[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 9102-9103]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                               DEBT LIMIT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Stearns) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, in March of 2006, then-Senator Obama was on 
the Senate floor and this is what he said: ``The fact that we are here 
today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership 
failure. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and 
internationally. Leadership means that `the buck stops here.' Instead, 
Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs 
of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a 
failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.''
  But now, Mr. Speaker, a few short years later, President Obama now 
takes the opposite approach, calling for an increase in the debt limit 
and threatening doom otherwise. President Obama has failed to send to 
Congress a budget that would realistically solve our Nation's financial 
problems. He calls for plans that spend too much and borrow too much 
and tax too much. When Congress reasonably rejected his plan and 
proposed a budget with responsible cuts, he turned to political 
rhetoric rather than meaningful discussions. So, at a time when our 
Nation must address a fiscal crisis, our President has offered no real 
solution and has politicized the issue. What we have today more than 
ever before is a sign of leadership failure, back to his original 
speech when he was a Senator. America deserves better.
  So today, with the debt ceiling already $5.3 trillion higher, higher, 
than the level President Obama objected to raising 5 years ago, he now 
asks us to raise it again for the 81st time since 1940. We all know 
this famous quote that defines insanity as doing the same thing over 
and over again expecting different results. If we actually want to 
solve today's problems, we must depart from the insane 70-year 
tradition of just continuing to spend. If we do not delve into the real 
spending problems today, we will have this same debate a year later, 3, 
5, 10 years later from now, and will again be urged to raise the debt 
limit or face a financial catastrophe.
  The United States Government already owes more than $14 trillion. 
Less talked about is the Federal Government faces another $114 trillion 
in unfunded liabilities for Social Security and for Medicare. An 
estimate by the Congressional Budget Office reveals that by the year 
2025, the government will spend 100 percent of every dollar in revenue 
on entitlements. And Federal debt aside, State and local governments 
face a combined $3 trillion coupled with their own unfunded liabilities 
in the form of pensions.
  Forcing the government to live within its means is the only solution. 
Just as a family household does it when it reaches its spending limits, 
we must begin to closely scrutinize our bills and decide where there is 
unnecessary waste. When families seek to decrease their utility bills, 
they remember to turn off lights when they leave a room. We must begin 
doing this as well. Wasteful, fraudulent programs must be turned off 
and long-term programs such as Medicare and Social Security must be 
addressed seriously today. Debt must be paid down instead of piled on.
  Although the President, the Senate leader, the U.S. Secretary of the 
Treasury believe the worst thing that could happen to all of us is that 
we default on August 2, I believe that the worst thing that could 
happen for Congress to do is to fail to couple the increased debt limit 
with meaningful spending cuts. Once again, the private sector has 
affirmed this. On June 11, 2011, 150 economists called for immediate 
spending cuts to help support job growth in a letter to Speaker John 
Boehner, which I would like to have placed in the Record.

   A Debt Limit Increase Without Significant Spending Cuts and Budget 
                   Reforms Will Destroy American Jobs

       An increase in the national debt limit that is not 
     accompanied by significant spending cuts and budget reforms 
     to address our government's spending addiction will harm 
     private-sector job creation in America. It is critical that 
     any debt limit legislation enacted by Congress include 
     spending cuts and reforms that are greater than the 
     accompanying increase in debt authority being granted to the 
     president. We will not succeed in balancing the federal 
     budget and overcoming the challenges of our debt until we 
     succeed in committing ourselves to government policies that 
     allow our economy to grow. An increase in the national debt 
     limit that is not accompanied by significant spending cuts 
     and budget reforms would harm private-sector job growth and 
     represent a tremendous setback in the effort to deal with our 
     national debt.
       Ryan C. Amacher, University of Texas at Arlington; Michael 
     Applegate, Oklahoma State University; King Banaian, St. Cloud 
     State University; Stacie Beck, University of Delaware; John 
     Bethune, Barton College; Scott Bradford, Brigham Young 
     University; Phillip J. Bryson, University of Wisconsin-
     Madison; Oral Capps, Jr., Texas A&M University; James E. 
     Carter, Emerson Electric Co.; Robert E. Chatfield, University 
     of Nevada, Las Vegas; Kenneth W. Clarkson, University of 
     Miami; John P. Cochran, Metropolitan State College of Denver; 
     Charles W. Baird, California State University, East Bay; 
     Bruce Bender, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; Donald R. 
     Booth, Chapman University; Michael Boskin, Stanford 
     University; David A. Brat, Randolph-Macon College; David P. 
     Brown, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Todd G. Buchholz, Two 
     Oceans Management; Samantha Carrington, California State 
     University.
       Don Chance, Louisiana State University; Candice Clark, 
     Economic Consultant; R. Morris Coats, Nicholls State 
     University; John F. Cogan, Hoover Institution; Robert 
     Collinge, University of Texas at San Antonio; Kathleen B. 
     Cooper, Southern Methodist University; Nicole Crain, 
     Lafayette University; Robert Crouch, University of 
     California, Santa Barbara; Coldwell Daniel III, The 
     University of Memphis; J. Ronnie Davis, University of New 
     Orleans; Ted Day, University of Texas at Dallas; Arthur T. 
     Denzau, Claremont Graduate University; Nasser Duella, 
     California State University, Fullerton; Joseph W. Duncan, 
     Private Consultant on Information Policy; Frank Egan, Trinity 
     College; Dorla A. Evans, University of Alabama--Huntsville; 
     Frank Falero, California State University; Layton W. Franko, 
     Queens College; Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Hudson Institute; Dave 
     Garthoff, The University of Akron--Akron, Ohio.
       Gerald Gay, Georgia State University; Cathleen J. Coolidge, 
     California State University, Chico; Mike Cosgrove, University 
     of Dallas; Clyde Wayne Crews, Jr., Competitive Enterprise 
     Institute; Robert Dammon, Carnegie Mellon University; Antony 
     Davies,

[[Page 9103]]

     Duquesne University; Stephen J. Dempsey, University of 
     Vermont; Phoebus J. Dhrymes, Columbia University; Floyd H. 
     Duncan, Virginia Military Institute; John Eckalbar, 
     California State University; John B. Egger, Towson 
     University; Dino Falaschetti, Florida State Law; Michelle 
     Michot Foss, University of Texas; Michele Fratianni, Indiana 
     University; Delworth B. Gardner, Brigham Young University; 
     James R. Garven, Baylor University; Robert Genetski, 
     classicalprinciples.com; Micha Gisser, University of New 
     Mexico; Joseph A. Giacalone, St. John's University, NY; David 
     Gillette, Truman State University.
       Marvin Goodfriend, Carnegie Mellon University; Richard L. 
     Gordon, The Pennsylvania State University; Richard J. Grant, 
     Lipscomb University; Earl L. Grinols, Baylor University; Eric 
     A. Hanushek, Hoover Institution; Joseph H. Haslag, University 
     of Missouri; Joel Hay, University of Southern California; 
     David R. Henderson, Hoover Institution; Douglas Holtz-Eakin, 
     American Action Forum; Chris Inama, Golden State University; 
     Stephen Jackstadt, University of Alaska, Anchorage; Gerald R. 
     Jensen, Northern Illinois University; Jerry L. Jordan, 
     Pacific Academy for Advanced Studies; Alexander Katkov, 
     Johnson & Wales University; Richard LaNear, Missouri Southern 
     State University; Lawrence Goodman, Center for Financial 
     Stability, Inc.; Ed Graham, University of North Carolina at 
     Wilmington; Paul Gregory, University of Houston; Dennis 
     Halcoussis, California State University, Northridge; Stephen 
     Happel, Arizona State University.
       Kevin Hassett, American Enterprise Institute; Bob Heidt, 
     Indiana University--Bloomington; John P. Hoehn, Michigan 
     State University; C. Thomas Howard, University of Denver; F. 
     Owen Irvine, Michigan State University; Joseph M. Jadlow, 
     Oklahoma State University; Ryan S. Johnson, BYU-Idaho; June 
     O'Neill, Baruch College, CUNY; Marek Kolar, Trine University; 
     Corinne Krupp, Duke University; Norman Lefton, Southern 
     Illinois University, Edwardsville; Larry Lindsey, The Lindsey 
     Group; Jane Lillydahl, University of Colorado at Boulder; R. 
     Ashley Lyman, University of Idaho; David Malpass, Encima 
     Global; Henry Manne, George Mason University; Timothy 
     Mathews, Kennesaw State University; Roger Meiners, University 
     of Texas-Arlington; James C. Miller III, Hoover Institution; 
     Ed Miseta, Penn State Erie, The Behrend College.
       Andrew P. Morriss, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa; John 
     E. Murray, University of Toledo; George R. Neumann, 
     University of Iowa; Seth W. Norton, Wheaton College; James B. 
     O'Neill, University of Delaware; Svetozar Pejovich, Texas A&M 
     University; Ivan Pongracic, Jr., Hillsdale College; John A. 
     Powers, University of Cincinnati; Richard W. Rahn, Cato 
     Institute; Glenn MacDonald, Washington University in St. 
     Louis; Yuri N. Maltsev, Carthage College; Michael L. Marlow, 
     California Polytechnic State University; Martin C. McGuire, 
     University of California-Irvine; Allan Meltzer, Carnegie 
     Mellon University; Thomas P. Miller, American Enterprise 
     Institute; James Moncur, University of Hawaii at Manoa; 
     Robert Mundell, Nobel Laureate in Economics, 1999; Richard F. 
     Muth, Emory University; Robert D. Niehaus, Robert D. Niehaus, 
     Inc.; Lee E. Ohanian, University of California, Los Angeles; 
     Stephen T. Parente, University of Minnesota; G. Michael 
     Phillips, California State University, Northridge.
       William Poole, University of Delaware; Ronald L. Promboin, 
     University of Maryland University College; James B. Ramsey, 
     New York University; Thomas A. Rhee, California State 
     University, Long Beach; R. David Ranson, H. C. Wainwright & 
     Co. Economics Inc.; Christine P. Ries, Georgia Institute of 
     Technology; Thomas Carl Rustici, George Mason University; 
     Thomas R. Saving, Texas A&M University; Judy Shelton, Atlas 
     Economic Research Foundation; George P. Shultz, Hoover 
     Institution; James F. Smith, EconForecaster, LLC; Houston H. 
     Stokes, University of Illinois at Chicago; Avanidhar 
     Subrahmanyam (Subra), University of California, Los Angeles; 
     Robert Tamura, Clemson University; Clifford F. Thies, 
     Shenandoah University; Leo Troy, Rutgers University-Newark; 
     George Viksnins, Georgetown University; James P. Weston, Rice 
     University; Michael E. Williams, University of Denver; 
     Michael Wohlgenant; North Carolina State University.
       Gene C. Wunder, Washburn University; Paul H. Rubin, Emory 
     University; Gary J. Santoni, Ball State University; Robert 
     Haney Scott, California State University, Chico; William F. 
     Shughart II, The University of Mississippi; Timothy F. 
     Slaper, Indiana University; Vernon Smith, Chapman University 
     School of Law; Lawrence Southwick, University at Buffalo; 
     Brian Strow, Western Kentucky University; Richard J. Sweeney, 
     Georgetown University; John B. Taylor, Hoover Institution; 
     Stephen A. Tolbert, Jr., Montgomery County Community College 
     (PA); David G. Tuerk, Suffolk University; Richard Vedder, 
     Ohio University; Sherri L. Wall, University of Alaska 
     Fairbanks; J. Gregg Whittaker, William and Jewell College; D. 
     Mark Wilson, Applied Economic Strategies; Gary Wolfram, 
     Hillsdale College; Benjamin Zycher, Pacific Research 
     Institute; Joseph Zoric, Franciscan University of 
     Steubenville.

  The letter specifically says: ``An increase in the national debt 
limit that is not accompanied by significant spending cuts and budget 
reforms to address our government's spending addiction will harm 
private-sector job creation in America. It is critical that any debt 
limit legislation enacted by Congress include spending cuts and reforms 
that are greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority being 
granted to the President.''
  If there has ever been a failure of leadership, it is today. We're 
broke, and the solution lies in reform rather than rhetoric, spending 
cuts rather than spending increases. Leadership has called for 
compromise in the next couple of weeks. A compromise does not involve a 
vote on raising the debt ceiling without these spending cuts. We 
demonstrated that on May 31 when, 97-318, the House rejected this 
measure. No Republican supported the vote then, and no Republican 
should support such a vote in August. Only after we curb the trillions 
of dollars of debt that we continue to pile up can we consider raising 
the debt limit.

                          ____________________