[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 62 (Monday, May 6, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3069-S3070]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE BUDGET
Mr. REID. Mr. President, for 38 straight months private sector
companies have added new jobs and put Americans back to work, 7 million
Americans in all. They have done it in spite of economic policies that
hampered growth--harsh austerity policies Republicans have forced on
the economy for the last 2 years. Yet the Dow Jones Industrial Average
and the other indicators hit an all-time high last week and the
manufacturing sector remains strong.
While the economy isn't back to full strength, and that certainly is
the truth, last week's job report shows we have made remarkable
progress in 3 years. But just imagine how strong job growth could have
been if Republicans had not insisted on round after round of meat axe
budget cuts that undercut economic expansion.
Every expert, every respected economist says the best way to
encourage a recovery, the best way to create jobs is with targeted
investments and balanced deficit reduction. The most responsible way to
reduce our deficit is to get away from short-term fixes, last-minute
negotiations and, instead, pursue a responsible budget process. We
can't begin to find common ground if we never get to the negotiating
table. That is why again today I will ask unanimous consent to go to
conference with the House on the budget, the budget that we passed.
For 2 years my Republican colleagues have complained the Senate had
not passed a budget resolution, even though we had enacted a budget
with the force of law and signed by President Obama. Remember, a budget
resolution is just an inter-Congress matter. It doesn't have anything
to do with the President. He doesn't have to sign that, but we enacted
a budget with the force of law and signed by President Obama.
The Republicans complained and complained: Why didn't we do a budget
resolution? We had something much better than a budget resolution, but
for 2 years Republicans longed for the days of regular order. We know
because they told us so. They wanted amendments; we gave them
amendments. They wanted bills to go through committee; they got bills
reported out of committees. Republicans were desperate for the Senate
to vote on a budget resolution that would set spending priorities for
the fiscal year. They got them. We passed a budget resolution under
regular order, complete with a late-night budget vote-arama that lasted
until 5 a.m. that included more than 100 individual votes. Still, the
House has refused to go to conference with us. Since they got what they
claimed they wanted, their interest in regular order has not just
waned, it disappeared.
They don't want to go to conference as we would under the regular
order--that they said they wanted. They don't even want to name
conferees. We tried to get that out of this body.
The ranking Republican on the Senate Budget Committee admitted these
stall tactics were an effort to provide political cover for his
colleagues in the House. This is what he said:
There are difficulties in the fact that we haven't been
able to have any understanding on how this conference might
work and what prospects we have for success might be. I think
it's possible that we could succeed, but at this point we're
not close enough to anticipate a successful conference and
that presents complications for the House.
Can you imagine? They don't have any understanding how this
conference might work. Well, probably one of the
[[Page S3070]]
reasons he doesn't have an understanding of how a conference works is
because they have stopped us from going to conference on virtually
everything.
He also says: We don't know what the prospects are for success. That
is what conference is all about. The Senate passes a bill, the House
passes a bill, and we sit down and try to work it out.
He said:
I think it's possible that we could succeed, but at this
point we're not close enough to anticipate a successful
conference, and that presents complications for the House.
We are the United States Senate, not the United States House of
Representatives. We should do our business and not be worried about the
tea party-driven House of Representatives. The budget process is the
only way to work through our differences without bringing the country
to the brink of another artificial crisis. To accelerate job growth and
reduce the deficit without harming the economy, we have to make
important and smart spending cuts, while asking the most fortunate
among us to do a little better, contribute a little more.
The arbitrary across-the-board cuts of the so-called sequester do
just the exact opposite. The sequester uses a meat cleaver where a
scalpel is needed. The sequester cuts were designed to be too painful--
so painful they would force the supercommittee to reach a bipartisan
compromise. We all remember what happened there. Republicans refused to
allow one penny of revenue. When they did that, they insisted on a
cuts-only approach. They ensured the sequester would kick in.
Eliminating sequester is part of a larger challenge: to set sound
long-term fiscal policy through the regular order of the budget
process, which they said they wanted--they, the Republicans. Now they
have walked away from it. That will take cooperation. Remember,
Democrats and Republicans voted for these arbitrary cuts, and Democrats
and Republicans will have to work together to reverse them.
Why are my Republican colleagues so afraid? We know the two sides
will not agree on every aspect of the budget. We know finding common
ground will not be easy.
We can get it done. We used to do it until we have been stopped from
doing everything by a tea party-driven House of Representatives and the
strongly influenced Republicans in the Senate by the tea party.
Republicans believe in one set of principles for how the government
should spend money and how it should save money.
Democrats have very different principles. Republicans would lower
taxes for the rich while the middle class foots the bill. Democrats
would ask the wealthiest individuals and corporations to contribute a
little more to reduce the deficit. Republicans would turn Medicaid into
a voucher program, in effect doing away with Medicaid as we know it.
Democrats would preserve and protect Medicare for future generations.
Republicans would use more harsh austerity to reduce the deficit.
Democrats would adopt a balanced approach that couples smart spending
cuts with new revenue from closing loopholes.
Remember, we have already cut more than $2.5 trillion from the debt.
We have our differences, but Democrats aren't afraid to work out those
differences. We are ready to go to conference to begin the difficult
work of compromise.
If this Congress is serious about reducing the deficit and protecting
the economy, we need to go to work now, not wait until this minor
impasse--and that is what it is--turns into another major manufactured
crisis, which the House loves to send to us at the last minute.
____________________