[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 18]
[Senate]
[Pages 24173-24174]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             RECONCILIATION

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, on Monday we begin consideration of the 
deficit reduction bill, a bill that goes by the title of a 
reconciliation bill. Indeed, it has been 8 years since we have 
addressed spending on a reconciliation bill, a critically important 
bill. It may well be the most important piece of fiscal legislation we 
will debate. I fully expect it will be enacted this year. For those who 
may watch this debate, I should be clear that the bill we will debate 
is focused on one piece of the Federal budget, not the entire Federal 
budget. It is, however, a major piece of the budget, mandatory 
spending. That word ``mandatory,'' sometimes referred to as entitlement 
spending, represents about $1.4 trillion or 56 percent of overall 
Federal spending this year. It will continue to grow in the future, 
particularly as that demographic shift occurs, as the baby boomers 
begin to travel through our system in 2008.
  Mandatory spending, entitlement spending, encompasses a whole range 
of programs familiar to my colleagues--Social Security, Medicare, 
Medicaid, Federal-civilian military retirement, student loans, TRICARE, 
foster care, child nutrition, SSI, unemployment insurance, farm price 
support programs, veterans disability, and the list goes on. If Federal 
spending is to be controlled--and it absolutely must be controlled--
over time, these programs are going to have to be addressed. They are 
going to have to be reformed.
  Over the last 5 years, mandatory entitlement program spending has 
grown at an annual rate of over 7.1 percent. That is three times faster 
than the overall growth in our economy. It simply cannot be sustained. 
The result is a greater share of our national economy's productive 
capacity, that proportion of our productive capacity, is being shifted 
toward those programs. We have to find a balance. It is incumbent upon 
us to do so.
  Under the procedures laid out by the Budget Act for considering this 
deficit reduction legislation that we will have on the floor beginning 
Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of next week, Social Security, 
which is the largest of these mandatory programs, is set aside. It 
cannot, nor should it be, considered in this legislation. It cannot be. 
So realistically, the universe of Federal spending that we will be 
dealing with over the next week is limited to 33 percent or about a 
third of all Federal spending. That is where the focus will be.
  The deficit reduction legislation we will be considering over the 
week is the culmination of a process that began in February, when the 
President gave us his budget. The President's budget included proposals 
to reduce the Federal deficit over the next 5 years by slowing the 
growth in Federal spending in this area of the Federal budget. Again, 
of the overall Federal budget, we are talking about a third of it that 
we will be addressing. The President's budget came over and said: We 
are going to slow that spending growth by $26 billion.
  The congressional budget resolution we adopted back in April 
similarly agreed that slowing that growth--and there is still going to 
be growth--in mandatory spending was an essential part of achieving not 
only deficit reduction but, not unrelated, being able to sustain 
economic growth. We want to achieve deficit reduction, but we want to 
be able to sustain economic growth. So to accomplish that goal, our 
2006 budget laid out a process that has not been used in about 8 years. 
I believe it was in 1997 that we last had a spending deficit reduction 
package, a reconciliation process used on the spending side of the 
equation. It has been 8 years since we have used this process.
  The budget we adopted directed eight authorizing committees in the 
Senate

[[Page 24174]]

and in the House to make changes in laws within their jurisdiction to 
achieve a total of $34.7 billion in savings over the next 5 years. That 
is what the budget told those eight authorizing committees to come up 
with. Subsequent to passage of our budget in the spring, we have had 
big, unanticipated spending demands that resulted from the worst 
hurricane season in the Nation's history. All of that placed added 
attention on spending and on Government spending. We responded to that 
appropriately, in a bipartisan way, by agreeing to delay consideration 
of the reconciliation process in early September so that we could focus 
on hurricane response and on the demands and on what the people who 
have been so directly affected by those hurricanes deserve. We have 
addressed the needs of the gulf coast families affected by the storms. 
We continue to address them. We did, indeed, in legislation last night. 
We will continue to do so in the future.
  Indeed, within this reconciliation legislation, while at the same 
time meeting the goal of deficit reduction, we do so while also 
providing the needed medical attention, the education attention, and 
other Government benefits to the victims of those hurricanes. We also 
recognize that because of the additional spending demands being placed 
on the Federal Government, we needed to do more in terms of deficit 
reduction itself, the deficit reduction we defined pre-Katrina, that we 
did need to do more.
  In late September, I, along with the chairman of the Budget 
Committee, wrote to the chairmen and ranking members of the eight 
reconciled committees, the committees that will be responding with 
their proposals next week, asking them each to consider how they could 
come up with increased savings.
  I am proud of the effort put forth by each of these eight committees. 
They have come forth with specific recommendations. Now that is what we 
are bringing to the floor of the Senate. They increased deficit 
reduction by nearly 13 percent so rather than $35 billion, as required 
by our initial budget proposal from the early part of this year, the 
legislation approaches about $40 billion, just under but almost $40 
billion in savings. I thank and applaud members of the various 
authorizing committees who have come forth with those increased 
savings.
  I would be remiss if I did not point out that in many instances, the 
additional savings were accomplished on a bipartisan basis in many of 
the committees. Forty billion dollars in savings over the next 5 years 
is less than 2 percent of the $2.6 trillion in mandatory spending that 
will occur over the next 5 years. It is tough to accomplish that. We 
will be debating that over the course of the week. But in truth, it is 
only 2 percent of the $2.6 trillion in mandatory spending that is going 
to occur over the next 5 years.
  There will be some who think this legislation does not go far enough 
to reduce spending. I personally would not disagree. There will be 
others who will come into my office saying it goes too far. I do 
disagree with them. Both proponents will have an opportunity, over the 
course of consideration of the bill, to amend the legislation to 
achieve whatever their objectives might be. I will be laying out that 
schedule later today.
  Regardless of that debate, no one will deny that this is the first 
real effort in 8 years to slow down growth in mandatory spending. The 
chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Gregg, and the ranking 
member, and the eight reconciled committees are to be congratulated for 
making the tough and difficult decisions they had to in bringing this 
bill to the Senate floor.
  Finally, in balancing deficit reduction with all of the other demands 
that come to this body, the committees were careful not to place the 
burden of deficit reduction on the most vulnerable in our society. As a 
member of the HELP Committee, I personally thank Chairman Enzi and 
Ranking Member Kennedy for meeting their deficit reduction requirement, 
while at the same time providing a 10-percent increase in average 
grants to low-income students, with additional assistance for those 
students working toward a degree in math, science, engineering, and 
technology. While that committee achieved over $16 billion in deficit 
reduction by eliminating banker and lender windfalls and special 
payments, it redirected some of those savings toward needy students.
  Similarly, the Finance Committee, in meeting its instruction to 
achieve $10 billion in deficit reduction, was able to redirect 
additional savings toward providing such things as $1.9 billion to 
Medicaid recipients in the Gulf Coast States, nearly $1 billion to 
expand Medicaid benefits to severely disabled children through the 
Family Opportunity Act, nearly $100 million for the SCHIP program, and 
extension of expiring provisions that will provide over $200 million to 
rural hospitals and sole community centers.
  Another committee, the Commerce Committee, was able to direct a 
portion of its deficit reduction savings toward implementing E-9-1-1 
emergency services as well as directing $200 million toward coastal 
disaster assistance.
  All of this is a first good positive step toward real mandatory 
spending reduction. Additional steps are being taken and will be taken 
to control the growth in the nonsecurity appropriations as we bring the 
2006 appropriations process to a conclusion over the next couple of 
weeks as well.
  We will apply fiscal discipline through the actions we take these 
coming weeks and we will continue to promote those policies that 
protect the needy while at the same time creating jobs and ensuring a 
growing economy.
  Let us work together to keep America moving forward. I look forward 
to the debate next week and doing just that, working together to keep 
this country moving in a positive direction.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________