[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 17]
[Senate]
[Pages 23298-23301]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          THE FEDERAL DEFICIT

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, on a completely different 
subject, as a Nation, we are recklessly careening down the road toward 
bankruptcy. In the fiscal year that ends in a week, September 30, we 
are going to be hemorrhaging in our budget to the tune of $500 billion. 
That is a half trillion dollars.
  In the new fiscal year that starts October 1, it is estimated we are 
going to be hemorrhaging to the tune of $600 billion, well over a half 
trillion dollars. Just to put it in perspective, in the decade of the 
1980s, when we ran up so much of our national debt, the max in any one 
year in the late 1980s was a deficit of $280 billion. That means we 
were spending $280 billion more than we had coming in in revenue. 
Therefore, we had to go out and borrow it, and that added to the 
national debt.
  The next fiscal year starts in a few days. We are going to spend more 
than we have coming in tax revenue to the tune of $600 billion and we 
have to borrow it. Now, where do my colleagues think we borrow it from? 
We borrow it from folks like you and me, when we buy Treasury bills. We 
borrow it from institutional investors like pension funds. But it will 
shock people to know that a good bit of the debt that is being 
acquired, or debt that is being bought--or to put it in the vernacular 
of the street, the people who we are borrowing from are the Chinese and 
the Saudis. Does that not portend some uncomfortable things for America 
to have a good part of its national debt owned by folks who from time 
to time we have serious policy differences with?
  How did we get into this? September 11 clearly was part of the 
problem. To protect this Nation, the war in Afghanistan and the war in 
Iraq have caused additional spending, but that is not the only reason 
for the $600 billion deficit. It was because in the spring of 2001, by 
a one-vote margin, on a technical part of the budget bill, this Chamber 
of the Senate passed an instruction that by a majority vote we could 
pass a tax bill and that tax bill, once we passed it, diminished the 
revenues so much that the deficit started to swell. We are on a 
reckless fiscal course, headed toward bankruptcy. Is it any wonder that 
earlier we heard the majority leader and the Democratic leader going at 
it over this question of addressing the President's $87 billion 
request? That is going to add all the more to the budget deficit. We 
are going to pass the $67 billion that is going to the troops because 
our troops are going to be provided what they need. But for the 
remaining $20 billion that is for building 1,000 schools in Iraq, what 
do we tell our constituents at home about building schools here? For 
that $20 billion that is to fix water systems and roads and bridges in 
Iraq, what are we to tell our constituents in America about the water 
systems and the roads and the bridges?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. I thank the Presiding Officer for giving me 
the remainder of the time.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I wish to first associate myself with the 
comments of my friend and colleague, the Senator from Florida, with 
regard to concerns he raised about all the stress on the National Guard 
and Reserve. I have been to a number of deployments of troops of the 
National Guard and Reserve from Minnesota. Our folks are serving 
admirably and bravely, and there is great stress. I think it is clearly 
important to make sure we do the things to alleviate the strain, not 
just on the folks on the front line but on the families, and creating a 
bit of certainty would be good thing to do. It is not a partisan thing. 
It is the right thing to do for the folks who are serving so bravely 
and for their families. So I thank my distinguished colleague from 
Florida for raising this concern and wish to let him know there are 
many of us on both sides of the aisle who share that concern and would 
like a greater sense of certainty.
  What does it mean to have boots on the ground? When are our folks 
coming home? We do have to give them every bit of support we can when 
they are there. But certainly for the families, the words of my 
colleague ring true and I associate myself with them.
  I do disagree with my colleague from Florida when it comes to his 
discussion about the economy and the cause and the impact of debt. By 
the way, debt is a bad thing. I am not going to spend a lot of time 
talking about that right now, but I do certainly want to raise the 
issue. The national debt today is not as great as it was in the 1980s, 
not if you measure it as a percentage of the overall economy. That is 
the way we have to do it. If you bought a house in the 1980s and you 
spent $30,000 and you put $15,000 down, $15,000 in cash, you would be 
in debt 50 percent. As time went on, inflation went on, and you made a 
little money and you bought a second house in the 1990s, or today, for 
$100,000, and you borrowed only $30,000, you would be twice as much 
indebted as you were in the 1980s, but the $30,000 as a percent of the 
overall value of the house would be less, only 30 percent.
  The reality is that the debt today is less than it was in the 1980s. 
That is not to say debt is ever a good thing, but I think you have to 
make the facts very clear.
  It is also important to understand the cause of that. Let's never 
forget that September 11 had a devastating impact on the economy of 
this country. Let's not forget that WorldCom and Enron and the 
corporate scandals that undermined the confidence of investors in 
corporate America--undermined it--had a devastating impact on the 
American economy. And let us not forget this economy was rolling into 
recession, was moving into recession at the time President Bush was 
elected. All these things had an impact.
  The other concern and observation I have to make, as a Senator who 
has been here at this point only about 9 months, is my distinguished 
friends and colleagues on the other side of the aisle, many of them, 
have consistently talked about the debt, they have great concerns about 
the debt, yet the reality has been that every time we have acted on 
budgets, one of the first things that I and, as a newly elected Member 
of this body, the Presiding Officer did was we had to resolve the 
budget for 2003 as soon as we got here. On issue after issue, my 
friends and colleagues from across the aisle, who loudly proclaim 
concern about the debt, sought to raise the spending. They sought to 
increase spending, I believe to the tune of perhaps $1 trillion of new 
spending.
  So it is hard to hear folks being concerned about the debt when, on 
issue after issue, they seek to raise spending. We have experienced 
that as we have gone through the process of approving the 2004 budget. 
On issue after issue, whatever amount is set in the budget to spend, my 
colleagues from across the aisle seek to increase that, again to the 
tune, calculated over 10-year periods, of trillions of dollars. Even 
for the Government, a trillion dollars is real money.
  So, yes, the debt is of concern. The way you deal with the debt is 
you get the economy moving. That is what the President has done. That 
is what the tax cuts have stimulated. And then you have the will and 
resolve to keep a lid on spending.
  Again, I urge my friends from across the aisle, every time you vote 
to increase spending, time and again, take a breath then before you 
talk about the debt.
  I came here this morning to support the President's request for a 
supplemental appropriation of $87 billion to support our troops in Iraq 
and to accelerate the redevelopment of that country to a stable, 
democratic, and peaceful member of the community of nations. As 
Senators, we have two responsibilities in this matter. As members of 
the legislative branch of Government, we must put the administration's 
proposals to the test to ensure they are prudent, practical, and can 
achieve the

[[Page 23299]]

promised results. That is what we do as a legislative body. We also 
have a responsibility to support our Commander in Chief as he leads us 
as a nation.
  I love the story told about Abraham Lincoln during the time he was 
leading our Nation in the Civil War. He was getting, on a regular 
basis, communications from an elderly woman who said to him that God 
was talking to her and God was telling her which general to hire and 
which general to fire and where to attack and where to retreat. He got 
this series of letters. Finally, President Lincoln wrote back to this 
lady and said: Ma'am, I want to thank you for your correspondence and 
thank you for your advice, but isn't it fascinating how the Lord 
Almighty has given you all the answers but gave me the job.
  We have a Commander in Chief. We have the right to question and 
modify the things he proposes. But it is our responsibility, I submit, 
to work expeditiously and to approve these urgently needed resources.
  I express my strong hope that this bill will not be held hostage to 
political ambitions or become the vehicle of high-profile second-
guessing. Our effort in Iraq has many challenges, but lack of politics 
is not one of them. This debate falls in a tempting place on the 
electoral calendar, but I do hope we rise above a talk show mentality.
  There was talk this morning: Why do we have to move quickly on the 
President's request? What is so urgent about it? Does the money need to 
be spent right away? Kind of a slow walk and no sense of urgency.
  I do hope those concerns are not raised so that we simply can extend 
the possibly to have in the political arena debate for the sake of 
taking political potshots. That is not what this is about. That is not 
what this body is about. We need to send a message to our troops in the 
field that we support them and will provide them the resources they 
need. We need to send a message to the Iraqi people that we are 
committed to working with Iraq to ensure that democracy is there. You 
can't have democracy when the lights are out 8 hours a day. We are 
seeing in Washington and Virginia how difficult it is to operate when 
the lights aren't on. Multiply that many times over.
  I am concerned about the nature of the debate that comes with our 
involvement in Iraq. Debate is what this body expects and understands, 
but there is a tone about the debate that is of great concern because 
others watch. There is discussion now about whether this is the 
President's war.
  Before you and I entered this body on October 11, 2002, there was a 
debate about what action we should take regarding Iraq, what authority 
we should give the President regarding Iraq.
  There was a full debate. There was a great dialog. There was great 
discussion. This body voted. The sense of this body was 77 to 23 to 
support the President and to give the President the authority to do the 
things that had to be done to make sure Saddam Hussein complied with 
the United Nations resolutions. Let us not forget that for a period of 
10 years he disregarded United Nations resolutions.
  By a vote of 77 to 23--not 51 to 49, not a 50 to 50 tie asking the 
Vice President to break that tie--a broad bipartisan coalition, an 
overwhelming majority of the Senate, said: This is our battle, this is 
America's battle, and the responsibility we have as elected 
representatives to speak for the people we represent and give voice to 
their hopes and concerns was reflected in that debate.
  When others now talk about the ``President's war,'' it causes great 
concern.
  I like the words of the ``Serenity Prayer.'' I hope we have the 
wisdom to address ourselves in the things we can change and not try to 
change the past.
  I say to my colleagues that one of my pleasures as a Senator from the 
State of Minnesota is to represent the western shore of Lake Superior, 
the world's largest body of freshwater. If you visit this area during 
the right time of year, you will see the enormous iron ore boats that 
transport Minnesota iron ore to the steel plants of the eastern Great 
Lakes. These gigantic boats are so large that it takes them many hours 
and many miles to execute a turn into port.
  The bigger something is, the longer it takes to turn it around. Such 
is our challenge in Iraq. We are attempting to turn a large society 
from a generation of tyranny and totalitarianism to democracy and free 
enterprise.
  For over 25 years, the people of Iraq suffered under the brutality of 
Saddam Hussein. For over 25 years, the people of Iraq didn't even have 
a budget. Its infrastructure was eaten away as resources were simply 
given to Saddam for his friends and for his palaces, and the country 
suffered.
  I find it ironic that some critics of our policy who said we could 
never defeat Saddam Hussein are now loudly complaining that it takes 
too long. In our instant-everything, drive-through, microwave society, 
we perhaps have lost sight of the fact that some things take time. The 
bigger the thing, the more time it takes.
  To those who lament our supposed slow progress in Iraq, we are 
exceeding any realistic expectations of success. Rome was not built in 
a day and Iraq won't be, either. The lasting social structures in Iraq 
need to rest on firm foundations and progress. And those foundations 
are being made.
  To those who say we need to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis, we want to 
turn it over to the Iraqis. We want the Iraqis to be in charge. We want 
the Iraqis to be guarding the hospitals and the oil wells. We want the 
Iraqis to be responsible for the future of Iraq. But in order to have 
that, you have to have a foundation. Iraq has to develop a 
constitution. It needs to be affirmed. When it is affirmed, it then 
needs to have free and fair elections. That is how to develop the 
foundation.
  As we are developing that foundation, we are making progress in 
developing Iraqi security forces and police units which can begin to 
take the load off the American and coalition military units.
  We are helping the Iraqi oil industry and its power generation come 
back to some semblance of functionality. The Central Iraqi Bank has 
taken bold steps to create a secure currency. Some of the most dramatic 
steps that any government has to set for itself is to be open to trade, 
to be open to entrepreneurship, and to be open to opportunity. These 
are bold moves in any part of the world but certainly in Iraq.
  The Governing Council has just taken steps to open the country to 
foreign investment.
  You heard earlier today my colleague, the distinguished chairman of 
the Energy Committee, Senator Domenici, talking about the Ministers of 
Iraq and the number of Ph.Ds--one of the most educated governments 
anywhere in the world--and the caliber of folks we are bringing to the 
table.
  The Poles have already assumed command of a multinational division in 
Iraq with NATO support. We have captured or killed over 40 of the 55 
most-wanted Iraqis, including one more over the weekend, Saddam's 
Minister of Defense.
  I mentioned the Governing Council being formed. I am told there is 
even a city council in Baghdad. I must say as a former mayor that when 
I heard there was a city council in Baghdad, my first thought was, 
Haven't the Iraqis suffered enough? But a city council is there and 
operating.
  Thousands of Iraqi policemen and soldiers are being hired and trained 
to help provide security for their nation. Every hospital and clinic in 
Baghdad is operating, as are most of the others around the country. 
Every hospital and clinic in Baghdad is operating. The clinics and 
hospitals in Iraq have 7,500 tons of medicine distributed by the 
coalition since May, an increase of over 700 percent over the level at 
the end of the war.
  For the first time in its history, all of Baghdad has garbage 
collection service. No longer is garbage collection a privilege 
reserved for neighbors favored by the Government.
  Again, I reflect back to my days as a mayor and the importance of 
basic services being provided to all of the citizenry and not just for 
the rich neighborhoods. We are doing that in Iraq.

[[Page 23300]]

  Iraqi workers are producing over 1 million barrels of oil per day, 
the proceeds of which will benefit the Iraqi people rather than Saddam 
Hussein's corrupt regime. Ninety-two thousand Iraqis receive social 
security and welfare benefits at levels four times higher than they 
received under Saddam. One point three million Iraqi civil servants are 
drawing salaries under a new salary scale. Many of them, such as 
teachers, are being paid four times what they were paid under Saddam.
  The test of our efforts is that the Iraqi people are voting with 
their feet. They are staying put. There has been no humanitarian 
crisis. There has been no flood of refugees as had been predicted. The 
$87 billion in this bill will bolster all of these critical efforts.
  We all need to put the daily events so effusively reported in Iraq in 
perspective. We see this, by the way, even in our own Nation. A lot of 
good is being done but somehow that doesn't always qualify as news.
  I believe the President's leadership is beginning to pay dividends, 
even at the United Nations. It is a slow boat to turn as well, but I 
believe we will soon see progress towards broad international 
cooperation for the rebuilding of Iraq. Even the French say they will 
not now veto a resolution.
  The President met with the head of Germany yesterday and had a good 
conversation.
  Let there be no mistake. We are in a state of war against terrorism. 
Our decisions and the tone of our debate must recognize that fact. 
Forces that seek to destroy us are measuring our will and our resolve 
at each turn. Their view is that we are weak and easily distracted and 
divided. We must prove to them the truth--that we are not. We do that 
by what our military does on the ground every day. We do that by how we 
as leaders conduct this debate in this body.
  Again, I recognize the importance of debate and challenging ideas and 
propositions. But there is a tone about debate and I worry that we are 
crossing the line. I worry that when we talk about this being the 
President's war, again disregarding the fact that this body, in a broad 
bipartisan way, raised its hand and understood the dangers of Saddam, 
understood the evil of Saddam and the evil impact he had on the Iraqi 
people, the impact that it was having on the region, the impact it was 
having on Israel, and the impact it was having on terrorism; understood 
that we had in Saddam and Iraq a nation which took care of and catered 
to the persons who masterminded the terrorist acts in the airports in 
Rome and Vienna; a nation that coddled, took care of and exalted the 
terrorists responsible for the execution of an American in a 
wheelchair, Leon Klinghoffer on the Achilles Lauro in Athens--everybody 
understood what we were dealing with.
  We rose together in unison. Let us not now forget. Let us not now 
pull apart. Let us not now send the signal that we are weak and in 
disarray. It is important to have a sense of strength and purpose. Let 
us have the debate but let us make decisions.
  In World War I, the French soldiers came up with the saying that 
``the difference between a hero and a coward is the hero is brave 2 
minutes longer.'' We cannot afford to lose our nerve at the point of 
victory or all the sacrifice and the progress to date could be lost.
  For those who question this amount of money being spent at times of 
economic difficulty and high deficits, I understand that concern. It is 
so easy to say, with anything we do, if we put dollars into something, 
why aren't we taking care of the needs of kids? Why aren't we taking 
care of the needs of schools? Why aren't we taking care of seniors? The 
arguments can certainly be made, and they touch a sympathetic chord, a 
sympathetic note.
  The reality is we have to understand again and again that you cannot 
have economic security, you cannot have peace of mind, you cannot have 
the opportunity for your kids to go to good schools, and folks to live 
in peace in their neighborhoods and go about their daily lives if we 
live in fear. The world changed after September 11. We have to reflect 
on the impact of September 11, not just psychologically but 
economically.
  What happens when we allow terrorism to visit our shores? The folks 
in Washington, DC, saw this very graphically during the terrible period 
when the sniper was on the loose in Washington, and people would not go 
out of their homes. They were afraid to go to a gas station, afraid to 
shop, afraid to go to a restaurant. I have not seen the final bills, 
but I am sure the economic impact was enormous. When people live in 
fear, they cannot prosper economically or emotionally.
  America has a responsibility at this point in history--for the sake 
of our kids, for the sake of our seniors, for the sake of our parents--
to do those things necessary to live in peace, to confront and deal 
with terrorism. We learned on September 11 we cannot contain terrorism. 
We have to aggressively reach out to make sure we do all we can to make 
sure terrorism does not visit our shores.
  It is not a matter of saying, if we did not put this money here we 
would put it there. The reality is, of the $87 billion, $67 billion 
goes directly to the military. It is also to rebuild the infrastructure 
of Iraq so that the military ethics can take hold. We cannot have such 
short memories.
  Ambassador Bremer visited with many Senators this last week and gave 
a little historical lesson. He said: Look at what we did after World 
War I. We did not step in. We did not have the sense of heart and 
purpose to come together and say we were going to deal with the 
destruction left in the wake. We gave rise to Nazism, to fascism. What 
happened is, ultimately, millions of lives were lost.
  I am of the Jewish faith. In our faith we say: We shall never forget; 
we shall never forget the Holocaust. The seeds of that were laid in the 
actions after World War I that were not taken to deal with the plight, 
deal with the economic plight, deal with the disarray, deal with the 
disintegration.
  After World War II, we took a very different path. After World War 
II, we enacted a Marshall plan, and we came together, with the United 
States taking the lead; the international community then joining in 
building up and restoring the economy, doing things that restored hope, 
doing things that restored water and electricity. The result is Europe 
has been safer. We have been safer until the rise of terrorism.
  Let us not forget those models. Let us not forget that history. 
Success will build world confidence and investment far beyond this 
investment in Iraq. Failure would cost far more.
  All of these practical arguments notwithstanding, I close with a 
simple argument for the passage of this supplemental appropriation: It 
is the right thing to do. Our troops need our support. The people of 
Iraq, present and future, need our help. The world that hopes for far 
more freedom and less terror needs what only the United States can 
provide. We can reach out and set an example to the international 
community to join with us.
  This bill is the right thing to do. It is the right for the people of 
Iraq who are free from the torture chambers so they may never come back 
again. It is the right thing to do for the young women of Iraq who are 
raped and assaulted by Quday and Usay Hussein. It is the right thing to 
do for the memory of thousands murdered and buried in mass graves, and 
for their justice; for the millions of Iraqi people who will choose 
their own path, live their own lives, and decide their own faith when 
we set the foundation, set the table for restoration of democracy, firm 
and lasting in Iraq.
  It is the right thing to do for the millions of neighbors of Iraq who 
will not fear the unbearable fanaticism of a dictator more concerned 
about power than the moral obligation of leadership. It is the right 
thing to do for our democratic ally in Israel who no longer will face 
the threat of Scud missiles from Iraq. It is the right thing to do for 
the courage of our American soldiers who have performed their duty and 
lived up to their oath to defend and protect the national interests of 
their Nation.
  It is the right thing to do for the memory of American soldiers who 
have given their lives so that others may live in freedom. It is the 
right thing to

[[Page 23301]]

do for the millions of Americans and the 3,000 who died on September 11 
that American determination, resolve, and will are not things of the 
past but are ironclad promises for the future.
  It is the right thing to do for the message it sends to those who 
support terrorism, that they will have no refuge; for the message it 
sends to those who kill, who terrorize, who destroy the hopes, dreams, 
and happiness of men and women and children that this is a new day, a 
better world. Their days are numbered. No more can we accept the crying 
faces, parents holding their dying children, parents burying their dead 
children. To those who seek to destroy, those who choose to unravel the 
fabric of society and civilization, this bill is the right thing to do 
because it makes it clear their time will come; our resolve is strong. 
We will support our fighting men and women and give them what they need 
to do the job.
  We will work with the Iraqi people to rebuild and create a foundation 
where democracy and hope will take place. Good will triumph over evil. 
Democracy will triumph over tyranny. Security will triumph over 
terrorism. Peace will come to Iraq. And all of us in America will be 
safer as a result.

                          ____________________