding bills for the current fiscal 
year. The current fiscal year started last October 1--not January 1, 
last October 1. We were supposed to get that finished up in September 
so that agencies know what they are going to be spending for the next 
fiscal year beginning October 1. Without action, the agencies get to 
spend a proportionate amount of what they spent the previous year.
  This year, we haven't had nearly the pressure to get a budget done 
that we have had in previous years. But it is easy to know why. The 
previous year, the spending increased by 18 percent. So agencies get to 
continue spending at 18 percent above previous levels until we do 
something about it.
  It is far too late to do what we should have done last September, 
which is make drastic cuts. We have already had 6 months of additional 
spending, which makes it a little tougher at this time of year because 
any spending cuts have to be taken out of the total year's revenue 
beginning now. So a 50-percent decrease in an overall budget now is 
tough because it is taken from funding for the remainder of the fiscal 
year. I am an accountant, so I like to explain how funding cuts work.
  I am especially concerned about our men and women in uniform who are 
putting their lives on the line for this country. They will be paid 
despite the shutdown, but their compensation should not have to be 
delayed. They don't hesitate to defend this country, and we should not 
hesitate to return that loyalty. I strongly support efforts to make 
sure military personnel and their families are paid without delay if 
the government shuts down.
  I am hearing from servicemembers and their families in Wyoming. They 
are worried about paying the rent, paying the bills, feeding their 
children. Some have recently been transferred and are dealing with the 
expense of moving their families across country or, in some cases, back 
to the United States. They do not know where the backpay will come from 
and are not sure what to tell their landlords or their banks. They want 
and deserve answers.

  For some time, we have been talking about reining in spending and 
making sure our grandchildren are not saddled with the enormous debt 
this country is facing. What we need to do in Washington is live within 
our means. We have not been doing that, and it shows. We have a $14 
trillion debt, and it is growing daily. Does anybody know what 1 
trillion is? I will tell you a good start: Write the number ``14'' and 
put 12 zeros after it. It is a whole different number than 1,000 or 1 
million or 1 billion. I saw a kid with a T-shirt that said: Please 
don't tell them what comes after a trillion. They are worried about it, 
and they should be. We should all be worried about it.
  This year we are going to take in $2.2 trillion. That is a lot of 
money. Unfortunately, we are going to spend $3.7 trillion. Imagine if 
you are a person who makes about $67,000 a year, and you spend $100,000 
a year, each and every year. Where are you going to get the money? 
Well, for a while you could probably borrow it. That is what we have 
been doing. We are borrowing 40 cents of every $1 we spend. That is the 
only way we can stay afloat--by borrowing 40 cents of every $1.
  That means the interest on what we owe is $616 million a day--a day. 
We are haggling over $61 billion in cuts. That would fund the 
government's interest for 100 days--a drop in the bucket. But we have 
to start sometime, and the best time to start is now.
  Yesterday, Britain raised their interest rates one-quarter of a 
percent. That is not much. Do you know what happens if our bonds go up 
one-quarter of a percent? We are spending $240 billion--with a B--a 
year on interest. If it goes up by 1 percent, we are going to spend 
another $140 billion a year on interest. Interest payments do not buy 
military equipment. They do not build schools. Interest payments go to 
other parts of the world, some of which are not our friends. If our 
interest rates increased by one quarter of one percent, that would be 
an additional $35 billion owed--$35 billion just in increased interest. 
If it goes up a whole percent, it is $140 billion.
  So what we have been talking about is going back to 2008 levels of 
spending, plus inflation. I have been talking to Wyoming folks who have 
come out here. March is a big month for people to come to Washington 
because they all come out for their special programs to make sure we 
know how important they are. Of course, one disappointment I always 
have is they think each one of those programs gets a vote. They do not. 
By the time it gets here, what we get to do is vote for a package that 
cuts spending or sometimes a package that increases spending. We do not 
even get to vote on one that keeps spending neutral. In the condition 
we are in, we have to be voting for the one that cuts spending--
whatever one it is that happens to get to us. Yes, cutting spending is 
going to inflict some pain on some programs that each of us feels is 
extremely important.
  It will affect families. It will affect people. But that is what 
happens when you get so delayed in outlining what you are going to pay 
that you are 6 months late. If you were paying your own bills and you 
were 6 months late paying them, what would your creditors say? They 
would be a little upset. That is where we are. We are that far behind. 
It is a dilemma, how to fund

[[Page S2318]]

the government so it spends within its means. But we are going to have 
to do that.
  When I explain where we are and what we have to do and talk about 
going back to 2008 levels, I have been real pleased that the Wyoming 
people say: Well, we can live with that. Hopefully, we don't have to go 
below the 2008 levels. Well, if we were being serious about it, we 
would. But that is where we are talking about going, the 2008 levels. 
So that is what we are facing today. The budget forecast for the future 
is troubling if we make changes now and dire if we do not. With 
Americans across the county tightening their belts, it is time for the 
Federal Government to do the same.
  Folks in Wyoming do understand this concept. Our State is required--
and many States are required--to operate under a balanced budget, and 
that does not mean borrowing money in order to balance the budget. That 
means spending less than the revenues you get in any given year. 
Wyoming is one of the few States that are still operating in the black.
  We noticed there was a problem, and I want to congratulate Senator 
Conrad and Senator Gregg for getting together the deficit commission 
bill. We got a lot of cosponsors on it, and we had a vote on it. We did 
not have the 60 votes that were necessary to do it. But I applaud the 
President for picking that up and appointing a deficit commission. I 
think he had two great cochairs. He had Alan Simpson, a former Senator, 
and Erskine Bowles, who was the Chief of Staff for President Clinton. 
They joined with 16 other people to figure out how to get out of this 
morass. They came up with a plan, a good plan.
  Their 18-member Commission had to have 14 members in favor of it 
before they could actually put it into a forced vote for us. They did 
not get that. They came close, but they did not get that. Of course, I 
would have liked them to have broken that down, promised they would do 
all six parts but break it down into six different parts because 
different people objected to different parts, and there would have been 
enough support to pass each part. We may have to do that in order to 
get the same thing done on the Senate floor. I hope we will pursue 
that. We need to pursue that. It is an absolute must.
  The President did the right thing appointing the Commission. But we 
had the State of the Union speech this year, and I thought he would 
take what the Commission said and make it clear to the United States 
that we must follow the Commission's recommendations. The President is 
very good at making things clear, and they gave him a blueprint to make 
clear. I think everybody in the United States would have understood. In 
fact, I think a lot of people in the United States understand, even 
without the explanation. They know if you spend more than you take in, 
you are going broke. We have been doing it so long we are $14.6 
trillion broke.
  President Obama had another opportunity, which was the budget, and I 
hoped his budget would reflect what the deficit commission said. One of 
the things I found was he took some of the savings in tax expenditures 
that could have resulted in some lower tax rates to increase our 
international competitiveness and he spent it on new programs. As I 
mentioned before, everybody has ideas for new programs, and a lot of 
them are good ideas, and they would have an impact. But we are not even 
able to afford the programs we already have.
  I wish to laud Senator Coburn for joining me in asking for a review 
of duplicative programs. In one department, we found $10 billion worth 
of duplicative programs. That is not fraud, waste, and abuse. That is 
people doing the same things as everybody else. I know from working on 
education that in preschool we have 69 different preschool programs 
that receive almost as much money as all of kindergarten through high 
school from the Federal Government. There is a review on which ones are 
effective and which ones are not, but we do not ever do anything with 
the ones that are not. We are going to have to start eliminating 
ineffective programs.
  Several of my colleagues and I have suggested going back to funding 
levels enacted in 2008 before the economic stimulus bill became the 
baseline for government spending.
  It is time to start making tough choices. If we do not make cuts now, 
all the scenarios down the road are worse than what we are facing 
today.
  Let's stop the partisan banter and concentrate on the job we are here 
to do. The current discussions between the Congress and the White House 
are the beginning of America's journey back from the brink of financial 
ruin. This is the first of many budget engagements. Democrats and 
Republicans are playing chicken and neither is swerving. There may be a 
collision tonight, but in the end, amongst the wreckage, smoke, and 
scattered debris, I know America has to be the one left standing.
  We can make it easy or we can make it hard. We do need to focus on 
getting a long-term funding bill passed for the remainder of the fiscal 
year--not just the next 5 days, the remainder of the fiscal year. Time 
is running out in that year.
  If we can get this done, we can start doing the real work; that is, 
focusing on the Nation's solvency for future generations. Senator 
Conrad, who is the chairman of the Budget Committee, has said he is not 
going to start on the next year's budget until we finish this year's 
appropriations. I think that probably makes sense so you know how much 
money there is left over. But, wait a minute, there is not any money 
left over. We are overspending.
  As a grandpa, I do want to get this done so my grandchildren and 
other children across the State of Wyoming and across the Nation are 
not stuck with the consequences of our inaction. I hope everyone here 
hopes they never have to answer to any of their grandchildren why they 
had a chance to fix the problem and they did not. I do not think that 
will happen. I think we will reach an agreement. I hope it is done 
tonight.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I will share a few thoughts, and if any 
of my colleagues come to the floor, I would be pleased to yield to 
them.
  I indicated earlier, pretty firmly, that I thought our Democratic 
colleagues did not recognize the severity of the crisis we are facing 
and were unwilling to confront the reality that we have to change what 
we are doing. We do not have the money. When you are spending $3.7 
trillion and taking in $2.2 trillion and there is no real prospect of 
any alteration of that trajectory, something has to change, just like 
everybody in the States are doing.
  But one of the things that is galling to me is that not only are they 
resisting taking any action to change the trajectory in any significant 
way, they are going about to savage, criticize good and decent people 
who are calling for change, people who pay their salaries. They are 
labeling the millions of Americans who took to the streets during the 
last election, went door to door, or had town meetings or rallies or 
protests, who wrote letters to Congress, wrote letters to the 
newspaper, called in to radio programs and said, We don't like what is 
going on in Washington--they are labeling those people who 
participated, many of them in politics for the first time in their 
lives because they were worried about America, as extremists, radicals, 
blind ideologues, basically with no common sense. I don't think that is 
accurate. I don't think that is fair. I think every expert we have had 
testify before the Budget Committee has said the same thing: You are 
spending this country into oblivion. Mr. President, you need to submit 
a budget that gets us off this path. It needs short-term spending 
reductions and long-term plans to deal with the surging instability in 
our large entitlement programs. You need to get busy now, and if you 
don't get busy now, things will be worse.

  Chairman Bernanke of the Federal Reserve said to the Budget 
Committee, regarding the debts over 10 years from now: Don't worry, it 
is not going to get there, because you are going to have a debt crisis 
before you get there, and you are going to have to make changes

[[Page S2319]]

in the midst of a financial crisis--the worst possible time to make 
those choices.
  These men and women who expressed their concerns about America are 
good people. They have been using the phrase I thought was interesting, 
that Pete Domenici, the former Senator from New Mexico and former 
chairman of the Budget Committee said: ``I have never been more afraid 
for my country.'' I have never been more afraid for my country. That is 
the heart and soul of the people who stood up in this last election who 
are concerned about their country. It is the establishment--the go-
along, the no-change, the people in denial, we can't cut spending, it 
will never work, no matter what we do it won't make any difference.
  I thank the Chair. I see my colleagues here. I will be pleased to 
yield the floor.
  I note the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  The Senator from Delaware.
  Mr. COONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. COONS. Mr. President, I rise today to add my voice to those who 
have spoken on this Chamber floor this afternoon to express frustration 
and concern about where we are as our Federal Government seems to be 
moving inexorably toward a shutdown this evening.
  As I have worked hard with my staff here in Washington and at home to 
help them prepare for and explain to the people whom I represent what 
is going on here and why, I have struggled. I have genuinely struggled 
to understand why this impasse is leading, I think now inevitably, 
toward a government shutdown. I still remain hopeful we will be able to 
find some resolution in these last few hours. But I think it is 
critical the people of the United States understand the consequences of 
a government shutdown.
  This isn't just about sending home Federal employees. This is going 
to have a significant impact on our economy, on our recovery, on 
working families all over this country, and I think on our reputation 
around the world. At a time when many of us are standing up and saying 
the United States and our system of democratic capitalism is a model 
other nations should follow, our inability as a Congress--the House and 
Senate working together--to reach a responsible consensus on what we 
all agree is one of our top priorities is profoundly frustrating to me.
  I was elected by the people of Delaware and sent here to deal with 
three things: to try and get our private sector going again, creating 
high-quality, good jobs for the people of Delaware and our country; to 
deal with our significant deficit and our dramatic national debt and 
the very real challenge to our future posed by them; and to try and do 
it in a responsible and balanced and bipartisan way. In my view, at 
this point in this budget fight, from everything I have been able to 
hear from the press and from the leadership of my party here in this 
body, it has stopped being about cutting the deficit and has instead 
turned into a fight about ideology. If I understand correctly, as of 
last night at the end of the negotiations, they moved from having 60 
riders, so-called, on the bill that would fund the Federal Government 
for the rest of the year, to down to just 1 or 2.
  I thought one of the good things that came out of the 2010 election 
was a broad-based focus--particularly by some of the tea party, but 
lots of folks in our country who were upset with how Washington works--
a broad-based focus to stop having bills that were loaded up with lots 
of riders and lots of extraneous things and to try and have commonsense 
legislation that is easy to understand and that does what it is meant 
to do. This, as I understand it, is no longer about the deficit and 
about the budget. We are not being asked to consider whether we should 
cut $70 billion or $72 billion or $78 billion; we are instead being 
asked to agree to defunding title X.
  Title X, a program that goes back to 1970, was enacted and signed 
into law by President Nixon and provides a remarkable range of health 
services to women all across this country. In my State of Delaware, 
there are 26 community health centers that are funded by title X. Just 
five of them are affiliated in some way with Planned Parenthood.
  I wanted to come to the floor and take a moment to focus on what 
title X funds: preventive health services, contraceptive services, 
pregnancy testing, but also screening for cervical and breast cancer, 
screening for blood pressure, anemia, diabetes, basic infertility, 
health education, and referrals for other health and social services. I 
know and have visited several of these health centers in my State. They 
provide services to folks who otherwise have no access to basic health 
care. If I understand correctly, what has happened in this body is that 
we have come down to being willing to shut down the entire Federal 
Government over this one issue of ideology. I am embarrassed and 
ashamed on some level that we can't get this resolved.
  As I understand it, the folks who came to Washington seeking 
aggressive deficit reduction and spending cuts in this fiscal year have 
achieved virtually all of their objectives. I think the initial goal 
was $100 billion. My understanding, as the Presiding Officer heard as 
well in our caucus lunch, is that we have agreed to up to $78 billion 
in cuts in this fiscal year across the board in lots of different 
sources of discretionary as well as other programs that can be cut this 
year. That is a hard concession for folks who support government action 
in our community and in our society to accept.
  But I think one of our challenges is for the folks who may be on the 
other side of this debate to hear ``yes,'' to accept that we have come 
almost 80 percent of the way to meeting their initial goal, and to 
instead recognize that I think this has long since turned into a fight 
over ideology--over the narrow issue of women's health.
  Let me give one last example, if I can, of what this means in my 
hometown. My Senate office in Delaware and I have been working hard for 
several months to follow on the example of my predecessor in this seat, 
Senator Ted Kaufman of Delaware, and host a job fair on Monday, from 9 
to 4, at the single biggest public space in Delaware, the Riverfront 
Arts Center. We are going to host a job fair. We have 50 employers 
lined up ready to interview people. We expect more than 1,000 out-of-
work Delawareans to show up, resumes in hand, ready to interview and, 
hopefully, to be hired. If I understand the rules right, if the Federal 
Government shuts down tonight, my staff can't carry out this job fair 
on Monday.
  Job one for me, and I think job one for all of us in this Chamber, is 
helping our private sector, helping small businesses, helping our 
communities connect good jobs with the folks who are out of work and 
seeking employment. Fortunately, in our case, we have scrambled and 
worked hard the last few days. The Governor of Delaware, our Department 
of Labor, the Delaware economic office, and other volunteers have 
worked hard and stepped up to make sure this job fair comes off on 
Monday just fine without interruption.
  We need to be focused on reining in the deficit and the debt, dealing 
with our long-term budget, and getting folks back to work.
  In conclusion, it is my hope that as a body we can come together in a 
commonsense way. If we need to have a vote on the floor, if we need to 
have a fight about access to health care for women in title X, let's 
have that debate, but this should be a discussion today about the 
deficit and about funding the operations of the Federal Government for 
the year ahead. I look forward and hope we can turn back to that very 
real work and not instead have a fight about ideology and access to 
women's health.
  Thank you very much, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.

                          ____________________