[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 23]
[Senate]
[Pages 31331-31333]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             APPROPRIATIONS

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, amid the news we have received this last 
month on a variety of fronts--some good, some bad--is some very 
positive news from our economy. October marked the 50th straight month 
of positive job creation in the United States, a new record since the 
Government began keeping such records in 1939. Unfortunately, Congress 
has set a record of its own last week, when it finally sent the first 
of 12 appropriations bills that should have been finished before 
October 1, when the new fiscal year began, to the President for his 
signature. Not since 1987, 20 years ago, has Congress taken this long 
to send a single appropriations bill to the President this late in the 
fiscal year. I ask this question: What family, what small business, who 
in the United States could run their fiscal house this way, other than 
the Congress? Only the Congress has the power to basically suspend the 
powers of disbelief and pass something called a continuing resolution 
so that spending remains on auto pilot at last year's levels, rather 
than meet the needs of this current year by passing appropriations 
bills. Instead of working hard together, as I genuinely believe most 
Members of this body want, we see instead a calculated game being 
played out.
  I want to focus specifically on our Veterans and Military 
Construction bill which should have been passed as a stone-alone bill 
and should have been signed by the President before Veterans Day this 
last Monday but was not. Rather than working to see that the funding 
for our veterans and for quality-of-life funding for military families, 
which is absolutely essential for a volunteer military force such as 
ours, we see this bill has consciously been held behind, even though it 
passed some 2 months ago, presumably to serve as a vehicle for a large 
spending bill that will be offered in December.
  This veterans funding bill is perhaps the most telling and troubling 
sign of the games this process has degenerated into. It strikes me--and 
I believe I am not alone--that there is a serious discrepancy between 
what Congress says to our veterans and what Congress does

[[Page 31332]]

for our veterans. Knowing how important veterans funding is to the 
President and to the country as a whole and to the Members of this 
body, some of my colleagues have decided instead to use this bill as a 
vehicle to expand Washington spending and, unfortunately, engage in 
partisan games. Rather than funding the veterans bill by itself with 
important funding and benefit enhancements that will serve America's 
veterans and military families, the majority leader has decided, 
initially at least, to try to merge this bill with another bill he knew 
the President was going to veto. As a matter of fact, he did yesterday, 
the Labor-HHS bill, because it would cost American taxpayers $11 
billion more than the President asked for and included a number of, 
shall we call them, ``interesting earmarks'' or special projects 
designated by Members of the Senate.
  Fortunately, we were able, through a point of order urged by my 
senior Senator, Mrs. Hutchison, under Senate rules, to separate the 
Veterans and Military Construction bill from an overloaded Labor, 
Health and Human Services bill.
  I ask my colleagues to consider what the American people are supposed 
to think when they see examples such as this. The labor bill the 
President vetoed included a special interest earmark for a San 
Francisco museum called the Exploratorium. I have never heard of the 
Exploratorium before, but let me explain a little about this particular 
earmark that was included in the vetoed bill. This is to fund, at 
taxpayer expense, a museum that has more than 500,000 visitors each 
year and an annual budget of almost $30 million. Yet the American 
taxpayer has been asked unknowingly to spend money on Exploratorium--
payments of more than $11 per visitor over the last 6 years. What is 
perplexing to me is why the majority would knit together funding for 
this Exploratorium, for example, along with about 2,000 other earmarks 
or special interest appropriations, with money for veterans health 
care. Why should veterans be required to shoulder the burden not only 
for this earmark, which I think we could fairly debate the 
appropriateness of, but over $1 billion set aside for earmarks in a 
completely unrelated matter and unrelated bill? This is exactly what 
the majority leader tried to do last week, along with our colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle.
  At the end of the day, we were able to stop this strategy and prevent 
our veterans from becoming yet another political football in the 
appropriations process. Unfortunately, we still haven't seemed to learn 
the lessons from this unfortunate gamesmanship, because we still have 
not yet passed the Veterans and Military Construction appropriations 
bill, even though it has been sitting there, waiting to go to the 
President for about the last 2 months. Just as we were able to free our 
veterans from this pork-laden trap, the majority leader indicated that 
the veterans bill would not actually ever get independent funding. On 
November 7, he said:

       Some Republicans are seeking to separate the two bills, to 
     force a vote just on the VA bill and vote just on the Labor-
     Health and Human Services bill. If we do that, here is what 
     happens. This bill will go back to the House with only the 
     Labor-Health and Human Services bill. That is all the 
     President will get. He will not get the veterans bill.

  In other words, the majority leader on November 7 said that if we 
were successful in splitting these two bills apart, the President would 
get the porkbarrel spending bill that pluses up spending for these 
2,000 earmarked special projects and is $11 billion over the 
President's requested amount, and the majority leader would make sure 
that the Veterans and Military Construction appropriations bill didn't 
go to the President. I don't know how this kind of action can be 
characterized other than a shameful way to treat our veterans and to 
deal with the quality-of-life issues included in the military 
construction portion of this appropriations bill.
  It is past time to fund the Federal Government at appropriate levels 
and to give our veterans and troops currently in harm's way the funding 
they need, as well as those who have proudly worn the uniform of the 
U.S. military whom we honored just this last Veterans Day, last Monday. 
It is long past time we put aside the gamesmanship that, unfortunately, 
seems to characterize so much of what happens here in Washington when 
it comes to politics.
  I think we ought to try to figure some way to work together to 
reverse the lowest approval rating in recent time which the American 
public currently has with regard to the U.S. Senate, to help put a stop 
to these games and liberate our Nation's finances from the grip of 
partisan politics, I would suggest, and to make sure we do not end up 
in a game of chicken where the American people are told if we do not 
pass a bloated Omnibus appropriations bill there will be a shutdown of 
the Government.
  I believe we ought to go ahead and pass, by way of insurance, the 
Government Shutdown Prevention Act. This legislation will guarantee 
that the Government continues to work for the American people until 
Congress passes responsible appropriations bills. We need to do this 
sooner rather than later. It does not look as if we are going to get it 
done this week before we break for the Thanksgiving recess, but we sure 
ought to get it done when we come back on December 3.
  Passing the Government Shutdown Prevention Act will make sure the 
American people need not be frightened into thinking the Federal 
Government will not continue to operate and fund essential programs 
while we continue to debate what the appropriate level of 
appropriations bills should be.
  Mr. President, I yield myself 2 more minutes, to be followed by the 
Senator from New Hampshire.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Whitehouse). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, my colleagues from the majority want to 
spend $23 billion above what the President has requested in his budget 
for discretionary spending. Now, that is $23 billion in discretionary 
spending over and above entitlement spending, which has been operating 
again on autopilot at the growth rate of about 8 percent per year. They 
have claimed $23 billion is not all that much money. But I would 
suggest that only in Washington is $23 billion to be considered pocket 
change. The American people are smarter than that. They know somebody 
has to pay for that money. It does not magically appear. What it means 
is the Federal Government is going to reach into their pockets and 
extract it from their hard-earned wages in order to fund these vast 
expansions of Government programs.
  We need to make sure that we are better stewards of the taxpayers' 
dollars and that we regain the lost confidence the American people had 
in this institution. We need to take care of problems, for example, 
such as the growing alternative minimum tax, which threatens to grow 
from 6 million taxpayers this year to 23 million taxpayers next year--a 
typical so-called tax-the-rich program, which, just as they always do, 
tends to grow to creep into the middle class. We need to make sure the 
middle class does not suffer a huge tax increase by dealing with the 
alternative minimum tax.
  Again, instead of being in lockdown, as we are on the farm bill 
because the majority leader will not allow any amendments to be offered 
except for ones he cherry-picks, we ought to be solving these problems, 
pass a Veterans and Military Construction bill, get it to the 
President, and not have a game of chicken with $23 billion in excess 
spending, which we know the President is going to veto. Instead we 
should engage in a meaningful dialog to try to come up with a 
negotiated amount. We should eliminate this middle-class tax increase 
which is going to grow from affecting 6 million people to 23 million 
people unless we do something about it before the end of the year.
  Mr. President, I know the distinguished Senator from New Hampshire is 
here with us and ready to take the floor, so I yield to him.
  I ask that the Senator from South Carolina, who I know is coming down 
after the Senator from New Hampshire, be reserved 8 minutes of the time 
we have remaining.

[[Page 31333]]

  Mr. President, could I ask how much time we have remaining on this 
side?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Seventeen minutes is remaining.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be split 
evenly between the Senator from New Hampshire and the Senator from 
South Carolina.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Texas.
  First, Mr. President, I join the Senator from Texas in asking that 
the majority leader and the Democratic membership free the Veterans 
bill and the Military Construction bill, which is ready to be sent to 
the President, stop holding it hostage for the purpose of holding it up 
with special interest projects which have nothing to do with the 
military or with veterans, and instead send that bill down to the 
President so he can sign it so our veterans can know they are getting 
the support they need after their great service to our Nation.

                          ____________________