[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 10776-10777]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           MISSED OPPORTUNITY

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, all of us watched the President's 
remarks last night. It is rare for a President to make a speech from 
the Oval Office. President Reagan did it with the Challenger tragedy. 
President George W. Bush, spoke about 9/11. I thought the President was 
right to focus on what the government is doing to clean up the oil 
spill, and what we are doing to help those who are hurt. I think he 
missed an opportunity, though, in terms of looking to the energy 
future.
  He mentioned the climate bill. Of course that is House passed cap-
and-trade bill which doesn't have enough support to pass the Senate. He 
mentioned windmills and solar panels, which have nothing to do with 
reducing our dependence on foreign oil. I thought the missed 
opportunity was the President could have announced a mini-Manhattan 
Project to reduce our dependence on foreign oil by electrifying half 
our cars and trucks, which we could do without building any new 
powerplants by plugging them in at night. The President is in favor of 
that. Secretary Chu is a leader in it. In a bipartisan way we support 
that goal. All 41 Republican Senators support electrifying our cars and 
trucks. Senator Dorgan, Senator Merkley, and I support legislation for 
that. He could have talked about that.
  A second part of the clean energy future could have been creating the 
environment to build 100 new nuclear power plants. The President has 
taken some impressive steps to create a better environment for nuclear 
power. All 41 Republican Senators support that. That would be for clean 
electricity, not for fuel, but it would be a clean energy future.
  Third, the President could have focused on mini-Manhattan Projects 
for energy research and development, such as reducing the cost of solar 
power by a factor of 4; recapturing carbon from coal plants; trying to 
invent a 500-mile battery, which would have made sure that we electrify 
a significant part of our cars and trucks in America; recycling used 
nuclear fuel; and biofuels--all 41 Republican Senators support the goal 
of doubling energy research and development. So does the President. So 
those are three steps toward clean energy independence that we agree 
on.
  He mentioned windmills and solar panels, which have nothing to do 
with reducing our dependence on foreign oil--those are for electricity, 
not fuel. They are puny amounts of electricity, in any event. If he 
would stick with the things that we and he agree on, he could have used 
that speech for an important step forward for our country. In that 
sense, I think it was a missed opportunity.
  This past weekend the President sent a letter to Congress urging us 
to approve $50 billion in emergency aid to State and local governments. 
I want to speak about that today from the vantage point I have as a 
former Governor and former U.S. Secretary of Education. According to 
the Wall Street Journal on Monday, the letter said budget cuts at State 
and local levels were leading to massive layoffs of teachers, 
policemen, and firefighters.
  The two points I want to make are that, No. 1, we here in 
Washington--I tried not to, but the majority did--created this 
financial cliff over which the States are about to run. And, No. 2, 
when it comes to the question of $23 billion for teachers, I think we 
need to ask, where is the money going to go? And from whose 
schoolchildren are we going to borrow it? Because right now we do not 
have extra money lying around in Washington, DC. We have a great big 
problem with spending and debt.
  Let me start with what I said first, which is that we in Washington 
have created this financial cliff over which State Governors are 
running. As we were debating the health care bill I said, not really in 
jest, that everybody who votes for it ought to be forced to go home and 
serve as Governor of their State under the new rules.
  Take Tennessee, for example. We were very fortunate that our State 
was one of the two winners in the Race to the Top education plan. Give 
credit to the Governor and teachers in the State. Tennessee will get a 
half billion dollars as a result of it. Yet, according to our Governor, 
the health care bill will take away more than twice as much during the 
same period of time by imposing $1.1 billion in new Medicaid costs on 
the State between 2014 and 2019. So we are causing problems for the 
State that caused the layoffs.
  Let me not ask you to take my word for it. Here is a January op-ed 
from the Wall Street Journal by the Democratic Lieutenant Governor of 
New York, Mr. Ravitch, who says the Federal stimulus, which Congress 
passed at the beginning of 2009:

     . . . has provided significant budget relief to the states. . 
     . .

  He approved of that.

     but this relief is temporary and makes it harder for States 
     to cut expenditures. In major areas such as transportation, 
     education and health care, stimulus funds come with strings 
     attached. These strings prevent States from substituting 
     federal money for state funds, require states to spend 
     minimum amounts of their own funds, and prevent states from 
     tightening eligibility standards for benefits.

  Lieutenant Governor Ravitch goes on to say:

       Because of these requirements, states, instead of cutting 
     spending in transportation, education and health care, have 
     been forced to keep most of their expenditures at previous 
     levels. . . .

  We did that. Congress did that.

     . . . and use federal funds only as supplements. The net 
     result is this: The federal stimulus has led States to 
     increase overall spending in these core areas, which in 
     effect has only raised the height of the cliff from which 
     state spending will fall if stimulus funds evaporate.

  That is the Lieutenant Governor of New York talking about the 
evaporation of stimulus funds which comes at the end of this year and 
he is saying we made it harder for States to pay their bills. At the 
time the stimulus package was passed, everyone said it was one-time 
funding. All of us knew that Medicaid costs were overwhelming the 
States. Still, Congress went ahead--the majority, in any event--and 
increased the federal match for Medicaid, and required States not to 
change eligibility requirements. Thus they created this financial cliff 
at the end of the year which will cause the States' share for Medicaid 
spending to increase from an average of 34 percent to 43 percent, a net 
increase of $39 billion in costs for 2011. We are getting close to the 
$50 billion we are being asked to bail States out for.
  Let me say a word about teacher salaries. The first question is, 
where is the rest of the money going to go? The request, as it has been 
talked about, says this will save 100,000, maybe 300,000 teacher jobs. 
We are supposed to appropriate $23 billion for that purpose.
  At $100,000 that works out to about $230,000 per teacher job saved. 
If we are saving 300,000 teacher jobs with that $23 billion, that works 
out to $76,667 per teacher job saved. The average national teacher's 
salary is $46,752. Where does the rest of the money go?

[[Page 10777]]

  At the beginning of this administration there was a huge increase in 
education funds; $97 billion over 2 years for elementary and secondary 
education and $53.6 billion for the State Fiscal Stabilization fund. We 
were assured this was one-time funding. In April 2009, the Department 
of Education itself said in its guidance to the States on how to spend 
the money:

       The [funds are] expected to be a one-time infusion of 
     substantial new resources. These funds should be invested in 
     ways that do not result in unsustainable continuing 
     commitments after the funding expires.

  What we could have said is, we don't have any more money either, 
States. We just print it up here. So don't expect us to send you 
anymore.
  The U.S. Department of Education helpfully suggested what some of 
those one-time expenditures might be--making improvements in teacher 
effectiveness; establishing pre-K-to-college-and-career data systems; 
making progress toward rigorous college- and career-ready standards; 
providing targeted, selective support; and effective interventions for 
the lowest performing schools. In other words, the States and schools 
were told: Don't spend this money on continuing programs. Spend it 
once.
  Our Governor, a Democratic Governor in Tennessee, got the message. 
Governor Bredesen said in his State of the Union Address in 2009:

       Please let me make it clear that no proposed version of the 
     stimulus is any panacea or silver bullet; substantial cuts 
     are still needed under any circumstances. Furthermore, it is 
     vital to remember that this stimulus money is one-time 
     funding.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The 10 minutes of the Senator has 
expired.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. I thank the Chair. I see none of my colleagues here.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Senator Barrasso from Wyoming is 
waiting.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. I ask for another 60 seconds to conclude my remarks. I 
thank the Chair.
  When we think about the funding, we need to remember the best things 
for us to do. They are to stop imposing health care mandates on States, 
which make it impossible for them to pay their bills; and to properly 
support public education, especially public higher education, which is 
going to take a terrible blow because of the passage of the health care 
bill. Thanks to the health care bill, tuition payments for students are 
going to rise.
  Second, we should recognize that the stimulus money passed last year 
was one-time funding. We created this financial cliff and now we have 
an unprecedented level of debt in the Federal Government. We do not 
have $23 billion lying around to send to the States.
  Whether we are sending $230,000 per teaching job, $76,000 per 
teaching job, or scaling it back and saying we are only going to send 
the national average, which is $46,000, the question still remains: 
From whose grandchildren will we borrow the money?
  We need to reduce the growth of the Federal debt. We should not be 
bailing out States with another $50 billion.
  I thank the Senator from Wyoming and I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Wyoming is 
recognized.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, could you please inform me how much time 
is remaining in morning business?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. There is 17 minutes on the 
Republican side.

                          ____________________