[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 20108-20110]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION RELATIVE TO REQUIRING A 
                     BALANCED BUDGET--S.J. RES. 24

                                 ______
                                 

    PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES 
        RELATIVE TO BALANCING THE BUDGET--S.J. RES. 10--Resumed

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume the en bloc consideration of S.J. Res. 10 and S.J. 
Res. 24, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A joint resolution (S.J. Res. 24) proposing an amendment to 
     the Constitution relative to requiring a balanced budget.
       A joint resolution (S.J. Res. 10) proposing an amendment to 
     the Constitution of the United States relative to balancing 
     the budget.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, there is 
5 minutes of debate equally divided prior to votes on passage of the 
measures.
  The Republican leader is recognized.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, yesterday and today my Republican 
colleagues here in the Senate have been coming to the floor one after 
another to deliver a simple, urgent message, one that I hear every time 
I am home in Kentucky: Washington simply must change course. The 
spending spree must end. We must put our Nation's fiscal house in order 
before it is too late.
  This is not a partisan message. Everyone recognizes that both parties 
played a role in getting us to this point. But let's be clear, 
Republicans are the only ones in Congress right now who are attempting 
to do something meaningful about fiscal restraint. The only way we will 
actually achieve it is by acting together on serious legislation such 
as the balanced budget amendment Republicans are voting on today--not 
through thinly veiled cover votes such as the one Democrats plan to 
hold alongside this morning.
  For nearly 3 years now, Republicans have stood up to the fiscal 
recklessness of this administration and pleaded with the President and 
Democrats in Congress to stop the spending spree--stop it--and work 
with us on a serious plan to put our Nation's fiscal house in order.
  For nearly 3 years we have met nothing but resistance. I even read 
this week that some Democrats in Congress actually view our insistence 
on fiscal responsibility as a good political issue for them. They say 
Americans have moved on, that they do not want to hear about fiscal 
restraint anymore. Apparently these Democrats are content to let this 
crisis continue to build and build until it pops up in the polls again.

[[Page 20109]]

  What Republicans have been saying this week is that we do not have 
that luxury. We cannot wait for a European-style calamity to happen 
right here to finally do something about our fiscal problems, nor 
should we want to. After all, we were not elected to get reelected. We 
were elected to recognize the Nation's problems and to face up to them 
with foresight and with courage.
  That is why Republicans have kept up our call for a serious and 
effective balanced budget amendment. We have seen all the statistics--
that Congress now borrows more than 40 cents for every dollar it 
spends; that interest payments on the debt alone will soon crowd out 
spending on things such as education and defense; that annual deficits 
under this President routinely double and triple the previous record.
  We know where it has gotten us. Under this President, the national 
debt has rocketed from $10.1 trillion all the way up to 15.1 trillion, 
more than a 40-percent increase in the national debt under this 
President in a record time of less than 3 years, a run of fiscal 
mismanagement only matched in its recklessness by total unwillingness 
to correct it.
  The President's most recent budget was so irresponsible that not a 
single Member of the Senate voted for it, not one. The President's 
budget was voted down unanimously here in the Senate.
  What about the first ever downgrade of U.S. debt, did that prompt 
action? Not in this White House. It prompted a round of ``shoot the 
messenger'' instead. This President's entire approach to our Nation's 
fiscal problems has been to sit back and blame somebody else, even as 
he continues to make all of these problems worse.
  There was a time when President Obama claimed to believe in the 
importance of paying our debts. As a Senator he stood on this very 
floor and chastised his predecessor for even asking the Congress to 
raise the Nation's debt limit. He called it a failure of leadership. 
Yet earlier this year, as President he demanded that Congress approve 
the single largest debt limit increase ever requested by a U.S. 
President--without any plan at all to cover the cost. It was this kind 
of fiscal recklessness that roused Republicans to recommit ourselves to 
the idea that, if we are going to preserve the American dream for our 
children, Congress has to stop spending more than it takes in, and it 
was the Democrats' resistance to that idea that convinced us the only 
way to make sure it happens is through a constitutional amendment that 
actually requires it.
  For too long, the politics of the moment or of the next election have 
been put ahead of Congress's responsibility to balance the books. Too 
many promises have been made that cannot possibly ever be kept, and now 
the time for serious action has come; we must prevent what is happening 
in Europe from happening here.
  That is what our balanced budget amendment would do. By permanently 
limiting Congressional spending to the historical norm of 18 percent of 
gross national product, and through a new three-fifths supermajority of 
both Houses of Congress to raise the debt limit, the balanced budget 
amendment Republicans are proposing today would go a long way in 
preventing that day of reckoning from happening right here in America. 
Every single Senator should support it.
  Democrats here in Washington know the American people want Congress 
to get its fiscal house in order. That is why they proposed a balanced 
budget amendment of their own. Unfortunately, they have no real 
intention of passing it. If they did, they would join us in supporting 
a bill that we know would lead to the kind of fiscal restraint the 
American people are asking for.
  I ask my friends on the other side to join us. It is not too late. We 
are only going to solve this problem together. Republicans are doing 
our part. We need them to do theirs. The American people are asking us 
to act. Let's do it. If this President will not take America's fiscal 
problems seriously, Congress should do it for him.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Colorado.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, as I rise to ask for the yeas 
and nays on the amendment, I point out my amendment is not a cover 
amendment. It includes many of the principles and provisions the House 
considered in a balanced budget amendment they voted on recently, and 
it also contains many of the provisions and principles that this body 
in the 1990s considered when Paul Simon and Senator Hatch and many 
others led on a balanced budget amendment proposal.
  With that, I ask for the yeas and nays on S.J. Res. 24.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The question is, Shall the joint resolution pass?
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 21, nays 79, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 228 Leg.]

                                YEAS--21

     Baucus
     Begich
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Brown (OH)
     Carper
     Casey
     Feinstein
     Gillibrand
     Hagan
     Heller
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Manchin
     McCaskill
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall (CO)
     Wyden

                                NAYS--79

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Barrasso
     Bingaman
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Boxer
     Brown (MA)
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Chambliss
     Coats
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Franken
     Graham
     Grassley
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hoeven
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson (WI)
     Kerry
     Kirk
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Lee
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Paul
     Portman
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Rubio
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Thune
     Toomey
     Udall (NM)
     Vitter
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. On this vote, the yeas are 21, the 
nays are 79. Two-thirds of the Senate duly chosen and sworn not having 
voted in the affirmative, the joint resolution is rejected.


                              S.J. Res. 10

  Under the previous order, there will now be 2 minutes of debate, 
equally divided, prior to a vote on S.J. Res. 10.
  Who yields time? The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. HATCH. Madam President, this is the last chance to vote for a 
constitutional amendment that will truly do something, that will tie 
the hands of Congress so they have to live within fiscal constraints. 
We are taxing and spending this country into bankruptcy. We have a $15 
trillion-plus national debt, growing to $20 trillion to $30 trillion. 
We don't have any restraint around here.
  People say: If we just live up to the Constitution and restrain 
ourselves, we can do that. They have been saying that for 35 years. The 
only time we have come to a balanced budget around here is when we had 
the first Republican Congress in over 40 years and we had a President 
who was willing to support it.
  This is our chance to try to do something for our country that will 
stop the outrageous, out-of-control spending. We need to do it. This 
amendment is the only one that can do it.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I have actually voted for a balanced 
budget. Democrats in this Chamber and in the other Chamber voted for 
one and it passed. Not a single Republican voted for it. During the 
Clinton administration, we were able to balance the budget and start 
paying down the debt. A huge surplus was left to his successor and it 
was squandered by that administration.
  We should not enshrine the extreme provisions in the current proposal 
in our Constitution. We should not make it more difficult for Congress 
to respond to economic and natural disasters. Proponents of this 
amendment

[[Page 20110]]

say: Let's let the courts make these decisions. Let us not transform 
our courts into budget-cutting bodies. They are not equipped to perform 
that role. Even Justice Scalia, testifying before our committee, 
laughed at the idea that they could do that.
  The Hatch-McConnell proposal will do nothing to spur economic growth 
or ease the partisan gridlock in the Congress. It will do the opposite. 
It will enshrine bad fiscal policy in the Constitution. A vote for this 
proposal is a vote for dramatic cuts in Social Security, Medicare, and 
veterans' benefits.
  Partisan efforts like this may be good bumper-sticker politics, but 
they are bad solutions. I wish those who say they revere the 
Constitution would show it the respect it deserves rather than treating 
it like a blog entry.
  I urge Senators to oppose this radical and ill-considered proposal to 
amend our Constitution.
  Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there a sufficient second? There 
appears to be a sufficient second.
  The question is, Shall the joint resolution pass?
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 47, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 229 Leg.]

                                YEAS--47

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Barrasso
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Brown (MA)
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coats
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Collins
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Enzi
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Johnson (WI)
     Kirk
     Kyl
     Lee
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Portman
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rubio
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Thune
     Toomey
     Vitter
     Wicker

                                NAYS--53

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bingaman
     Blumenthal
     Boxer
     Brown (OH)
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Conrad
     Coons
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Johnson (SD)
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Manchin
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wyden
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. On this vote, the yeas are 47, the 
nays are 53. Two-thirds of the Senators voting not having voted in the 
affirmative, the joint resolution is rejected.
  The Senator from Illinois.

                          ____________________