[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 7209-7213]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    ENTITLEMENT AND TAX CODE REFORM

  Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, I rise today to call attention to what 
I refer to as the irresponsible and reckless fiscal path we find 
ourselves on as a nation and to urge my colleagues to act now to take 
the first step toward meaningful, comprehensive tax and entitlement 
reform.
  On Tuesday night, we gathered here to cast our votes on the Omnibus 
Appropriations Act of 2009. I could not vote for this bill because it 
ignores the fiscal realities we find ourselves in today. This omnibus 
bill, which includes $408 billion in nonemergency spending, is 8 
percent larger than it should be. Some agencies in the bill are set to 
get a 40-percent increase in funding. From my experience as a former 
Governor of Ohio and the mayor of the city of Cleveland, I do not 
believe those agencies have the capacity to spend that kind of money. 
This adds to the $787 billion stimulus bill that was passed last month. 
It increases the already staggering $10.9 trillion national debt and 
continues to expand the size of the Government at what has become an 
alarming rate.
  As you can see from this chart, Federal spending as a percentage of 
GDP averaged just under 20 percent under President Bush. This year, 
under President Obama, it will reach almost 28 percent, and his 
administration projects that it will average out to over 23 percent 
across two terms. In other words, I came to the Senate in 1999, and 
this is what we were spending, totally, on Medicare, Medicaid, all the 
other appropriations. Then, as you see, it started to go up. We have to 
be honest, that is where we started to borrow money because we were not 
taking in enough money to pay for it, so we started to have deficits. 
Then, under Bush, it started to go up some more.
  Here we are in 2009. You can see that the size of the Government is 
up to 27.7 percent. That is what we are spending on everything. We have 
gone from 8 percent to 27.7 percent. That is going to start to slide 
down. In 2012, the President says to us, don't worry, we are going to 
reduce the deficit spending by 50 percent. Look at this, it continues 
to spend out at this point, and by 2016--I have not shown it on the 
chart, but it just keeps going. We just cannot keep going that way. 
That is over half a trillion dollars a year we are borrowing to run the 
Government.
  To complete what I call the triple whammy to our national debt, the 
administration adds to the stimulus and omnibus a new 10-year budget 
where the lowest deficit for a single year is larger than any annual 
deficit from the end of World War II.
  In fact, President Obama's smallest deficit is larger than President 
Bush's largest deficit. And that is true despite proposing the largest 
tax increase in American history, including a new energy tax that will 
expose the false claim that we will not raise taxes on the middle 
class. This $646 billion tax increases will affect rich, poor and 
middle class alike. Yet future generations will still be burdened with 
higher debt. So we have gone from--and I am not proud of some 
Republican years, what we did. As I used to say, the Democrats tax and 
spend; the Republicans spent and borrowed. Now we have gone to spend, 
borrow, and tax.
  In spite of all of that, we are going to have these gigantic deficits 
as far as we can see in this country. Simply put, our spending is out 
of control. We are spending and funding more money at a time when we 
should be finding ways to work harder and smarter and do more with 
less. I know a little bit about this, because I took over Cleveland, 
the first city to go into default in the depression of 1979. We were in 
deep trouble. I took over the State of Ohio. We were $1.5 billion in 
debt at that time. We had to cut the budget four times, and ultimately 
had to increase taxes in the margin. I know what this is about.
  But nobody is talking about ``working harder and smarter'' or ``doing 
more with less.'' If you look at the stimulus, we spent $787 billion, 
and now some congressional leaders are talking about putting together a 
second package. I cannot believe it. We cannot continue down this path.
  It is our responsibility to make budgeting decisions based on our 
Nation's fiscal situation and to take into consideration the impact it 
is having on others but, more importantly, on our children and 
grandchildren. Over the past year, we have been hit by an economic 
avalanche that started in housing, quickly spread to the financial and 
credit markets, then continued onward to every corner of the economy 
and across the world.
  We have taken steps over the past months to dig out of the avalanche. 
But we have not reinforced our tax and entitlement system's crumbling 
foundation. In other words,--I have been talking about this for 8 
years--we need to have tax reform and entitlement reform. Now all of 
this other stuff has hit us, but the fact of the matter is, that is 
still there. We need tax reform. We need entitlement reform. And that 
is why, despite the enormity of the legislation passed over the past 
month, there is still a sense of great anxiety

[[Page 7210]]

on Main Street and my street. I still live in the house that Janet and 
I bought in 1972. I am with real people every day. They are very 
concerned about the future. They get it.
  The stimulus and omnibus has caused everyone who paid attention to 
say: My God, we have to do something to get back on firm fiscal 
footing. They know that unless we fix our tax and entitlement system we 
might as well be flying a kamikaze plane.
  When I arrived in the Senate in 1999, gross Federal debt stood at 
$5.6 trillion or 16 percent of GDP. The Obama administration recently 
projected the national debt to more than double, to $12.7 trillion by 
the end of fiscal year 2009. That would amount to a 126-percent 
increase compared with only a 56-percent increases in the gross 
domestic product during the same 10-year period.
  From 2008 to 2009 alone, the Federal debt would increase 27 percent, 
boosting the country's debt-to-income ratio or national debt as a 
percentage of our gross domestic product from 74 percent last year to 
89 percent this year.
  The Pacman. Here it was in 1999. Federal debt. And it is up to 70. We 
are now up to 89 percent. I think there are still some people who 
understand Pacman. When I was Governor of Ohio, I used to say that 
Medicaid--I am sure the Presiding Officer understands that Medicaid is 
the Pacman that kept eating up the budgets in your State.
  Under the Obama budget, though, at 2017, for the first time since 
1947 when we were paying down our World War II debt, the national debt 
will be larger than the size of the entire American economy.
  At that point, we will be too fat and out of shape to escape from our 
creditors around the world. That is what it is going to look like. In 
2017, it is more than 100 percent of our gross domestic product. Think 
of that. Today, if we are candid with the American people, when you 
consider the TARP, the stimulus package, and the money we continuously 
borrow from the Social Security trust fund, we are facing a projected 
budget deficit of $1.9 trillion, which is more than four times the 
reported 2008 deficit of $455 billion as a share of the economy.
  The 2009 deficit will become the largest recorded deficit since World 
War II. Last June when I spoke here on the floor of this fiscal crisis, 
I pointed out that our national debt was $9.4 trillion, and the per 
capita debt, each American's share of the national debt was $31,000, up 
from $20,000 in 1999.
  This year, that figure will reach $41,000. Let's put that into 
perspective. In 2009, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the 
median income for an Ohio family in 2007 for one earner was $40,000. 
That means each person's share of the national debt is more than many 
hard-working Ohioans make in an entire year.
  Alarmingly, these figures did not even count our accumulated long-
term financial obligations: Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, which 
grew $2.5 trillion last year as a result of the increases in the costs 
of Medicare and Social Security benefits.
  The baby boomers are here. They are coming on. If we include those 
numbers, taxpayers are on the hook for a record $57 trillion in Federal 
liabilities to cover the lifetime benefits of everyone eligible for 
Medicare, Social Security, and other Government programs. That is 
nearly $500,000 per household.
  Now, it does not take an economist to realize that of course we 
cannot keep going. As our former Comptroller General and head of the 
Government Accountability Office said, we are facing a fiscal timebomb. 
We must come to terms with the fact that the U.S. Government is the 
worst credit card abuser in the world, and it is time that we came to 
terms with the fiscal realities of 2009.
  We cannot continue to heap debt on the backs of our children and 
grandchildren without a second thought. Lip service from Congress and 
the administration is not going to get the job done. Recently, the 
Office of Management and Budget Director, Peter Orszag, spoke to a 
group of bipartisan Senators who have breakfast regularly to talk about 
some of the problems.
  He pointed out that as we are confronted with the economic tsunami 
hitting our country, we are lucky our interest rates are very low, 
because many investors in America and around the world are parking 
their money in Treasury bills.
  Mr. Orszag continued on to say, we cannot expect that rate of 
borrowing to last, and it is imperative we take advantage of this 
phenomena now before foreign markets and our people demand more 
interest for their investment in the U.S. debt.
  I could not agree more. We cannot rely on luck and foreign investors. 
When I met with Larry Summers, Martin Feldstein, and Larry Lindsay, 
they say our current fiscal path is only sustainable--listen to this--
as long as the Japanese, the Chinese, and the OPEC and others have 
confidence that we are going to pay back our debt. And, boy, are they 
watching whether we are going to do anything about tax reform and 
entitlement reform.
  Now, this has serious implications. Foreign creditors have provided 
more than 70 percent of the funds that the United States has borrowed 
since 2001--70 percent.
  Today 50 percent, 51 percent of the privately owned national debt is 
held by foreigners. That is up from 37 percent just 6 years ago. If 
these foreign investors lose confidence and pull out of U.S. Treasurys, 
Katey bar the door. Borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars from 
China and OPEC nations not only puts our economy but our national 
security at risk. We have to make sure other countries do not control 
our debt.
  One of the things I pointed out--and the Presiding Officer 
understands this--is that we have to become more oil independent. We 
have a situation today where somebody else controls the supply, the 
cost, and they are buying our debt. If I control the supply and the 
cost and then I am paying for your debt, I put you out of business. 
That is just a fact of life. We have to wake up to the fact that we 
cannot rely on these other countries to take care of this debt. We 
cannot continue to live in the United States of denial.
  In 2006, I sent a letter to President Bush urging him to take on 
comprehensive tax and entitlement reform. I ask unanimous consent to 
have that letter printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:


                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                 Washington, DC, December 4, 2006.
     The President,
     The White House,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear President Bush: I am respectfully writing to encourage 
     you to take the lead on pursuing fundamental tax reform as we 
     begin the 110th Congress in January. You have an historic 
     opportunity, through fundamental tax reform, to transform the 
     U.S. economy in a manner that will make our nation stronger 
     and more prosperous for generations. In so doing, you will 
     cement your domestic policy legacy, I urge you to carry the 
     banner of tax reform.
       In 1984, President Ronald Reagan declared to the American 
     people that the tax code was fundamentally unfair, and that 
     he was going to reform it. President Reagan held his belief 
     in the unjustness of the tax code deep in his heart. He knew 
     that hundreds of targeted tax subsidies for the benefit of 
     powerful interests forced average Americans to pay higher 
     marginal rates and reduced economic growth. He saw tax reform 
     not as a retreat from his 1981 tax relief agenda, but rather 
     as a logical continuation and enhancement of that agenda. The 
     Tax Reform Act of 1986 was the culmination of the quest he 
     began in 1981. to create a tax code with low marginal rates 
     that raised the necessary revenue to fund the government with 
     the least possible interference in our free market economy.
       Likewise, fundamental tax reform that makes the tax code 
     simple, fair, and pro-growth could serve as the third and 
     final phase of the project you began in 2001 and continued in 
     2003. You do not have to choose between making the 2001 and 
     2003 tax relief permanent and reforming the tax code. The 
     latter idea is a complement to, not a competitor with, the 
     former idea. We live in a 21st century global economy, but we 
     suffer from a tax code designed for the 20th century. Small 
     businesses--the engines of job creation--are overwhelmed by 
     complexity. In many cases, neighborhood businesses are forced 
     to comply with the same convoluted rules as multinational 
     corporations. Our international tax rules were designed in an 
     era when the United States accounted for 50 percent of global 
     economic output, and we had no worries about other countries 
     competing with us for jobs and capital. Now we

[[Page 7211]]

      live in the most competitive global economy we have known. 
     We have redesigned social programs as targeted tax breaks 
     with complex eligibility criteria and restrictions, 
     completely baffling ordinary families who cannot obtain the 
     benefits of these provisions because they are too complicated 
     to understand.
       Mr. President, you and I have been advocates for tax reform 
     for years. In 2003, I attached an amendment to the Jobs and 
     Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act that would have created 
     a blue ribbon commission to study fundamental tax reform. The 
     amendment was adopted by voice vote, but later was removed in 
     conference committee. At the 2004 Republican National 
     Convention, you announced that fundamental tax reform would 
     become a top domestic priority. I remember sitting in the 
     front of the audience with the Ohio delegation when you made 
     the announcement, and I leapt to my feet to applaud you. A 
     couple of days later while campaigning in Ohio, you told the 
     audience that when I rose to applaud you, you thought I was 
     going to jump up on stage and hug you.
       It seemed that the tax reform bandwagon finally had started 
     to roll. In the autumn of 2004, I offered my tax reform 
     commission amendment again, this time to the American Jobs 
     Creation Act. The Senate again adopted my amendment. During 
     conference negotiations, the White House contacted me and 
     requested that I withdraw my amendment because you were 
     preparing to take a leadership role by appointing your own 
     tax reform panel. I enthusiastically agreed to defer to your 
     leadership, and I withdrew my amendment. In January 2005, you 
     announced the creation of an all-star panel, led by former 
     Senators Connie Mack and John Breaux, and that panel spent 
     most of the year engaging the American public to develop 
     proposals to make our tax code simpler, fairer, and more 
     conducive to economic growth. In November 2005, the panel 
     issued its final report. While not perfect in anyone's mind, 
     the panel's two plans provided a starting point for 
     developing tax reform legislation that would represent a huge 
     improvement over the current system. The panel's proposals 
     belong as a key part of the national discussion on 
     fundamental tax reform,
       Yet, momentum for tax reform seems to have slowed in the 
     more than one year since the panel submitted its report to 
     the Treasury Department. Initially, you indicated that upon 
     receipt of the panel's report, the Treasury Department would 
     analyze the proposals and then provide you with its own 
     recommendations. These recommendations would serve as the 
     basis for legislative action. In the meantime, however, your 
     administration and the Congress have faced other immediate 
     priorities--from Social Security solvency to the global war 
     on terror to relief for victims of Hurricane Katrina. As a 
     result, we missed an opportunity to address fundamental tax 
     reform during the 109th Congress. And now, time is running 
     short. Your 2007 State of the Union address provides an 
     excellent opportunity to take up a cause that will lead you 
     to being remembered as the president who made the tax code 
     simple, fair, and pro-growth.
       I have discussed fundamental tax reform with OMB Director 
     Rob Portman, Secretary Hank Paulson, and Chief of Staff Josh 
     Bolten. Mr. President you have a great team that, working 
     with you and Congress, can get the job done. I also sense 
     responsiveness in Congress for tax reform. Congressman Frank 
     Wolf and I have introduced the SAFE Commission Act, which 
     would require consideration of tax reform and entitlement 
     reform, in the House and Senate. Senator Bob Bennett has been 
     putting together a Senate working group on tax reform (in 
     which I am actively participating), and other senators have 
     expressed interest in working with us. For example, Senator 
     Ron Wyden, who has introduced his own tax reform legislation, 
     has shown tremendous enthusiasm for organizing a bipartisan 
     Senate effort on tax reform.
       The American people are ready for tax reform. Unlike Social 
     Security, no one defends the current tax code. Without your 
     leadership, however, the incoming congressional majority 
     likely will propose their own version of ``reform''--but you 
     and I both know it will not be true reform. They will provide 
     new middle class tax breaks and pay for then by raising 
     marginal tax rates on high-income taxpayers and businesses. 
     They will challenge congressional Republicans to vote against 
     these class warfare proposals and they will challenge you to 
     veto them. Raising marginal tax rates on an already-broken 
     tax system will only serve to reduce U.S. competitiveness in 
     the global economy, and ultimately will prove self-defeating. 
     Instead, Republicans and Democrats must work together to 
     reform the tax code in a manner that will raise sufficient 
     revenues to fund important national priorities, while 
     providing an environment conducive to innovation, 
     entrepreneurship, and economic growth.
       The time to act is now. Twenty years after Ronald Reagan 
     reformed the tax code, he still is remembered fondly as the 
     leader who set the stage for years of prosperity at the end 
     of the 20th century. Working on a bipartisan basis, you have 
     an opportunity to accomplish a similar achievement for the 
     21st century--a lasting legacy for your fellow Americans. I 
     urge you not to pass up this once-in-a-lifetime chance, and 
     if you take up the challenge, I will be your faithful ally.
           Sincerely,
                                              George V. Voinovich,
                                            United States Senator.

  Mr. VOINOVICH. Sadly, no action was taken. We missed a gigantic 
opportunity to make meaningful reform while times were relatively good. 
We are more or less lucking out now, but we cannot count on that luck 
to last forever. We have to tackle tax and entitlement reform to 
maintain credibility, to turn around our economy, and to regain our 
global respectability--not a year from now, not 2 years from now, but 
now, now, now.
  Our Tax Code, for example, is imploding from the hundreds of economic 
and social policies Congress pursues through tax incentives and dozens 
of temporary tax provisions. It is a nightmare. Just ask the millions 
of Americans right now who are filing their tax returns. I have said 
this on the floor before: When we got our tax return back last year, my 
wife and I looked at it. My wife said: Do you understand it?
  I said: No, I don't understand it.
  I said: Why don't we call our accountant; maybe he will explain it.
  She said: Don't you dare. He will charge us $500.
  It is out of control. For anybody who understands what is going on, 
it is a nightmare.
  Tinkering with the Tax Code won't work. The argument I made to 
President Bush several times was that we know the reduction in marginal 
rates is going to evaporate. We know the capital gains reduction is 
going to evaporate in 2010. We know the reduction in taxes on dividends 
is going to evaporate in 2010. Why don't we take this opportunity to 
look at tax reform and look at those things that are going to encourage 
people to save and keep the economy going?
  Frankly, those three things might be wonderful in that regard. But 
you can't have it unless you make it up with some other taxes that are 
the least hurtful to savings and the economy.
  Since the last major tax reform in 1986, we have added over 15,000 
new provisions in the Internal Revenue Code. Last year alone, we passed 
500 changes in the Tax Code. It is no wonder why only 13 percent of 
Americans file their taxes without the help of either a tax preparer or 
computer software. Clearly, we have waited too long to act. This is not 
just a matter of saving taxpayers' time and effort, it is also about 
saving real money.
  The Tax Foundation calculates conservatively that we all spend about 
$265 billion a year to keep track of our records and pay people to pay 
our taxes. If we could streamline it and make it simple and 
understandable, if we could only cut that in half, that would be a 
gigantic tax reduction for the American people and not cost us one 
dime.
  We must enact fundamental tax reform to help make the Tax Code 
simpler, fairer, transparent, and economically efficient.
  Thankfully, there have been some encouraging signs of new 
developments. Earlier this month, I attended a bipartisan press 
conference along with Senator Conrad, Representatives Cooper and Wolf, 
and former U.S. Comptroller General Walker who now heads up the Peter 
G. Peterson Foundation. David Walker and the rest of us urged Congress 
to take action to restore fiscal discipline. In other words, we all 
said: This has to be done. We agreed it is time to begin to enact the 
first pillar of meaningful comprehensive tax and entitlement reform. 
That is why I am disappointed that President Obama did not mention a 
vehicle to enact tax and entitlement reform in his address to Congress, 
just as I was very disappointed that the Bush administration never once 
mentioned reducing our national debt after 2001.
  I am a Republican. He was a Republican President. Our President 
never, ever mentioned the national debt all the time he was President. 
It was like it didn't exist. Yet the debt kept going up, up, up, and 
up. I have been calling for the creation of a commission to facilitate 
tax and entitlement reform for

[[Page 7212]]

some time. In fact, back in 2006, I introduced the Securing America's 
Future Economy or SAFE Commission Act, which I reintroduced in the 
Senate in the 109th and 110th Congresses.
  Congressman Jim Cooper of Tennessee and Congressman Frank Wolf of 
Virginia introduced a version in the House that enlisted 93 cosponsors 
from both parties. This bipartisan, bicameral group had the support 
from corporate executives, religious leaders, and think tanks across 
the political spectrum--the conservative Heritage Foundation and the 
liberal Brookings Institute. All of these people realize where we are.
  Building on the SAFE Commission, two of my colleagues, the Budget 
Committee chairman from North Dakota, Senator Conrad, and ranking 
member from New Hampshire, Senator Gregg, introduced a bipartisan bill 
that would create a tax and entitlement reform task force very similar 
to the SAFE Commission called the Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible 
Fiscal Action. I signed on as 1 of 19 cosponsors. We will never, ever 
take the necessary steps toward fiscal responsibility unless we create 
this BRAC-like, bipartisan commission.
  The commission would take on the tough issues of Social Security, 
health care, and tax reform, and create recommendations that would be 
fast-tracked through a special process and brought to the floor of both 
Chambers for a vote. In other words, to do it the traditional way we do 
things around here it will never, ever get done. If you think we would 
have been able to close airbases and other bases around the country by 
doing it through legislation without the BRAC process, you are not in 
the real world.
  If we really want to tackle this stuff, we have to get a group 
together. We have to work on it and come up with a compromise. If three 
quarters agree, it is the thing to do. We put it through an expedited 
procedure. The Senate gets it; the House gets it. They have to vote up 
or down.
  It is important that that happen because it will have legislators on 
it. I know if somebody asked you to spend a year and a half of your 
life putting something together and then said: Well, once it is done, 
it will go through the regular procedure, you would say: Goodbye. I 
don't have time for that.
  But if you knew you put the time in and that if you had three 
quarters who agreed on it and the thing was going to get some action, 
then you would have some incentive to say: I will stay at the table, 
work on this, and we will get the job done.
  The workload would be heavy, and the commission could certainly 
benefit by taking a look at previous work that has been done to study 
these issues by foundations and others. It also could start by 
considering some of the previous proposals that have been introduced by 
some of our former colleagues, Senators Mack and Breaux, cochairs of 
the commission created by the Bush administration to reform our Tax 
Code.
  I worked like the dickens to say: Let's have this commission to study 
the Tax Code. I will never forget talking to Karl Rove.
  I said: I want it to be legislated. That is the way we had it in the 
appropriations bill.
  He said: No, we will do it with something else. We will put Breaux 
and Mack in charge. I think he said at that time he was afraid that 
Pelosi and Steny Hoyer might kill it in the beginning.
  I said: If they are going to kill it in the beginning, let's find 
out. He said: No, we want the other direction. So Connie Mack and John 
Breaux worked their tails off for over a year. They came back with a 
very good report. It wasn't perfect, but I expected President Bush to 
take that and tweak it and send it over here.
  I will never forget the story John Breaux told me. He went to visit 
with President Bush. He walked in the Oval Office and he started 
looking around. The President said to him: John, what are you doing?
  And he said: Mr. President, I am looking for the report that we did.
  On the shelf, gathering dust.
  That is why I was pleased to hear President Obama mention the 
national debt in his address to Congress. But I was disappointed that 
when he mentioned the ``crushing cost'' we face and the reform we can 
no longer afford to put on hold, he only talked about health care. 
Although health care costs are a big part of our entitlement problem, 
addressing health care reform alone will not get the job done.
  It is not the time for dodging and ducking. This is the time for the 
cold hard truth. Everyone knows we need tax and entitlement reform. I 
know it, the Obama administration knows it, and the American people 
know it. And I know for sure Peter Orszag does because a couple years 
ago, he was as enthusiastic about dealing with this problem as anybody 
in this country.
  The American people elected President Obama to make the tough 
decisions to put this country back on the right track. As President 
Obama said himself so eloquently:

       We must take responsibility for our future, and for 
     posterity.

  I love that. I love that part of his speech. I thought it was just 
great. He cares about me. He cares about my children. He cares about my 
grandchildren. ``We must take responsibility for our future, and for 
posterity.'' Sadly, so far he is missing in action on tax and 
entitlement reform. In fact, in a February 27 column in the Washington 
Post, Michael Gerson called the President's stance on tax and 
entitlement reform in his joint address to Congress ``timid'' and 
``hardly courageous.''
  Now, in fairness to our President, he and his administration have 
been busy putting out fires. This President has more on his plate than 
maybe any President we have ever had, maybe since Franklin Delano 
Roosevelt. But if he ignores comprehensive tax and entitlement reform, 
we could see an economic holocaust.
  That is why I would suggest to my fellow colleagues who have voiced 
similar calls for reform that we should gather our staffs, on a 
bipartisan and bicameral basis, to agree on the language of a vehicle 
commission that can get the job done--in other words, getting 
Republicans and Democrats, House and Senate, to get the language of 
what this commission should look like. We will work on that. If the 
administration does not like our proposals, then they would be free to 
weigh in with their own ideas. But doing nothing simply is not an 
option. I have talked to Senator Gregg about this, Senator Conrad. And 
I said it is our duty to position this Nation so we have the greatest 
opportunity for success for the future.
  I am saying, if the President does not want to do this, let's us get 
together and help him. OK. Let's get together. Let's help him and then 
say: Here, Mr. President, here is something agreed to on a bipartisan 
basis. We would like to go with it. If you have a better idea on how to 
get it done, amen and hallelujah, but we have to get going.
  Each and every one of us should be able to look into the eyes of our 
children and grandchildren and know in our hearts we have done all we 
can to make sure that at least they have the same opportunity we have 
had for our standard of living and quality of life.
  If I had to name one of the primary contributing factors to our 
worsening economic situation, it would have to be the loss of faith we 
seem to have experienced in ourselves. In many ways, today America is 
mired in a crisis of confidence.
  I do not share the despair many experts hold concerning the future of 
our country. When I first became mayor of Cleveland in 1979, the city 
was in default on its bonds. Unemployment for the first couple of years 
continued to grow to more than 18 percent. Think of that: 18 percent. 
Cynics at the time joked, saying: Will the last person leaving 
Cleveland turn out the lights.
  We decided that no one was going to come to Cleveland and solve our 
problems for us. We had the courage to be more self-reliant and make 
tough decisions. Through the public-private partnerships we created, we 
were able to unite everyone behind common goals. We empowered the 
community, and it

[[Page 7213]]

worked. In fact, at that time, Cleveland was known as the ``comeback 
city.''
  I say to the Presiding Officer, I know you could identify with this. 
Cleveland was named an All America City three times in a 5-year period. 
It never happened before, and I suspect it will never happen again. It 
was that public-private partnership, everybody coming together. Our 
motto was: Together we can do it.
  Similarly, when I became Governor of Ohio in 1991, we faced a $1\1/2\ 
billion budget shortfall, and we were a no-growth State. We made some 
tough decisions. As I mentioned earlier, I had to cut the budget four 
times and raise taxes. But, as a result, we were able to turn the tide, 
create 540,000 new jobs--in fact, manufacturing grew for the first time 
in 25 years--and the State's rainy-day fund grew from 14 cents to over 
$1 billion. And we put $200 million aside to take care of any Medicaid 
problem we would have.
  Mr. President, I know we can turn things around again. We really can. 
But we need to stop the spending spree and start making tough decisions 
on this tax and entitlement reform. Why don't we work together to get 
America back on track? Let's work together to systemically deal with 
each of the problems, challenges, and opportunities we have in America, 
so we are filled with the same hope and optimism of Ronald Reagan. I 
got to know Ronald Reagan. He was quite a guy, quite a President. He 
always had a positive attitude, and he said:

       I know that for America, there will always be a bright dawn 
     ahead.

  Mr. President, the glass is not half empty, the glass is half full. 
If all of us work together, we can turn this thing around.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________