[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 18974-18975]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              THE ECONOMY

  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam President, I understand the President made 
another speech today, and the speeches he has been giving lately are 
clever political documents. It is pretty clear his focus has shifted 
from governing to campaigning, with about a year from now until 
election day. But our Nation is in a serious financial condition. Our 
debt is larger than we like to acknowledge it is. Our European friends 
on the other side of the Atlantic are wrestling with their debt 
problems, and many of those nations--most of those nations--have debt 
less than we do as a percentage of GDP. We know, from every expert we 
have heard testify before the Budget Committee, on which I serve as 
ranking member, that we must change our path. We are on an 
unsustainable path, and we cannot continue on it.
  Time after time we have had hearings and have heard from experts 
telling us we have to alter our debt trajectory. We have to get on a 
sound path. Perhaps it will be a tougher path for a few years, a harder 
road, but it is the right road, and the road that will lead to 
soundness in our economy. Prosperity and growth is what we need.
  The debt commission President Obama appointed, headed by Mr. Erskine 
Bowles and Senator Alan Simpson, told us we are on a path to the most 
predictable financial crisis the Nation has ever been on. They were 
saying that the unsustainable trajectory of the this country's debt 
will lead us to some sort of economic catastrophe. It will knock us 
back into a recession, put us back to where we were in 2007 or 2008, or 
like what Europe is facing right now. They pleaded with us to do 
something about it.
  The debt commission laid out a plan. I don't agree with everything in 
the plan, but it said, at a minimum--and there was bipartisan agreement 
on this--the debt should be reduced. The added debt we incur over the 
next 10 years should be reduced by at least $4 trillion. They said we 
should reduce the growth of our debt by at least $4 trillion.
  So in the last two meetings in the Budget Control Act, it looks as if 
we achieved about $2.1 trillion, not $4 trillion, but they all said we 
needed more than that, because the increase in our debt over the next 
10 years would be about $8 trillion to $10 trillion. That is the 
increase on top of the $15 trillion we have already incurred. This past 
fiscal year, which ended on September 30, we will have added $1.23 
trillion to our debt; the year before that, $1.3 trillion, the year 
before that, $1.2 trillion--the only three times in history we have had 
deficits over $1 trillion. It is a very serious situation.
  So we have a speech. I just have to say, we tried to look at the 
speech to see what it is that the President has proposed. He is our 
leader, our Commander in Chief. We only have one Chief Executive, one 
Governor, one mayor. I see Senator Manchin here. He was a Governor. He 
had to manage the State and exercise leadership.
  So what is it this Executive, our President, is proposing that we do? 
Well, it is pretty clear. It appears that he is proposing that we spend 
next year $324 billion more than we planned to spend. He calls it a tax 
cut or maintaining a tax cut. In truth, it is a holiday from paying 
into our Social Security pension that all Americans pay into as they 
work. It is a holiday from that.
  Well, where does the money come from? We have a trust fund, Social 
Security, that we pay into, and we have a promised benefit when we 
retire. We want to honor that and make sure the Social Security trust 
fund is able to honor that. How do we not pay into it without hurting 
or damaging the Social Security trust fund?
  They say: Well, don't worry. We will put the money in. Who is ``we''? 
Well, ``we'' is the United States Treasury. The United States Treasury 
will put the money in. But the Treasury is projected by the 
Congressional Budget Office to run a $1 trillion deficit this year, a 
little bit better than the $1.23 trillion deficit that we ran last 
year.
  So we are running a $1 trillion deficit. We don't have any money in 
the Treasury to pay to Social Security. So how do we honor the Social 
Security trust fund? How do we put the money in? Well, we give bonds. 
Just an IOU. The United States Treasury, as easy as pie, signs a 
document, an IOU, gives it to Social Security, and says: You are made 
whole. Don't worry; no problem. What? Me worry? We have it under 
control. Where does this come from?
  Social Security is on a trajectory that is going to call this debt. 
The trustees are going to need this money to pay our beneficiaries, and 
they are going to call the debt to the United States Treasury and the 
United States Treasury is going to have to pay it, in my opinion, 
unless we totally abandon our responsibility to the seniors in America. 
I don't think we will. So we are going to pay that money, and it is 
added to the debt. This year, under the President's plan, beginning in 
January, he will add $324 billion in debt.
  What the Bowles-Simpson Commission was all about was laying out a 
plan to reduce our debt, not increase the debt. The first thing we have 
to do to confront a surging debt in America is to quit digging the hole 
deeper, quit asserting new programs to spend larger and larger amounts 
of money. It would also add $155 billion the second year. So it would 
total $479 billion over the first two years.
  So they say: Well, we have the Treasury figured out. We will have a 
tax increase. We will raise taxes, and over 10 years that will pay for 
the $479 billion that is added to our debt right now. There will be 
enough money coming in--don't worry--over 10 years from this new tax.
  Well, I will just say a couple things about that. If we are going to 
raise taxes, what the bipartisan Debt Commission told us was, use it to 
pay down debt. Don't use it to fund a new spending program of $479 
billion. If we are going to cut spending somewhere in the program to 
save money, let's begin to reduce our debt. Don't just cut spending so 
we can create a new spending program.
  We have to watch what we are doing. I don't believe it has been 
thought

[[Page 18975]]

through carefully where we are headed, and I don't see anything in this 
speech today that will lay out a 2-year, 5-year, 10-year plan for 
making America a stronger and better place.
  But, we are told, the President cares about the middle class; and if 
we question any of these schemes, then we don't care about working 
Americans. I reject that. That is offensive to me. I totally believe 
that I represent the cross-section of people in my State and America. I 
love and respect the working people of this country, and they are 
entitled to better. They are entitled to leadership that tells them the 
truth. The truth is that we are endangering their future and their 
children's future by allowing the most incredible debt increases that 
the Nation has ever seen, and that has to be brought under control.
  It is offensive to suggest that if someone has a different view about 
how to create jobs and wealth in America, they don't care about the 
people who make America great, people who go to work every day, people 
who send their children to defend this country and pay their taxes and 
obey the law and do things right and support those who are in trouble 
and need help.
  I would propose this, more specifically--and I think the Republican 
plan touches these very issues in an effective way that would, in fact, 
increase and enhance job creation and economic growth in America.
  First, we need policies that reduce the cost of energy for Americans. 
We have an Energy Department and an Interior Department that seem to 
believe their goal in life should be to drive up the cost of energy: to 
make coal and natural gas harder to produce, make oil more hard to 
produce, make us have to buy it from abroad when we could produce more 
at home, creating jobs in this country, creating wealth in this 
country, creating taxpayers in this country.
  We need more American energy. We need more energy at lower prices. 
The idea that somehow we are going to be better off because of carbon 
or other issues to have higher energy prices so we use less of it is 
totally unjustified, and it is creating an incredible burden on working 
Americans.
  We need to end the health care proposal that is clearly driving up 
health care costs. It is causing businesses not to hire. I have talked 
to small businesses in my State. They assure me with absolute 
confidence that the health care bill that will be taking effect, and is 
beginning to take effect, will cause them to hire fewer people. We need 
more people hired. We need more people working. We need to eliminate 
unnecessary, counterproductive governmental regulations that drive up 
the costs of our products, making them less competitive in the world 
marketplace. We need to do that. It will not cost the Treasury any 
money, but it will make America more productive and create jobs.
  I supported and worked with my Democratic colleagues, and we passed 
in this Senate--but the President didn't support it--legislation to 
demand that China treat its currency in a fair way to eliminate the 
currency manipulation they have been participating in and to eliminate 
the unfair hammering, savaging of American industry that is occurring 
in this country as a result of unfair trade. That is very real. It has 
to end, and the President needs to be leading on that. It would create 
jobs in our country without adding to our debt.
  Finally, the greatest threat to our economic growth and to our job 
creation in America is the debt itself. It is the cloud over our 
economy. We have to do more about it.
  There is one more thing I would mention; that is, tax simplification 
and tax alteration. Not to necessarily get less taxes but to create the 
tax revenue that the government takes in in a way that does not damage 
the economy. Create a tax simplification plan that would encourage 
economic growth and prosperity and not pull down economic growth and 
prosperity. So once we have done those things, we begin to focus on 
reducing our surging debt. If we do it steadfastly, like Governors all 
over America--Governor Bentley in Alabama is having to face challenges 
and is making tough decisions. But the State is still operating. It 
hasn't sunk into the ocean. Neither has New Jersey. Neither have other 
States. Even New York and others are beginning to confront their debt 
situation and make tough choices.
  We are not doing it here. Our President is proposing more spending--
not just this $324 billion plan for this year, he is proposing to spend 
10 percent more on the Education Department next year, 10 percent more 
on the Department of ``anti-Energy,'' 10 percent more for the State 
Department at a time when the country is in its most severe debt crisis 
in its history. That is not responsible. This debt is a threat to us.
  If we talk to the financial experts and the wizards who move money 
around the world, they are worried about it. If we talk to government 
experts such as the Secretary of the Treasury or the Federal Reserve 
Chairman or the head of the Congressional Budget Office, they tell us 
what we are doing is dangerous, that we are on an unsustainable path. I 
do not see in this speech today any commitment, any leadership from the 
President on this fundamental issue. The most fundamental failure of 
his leadership is not to look the American people in the eye and to 
tell them honestly and truthfully that we are spending too much.
  Back in Marion, AL, I was at a town meeting at somebody's house with 
30 or 40 people there. The oldest gentleman there spoke last. He had 
fought in World War II. He grew up during the Depression. He told us, 
in his view, it was not the high cost of living that was getting us in 
trouble but the cost of living too high.
  I do believe we have been living too high, and we have been spending 
too much. The President--our leader--should be talking directly and 
honestly to us and laying out a 2-year, 5-year, 10-year plan that will 
bring this deficit down. He should be explaining to the American people 
why we are all going to have to tighten our belts; why there is 
nothing--defense or anything else--that is going to avoid having to 
tighten its belt. We can do this and put our country on a sound path 
without having a debt crisis that would be a tragedy of monumental 
proportions.
  Madam President, I just wanted to share those thoughts today. This 
Congress is going to have to do more than tread water for the next 
year. We are going to have to do more than just play clever political 
games. We are going to have to deal with the threat we face directly 
and honestly.
  The proposal I see that was floated again today from the White House 
may sound good politically. But for me, as one who has been looking at 
the numbers, it does one thing: it increases the debt over the 2 years 
by $479 billion. That means probably this year's deficit will not be $1 
trillion but probably $1.35 trillion--1,350 billion dollars--this 
year's deficit. We are promised that there will be a tax increase that, 
after 10 years, will somehow pay for this.
  That is the kind of thinking and action that has allowed this country 
to get out of control financially, and I hope we can do better.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from West Virginia.

                          ____________________