[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 518-524]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2001, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Speaker, this evening during this hour the Blue Dog 
Democrat coalition in the House is going to talk about the issue of 
fiscal responsibility, an issue that we think is very important to 
address tonight in light of the President's recent budget submission to 
this Congress.
  The President and the Congress are united in the war on terrorism. 
Members on both sides of the aisle stand together in our commitment to 
defeat the terrorists and to do whatever is necessary and pay whatever 
price may be required to preserve our national security and to ensure 
that we protect the homeland.
  There is no division that the current tax cuts that we have enjoyed 
in the form of the rebates have been important to the American people, 
and there is no suggestion, contrary to some on the Republican side 
tonight, that there should be any tax increase in the time of a 
recession, because we firmly believe that the recession needs to be 
addressed by this Congress in a responsible way, and tax cuts, tax cuts 
which have already been given and which already are being implemented 
in this current recession, are important to the recovery.
  So when we debate the resolution on the floor of the House tomorrow, 
let there be no misunderstanding: Democrats understand that in a 
recession it would be wrong to increase taxes.
  We passed a record tax decrease in June. The tax rebates were good 
for the American people. But back in June the Congressional Budget 
Office projected a 10-year surplus of over $5 billion. Just 7 months 
later, these projections of a surplus are gone. We find that as a 
result of the tax cut, as a result of the recession, as a result of the 
war, we no longer are able to project future surpluses, and, in fact, 
we can only project future deficits.
  We are once again confronted with a pattern of spending that was 
engaged in for over 30 years by this Congress that was ended in 1996-
1997 when this Congress voted for the Balanced Budget Act, an act that 
put us on the road to fiscal responsibility, that resulted in 3 years 
of surpluses at the Federal level.
  But once again we now see the President of the United States 
submitting a budget to this Congress that will return us to deficit 
spending. We believe as Blue Dog Democrats that we can win the war 
against terrorism, we can protect our homeland, without raiding the 
Social Security Trust Fund and increasing the national debt that we 
pass on to our children.
  We notice in the President's budget submission of today that the 
national debt, which was projected back in April of last year to 
actually disappear over the 10-year period, in fact turn to a surplus, 
has now evaporated, and, based on the projections now contained in the 
President's budget, we will once again see $2.7 trillion in debt by the 
year 2011.

                              {time}  2030

  So in just 7 short months, we went from projections of a surplus over 
the next 10 years to ever-increasing national debt. These figures show 
the debt that will be held by the public, the debt that we owe to 
people who buy those Treasury bills and Treasury bonds, a large portion 
of which are owned by foreign investors, moving from a surplus to a 
debt of $2.7 trillion.
  Just look at the interest costs that this new debt will bring to the 
American people. We projected that over the

[[Page 519]]

next 10 years, back in April, that we could eliminate our debt and, 
over the period of 10 years, we would have to pay $709 billion in 
interest. With the new President's budget, we now see that these 
interest payments will equal 1.8, almost $1.8 trillion. That is just in 
interest that we will have to pay over the next 10 years. That is an 
increase in interest payments alone of about $1.1 trillion over the 
next 10 years.
  Now, to put that in perspective, what could we do with $1.1 trillion 
in interest costs if we could simply return to the surpluses that we 
had anticipated back last April? Mr. Speaker, $1.1 trillion will fund 
the President's defense budget request for not just one year, but for 3 
years. Mr. Speaker, $1.1 trillion would fund the President's budget 
request for defense for 3 years. That is why we need to be sure that we 
do not go back deeper into deficit spending, increase that national 
debt, and waste the resources of our taxpayers on interest servicing 
our national debt.
  We know as Democrats that raiding Social Security is the wrong thing 
to do. Raiding Social Security will result in debts that will fall on 
the backs of our children. The American people know or deserve to know 
the truth. They understand that raiding Social Security and increasing 
our national debt will ultimately result in higher taxes for our 
children.
  We have called on young men and women who wear the uniform of our 
great Nation to sacrifice, even to risk their lives in the defense of 
freedom. We all know that we are at war, but no one has told the 
American people that each of us must be willing to sacrifice as well. 
We have been told that we can have it all. We have been told that we 
can win the war, we can increase spending, we can have our taxes cut, 
that it will all be possible.
  During World War II, every American sacrificed. During World War II, 
every American did their part. In the current war, we have been led to 
believe that we do not have to sacrifice. By doing so, we are entering, 
once again, into a period of deficit spending and growing national debt 
that, after 3 short years of fiscal responsibility, we will pass on to 
our children the cost of paying for this war.
  I believe that is wrong. Blue Dog Democrats believe that is wrong. We 
believe that it is important to be honest with the American people 
about our finances in Washington. We believe it is important to 
preserve the principle that was voted on repeatedly on the floor of 
this House to lock box the Social Security trust funds. We, once again, 
under the President's budget, will be spending Social Security money to 
operate the rest of the government. Our children will pay the price of 
our fiscal irresponsibility. We believe as Blue Dogs it is time to get 
our house in order and to be honest with the American people.
  We have several members of the Blue Dog Coalition who are here with 
us tonight who will address these issues. The first member of the 
coalition is the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff). The gentleman 
has been very active in fighting for fiscal responsibility, for paying 
down the debt; and I am happy to yield to him to speak on this subject 
tonight.
  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Tonight 
I join my colleagues in expressing my concern about the President's 
budget proposal. We applaud the President for outlining the priorities 
of beefing up homeland security and strengthening our national defense. 
What our troops have done halfway around the world in Afghanistan is 
nothing short of miraculous, and it is our obligation and our 
responsibility to make sure that the men and women in uniform have 
every tool at their disposal to win the war on terrorism and win it 
convincingly.
  But the President has also proposed in his budget new levels of 
domestic spending and more than half a trillion dollars of additional 
tax cuts. One critical issue has been left out of this budget and that 
is, how do we pay for all of this? So many American families are facing 
the challenge of making ends meet, especially during this recession. 
American families are struggling to live within their means, and it is 
our responsibility as the Federal Government to do the same. We must 
find a way to balance the budget and remain steadfast in our commitment 
to fiscal discipline.
  The new budget reports indicate that the government will return to 
deficit spending and raid all of the Medicare surplus and further raid 
the Social Security trust fund by more than $1.5 trillion over the next 
10 years. This should be cause for great concern for our Nation's long-
term economic well-being.
  We are, I fear, at risk of making the same mistakes we made 2 decades 
ago when we began a vicious cycle of deficit spending and burdened 
ourselves with terrible debt and crushing debt service. We are at risk 
of ignoring the lessons of our protracted climb out of debt during the 
1980s and 1990s and the enormous economic benefits that the return to 
fiscal responsibility brought this Nation. Having failed to learn from 
that history, we are now perilously close to repeating it.
  Even now, credible voices within the administration are saying that 
debt simply does not matter. How soon we forget. During the debate last 
year, Congress and the President agreed that the Social Security trust 
fund surplus would be put in a lock box and saved to prepare for the 
retirement of the baby boomers. The new projections show that this 
promise will not be kept. Unfortunately, the new projections show 
return of budget deficits, of borrowing from Social Security, and a 
rapidly increasing national debt. Soon, very soon, the administration 
will be before this Congress asking us to raise the limit on the 
national debt; for permission, in effect, to open the Social Security 
lock box and throw away the key until one day, too far in the haze of 
our tomorrows to see now, we may find that key again.
  Now, it is reasonable and appropriate to run temporary deficits 
during a recession and wartime, and we all fully support the 
President's efforts in this war on terrorism. However, under 
responsible fiscal policy, the temporary deficits incurred during a 
period of economic weakness and war must be offset by a return to 
budget surpluses when conditions improve. The government is projected 
to run on budget deficits that will require the government to raid the 
Social Security and Medicare trust funds for the rest of the decade, 
even before, even before additional spending increases for defense and 
homeland security are even counted.
  We need a plan for the long-term budget that brings us back to fiscal 
responsibility. We are spending money now faster than it is coming in; 
and in doing so, we are risking the long-term solvency of the Federal 
budget and, worse, we are simply mortgaging our children's future.
  Because our great Nation is faced with the challenges of protecting 
our national security, both at home and abroad during this time of war, 
we need to make tough choices in addressing the budget outlook. We need 
simply a wartime budget, one that meets our national defense and 
homeland security needs, and one, like in past wars, that calls on 
Americans for something they are willing to give, if asked; something 
they, in fact, yearn to be asked for in plain and candid terms, and 
that is sacrifice. Yet, this administration and this Congress has not 
called on the American people for sacrifice; not yet. Not with a budget 
that says we can have our cake and eat it too. We must keep our Nation 
strong, and we will; but we should not force our children to pay for 
it.
  The price of freedom is high, as President Kennedy once said; and 
Americans have always been willing to pay it. We pay it still. We must 
sacrifice now for our children's future so we do not mortgage that 
future. While we stand in support of the President's efforts in this 
war on terrorism, we also must challenge our colleagues in Congress and 
in the administration to effectively address these economic 
circumstances and, working together in a bipartisan way, to return to a 
balanced budget, responsible fiscal discipline, and keep that Social 
Security trust fund sacred.
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Schiff) for his remarks. Another member of the Blue Dog Democrat 
Coalition

[[Page 520]]

who has been an outstanding leader in trying to urge this Congress to 
maintain and stay the course of fiscal responsibility has been the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Phelps). We are proud to have him on the 
floor tonight to share his thoughts with us.
  Mr. PHELPS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Turner), a vibrant leader of our caucus; and we appreciate his 
leadership in every way in trying to bring out the truth in honest 
budgeting, and that is truly what we need here in Washington.
  I join my fellow Blue Dog colleagues in voicing my concerns with the 
President's budget. I support the President's outline for handling the 
war on terrorism, but I have concerns that the domestic priorities are 
being somewhat ignored. We can strike a fair balance and reasonable 
balance between our commitment to deal with terrorism and recognizing 
our needs for the economy.
  Under the President's budget policies, the 10-year budget surplus is 
reduced by almost $5 trillion from what was expected a year ago. No 
doubt some of this is caused by the war on terrorism and the economic 
downturn. However, the President's budget cuts critical domestic 
funding for education, health care, and farmers for this year in order 
to reward corporate interests down the road. Even more, in order to 
avoid reporting deficits, the budget dips into the Social Security and 
Medicare trust funds, something he agreed during the election would not 
happen. As we Blue Dogs feared, this budget will start the public debt 
to rise again after reductions over the past 4 years and, as we 
expected, has already resulted in a request by the administration to 
raise the statutory debt ceiling.
  In my congressional district of central and southern Illinois, 
domestic priorities such as creating jobs, providing affordable health 
care, improving schools and helping farmers are critical, especially 
during a recession. I am concerned that if we shortchange these 
critical domestic needs while running deficits and increasing the 
national debt, we will jeopardize our long-term fiscal health and will 
hamper our ability to meet future obligations to Social Security and 
Medicare, as well as our ability to pay for the next unforeseeable 
crisis our Nation might encounter.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for this opportunity, and I 
appreciate his leadership.
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his remarks. I 
appreciate the leadership that he has given to our Blue Dog group as we 
work on these and other issues in this Congress.
  I would like to yield now to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. 
Taylor). The gentleman has been a leader in strengthening our military, 
serving as the ranking Democrat on the Subcommittee on Procurement of 
the Committee on Armed Services. But while working to strengthen 
defense, he has also been an outspoken advocate of fiscal 
responsibility. I am proud to yield to a fellow Blue Dog Democrat, the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

                              {time}  2045

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Turner) for this opportunity to speak to the American people 
tonight. I would ask Members to try to remember back a year ago. A year 
ago right now the President of the United States was saying that we 
were going to have surpluses as far as the eye could see, that nothing 
that could happen in Washington could keep that from happening, and, 
doggone it, there ought to be tax breaks because we have all these 
surpluses.
  Washington is awash in money. His words, not mine. Back then I said 
it was not true. I knew it was not true then. It is certainly not true 
now.
  A year ago in August, just think back to August, the President wanted 
to give 3 million illegal aliens amnesty coming to the country. Now he 
is on the right track saying we need to tighten our borders. I want to 
commend him for that.
  A year ago the President had waited until the last day of July to 
submit his budget for defense to the Committee on Armed Services. Most 
Presidents, including President Clinton who was never accused of being 
pro-defense, would do it in February so we would have a chance to look 
at it, to scrub it, to try to make it better.
  President Bush chose to make it his lowest priority, I am sorry to 
say. I want to commend him when this year he makes it his highest 
priority. I want to commend him for getting right on tightening our 
borders and not letting illegal aliens in and giving them amnesty.
  There is one thing that the President continues to do that I need to 
point out and say, Mr. President, you have changed your tune on two 
things for the better; I am hoping you will change your tune on the 
third.
  Mr. President, after some soul searching a couple of years ago I 
voted to impeach a guy who I felt lied under oath. We do not need to 
get into the details of that, but I felt like he lied under oath and he 
did not deserve to be President anymore. When someone talks about non-
existent surpluses, it is probably just as good you did not say that 
under oath. When somebody talks about that we can go back temporarily 
to deficit spending, it is okay, it is probably just as good you did 
not say that under oath because I do not think that is true.
  You see, Mr. President, what you totally ignored a year ago, and you 
cannot ignore now is right now, as we speak, our Nation owes the men 
and women of America, the working people that we all profess to 
represent, $1,210,000,000,000.
  Let us remember a million is a thousand thousand. A billion is a 
thousand million. A trillion is a thousand billion. It is pretty mind 
boggling. We have a tendency here in Washington to think of something 
as 1.2 apples. No, it is 1 trillion, 200 billion, hundreds of millions 
of dollars that right now hardworking Americans have had taken out of 
their paychecks since the 1980's and even before with the promise as 
recently as the Reagan administration when Social Security taxes were 
increased with a Democratic House, a Republican Senate, a Republican 
President. They raised the amount that was taken out of people's 
paychecks for Social Security with a solemn promise that that money 
would be set aside to use for nothing but Social Security.
  The much-discussed lock box on this House floor, if you could get to 
that lock box and open it up, all you would find is an IOU for 1 
trillion, 210 billion, hundreds of millions of dollars. They did the 
same thing with Medicare. Again, the taxes went up on individuals. The 
taxes went up on employers. This happened during a Republican 
President, Reagan, a Democratic House, a Republican Senate, with the 
promise that that money would be set aside to pay nothing but Medicare 
bills for when people get 65 years old and when they get sick and need 
some help.
  If you were to find that nonexistent lock box, all you would find is 
an IOU for $249,700,000,000. It is not there, not one penny of it.
  We take money out of the folks who work for our Nation, not just the 
folks here on this House floor but the folks who are out there every 
day being park rangers, the folks being border policemen, INS agents, 
Customs Service agents. A little bit of money is taken out of their 
paycheck every month with the promise that it is set aside for their 
retirement. They have been doing it for a long time. If you would 
finally go through the hoops and find that account and open up that 
box, all you would find is an IOU for $537,500,000,000. There is 
nothing there.
  For our military retirees it is a little bit different. They invest 
with their lives. They invest with their time away from their families. 
They invest with the thought that they could be killed any day at any 
moment, even in so-called safe places like the Pentagon, which we 
learned tragically in September are not safe places for America's 
military personnel.
  So although they do not pay directly out of their paychecks, there is 
a line in the defense budget every year that contributes money to their 
retirement account, again, with the promise that it is going to be set 
aside and used for

[[Page 521]]

no other purpose but to pay their retirement. If you were to find that 
account all you would find is an IOU for $173,700,000,000.
  So when the President and the talking heads in the media and other 
folks last year were talking about Washington being awash in money, I 
think they were fibbing to the American people. Either they did not 
know the truth, or they were misleading the American people. And that 
is not a good thing for either one of them to do. That is why a group 
of us said last year is it not more important to honor the promises, 
now that we have finally broke even and started having small surpluses, 
to pay those bills back?
  That is why a group of us last year initiated the effort to increase 
defense spending. It started with the Blue Dog Coalition. Thank 
goodness the President got on the right side of that issue later in the 
year. But I certainly feel like we helped steer him in the right 
direction.
  Remember, even with the increases in last year's defense budget, the 
procurement accounts were short-changed again. They were no better than 
under Bill Clinton; and as a matter of fact, the Bush budget asked for 
fewer ships for the United States Navy than even Bill Clinton did. Once 
again, this year the Bush budget despite the huge increases asked for 
even fewer ships than last year. The Bush budget only asked for five 
ships for the U.S. Navy. The typical life expectancy of a U.S. Navy 
ship is 30 years. Quick math, 150-ship Navy.
  Just a few years ago Ronald Reagan was trying to get us to a 600-ship 
Navy. Just a few years ago we had a 400-ship Navy. Today our Naval 
fleet is 318 ships and only 100 of them are combatants. If we accept 
the Bush budget, we will have a Navy fleet in short order of only 150 
ships.
  I do not think those are good priorities. I think the priority ought 
to be honesty to the American people. Remember all the talk about 
Washington is awash in money? Please, someone, explain to me if 
Washington is awash in money, the debt this year compared to the debt 
last year has increased by $281 billion in 12 months.
  Now, folks will say September 11 threw us out of whack. I will remind 
you that our Nation's budget runs from the first of October to the end 
of September. The events of September 11 took place exactly 20 days 
before the end of the fiscal year. No one on Earth with a straight face 
is going to tell you that almost a $100 billion deficit occurred in the 
last 20 days of the year, because it did not.
  One of the things I will encourage the American people to do, because 
a lot of the numbers get thrown around in Washington, I want you to 
check my numbers. I want you to check my sources. I hope you look at 
http/www.publicdebttreasurygov/. You can look it up on your computer. 
They track it by the month. You can see on September 1 our Nation was 
well on its way to about a $90 billion annual operating deficit. It got 
bigger each month of the year. That is the truth to the American 
people.
  Please check my figures because very few people in Washington will 
encourage you to do so. That is one of the reasons why tomorrow, when 
people say, if you vote against this motion tomorrow you voted for a 
tax increase, you know what, if that guy said that under oath, I would 
have to impeach him because that is a lie. It is not a tax increase. It 
is a tax decrease that has not taken place yet. It is a tax decrease 
that those people who voted for it knew automatically sunsets 5 years 
from now. They all go away. All the taxes that were in place 18 months 
ago come right back.
  So using their line of thought, those people who voted for it, voted 
for a tax increase because they all come back in 9 years.
  The much talk about the estate tax relief that they make mention of 
does not really kick in until the ninth year and goes away entirely. 
That means it comes back the tenth year. Are we going to encourage 
people to commit suicide the ninth year because that is the only year 
that has meaningful change?
  We propose giving people $4 million in their estate tax free. That is 
a heck of a lot of money in Mississippi. Even in Texas that is a lot of 
money. That is a lot of money in Florida. That is a lot of money in 
Illinois. I think that is fair. Because remember, a guy who is out 
there earning $40,000, paid taxes on everything he earns. Why does it 
have to be so magical about money you are given?
  In fact, some of the most conservative commentators in America said 
it is really not conservative to tell people that a gift ought to be 
tax exempt when earnings are not. Why should earnings be taxed higher 
than things you are given, things that you have earned?
  I want to encourage people to work. I want people to have faith that 
when they go to work and pay their Social Security taxes, that it 
really will be set aside for their Social Security; when they pay their 
Medicare taxes, it really will be set aside for that. For folks who 
work for us here, who work for the INS, the Customs Service, Federal 
firefighters on our military bases, I want them to know that their 
retirement is going to be there.
  If we continue along this path of deficit after deficit, there is no 
guarantee it will be there. In fact, the chances are that it will not. 
I will remind people the most common question asked of me is Where does 
the money go? And their jaws hit their chest when they say the biggest 
expense of this Nation is not welfare. It is not foreign aid. It is not 
health care. It is not taking care of kids. It is not building roads. 
The biggest expense to this Nation on an annual operating basis is 
interest on the national debt, and it is $1 billion a day. The war 
against terrorism is $1 billion a month. The cost of incompetence in 
spending money we do not have is $1 billion a day. It continues and 
only gets worse as long as we continue to borrow money.
  Mr. President, two things I think you ought to know. We are 
approaching the $5,950,000,000,000, mark which the law says is the 
Federal debt limit. You are rapidly getting there. This Member will not 
vote to raise the debt limit. If we have to tweak other budgets, if we 
have to suspend some of the tax breaks that have not taken place yet in 
order to fund the war on terror, I will help you do that. But I will 
not ask my kids and your kids and our grandkids that have yet to have 
been born to pay our bills, because no other generation of Americans 
has done that, and this generation of America cannot start that bad 
trend.
  All the way from George Washington through the Carter presidency, 
this Nation only borrowed $1 trillion. That doubled in the 8 years of 
the Democratic House, Republican Senate and Ronald Reagan was 
President. Look where it is now.
  As the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) jokingly says, Confucius 
says, ``When you find yourself in a hole, quit digging.'' It is time 
for our Nation to quit digging. It is time for our Nation to get 
serious about paying our bills. It is time for your generation and my 
generation to get serious about paying our bills.
  Mr. President, if you send us a budget that is not in balance, that 
does not pay for this year's needs with this year's revenues, I cannot 
support it. We know how to balance the budget. You know how to balance 
the budget. This war is only costing one-twentieth of what we are 
squandering on interest on the national debt. It is not the reason the 
budget is out of balance


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Brown of South Carolina). Members are 
reminded that the remarks in debate should be addressed to the Chair. 
It is not in order to direct remarks directly to the President.
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. 
Taylor) for his presentation. The gentleman has been one of the 
foremost advocates of fiscal responsibility, balancing the budget and 
paying down the debt, and we are grateful for his membership in the 
Blue Dog Democratic Coalition.
  Another Member who has been very active in leading the Blue Dogs and 
serves as a co-chair of the coalition is

[[Page 522]]

our friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Boyd). It is my pleasure to 
yield time to him.
  Mr. BOYD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) 
for organizing this Special Order to give the members of the Blue Dog 
Coalition a chance to talk a bit about fiscal responsibility.
  I also want to thank the previous speaker, the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor). He has been a forceful and long-time advocate 
for a strong national defense and also for fiscal responsibility. So we 
appreciate the gentleman's long work here in the House of 
Representatives.
  Mr. Speaker, tonight I have a feeling inside somewhat like I had 
about 13 years ago. Before I entered elected public service, I was a 
business person running a family business that I had spent 25 years in. 
I was extremely concerned about the future economic health and 
viability of our Nation.
  Let me remind the Members about where we were in 1988. We had annual 
deficits, annual deficits running in the hundreds of billions of 
dollars. That means that the government was spending hundreds of 
billions of dollars on an annual basis more than it was taking in in 
revenue. And that deficit was only counted after you spent all of the 
Social Security money, after you spent all the Social Security money 
which was supposed to be set aside for future retirees. Our accounting 
practices were really messed up. We did not count a deficit until we 
spent everything, what we call the operating money, off-budget money, 
and then all of the Social Security money too.

                              {time}  2100

  In 1992, President George Bush was running for reelection. This 
country that fiscal year had a $290 billion deficit. President Bush, if 
my colleagues will remember where we were back then, we had just come 
out of the Desert Storm, the Persian Gulf conflict in which the Iraqi 
government had threatened some neighbors and America came to their 
defense and again showed us leadership around the world and doing what 
was right.
  President Bush did a great job prosecuting that war. That happened I 
think in 1990 or so, but the election in 1992 really became about the 
economy and the fact that we had a $290 billion annual deficit, even 
after spending all the Social Security surpluses; and unemployment was 
high, interest rates were high, jobs were not being created. The 
economy was generally fairly stagnant.
  That election, as I said, was much about the economy; and of course, 
President Bush lost that election, and in the next 8 or 10 years the 
administration, in concert with the Congress, I think because the 
country demanded it, began to work together to solve the economic 
problem, to solve this deficit problem that we had in this country.
  I ran in 1996 for the U.S. House of Representatives, and I remember 
the cornerstone of that campaign was about the economy, was about the 
deficit, the fact that this country was not able to balance its books. 
So a lot of that conversation and debate that we had during the 1996 
campaign was about that.
  When I got to Washington I was anxious to become part of a group that 
was interested in fiscal responsibility, and so that is why I joined 
the Blue Dogs; and as my colleagues know, the leadership of the United 
States Congress, which was Republican in both the House and the Senate, 
and working in a bipartisan way with President Clinton's 
administration, developed a plan, actually it was a seven year plan in 
1997, which would take our Nation out of deficit spending and carry us 
back into fiscal responsibility. I think the Blue Dogs played a very 
important role in that debate or that deal that was cut, and it just 
showed what can happen when the country comes together. We have a 
problem, we figure out a way to solve it, set aside our partisan 
differences and work together.
  That plan was really a pretty simple plan, if put in place. Spending 
caps, it required that we ratchet down our spending as we went along 
and that if the economy would continue to grow we would be able to get 
in a surplus situation.
  Guess what happened. The business community had great confidence that 
the government was doing its part, that we were doing our best to hold 
down spending and that in the long run we would get out of that deficit 
situation. As a result, the business community began to invest. The 
economy began to boom. We had a lot of people who had capital who were 
willing to risk that capital in new ideas and creative ideas. Next 
thing we know interest rates begin to go down. Employment was higher. 
New job creation. We had rising markets everywhere.
  Of course, everybody knows that in 1992 the stock market was in the 
3,000 range and maybe even below, and it went up in 2000, 2001 era, 
went up to 11,000.
  When we got to balance, there was a lot of talk about lock boxes. 
This Congress had many debates. I know we have taken numerous votes on 
the lock boxes. That was a good idea; and that idea was simply this, 
that we use whatever surplus money we had to pay off the Federal debt. 
The Federal debt was running in the five and a half trillion dollar 
range. That Federal debt, to service it, was costing us, as my 
colleagues heard the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) say, the 
largest single expense item of the Federal budget, costing us in the 
neighborhood of $325 to $350 billion.
  My contention is, as a businessperson, that a debt that is of that 
high percentage of an annual budget, it was in the neighborhood of 15 
to 16 percent I believe, would really drag us down over a period of 
time, and we had to figure out a way to reduce that debt. So the lock 
box idea was a very good idea, which we would be forced to put Social 
Security surpluses into reducing Federal debt and any other surpluses 
that we might have into reducing Federal debt.
  2000 Presidential election came along. OMB and CBO and others were 
forecasting just a year ago that we would have a $5.6 trillion surplus 
over the next 10 years, a $5.6 trillion surplus. Given the current laws 
that we are operating on, the current expected spending or revenues 
that we are going to get in and the spending requirements we have, we 
were looking at about a $5.6 trillion dollar surplus over the next 10 
years, and if we had that kind of surplus we could almost pay off the 
total Federal debt. That was 1 year ago, January 2001.
  What is that projection or forecast today about surpluses? Four 
billion dollars of that surplus has disappeared over the last year, 
projected surplus, $4 billion. There are lots of reasons for that. We 
all know what they are. Some have to do with the natural downturn in 
the economy that happened, some have to do with the September 11 
tragedy and the effect it has had on our economy, and certainly a 
portion has to do with the economic policy that this Congress and 
administration put in place a year ago.
  I would submit to my colleagues that there are three very good 
reasons not to go back to deficit spending. Number one is, and I think 
they are all equally important, but number one, the best way to 
continue our economic prosperity or economic boom that we experienced 
in the 1990s is to continue to run a surplus and to continue to pay 
down our Federal debt. Take pressure off the capital markets, interest 
rates stay low. The investment community, people who have money to 
invest will continue to have confidence that the economy is going to 
continue to be good and they will invest in it.
  Secondly, I think the second reason is and certainly one some others 
have spoken about very eloquently is that when we borrow money to pay 
for programs that we want today, we are just mortgaging the future of 
our children and that is not fair. That really is an unfair thing to 
do.
  Thirdly, certainly a situation that those of us here in Washington 
have been unable to face squarely is the Social Security issue. We all 
know that we are running surpluses in the Social Security trust fund 
now on an annual basis, but soon that will change. Within about 10 
years we will not run an annual surplus in the Social Security

[[Page 523]]

trust fund. We will begin to draw out of that IOU that the gentleman 
from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) talked about that is in that box, and we 
know the box is not locked by now. We do.
  We expect the baby boomers to retire, and our economists and 
forecasters tell us that there is going to be a tremendous amount of 
pressure on our Federal Treasury to meet the requirements under the 
current Social Security and Medicare law. We have to prepare that, and 
we have not done a good job of that. One of the things that I hope this 
administration and this Congress can do this year is begin to address 
the long-term Social Security reform.
  I think the last issue that I would like to talk about is one of the 
debt lending. I think the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) has 
addressed it in a very adequate way; but I said on this floor last 
year, as others did, and we heard arguments, as we presented our Blue 
Dog budget, which we thought was a good budget that would have kept us 
out of this mess that we are in now, some argued against that budget 
and ultimately defeated it on the basis that we would pay off the 
Federal debt too quickly, that this United States Government that would 
pay off, if we went into the surplus and began to pay down some of the 
debt, that we would pay off the debt too quickly and have to pay some 
kind of penalty. I wish we could even think that today.
  The same folks who may have argued a year ago that we could not pay 
down the surplus because we might have to pay off the debt too quickly 
today might ask us to raise the debt ceiling. I have to agree with the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor). I am not going to vote to 
raise the Federal debt ceiling until we put a good plan in place. I 
think we need to go back, like we did in 1997, and the President and 
the administration and the congressional leaders need to sit together 
and we need to figure out how to get out of this mess together.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) for his work. I 
know that he and others have organized this event tonight; and I want 
to say to the leadership, the Republican and Democratic leadership, and 
to the administration, the Blue Dogs stand ready to work in a 
bipartisan way to help us find the solutions to these problems that we 
are facing today. We are ready. We have got a lot of good folks who 
understand that the country has many needs, who understand where its 
priorities are, and we want to work with the President and the 
congressional leadership to get those problems solved.
  I yield back to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) and thank him 
for allowing me to speak.
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Florida's 
remarks and appreciate his commitment to fiscal discipline and fiscal 
responsibility. It does seem somewhat surprising that in just a year's 
time or less than a year that our Federal financial picture could have 
changed so much.
  I think one of the most difficult things at work in this Congress 
today is to acknowledge that the circumstances have changed. There is 
going to be a resolution on the floor tomorrow. It is not a law. It 
does not have any effect. It is what we call a sense of the House. It 
is simply an effort by the Republican leadership to try to put folks on 
record as to whether or not they are committed to the tax cut that was 
passed last June.
  I was pleased to be one who supported the tax cut last June, but I 
also understand that since last June we are now at war again. We are 
now in a posture where we are seeing record projections of deficits 
rather than surpluses, and I think even though all of us understand 
that we must not raise taxes in the current recession, the long term 
does require an intelligent and a careful discussion of the direction 
this country has taken; and to blindly follow a path toward fiscal 
irresponsibility is going to result in debts on the backs of our 
children that all of us will be ashamed to see.
  Our Federal debt, almost $6 trillion today, is increasing daily 
because of the deficit spending, and as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Boyd) pointed out, the President, through the Secretary of the 
Treasury, has asked this Congress to raise the debt ceiling $700 
billion. We were told back last June that it would not be necessary to 
raise the Federal debt ceiling for at least 6 or 7 years; but all of a 
sudden, just before the Christmas recess, we were told that we are now 
going to have to raise the debt ceiling sometime in late February or 
early March.
  I agree with the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Boyd), we do not need to vote to increase 
the national debt of this country, to raise the ceiling of that debt 
until we have some firm commitments regarding a return to fiscal 
responsibility. As we said earlier, if we continue along the path of 
the Republican's budget plans over the next 10 years, based on the best 
estimates we have from the Congressional Budget Office, we will 
increase the amount of interest that we pay on our national debt by a 
trillion dollars, over a trillion dollars.
  There is a lot we could do with that trillion dollars. As I said, we 
could fund the President's defense budget request for 3 years straight 
if we could save that trillion dollars.
  We already spend a billion dollars a day on interest on our Federal 
debt. We were told earlier that the war is costing us a billion dollars 
a month, contrast that, and it is very expensive to fight this war, and 
all of us believe we need to spend every dollar necessary to win this 
war; and it is currently costing us a billion dollars a day, but we are 
paying a billion dollars every time, billion dollars every month, but 
it is costing us a billion dollar every day just to pay the interest on 
our national debt.

                              {time}  2115

  Clearly, our national debt has grown too large. The interest consumes 
too much of our Federal budget, and we are going in the wrong 
direction.
  If we had a trillion dollars in interest savings by not increasing 
our national debt, by proceeding on the path we were on and thought we 
were on last June, where we are not increasing the national debts and 
in fact were headed towards paying it off, we could take that trillion 
dollars and save it, and we could pay for 20 years of war at $1 billion 
a month.
  We are clearly moving back to deficit spending, to raiding Social 
Security, and toward reckless fiscal policies that our children will 
have to pay for someday. All we are asking of our Republican leaders 
and of the President is to be honest with the American people; to be 
sure that they are told the straight story and that they too understand 
that it is not just the men and women in uniform who are having to 
sacrifice and risk their lives in fighting this war, but that every 
American has a role to play and we all have to be willing to sacrifice.
  Yes, we need to cut spending in areas where we can cut it. But when 
we sit down to draw up the Federal budget for the American family, we 
ought to do it just like we do at home, and that is we ought to measure 
our revenues and balance those against our expenses. And if we do not 
have enough income to cover our expenses, we need to cut our expenses 
and balance our budget. Washington has not learned that. Apparently, 
even after 3 years of returning to fiscal responsibility and having 
surpluses in our Federal budget, we once again are turning a blind eye 
to the importance of balancing our budget.
  We believe that the President and the leadership of this House have a 
responsibility to submit to us a balanced budget and a plan to keep us 
on the road to fiscal responsibility. That is the only way to preserve 
the long-term prosperity for the American people. We want to look to 
the longer term, to be sure our children and grandchildren do not 
inherit the reckless fiscal policies of the current generation.
  I thank the Blue Dog Democrats who have joined me on the floor 
tonight for this discussion on the importance of fiscal responsibility. 
I look forward to the opportunity to debate this issue in the days 
ahead as we continue to work to balance the budget and to pay down

[[Page 524]]

our debt and to protect the Social Security trust fund for the future.
  In closing tonight, the Blue Dogs would like to close this hour in 
memory of Darlene Luther, the wife of our friend and colleague, Bill 
Luther. Both Bill and Darlene have been known throughout the years as 
public servants, a family that served their constituents, who worked 
hard together to make America a better place, and our hearts go out 
tonight to Bill and his family in the loss of Darlene.

                          ____________________