[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 68 (Wednesday, May 15, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3441-S3442]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE BUDGET
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am going to take a few minutes to talk
about why the events of the last 24 hours drive home how valuable it
would be to have a House-Senate budget conference begin to meet and to
deal with the extraordinary set of fiscal challenges our country has in
front of us.
As the President of the Senate knows, a number of Senators on our
side have been trying to get a budget conference with the House. It has
been several months since the budget resolutions in the respective
bodies, in effect, have been set in motion. I want to talk about what
has happened in the last 24 hours because it again drives home how
valuable it would be for the Senate and the House to move to a budget
conference at this time.
Yesterday the Congressional Budget Office--of course, our official
arbiter of official numbers and trends--made public a new report
showing there has been a significant reduction in the budget deficit.
In fact, their analysis shows there has been something like a 24-
percent reduction from what was estimated a few months ago.
If we couple that new evidence from the Congressional Budget Office
with the fact that consumers continue to spend--which is certainly
encouraging--the housing market coming back, employers adding 165,000
jobs in April, all of this drives home that in the short term the
economy is picking up and we are making real progress.
The point of a budget resolution, on the other hand, is to give us a
chance to look long term and look at the next 10 years how Democrats
and Republicans can come together, for example, on the long-term
challenge of holding down health care costs. We have certainly seen
progress in the last few months on that.
There is a debate about why health costs have been moderating of
late. I happen to think it is because providers and others are
beginning to see what is ahead, but we can have that debate. Certainly
there is a lot more to do in terms of holding down health care costs
for the long term, and that is what I wish to see the Senate and House
go to in terms of the budget resolution.
For example--and I think I have talked about this with the President
of the Senate before--chronic care is where most of the Medicare money
goes. Chronic care is for people with challenges with heart disease,
stroke, and diabetes. We have some ideas we believe could be
bipartisan, and would be exactly the kind of thing the House and Senate
should take up in a conference on the budget, which we have been
seeking for some time.
I only come to the floor today by way of trying to lay out why the
events of the last few days dramatize how useful it would be for the
Senate and the House to start thinking about what the country cares
about, which is our long-term trends.
In fact, this morning I was struck by the fact that some economic
theorists
[[Page S3442]]
say the Congress has, over the last few months, had it backwards. We
have been consumed with everything short term when, in fact, we ought
to say: Look at some of those positive developments I just cited--
including the Congressional Budget Office numbers here recently--that
would indicate maybe a little bit less of the back and forth. That is
certainly what voters see as unduly partisan. We need to give way to
some thoughtful, long-term efforts in perhaps a 10-year window, which
is what is reflected on the budget side.
Some of the leading Republicans and some of the archconservatives
with respect to economic analysis are all saying the same thing: We
ought to be talking about long-term trends. I, as well as my fellow
Democratic colleagues, have said that is one of the reasons for a
budget conference. Glenn Hubbard, for example, one of the most
respected of the conservatives, talks continually about the long-term
challenge and the dangers of waiting.
Well, on this side of the aisle, we are saying we don't want to wait
anymore in terms of getting to a budget conference. We want to be in a
position to tackle some of these major kinds of questions: pro-growth
tax reform--tax reform that can, again, generate revenue, and we have
some ideas we would like to raise in a budget conference that we think
would be attractive to the other side.
So I hope colleagues who have had questions about whether there ought
to be a budget conference now--an actual budget conference between the
Senate and the House--will look at these matters anew, given these
kinds of trends. I would point out, to tell my colleagues the truth, I
am encouraged on this point. We have heard colleagues over the last few
days on the other side of the aisle say they too think this is the time
for an actual budget conference between the House and the Senate. They
have called for it for a long time. We now have a chance to not just
call for it but actually do it. If anything, the economic news I have
cited suggests some of the focus on these short-term trends ought to
give way to more emphasis on bipartisan concern for the long-term
trends, which are, in particular, going to revolve around health care,
especially Medicare, and taxes where we have an opportunity to look at
bipartisan approaches for tax reform.
I commend particularly Senator Baucus and Senator Hatch, our
leadership on the Finance Committee on which I serve, who have been
talking with Senators in weekly sessions they have pulled together on
particularly the tax reform issue.
So we couple the opportunity for the long term, looking at things
such as chronic health care which is where most of the Medicare dollars
go. I think there are some good opportunities for protecting the rights
of seniors while having quality care, holding costs down--those are the
things we can look at in the longer term, which is what a budget
resolution is all about.
So it has been 2 months since the House and Senate adopted their
respective budget resolutions. I think, if anything, what we have
learned in the last few days is yet more evidence of why Senators and
House Members of good will who want to tackle the long-term economic
challenge--which, if anything, becomes increasingly important day by
day--ought to go to a budget conference and go forthwith to that effort
in a bipartisan way.
Later on today I intend to propound a unanimous consent request to in
fact go to that conference with the House on the budget, and I urge
colleagues to join me--I know Senator Coburn is here, and I commend him
because he has been one who has been interested in tackling long-term
fiscal challenges. Long-term fiscal challenges, in a debate between the
House and the Senate over the next 10 years and the future trends we
are looking at, are going to be front and center. We can tackle those
questions, particularly on health care and taxes, by going to a
conference, as well as looking at the long term overall. We would also
be, in my view, picking up on what economists and leaders in the
private sector of both political parties are saying now, which is there
should be a little bit less of a focus on short-term sparring about our
economy and more of a focus on the long-term economic challenges, which
is what a House-Senate budget conference, looking at 10 years ahead,
could be all about.
With that, I yield the floor and I note the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________