[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 11313-11316]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 
                        2009--CONFERENCE REPORT

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will now be a 
period of 15 minutes of debate equally divided with respect to the 
conference report to accompany S. Con. Res. 70.
  Who yields time?
  The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, as we begin the debate, first I thank my 
colleague, the ranking member of the Budget Committee, Senator Gregg, 
for his continuing graciousness and his professionalism as we have 
sought to find a way to conclude our work on the budget for this year. 
I also thank his staff. We appreciate very much the relationship we 
have and the very constructive dialog between us as we have searched to 
find a way to bring this debate to a close.
  With that, I wish to describe the conference agreement in general 
terms. This agreement, we believe, will strengthen the economy and 
create jobs. It will do that by investing in energy, in education, in 
infrastructure. It will expand health coverage for our kids. It will 
provide tax cuts for the middle class. It will restore fiscal 
responsibility by balancing the books by 2012 and maintaining balance 
in 2013. It also seeks to make America safer by supporting our troops, 
by providing for our veterans' health care, and by protecting the 
homeland and rejecting the President's proposals for deep cuts in law 
enforcement, the COPS program, and for our first responders.
  The tax relief in this budget is significant. This conference 
agreement extends the middle-class tax relief, provides for marriage 
penalty relief, the extension of the child tax credit, the 10-percent 
bracket. It also provides for alternative minimum tax relief so more 
than 20 million people in this country don't get caught up with 
additional tax obligations. It provides estate tax reform, it allows 
energy and education tax cuts as incentives to reduce our dependence on 
foreign oil, and it provides assistance for families who are struggling 
to pay college costs. It also provides for significant property tax 
relief and, of course, for the important extenders package.
  The record under this administration has been a record of debt and 
deficits as far as the eye can see. This chart shows very clearly what 
has happened to the debt under this administration. This President, at 
the end of his first year, had a debt of $5.8 trillion. We don't hold 
him responsible for the first year because he inherited that budget. 
But over the 8 years he is responsible for, the debt has gone from $5.8 
trillion to $10.4 trillion--almost a doubling of the debt in this 
country. This President's fiscal failures are manifest. They are 
written across the pages of the economic history of this country.
  This budget seeks to take the country in a different direction. Under 
this budget, we reduce the debt as a share of the gross domestic 
product each and every year, from 69.3 percent of GDP to 65.6 percent 
by the end of the fifth year. The same is true of the deficit picture 
under this budget. I am proud to report that we balance the books by 
the fourth year of the budget. We maintain balance in the fifth year. 
While the President's budget balances in the fourth year, it swings 
right out of balance once again in the fifth year. We don't believe 
that is a responsible course.
  Under this conference report, spending goes down as a share of gross 
domestic product, from 20.8 percent of gross domestic product in 2009 
to 19.1 percent of GDP in 2012 and 2013.
  We will hear a lot from the other side about spending in this budget 
and we will hear claims that this takes spending through the roof. 
Let's compare the spending in this conference report with what the 
President proposed. In this conference report, total spending is $3.07 
trillion in 2009. The President has $3.04 trillion. That is a 
difference of 1 percent. Again, the conference report shows spending of 
$3.07 trillion, the President proposed $3.04 trillion, a difference of 
1 percent. Where did the difference go? Well, it went in those areas I 
have discussed: energy, education, and infrastructure, all of them 
critical needs.
  On the revenue side, the President proposed $15.2 trillion of revenue 
over the 5 years of this budget. We have $15.6 trillion of revenue--a 
modest difference, a 2.9 percent difference in revenue. We believe that 
can be accommodated without any tax increase. There is no assumption of 
a tax increase in this budget. In fact, as I have identified, there are 
substantial middle-class tax cuts in this budget. In addition, we 
believe this modest increase in revenue over what the President has 
proposed can be provided by aggressively going after the tax gap--the 
difference between what is owed and what is paid--by going after the 
offshore tax havens, as well as closing down abusive tax shelters. We 
believe that difference can be easily accommodated in those ways.
  Now, I predict that my colleague, for whom I have great respect and 
real affection, will stand up here momentarily and he will tell all of 
us this is the biggest tax increase in the history of the United 
States. He may even say that is the biggest tax increase----
  Mr. GREGG. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. CONRAD. Momentarily.
  Mr. GREGG. I was going to say: in the world.
  Mr. CONRAD. We have agreement on that. My friend is going to stand up 
here and say: ``The biggest tax increase in the history of the world.''
  I wish to recall his words from last year. Last year he said about 
our budget: It includes, at a minimum, a $736 billion tax hike on 
American families and businesses over the next 5 years--the biggest in 
U.S. history.
  Here is what happened. There was no tax increase.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. CONRAD. Let me conclude on this thought. Here is the record. We 
had tax cuts of $194 billion. That is the record. That is what 
happened. No tax increase; tax reductions. If anybody wonders, go to 
your mailbox and look at the checks you have received from the United 
States Government. That was passed by a Democratic Congress.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my brief 
statement not take away from the 15 minutes that has been allotted to 
the two managers of this budget conference report.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I wish to have the record spread with how we 
work together here, not as much as we should, but we do it often.
  As everyone knows, Senator Kennedy is ill. He has had brain surgery. 
He is now in a hospital in North Carolina. Senator Byrd has taken ill. 
He is in a hospital in Virginia. My Republican colleagues stepped 
forward. Senator Warner said: I will pair with Senator Kennedy. That is 
something we used to do a lot. We don't do it as much as we used to. 
But I will pair, said Senator Warner, with Senator Kennedy. That way he 
is recorded as if Senator

[[Page 11314]]

Kennedy were here, he would vote opposite of Senator Warner and 
therefore it cancels out the votes.
  I called Pete Domenici at home last night and said: Pete, as you 
know, Senator Byrd is sick. Would you pair with him? He didn't hesitate 
a half a second. He said: Of course I will.
  Now, I want everyone to understand how much I personally, as do we 
all, appreciate these men stepping forward and doing this in a time of 
need. It would be easy for them to say wait until we get everybody here 
and we will have a vote.
  But in addition to that, Judd Gregg last night said: I would be happy 
to pair with someone if that is necessary. This is above and beyond the 
call of duty. Senator Conrad has spoken many times about his affection 
for Judd Gregg. They have worked so closely together for so long. I 
also feel he is one of America's very good Senators. Very few people 
are as well prepared as he is to come to the Senate. He has been a 
Member of the House of Representatives, he has been Governor of his 
State, and now a Senator. He and I don't agree with a lot of the votes 
we do here, but as far as him being a good legislator, he is truly a 
good legislator.
  So Senator Gregg, Senator Domenici, and Senator Warner I would 
acknowledge are very outstanding not only Senators but human beings.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, on a point of personal privilege, I thank 
the leader for coming and making the statement he has. People see this 
body and sometimes they see it at its worst. This, in many ways, is the 
Senate at its best: Senator Domenici agreeing to withhold his vote to 
pair with Senator Byrd who could not be here because of illness; 
Senator Warner, whom I asked yesterday to pair and who readily agreed 
he will pair with Senator Kennedy who could not be here. This is to me 
an act of graciousness, it is thoughtful, it is respectful, and it is 
exactly what one would expect of Senator Domenici and of Senator 
Warner.
  I wish to say a special note about Senator Gregg who told me 
yesterday if we couldn't find someone else to pair with Senator Kennedy 
or Senator Byrd, he would be willing to do that. When I told my staff, 
I told them that is class. I wish to say publicly what I said to my 
staff privately, that Senator Gregg has demonstrated the highest 
example of what the Senate should be about and I thank him for it.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my statement 
and that of Senator Conrad's not take away from the time of Senator 
Gregg because he needs all the time he can get to show that this is the 
biggest tax increase in the history of the world.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire is recognized.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, let me thank the majority leader and the 
chairman for their kind words. They would have done the same thing were 
they in my position, if somebody on our side were ill. I know they 
would have, because I know the type of people they are, and I thank 
them for their generous comments relative to my willingness to help on 
that issue.
  I especially want to acknowledge, as they have, Senator Warner and 
Senator Domenici. This is Senator Domenici's last vote on the budget, 
and Senator Domenici and the budget are inextricably identified 
together. He basically wrote the Budget Act along with Senator Byrd, 
who regrettably can't be here and whom he is pairing with, and for 30-
plus hours now, he has been overseeing the budget as the godfather of 
it. For him to pair on this matter on this last vote on the budget is a 
very gracious act, as Senator Conrad has pointed out.
  I also thank Senator Conrad and his staff for their courtesy and 
their professionalism. It is always afforded to us as Republicans by 
the majority staff and we very much appreciate it. We obviously 
disagree fundamentally on where this budget is going, but that doesn't 
mean we can't proceed in an orderly manner. As I have said before, 
although I strongly disagree with this budget, I feel equally strongly 
that this Nation needs a budget, even though in this instance it is 
something I will point to as a mistake. But we could have done a lot 
better.
  As a practical matter, I respect the efforts put in by the majority 
and the majority staff, and especially the chairman of the committee 
who worked tirelessly on this and defends it very effectively. He has 
said I will say this is the largest tax increase in the history of the 
world. Let me confirm that, and let there be no mistake about it--there 
is the largest tax increase in the history of the world in this budget. 
We are talking trillions here, which is hard to understand for anyone. 
It is a concept that is alien to all of us. But this budget talks in 
the trillions.
  This will be the first budget that pushes debt over $10 trillion. 
That is a lot of money. Two trillion dollars will be added to the debt 
as a result of this budget. This will be the first budget that takes 
non-emergency discretionary spending over $1 trillion. I suggested we 
draw the line and say, at least for 1 year, we will hold back and not 
go over $1 trillion. That idea was rejected.
  This budget has buried in it a $1.2 trillion tax increase. Yes, it 
would not occur this year, but it is assumed in the budget. That is how 
they get to balance in the budget. It is assumed in the outyears. That 
tax increase will translate, when it kicks in, in 2011, into real 
increases in taxes for Americans. Although most of us cannot understand 
$1 trillion, we can understand the fact that for families earning 
$50,000, with two children, their taxes, under this proposal, over the 
next 5 years will go up $2,300. For retired people--and there are 18 
million of them--their taxes will go up over $2,000. For 47 million 
small businesses in America today--the engines of the economy, of 
economic growth, the people who create the jobs in this economy--their 
taxes will go up $4,000. That is a lot of money. That is money they 
should be able to keep, and it should not come to the Federal 
Government. That tax increase should not go into place.
  This bill has taxes in it that presume that the capital gains tax 
will essentially double for many Americans. The dividends tax will 
definitely double. Rates will jump dramatically. The 10-percent rate 
will be repealed. The estate tax will jump dramatically.
  This bill essentially assumes a major tax increase on working 
Americans and on small business. In my opinion, that is a huge mistake. 
The other huge mistake that this budget has in it is it makes no effort 
at all to control the accounts that are going to essentially bankrupt 
our Nation for our children, which are the entitlement accounts. We 
know we are sending this Nation over a fiscal cliff. We know that if we 
don't act, our children and grandchildren will not be able to afford 
this Government because of the cost and burdens of Medicare, Medicaid, 
and Social Security.
  We know the baby boom generation is alive and is going to be moving 
into retirement. Yet this bill takes no action--no action at all--to 
try to remedy this very serious fiscal problem, which is going to occur 
on the watch of this bill. This is a 5-year budget. So this is a very 
serious failure of taking responsibility on a key issue of fiscal 
policy.
  In addition, of course, we have strong differences over the amount of 
spending in the bill. It crosses the trillion-dollar line. The Senator 
from North Dakota named some of the important things to spend money on. 
Yes, they are important, but we need to set priorities. Rather than 
simply increasing spending, we ought to look at programs now on the 
books, which are not as high a priority as we need, and move the money 
from those programs into the programs we want to spend more money on. 
This budget assumes that of all the Federal programs on the books--$1 
trillion of discretionary spending--none will be eliminated, not one.
  Let me tell you, there are programs we can eliminate, and we should 
have made that tough decision. So we have strong opinions that this 
budget doesn't go where it should go. It fails in the issues of tax 
policy, entitlement policy, and spending policy. Obviously, the other 
side of the aisle is the majority--and, remember, they were in the 
majority last year too--so they have

[[Page 11315]]

the right to pass their budget. I point out that last year they claimed 
they were going to give us a tax cut, and they didn't do it. They took 
credit for the amendment that said they were going to give a tax cut, 
but it was never passed. This year, they are taking credit for the same 
amendment, and I suspect it would not pass again.
  What will pass is the tax increase of $1.2 trillion in this bill on 
working Americans. That will come to fruition because the majority 
assumes this budget event. This budget doesn't work without those new 
revenues. It is a failure, in our opinion, and that is why we oppose 
it.
  I yield back the remainder of my time and ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to the conference report to accompany S. 
Con. Res. 70.
  The yeas and nays are ordered and the clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, on this vote, I have a pair with the 
Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd. If he were present and voting, he 
would vote ``yea''. If I were permitted to vote, I would vote ``nay''. 
I, therefore, withhold my vote.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, on this vote, I have a pair with the 
Senator from Massachusetts, Mr. Kennedy. If he were present and voting, 
he would vote ``yea.'' If I were permitted to vote, I would vote 
``nay.'' I, therefore, withhold my vote.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Biden) and 
the Senator from New York (Mrs. Clinton) are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Delaware (Mr. Biden) would vote ``yea.''
  Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 48, nays 45, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 142 Leg.]

                                YEAS--48

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--45

     Alexander
     Allard
     Barrasso
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Wicker

                   PRESENT AND GIVING A LIVE PAIR, AS

                         PREVIOUSLY RECORDED--2

     Domenici,
     against
     Warner,
     against

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Biden
     Byrd
     Clinton
     Kennedy
     McCain
  The conference report was agreed to.
  Mr. CONRAD. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that 
motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I again thank all our colleagues. This is 
a significant vote because this is the first time in an election year 
since 2000 that we have been able to pass a budget. That sets a good 
example for the future.
  I, again, especially thank Senator Domenici. This is his last vote on 
a budget. He, out of respect for this institution, respect for Senator 
Byrd, respect for the budget process, agreed to pair with Senator Byrd. 
We thank Senator Domenici for that gracious act.
  And Senator Warner, I deeply appreciate your willingness to pair with 
Senator Kennedy, who, as we all know, is ill and recovering. You are a 
pro's pro, and we deeply appreciate the respect that you have shown for 
our colleague, Senator Kennedy.
  Again, I thank all of the staff who have worked so hard. I again want 
to conclude by thanking the ranking member, Senator Gregg, for all he 
did to allow us to complete work today.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, we are all familiar with the phrase ``all 
you can eat.'' There are restaurants everywhere that specialize in 
feeding us until we burst. Needless to say, that isn't a good idea. 
Eating until you just can't eat any more isn't just a waste of 
resources, it is likely to have a severe impact on your future health--
and your current waistline!
  We are in a similar fix here in the Congress. Our country is in a 
sinkhole of debt and it's almost as if we have adopted a philosophy of 
``all you can spend'' around here. Spending is out of control and we 
are doing more than just wasting resources--we are destroying the 
future of our children and our grandchildren. Our friends on the other 
side of the aisle don't seem to see what a terrible problem we face. 
Just like that all you can eat line, our colleagues are heading back to 
the buffet for one more full plate and leaving the bill for our 
children to pay. As the old adage says so well, you can pay me now, or 
pay me later--and our colleagues have chosen to leave the bills for 
later. We ought to know better.
  This week the Senate is considering the conference report for the 
fiscal year 2009 budget resolution, a blueprint that is supposed to 
provide us with guidance for spending that reflects the priorities of 
the Congress. As stewards of the public trust, the Congress needs to 
make responsible choices that leave a fiscally sound country to our 
children and our grandchildren. Unfortunately, the budget resolution 
conference agreement we are debating this week doesn't confront any of 
the tough choices that face our country.
  I will say once again that we cannot sustain the current level of 
spending without inflicting grave damage on the fiscal health of our 
country. This conference agreement rejects the President's proposals 
that slow the growth of spending in mandatory programs, as well as keep 
a handle on discretionary spending.
  It does nothing to shore up the government's fiscal house, and 
instead leaves the tough choices to future Congresses and the next 
administration. Yet every day, Americans sit at their kitchen tables 
and tighten their own budgets to pay for gas, food and other necessary 
expenses--while we can't even impose meaningful discipline on spending 
here in Washington.
  As stewards of the public trust, we owe it to all American taxpayers 
to use the funds they provide us in the most efficient way possible. If 
we do that, then we provide future generations with a strong economy.
  As an accountant, I particularly welcome the opportunity to look at 
the overall spending priorities of our Nation. Fiscal year 2009 ought 
to be another tight year for spending. This year the Federal deficit is 
projected to be close to $350 billion--under the Conference Agreement--
which will pale in the face of major demands on resources as the so-
called baby boom generation begins to reach eligibility for Social 
Security and Medicare. We must realistically deal with issues like 
increasing health care costs, tax policy, burgeoning energy costs, as 
well as continuing national security obligations. Americans deserve 
more than another ``pass the buck'' budget.
  Mr. President, here is the truth about what the Democratic budget 
resolution would do. It will: raise taxes by $1.2 trillion meaning that 
43 million families with children will pay $2,300 more each year, and 
18 million seniors will pay $2,200 more; increase spending by $210 
billion over 5 years. For fiscal year 2009, exceed the President's 
requested

[[Page 11316]]

budget by $24 billion; would allow the gross debt to climb by $2 
trillion by 2013; last year's budget grew our national debt by $2.5 
trillion. It ignores entitlement reform--there is no attempt to tackle 
the $66 trillion in unsustainable long-term entitlement obligations 
that face our country. The President's budget proposed to reduce the 
rate of growth in one of our most expensive entitlements, Medicare. 
This would not cut Medicare at all--it would simply reduce the rate of 
growth. This conference report rejects even slowing the growth in 
entitlements. For these reasons alone, the conference report ought to 
be rejected.
  Congress ought to be considering a budget that reduces the national 
debt, promotes honest budgeting, and encourages true economic growth by 
reducing energy costs, reducing taxes, and reducing health care costs 
and increasing access for all Americans.
  Last year, the majority also promised to abide by pay-go rules and 
actually pay for all new spending. Well, as far as I can see this has 
not happened, and in fact, pay-go enforcement rules have been weakened 
through a variety of different mechanisms and smoke and mirrors that 
taxpayers have ended up with billions in new spending.
  Congress must take seriously the warnings from the General Accounting 
Office and the Congressional Budget Office about Federal expenditures 
spiraling out of control. We need to make procedural and process 
changes to directly address these problems. One of the many procedural 
reforms that I believe would promote fiscal responsibility is a 2-year 
budget process, known as biennial budgeting.
  In fact, in his budget for fiscal year 2009, the President once again 
proposed commonsense budget reforms to restrain spending. He has 
several recommendations, including earmark reforms and the adoption of 
a 2-year budget for all executive branch agencies in order to give 
Congress more time for program reviews. Implementing these overall 
recommendations would be a step in the right direction.
  The budget process takes up a considerable amount of time each year 
and is drenched in partisan politics, while other important issues end 
up on the back burner. The Federal budgeting and appropriations system 
is broken, and lends itself to spending indulgences taxpayers cannot 
afford. We only have to look to the mammoth spending bills that nobody 
has time to fully read or understand before they are passed into law. 
Last year's omnibus appropriations bill is an example of a system that 
promotes fiscal recklessness.
  This conference report is a missed opportunity. There is a crucial 
need to enact procedural and process changes that will enable us to get 
this country on the right budgetary track again. We simply cannot risk 
the economic stability of future generations by continuing to ``get 
by'' with the status quo. The risks are far too great.
  The conference report we are debating today is a hollow, tax and 
spend, big government budget. It makes no tough choices.

                          ____________________