[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 23, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S223-S225]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
______
SENATE RESOLUTION 8--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT CONGRESS
HOLDS THE SOLE AUTHORITY TO BORROW MONEY ON THE CREDIT OF THE UNITED
STATES AND SHALL NOT CEDE THIS POWER TO THE PRESIDENT
Mr. ROBERTS (for himself, Mr. Moran, Mr. Johanns, Mr. Johnson of
Wisconsin, and Mr. Cornyn) submitted the following resolution; which
was referred to the Committee on Finance:
S. Res. 8
Whereas it is Congress' prerogative and duty to decide how
much the Nation will borrow and for what purposes;
Whereas Congress has the responsibility under the
Constitution to regulate the terms and conditions under which
the Nation borrows funds;
Whereas Congress has the power and the obligation to ensure
that payments are made on the national debt;
[[Page S224]]
Whereas Congress is directly accountable to the people
concerning any tax and spending burdens placed upon the
public;
Whereas these Constitutional powers and responsibilities
create an appropriate check on the executive branch and
preclude the President from raising taxes and issuing debt;
Whereas on November 29, 2012, the Secretary of the
Treasury, on behalf of the President, proposed that Congress
should surrender its authority to establish the debt limit of
the United States to the executive branch; and
Whereas for 6 decades Congress and the President have
routinely used the necessity of increasing the debt limit as
a vehicle for debate and broader reforms on the path of
spending and future deficits: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that
Congress--
(1) should not relinquish its long utilized authority
vested in article 1, section 8 of the Constitution to
``borrow money on the credit of the United States'' by
refusing to debate, amend, and vote on a bill to address the
debt limit; and
(2) should not provide the executive branch with exclusive
power to issue debt on behalf of the United States
Government.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I am rising to submit a resolution making
it absolutely clear that Congress, and only Congress, has the authority
and responsibility to set the Federal debt limit. I should not even
have to submit a resolution such as this, but I feel it is absolutely
necessary.
Raising the Federal debt limit--the limit we place on government
borrowing--as everybody knows, has been a hot topic around Washington.
It is a key issue for the start of the 113th Congress. It is another
case where if we could just maintain regular order, regular authority
to address our problems, that is the best way for us to approach the
task of getting our fiscal house in order.
I know there is a lot of dispute over what breaching the limit means.
There is a lot of talk about that. It is clear a great deal of the
public and our financial markets are extremely concerned about the
Federal Government's ability to meet its financial obligations once we
do hit the limit.
The President has asked for a very large increase in the debt
ceiling, and some in the administration have called for no limit at
all. Others of the administration and in the House are calling for
Congress to give up its authority to set the debt limit--rather
amazing--thus giving the executive branch unilateral authority to
borrow. This is not a good idea.
If the Federal Government does not collect enough revenue to pay for
all its spending obligations, it must borrow to make up the shortfall.
Everybody knows that. We are borrowing now about 42 cents of every $1
we are obligated to spend.
This is clearly--I think everybody would agree on either side of the
aisle and the public--an unsustainable situation which will only get
worse if we do not begin meaningful discussions over our spending
priorities, including--including--entitlement spending to strengthen
and preserve those programs for future generations.
The national debt is growing. Everybody has seen that chart. It is
about $16.4 trillion. The total public debt outstanding at the end of
the third quarter just passed was $16.07 trillion. That is up from
$15.86 trillion reported in June 2012. We are on the wrong path.
The Federal debt is now equivalent to at least 73 percent of the
Nation's gross domestic product--nearly double the level as a
percentage of GDP that we had back in 1990. That is not too long ago.
According to some measures, there has been a 60-percent increase in
the debt limit since 2009. At the rate we are going, in a few short
years we will be spending more to pay interest on the debt than we will
on all discretionary programs outside of defense. Even defense now is
going through a very difficult time with the sequester and has already
been cut about one-half trillion dollars.
Let me just say that means no money for education. That means no
money for agriculture. That means no money for the environment. That
means no money for health care. It all goes to pay off interest on the
debt.
The Federal debt is the accumulation of this borrowing, including all
bills, notes, and bonds issued by the Department of the Treasury.
The current statutory debt limit is $16.394 trillion, which was
established on January 28 of last year, 2012--about 1 year ago--under
the procedures of the Budget Control Act of 2011.
According to the Department of the Treasury, as of December 31--just
last month--total debt outstanding subject to the limit was only $25
million--million; it used to be a lot of money--below the current
limit.
Once the amount of outstanding debt reaches the debt limit, the
government can no longer issue additional debt to cover the cash
shortfalls needed to fund government operations and meet legal
obligations.
Similar to the power of the purse, Congress's powers over borrowing
are firmly rooted in our constitutional traditions. The Founders
understood the potential danger of permitting the executive branch to
unilaterally incur new public debt. Article I of the Constitution
empowers only--only--Congress ``to borrow money on the credit of the
United States.''
The debt limit is the means by which Congress--Congress--exercises
this critical legislative responsibility.
I can remember well that lesson, that lecture, if you will, from
Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, the institutional flame of the Senate,
who would have repeated that Congress cannot give debt limit authority
to the executive, should not, cannot. It is not constitutional.
To implement this congressional prerogative, the amount of money the
Federal Government is allowed to borrow is subject to a specific
statutory limit.
From time to time, Congress considers and adopts legislation to
change this limit and has done so more than 100 times since the first
modern debt limit was set way back in 1939, and we will do so again
shortly. We have to.
So preserving this role and establishing the debt limit is vital to
encourage deficit reduction and to uphold our constitutional tradition
of legislative control over borrowing. Not only does the debt limit
provide an essential check on executive borrowing, it provides public
accountability--everybody is talking about transparency--for Congress's
borrowing and debt management practices. We cannot duck that
responsibility. We cannot pass this debt limit simply to the Executive
and duck our responsibility and the public accountability.
In other words, debates over the debt limit, as difficult and as
contentious as they are--and they are; I know that--shed the light of
day on the overall financial condition of the Federal Government.
Precluding these discussions by removing Congress's authority over the
debt limit would lead to a less well-informed decisionmaking over
fiscal policy. That is probably the understatement of my remarks. It is
a nice way to put it.
We can do this. In the past, legislation to raise the debt limit has
frequently been coupled with legislation to reduce the overall Federal
debt and deficit. That is the way we should do it. These extensions,
often approved on a bipartisan basis, have been important catalysts for
fiscal reform. In this respect, the debt limit is a strong mechanism, a
strong tool, a way for Congress to evaluate fiscal policy and to
maintain control over such policy.
Abdicating this role would fundamentally alter the checks and
balances embedded in the Constitution. This is a power that should not
be bargained away.
The necessary and critical battle to control spending is far from
over. I view the debt ceiling debate as a critical means in what has to
be an ongoing effort to tighten the government's fiscal belt--if we can
just do that. But we cannot settle our national finances by
fundamentally altering the constitutional structure and processes
governing those finances. We cannot cavalierly give up one of our most
important tools in evaluating and reining in the Federal Government's
runaway spending.
Equally clear, we cannot keep spending what we do not have. We must
continue to fight for spending cuts, for debt reduction, and against
tax increases and, I might add, the tidal wave of regulations that
continue to pour out of Washington.
In response to calls to give up this vital congressional authority
over debt issuance, I am submitting today a simple resolution. Let's
put the Senate on record. The Congress holds the sole authority to
borrow money on the credit
[[Page S225]]
of the United States and cannot cede this power to the President.
I invite everybody to cosponsor this important measure and look
forward to passage of this resolution. This should be a bipartisan
effort, and it is absolutely necessary.
____________________