[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 69 (Thursday, May 16, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3557-S3558]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE BUDGET
Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I remember--and I am sure the Presiding
Officer does too--an early morning in March when we completed our
budget deliberations. That was a couple of months ago. I remember the
outcry about the Senate not following regular order in passing a
budget. On that March morning, we followed regular order. We passed a
budget. We took up lots of amendments. We spent hours on debate. We
voted on many amendments, and the Senate worked its will. Of course,
the House has also worked its will. It passed a budget that is
different from the Senate budget.
The next step in regular order is for the House and Senate to meet in
what is called a conference to work out the differences between the
House and the Senate so we can then have a budget for the country. That
is how the regular process works.
I know for the last couple of years we have had budgets. We have had
budgets because of grand bargains that have been agreed to on debt
extensions and things such as that, but there is now a cry to follow
regular order. That is what we should do: Follow regular order. So the
next step is to go into a conference.
I must tell my colleagues, I don't quite understand why the
Republican leader is objecting to going to conference. He is trying to
say, We will go to conference if the Senate agrees with the House. No,
we don't go to conference because we agree with one body; we go to
conference to work out our differences. So I am extremely disappointed
that those who are yelling the loudest about following regular order
are now preventing us from using regular order.
We need to get to conference, and one of the reasons is so we can get
rid of sequestration. Sequestration means across-the-board mindless
cuts. It treats every priority in government the same. That is
mindless. That is not what we should be doing. It is having a major
impact on the mission of many agencies in this country. They can't do
what the public wants them to do because they don't have the budget
support to do it. For an agency that is affected by sequestration, it
amounts to almost 10 percent of their budget, because they have to cram
in savings over a short number of months. Also, it only affects some
agencies, not all. Not all of the programs are affected by
sequestration. But those discretionary programs that are affected are
across the board, without any discretion.
If the Presiding Officer ran into a tough economic time or someone we
represent does and they lose some income, they look at their family
budget. They may have money put aside for rent or mortgage payments,
maybe some money put aside for a food budget for their family, and
maybe there is some money put aside to go to an Orioles-Red Sox game.
They are going to have to make some tough choices, but they are going
to make choices based upon what is most important to their family. They
certainly are going to pay their rent payment or their mortgage payment
to keep the roof over their family home.
So that is what we should be doing. We have to make decisions, and we
cannot do these across-the-board cuts. It is hurting agencies. These
are cuts on top of cuts on top of cuts.
Let me mention one group that will be particularly affected by that,
and that is our Federal workforce. These are the people who are at NIH,
the talented scientists doing the research that is keeping us healthy.
They are finding the answers to the dread diseases in our society.
These are people who are standing guard on our border, keeping us safe.
These are people who do food inspections to make sure we have a healthy
food supply. These are people who help our seniors, to make sure they
get the checks they need for their dignity in their older years. These
are people who are working for the public.
What have we done to them? Three straight years of freezes, no
increase in their salaries. We are now looking at what we are going to
do with their benefit structure. On top of that, we have freezes on the
number of employees; therefore, they are being asked to do more with
less. And now we have furloughs, which is basically cuts--cuts in their
salary.
It is not the Federal payroll that causes the deficits we have today.
As the Presiding Officer and I know, it is the fact that we went to war
in two countries, we cut taxes, we went through a recession. We have to
answer the way of getting out of this problem in a balanced approach.
We have already done the discretionary cuts to those agencies, and we
are now affecting their ability to do their mission.
I want to mention some of the effects of sequestration on the
citizens of Maryland, whom I have the opportunity to represent in the
Senate.
Maryland will lose approximately $14.4 million in funding for primary
and secondary education. Twelve thousand fewer students will be served
and approximately 30 fewer schools will receive funding. In Maryland,
we believe education is a top priority. That is how we compete. That is
how we invest in our future. We invest in our children.
Maryland will lose approximately $10 million in funds for about 120
teachers, aides, and staff who help our children with disabilities.
Around 770 fewer low-income students in Maryland will receive aid to
help them finance the cost of college, and around 440 fewer students
will get work-study jobs that help them pay for college. These are
programs that Democrats and Republicans have fought for over the years
to make sure they are funded. Now, in Maryland, we are going to have to
cut back.
Head Start and Early Head Start services would be eliminated for
approximately 800 children in Maryland, reducing access to critical
early education.
The list goes on and on and on.
Maryland would lose about $3 million in environmental funding to
ensure clean water and air quality, as well as prevent pollution from
pesticides and hazardous waste. We have worked hard to clean up the
Chesapeake Bay and provide a safe environment for our families. That is
in jeopardy as a result of sequestration. In addition, Maryland could
lose another $467,000 in grants for fish and wildlife protection.
In Maryland, there will be 46,000--tens of thousands--of civilians in
the Department of Defense who will be furloughed, reducing gross
payroll by around $353.7 million in total in our State.
Maryland will lose about $317,000 in justice assistance grants. These
grants support law enforcement. We all talk about supporting law
enforcement. These grants also support prosecution and courts, crime
prevention and education, corrections and community corrections, drug
treatment and enforcement, and crime victim and witness initiatives.
Maryland will lose about $66,000 in funding for job search
assistance, referral, and placement, meaning around 9,270 fewer people
will get the help and skills they need to find employment.
Madam President, 2,050 fewer children in Maryland will receive
vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus,
whooping cough, influenza, and hepatitis B.
Maryland will lose approximately $551,000 in funds to help upgrade
its ability to respond to public health threats, including infectious
diseases, natural disasters, and biological, chemical, nuclear, and
radiological events.
Maryland will lose about $1.6 million in grants to help prevent and
treat substance abuse, resulting in around 2,500 fewer admissions to
substance abuse programs.
Maryland health departments will lose about $595,000, resulting in
around 14,900 fewer HIV tests.
Maryland could lose up to $124,000 in funds that provide services to
victims of domestic violence.
[[Page S3558]]
My point is these are cuts that I do not think the public wants us to
do. In Congress, each of us says: Oh, we did not mean that. Well, it is
time for us to act. Democrats and Republicans, coming together in a
bipartisan way, compromise. That is what our Founding Fathers
envisioned we would do--working together--so we have a balanced
approach.
Just look at compulsory spending, mandatory spending. We can organize
our health care delivery system in a more cost-effective way. Dealing
with individuals with high-cost interventions--we can save money
there--reduce hospital readmission rates. There are ways we can bring
down costs in a sensible way. Our troops are coming home from
Afghanistan. We can reduce our military spending. We can certainly look
at the $1.2 trillion we spend every year through the Tax Code--that is
on a yearly basis--tax expenditures. We can certainly close some of
those loopholes and get the badly needed revenues so we can deal with
our budget in a balanced, responsible way.
Let's work together in a bipartisan fashion, Democrats and
Republicans.
One more thing it will do: Solving problems gives predictability, and
people will know what the rules are. They will know what our budget is,
they will know what our Tax Code is, and that unleashes our economy and
creates jobs, which helps the economy and helps balance our budget.
I urge my colleagues, let's take the next step. The next step is to
go to conference on the budget. Let's work out the differences between
the House and the Senate. Let's do what we are supposed to do in
regular order.
I urge my Republican colleagues to remove their objections, and let's
get to a conference on the budget as soon as possible.
With that, I see my distinguished friend from Utah who is on the
floor. I always learn a lot when he speaks, so I am going to yield the
floor for my colleague from Utah.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
Mr. HATCH. Madam President, I thank my dear friend and colleague from
Maryland. He is a wonderful person and a very good Senator. I enjoy him
on the Senate Finance Committee. He is one of the brighter people on
that committee, among a whole bunch of very bright people.
____________________