[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 1364-1365]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                           BIENNIAL BUDGETING

  Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, 2 weeks ago, the administration 
released its budget for fiscal year 2001--its last and its biggest, 
totaling $1.8 trillion and proposing a whole host of new programs.
  So begins our annual budget process.
  From now until September 30, Congress will conduct dozens of hearings 
and hold countless meetings, while members of both Houses deliver 
innumerable speeches and spend long hours of debate over every subtle 
nuance of the Federal budget process.
  Over the next 8 months, Congress will consider a budget resolution, a 
budget reconciliation package and as many as 13 separate appropriations 
bills--the latter only if we do not combine those appropriations bills 
into one massive spending bill, as has been the practice in recent 
years.
  By the time Congress adjourns--currently scheduled for October 6--a 
majority of votes taken in the Senate will relate to the budget 
process.
  Indeed, as my colleague, the distinguished chairman of the Budget 
Committee, Senator Domenici, has pointed out, 73% of the Senate's votes 
in 1996 were budget-related, 65% in 1997, and 51% in 1998. It is no 
wonder--each year, it is quite common for the same subject to be voted 
upon 3 or 4 times during the course of the entire budget process.
  Despite the inordinate amount of time and effort that Congress will 
put into fashioning a budget that will meet our Nation's spending needs 
in a fiscally responsible way, a veto threat still looms on each of the 
appropriations bills if spending does not approach what the President 
wants.
  At that point, high-stakes negotiations between the Congress and the 
President will ensue. In an effort to avoid a Government shutdown--and 
the blame that goes with it--these negotiations inevitably yield a 
spending compromise that neither Congress nor the President 
particularly likes, but both agree is necessary.
  It is a heck of a way to run a railroad, but what is really 
unbelievable is this whole process is repeated each year.
  I say enough is enough. It's time to bring rationality to our 
nation's budget process.
  It's a fact that Congress spends too large a portion of its time 
debating and voting on items related to the Federal budget. Meanwhile, 
most other Congressional functions are not given proper attention.
  We need to reestablish our priorities so we may effectively do the 
work of the people, make sure that the Federal Government is running at 
peak efficiency and deliver value, which is quality service for the 
least amount of money.
  I believe we have an excellent opportunity to do that this year.
  One of the first bills I cosponsored when I became a Senator was a 
measure introduced by Senator Pete Domenici that would establish a 2-
year budget--just like we have in about 20 States including the State 
of Ohio. I believe enactment of this bill, S. 92, will provide an 
important tool in the efficient use of Federal funds while 
strengthening Congress' proper oversight role.
  Because Congress produces annual budgets, Congress does not spend 
nearly as much time as it should on oversight of the various Federal 
Departments and agencies due to the time and energy consumed by the 
budget resolution, budget reconciliation, and appropriations process.
  Not only is this a problem for Congress, but each executive branch 
agency and department must spend a significant amount of its time on 
each annual budget cycle.
  Again, as my colleague, Senator Domenici, pointed out in his 
statement on S. 92, the executive branch spends 1 year putting together 
a Federal budget, 1 year explaining that Federal budget before 
Congress, and 1 year implementing the budget eventually passed by 
Congress.
  Even the most diligent Cabinet Secretary cannot keep track of all the 
oversight he or she is supposed to accomplish if they are trapped in 
this endless budget cycle.
  A biennial budget will help Congress and the executive branch avoid 
this lengthy process. Since each particular Congress lasts only 2 
years, a biennial budget would allow us to consider a 2-year funding 
proposal during 1 year, while reserving the second year for the 
Government oversight portion of our job.
  As chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management

[[Page 1365]]

and Restructuring in the Governmental Affairs Committee, I have noted 
that even though the General Accounting Office conducts numerous 
reports documenting Government inefficiencies that need to be 
corrected, most GAO reports sit on the shelf because there is no time 
to conduct detailed hearings.
  When oversight hearings are held, nearly everyone in the executive 
branch knows--from career bureaucrats to Cabinet Secretaries--that they 
need only weather the immediate storm when they are asked to come to 
the Hill to testify.
  That is because once they answer the criticisms that have been 
leveled in these GAO reports, and explain how they are going to improve 
the situation, it is over; the worst has passed. Rarely do they have to 
worry about followup hearings to make sure they have implemented the 
proper remedies because they know Congress just will not have the time 
to conduct future hearings.
  Unfortunately, that reality can lead to problems later on that impact 
public safety or national security.
  Last year, the Governmental Affairs Committee held hearings regarding 
Dr. Wen Ho Lee and the security situation at the Los Alamos National 
Lab. I was shocked to learn that for 20 years we have had a problem 
with security at the Department of Energy, and no one did anything 
about it. But GAO knew: they had released 31 major reports on nuclear-
security problems at the Department since 1980.
  Congress needs the time to conduct proper oversight--including 
followup investigations--in order to make sure that situations like 
this do not repeat. Without having to devote the majority of its time 
and energy to annual budget bills, Congress will be able to make sure 
that the Federal Government operates harder and smarter and does more 
with less. I am confident that the Senate will pass S. 92--biennial 
budget legislation--during this session of Congress.
  Regardless of the Senate's actions on passing this bill, I believe 
the House of Representatives needs to be more engaged in this process. 
Unfortunately, the news reports that I have seen indicate that there is 
not much support at the leadership level in the House for such a bill.
  I urge my colleagues in the House to reconsider their views on 
biennial budget legislation, or in the alternative, pass a better 
legislative proposal. Congress should not continue to come up with 
reasons why budget reform can't pass, but find ways to make sure that 
it can.
  It should be plainly obvious to my colleagues in both Houses--
including those on the Appropriations Committees--that the annual 
appropriations process is not working. As I stated earlier, each year 
Congress ends up negotiating a spending deal that is higher than 
Congress wants in order to avoid the Presidential veto pen. If we are 
ever going to get a handle on our debt, we have to end this bad public 
policy. It would definitely be in the best interest of our Nation.
  I believe this biennial budget legislation, S. 92, is one of the most 
important pieces of legislation we could consider this year. I will 
continue to press for its passage.
  For my colleagues who are tired of the seemingly endless budget and 
appropriations cycles and are frustrated at the inability to devote 
enough time to the oversight duties of their committees, I urge them to 
join in cosponsoring this legislation. I also urge my House colleagues 
to review the merits of the biennial budget process and act upon 
legislation as expeditiously as possible for the good of America.
  The point I am making is this. It is time for this Congress to adopt 
a 2-year budget cycle instead of the one we have had for too many 
years. It will help us do a better job in terms of budgeting and 
certainly get us to do the oversight that is so badly needed by this 
Congress.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. WYDEN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from Oregon.

                          ____________________