[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 74 (Thursday, May 26, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3415-S3416]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         ADJOURNMENT RESOLUTION

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, today the Senate declined to vote on 
whether to recess. Someone said the Republicans blocked the Senate from 
recessing. That is not correct. Republicans wrote a letter to the 
majority leader and said we should not recess until we have plans set 
forth and begin to take action to deal with the budget that we have not 
passed that is required by law to be passed.
  That is what was done. So when it comes down to the moment to move to 
recess and vote to recess, as we are required to do to have a recess, a 
unanimous consent, or an actual vote, the majority leader chose not to 
vote. I guess he wanted to protect his members from having to actually 
be recorded voting to recess this body when we have not done our work.
  The Budget Act, in the United States Code, in the Code book, the 
Budget Act requires that the Senate commence markup hearings in the 
Budget Committee by April 1 and that a budget be produced by April 15. 
Congress does not go to jail if it is not passed, I will acknowledge. 
There is no fine. Perhaps there should have been.
  Congress writes laws. I guess they make sure that no consequences 
occur when they apply to them and they do not comply with their duties.
  The majority leader decided to keep us in pro forma session through 
the week but to do it in a way that guarantees we will take no action 
on a budget. This is a sad thing. It is not a little bitty matter. Our 
Congress knows we are in a serious national crisis. I think we can't 
deny it, and we have to figure out how to respond to it.
  I hope this letter--and I will make it a part of the Record--to the 
majority leader will have some impact on our colleagues and cause them 
to reconsider the actions that have been taken so far. This is what it 
says:

       Dear Majority Leader Reid: Today marks the 757th day since 
     Congress last adopted a conference report on a budget 
     resolution. But while the Republican House has met its 
     obligations this year, the Democrat-led Senate remains in 
     open defiance of the law--last year the Senate did not even 
     call up a budget for a vote and this year the Senate Budget 
     Committee has not even marked up a resolution, as required 
     under Sec. 300 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
       Despite this dubious distinction, the Senate plans to 
     adjourn for a week-long recess on Friday to coincide with 
     Memorial Day, a holiday that honors our men and women in 
     uniform. As our service members put their lives on the line 
     to defend this nation, surely the least Congress can do is 
     produce a plan to confront the debt that is placing the whole 
     country at risk. House Republicans put forward just such a 
     budget weeks ago--an honest plan for prosperity to overcome 
     this nation's dangerously rising debt, cut wasteful 
     Washington spending, and make our economy more competitive.
       But, in this time of economic danger, the Senate continues 
     to stonewall any and all action on a FY2012 budget. For this 
     reason, we respectfully request that you delay any 
     adjournment of this body until you or members of your party 
     in the Senate bring forward a budget resolution and schedule 
     a meeting of the Budget Committee--a power which resides 
     solely with the majority--to work on that budget.
       In an interview last week, you stated, ``There's no need to 
     have a Democratic budget in my opinion . . . It would be 
     foolish for us to do a budget at this stage.'' We find these 
     remarks shocking, especially given the state of our fiscal 
     affairs: the co-chairs of President Obama's own fiscal 
     commission recently warned that, if we do not take swift and 
     serious action to address our rising debt, the United States 
     faces ``the most predictable economic crisis in its 
     history.''
       The House completed its work on the FY2012 budget 
     resolution on April 15th. But no budget can become binding 
     until the Senate acts. In our view it would be an astounding 
     abandonment of responsibility for the Senate to go on recess 
     without having taken any steps to produce a budget. We hope 
     that, as required by law and in your capacity as Majority 
     Leader, you change course and follow the example of the 
     Republican-led House and provide the American people with the 
     honest leadership and the honest budget they deserve.
       Until a budget plan is made public, and until that plan is 
     scheduled for committee

[[Page S3416]]

     action, on what basis can the Senate justify returning home 
     for a one-week vacation and recess while our spending and 
     debt continue to spiral dangerously out of control?
       We appreciate your thoughtful consideration of this request 
     and welcome any questions you might have.

  We are out of sorts. The American people are not happy with this 
Congress. They say our polling numbers are the lowest they can get. In 
last fall's election, there was a shellacking, particularly of the big 
spenders, the ones who want to have more government programs and create 
more debt. There was an accounting and I guess there will be an 
accounting in the next election and we all better be sure we have tried 
to respond faithfully to the challenges America faces.
  What has happened this week is a mockery, a sham, a joke. We had four 
votes yesterday. Each one of them was carefully and sophisticatedly 
structured to fail. The one that failed the biggest was President 
Obama's budget. It was voted down unanimously by this body, with zero 
votes. It was all designed to suggest it is impossible for the Senate 
to pass a budget. But the Senate doesn't even require a supermajority 
to pass a budget. Under the Budget Act that we have, it provides that 
it has a preference, has to be brought up properly, and can be passed 
with a simple majority.
  The Democratic majority, similar to Republican majorities in the 
past, have to choose will they seek to pass a budget that has the broad 
support of both parties or will they simply use their majority and pass 
their budget? You should do one or the other. A good, bipartisan budget 
is always preferable, but sometimes we have different opinions. So if 
you have a different view from the other party and you can't reach an 
agreement, you have a majority, you can pass your budget. You know, 
when you do that, what happens. When you pass your budget, what 
happens? You lay out for the American people what you believe. It is 
one thing to criticize someone else, it is another thing to tell the 
world what you believe. The House has told the world what they think 
would be an effective budget for the future. What does the Senate say? 
Nothing. We haven't even commenced a markup in the Budget Committee.
  A budget sets forth your vision for the future. It tells how much you 
want to cut taxes or raise taxes. It tells how much you want to raise 
spending or reduce spending. It says how much debt you expect to 
accumulate over the years to come or whether you would reach a surplus 
or a balanced budget. That is what a budget does. It holds you 
accountable. You have to defend it. You have to say what it is.
  One thing I have been proud about is that the Republicans over in the 
House met their duty and produced a budget and they are prepared to 
defend it. Congressman Ryan knows what he is talking about. He worked 
on that budget and he is prepared to defend it. It has been terribly 
misrepresented, but he is prepared to defend it, explain it, and talk 
to anybody about it.
  But if our colleagues in the Senate fail to produce a budget--don't 
produce one at all--it is kind of hard to hold them to account, isn't 
it? That is why it is pretty clear that Senator Reid said: Why, it is 
foolish for us to have a budget. It is foolish for us to have a budget 
because we would then be in a position to be held accountable. Was he 
talking about foolish for America to have a budget? Was he expressing a 
view that it is better for America that we have a budget? No. When he 
said it is foolish for us to produce a Democratic budget, he was 
talking purely politically. He was saying we think it is smart politics 
for us not to put our necks on the line to actually expose to the 
American people what we believe in. We would rather be in a position to 
criticize those people in the House who actually had the gumption--I 
guess he would say the foolish sense--to pass a budget and tell the 
American people what they think.
  I have to say that is not a good situation. We didn't have a budget 
last year. We are not having one this year. Is there any wonder, then, 
our deficits continue to spiral out of control to a degree that we have 
never, ever seen before?
  Many criticized President Bush--and so did I--for the $450 billion 
budget deficit he produced. I thought it was a stunning number. Since 
President Obama has been President, the budget deficits have been $1.2 
trillion, $1.3 trillion, and by September 30, it is projected to be 
about $1.5 trillion. We will take in $2.2 trillion this year, we 
expect, and we will spend $3.7 trillion. Forty cents-plus of every $1 
we spend is borrowed. We are not confronting that.
  So we are taking a recess. When it came time to vote to recess, the 
majority leader figured out a way to not have to actually vote to go 
home because, I guess, his Members felt they would be embarrassed if 
they had to vote to go home after being in violation of the United 
States Code to produce a budget.
  This is not going away. This issue is not going away. Every expert, 
including the chairman of the fiscal commission formed by President 
Obama, the chairman of which he appointed Mr. Erskine Bowles, told us 
in a written statement, delivered by Mr. Bowles and Cochairman Simpson, 
that this Nation has never faced a more predictable financial crisis. 
We are heading toward that wall at warp speed. We can have a financial 
crisis. In fact, Mr. Bowles was asked by our chairman, Senator Conrad: 
When do you think this crisis might occur? He said: Two years, maybe 
less. Alan Simpson said: I think maybe 1 year.
  Surely, we have to get off the debt path we are on, spending so much 
more than we take in, and 40 cents of every $1 we spend is borrowed and 
we pay interest on it. The interest has the potential to damage our 
economy in a very significant and substantial way. It could put us in 
another recession. That is what Mr. Bowles was talking about--a debt 
crisis, another recession. Maybe it could be perhaps worse than the one 
we are in. Our projection for a fragile growth is not coming back as 
much as we would like it to. One reason, expert economists tell us, is 
that we are carrying too much debt and that has the potential to pull 
down our economy.
  I think we are in a crisis. I think the economy is so naturally 
strong, the American people have so many capabilities and such a good 
work ethic that if we get the economy under control and our fiscal 
house in Washington under control, I believe the economy will come 
back. But we need to do it now, and every day we delay increases the 
risk that we will have a crisis occur.
  I thank the Chair. I saw my colleague, Senator Klobuchar. I know she 
wants to speak tonight. I will repeat that this matter is not over. We 
are in a long-term battle for the future of America. We are in a long-
term battle for the financial security of our Nation. Yes, it is about 
our grandchildren. But as Mr. Bowles told us and Alan Simpson told us 
and Alan Greenspan told us, we could have a debt crisis in just a few 
years. Would that not be a disaster--because of our failure to respond 
to the extraordinary debt we are incurring, that we have a financial 
crisis that could put us back into recession. I hope not. I don't think 
that is going to happen this year, but I don't know. We have been 
warned it might. It is scary.
  So we are going to continue to talk about this. We are going to 
continue to use the rules of the Senate to try to force the Senate to 
comply with the rules of the United States Code that says we should 
have a budget. We have had 757 days without a budget. How many more 
will it be before we have a budget? We will continue that battle. It is 
going to be a battle for the financial future of our country. 
Hopefully, we will be successful and somehow, someway, as the pressure 
builds and the American people continue to have their voices heard, the 
White House, which today has been oblivious to these challenges, that 
the Democratic Senate, which has been oblivious to these challenges, 
will somehow get on board and seriously work with the House to confront 
the challenges we face and put us on a sound path to financial security 
for the future.

                          ____________________