[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 11997-11998]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             BUDGET CRISIS

  Mr. ROBERTS. I thank the President. In making these remarks, I wish 
to emphasize that I am not trying to be presumptuous or disrespectful 
in any way to the Office of the Presidency or to the President 
personally. I wish to make that very clear. It is just that I am trying 
to think of an allegory to try to get my point across, and it seemed to 
me this might be the way to do it.
  We have our national unemployment rate at its highest level all year. 
We have the debt ceiling rapidly approaching the crisis everybody is 
talking about, and one would think we could do everything we could to 
support those industries very critical for job creation and economic 
development. There is one industry I am referring to in particular; 
that is, general aviation, and I was trying to think, how could I get 
my point across.
  Since we had Speaker Boehner, Leader McConnell, and the distinguished 
majority leader Senator Reid conducting the very best they can to get a 
solution, perhaps the President, although his time is very valuable, 
could talk to somebody such as me, a ranking member of a committee, 
very worried about what is happening with our country, very worried 
about what we can do to get this debt ceiling fixed and we can get a 
long-term solution with regard to our entitlement programs. Perhaps he 
could actually invite me down maybe later--a lot later, certainly no 
cameras--in regard to a little basketball game of horse because 
everybody knows the President is a very good basketball player, as a 
matter of fact an extremely good basketball player. I am not going to 
make that claim, but there was a day on blind-side picks and a few 
other things I could do.
  But I would emphasize to the President, bouncing the ball to him just 
on a bounce pass, and say: Your ball, Mr. President. The ball is in 
your court. I would like to emphasize, while we are playing, that 
basically he shouldn't be more concerned with increasing the debt 
ceiling past the 2012 elections than working on a long-term solution 
for solving the crisis. That would just be a suggestion. He would 
probably go to the left corner and sink a three about that time. I 
would want to emphasize to the President that he is singling out and he 
seems to be fixated on one specific industry that affects me and other 
specific industries as well, and I don't know how we pick and choose 
who should pay more taxes, who should pay more in terms of sacrifice, 
in terms of picking and choosing industries.
  But at any rate, I would tell the President when I had the ball--I 
would probably be dribbling a lot or trying to, if he wasn't playing 
tough defense--and I would say: Mr. President, since negotiations 
started last month on raising the debt limit, you have, on multiple 
occasions over and over again, singled out the general aviation 
industry as an example of big business that serves only the wealthy and 
should contribute more to lowering the deficit. The only problem with 
this claim is it is not real, it is not factual, it is not correct. 
Consequently, I don't know whether it is in his head or maybe the 
writers who write that valuable information for him that general 
aviation only serves millionaires and billionaires. Then, after I shot 
and missed it, I would say: Your ball again, Mr. President. I would say 
as he was trying to drive around me, rather successfully: The truth is, 
these aircraft actually serve as an essential business tool for a 
multitude of businesses of all shapes, all sizes, farmers, ranchers, 
manufacturers, business men and women, to access multiple offices and 
facilities that are spread across this great Nation. These folks are 
not fat cats. I would like the President to understand that managers 
and sales teams and technical experts, those are the people we are 
talking about who are in that corporate aircraft to be sure, but it is 
general aviation that serves the general public's welfare. They are 
often required to visit numerous offices in a short amount of time in 
regions of the United States that aren't served by large airports.
  By that time, the President has scored a couple layups and two more 
jump shots and I have yet to hit a shot. But I will persevere. I would 
say to him as we were playing there on the court: Mr. President, in 
fact, 90 percent of our country's airports aren't even accessible by 
commercial aircraft--certainly, the Presiding Officer knows that--and I 
think they represent just those plain folks you have been talking 
about, just the folks who are in the middle, just the folks who are 
having a tough time, just the folks who have been laid off.
  Then we have a paradox of enormous irony where, in the stimulus bill, 
there

[[Page 11998]]

was a tax incentive for general aviation that helped some of those 
folks get those jobs back and it is that which you are attacking, which 
is your own suggestion or at least that of the majority in the Senate.
  General aviation employs 1.2 million workers and annually contributes 
$150 billion to the U.S. economy. That is a mouthful. By that time, the 
President has probably stolen the ball and scored another layup. 
Playing horse, we have five. I would probably ask him to play 10 or 
spot me 10.
  Just last year, I would point out to the President, general aviation 
delivered 1,334 aircraft valued at over $7.9 billion, over half 
attributed to exports, and that is what the President wants to achieve 
in his trade policy. I would tell him: Sir, your goal is doubling U.S. 
exports over the next 5 years. You don't do it by calling general 
aviation fat cats and singling out that industry for political blame.
  Let's talk about tough times and tough going. Similar to every other 
business sector, general aviation has struggled during the recession. 
At that particular time, I would claim the President fouled me with a 
sharp elbow and I would take a free shot and I would say: Wait a 
minute. Unfortunately, this has resulted in layoffs among many high-
skilled, high-paying jobs in this industry, and that is a two-shot 
foul, by the way, so I have a little time. I would say: To help offset 
these job losses and incentivize the purchase of these aircraft, 
Democratic Members included a provision in the infamous stimulus bill 
to accelerate the depreciation schedules for a wide range of capital 
investments.
  In Kansas, for Cessna Aircraft, accelerated depreciation was a key 
factor for Cessna and its suppliers being able to retain 1,000 jobs. 
Jobs held by folks whom I would tell the President are not fat cats. 
Again, they are just folks. They are doing the job to produce a product 
in the United States that we are very proud of, and we certainly don't 
want them to go to Mexico or to go to Canada. Some have already left.
  So it came as a pretty big shock that you, Mr. President--and I am 
still on my second shot on the free shot. He is now asking me to quit 
talking and start shooting. But I would say: It comes as a pretty big 
shock to those workers that yourself and the Democratic Members in both 
Chambers would direct an attack on this industry.
  This is true. I don't know how many Members of the Senate--not too 
many but, my word, I don't know how many Members of the House have 
heard that--corporate jet. Corporate jet. It has a ring to it, I guess. 
But at any rate, why would you repeal a tax provision that has 
contributed to job creation at a time of severe economic downturn; in 
fact, the one you actually suggested.
  But there is more. There is more, Mr. President. Your ball. On top of 
this, budget negotiators are considering implementing user fees on 
general aviation as a way to generate revenue. We have been down that 
road. Let me be very clear. If user fees on general aviation are 
implemented, we could very well see the beginning of the end of this 
very critical industry.
  With all that is going on--and I hate to remind you of this. By the 
way, I just scored a hook shot, Mr. President. It wasn't very pretty, 
but it rolled in. So it is about eight to one, something like that. At 
any rate, I am coming back.
  When you mention corporate jets six times in two paragraphs in one 
speech and that is repeated on the various pundit shows on TV over and 
over again as a fat cat industry, that is most unfortunate.
  I think we need to get serious about spending. I have thought so for 
some time, and I think every Member here does as well. We have our 
different ideas on how to do it. But I also believe it makes sense to 
consider those provisions that would actually have a measurable impact 
on reducing our more than $14 trillion national debt.
  I would ask as I bounce the ball back to the President and he heads 
for that left-hand shot in the corner again and I am hustling to try to 
keep up, I would ask: Do you have any idea, if you just taxed all 
general aviation, what that would amount to? Just changing these 
schedules, these depreciation schedules for corporate jets; i.e., 
general aviation only contributes $3 billion over 10 years. We borrow 
around $40 billion every 10 days. Repealing this tax provision would 
close our national budget deficit for 1 hour--1 hour--1 hour in terms 
of a measurable effect. Yet we still pick on general aviation, calling 
them all fat cats.
  Sadly, this isn't the first time we have seen this happen; that the 
Congress of the United States, a different President has singled out 
general aviation. In the 1990 budget deal, the majority created a new 
luxury excise tax that applied to boats and aircraft. The tax was 
repealed in 1993. Because, as the Democratic-controlled Senate Finance 
Committee report explained, during the recent recession the boat and 
aircraft industries have suffered job losses, increased unemployment. I 
guess those are plain folks, they qualify, not fat cats. It said:

       The committee believes it is appropriate to eliminate the 
     burden these taxes impose in the interests of fostering 
     economic recovery in those and related industries.

  That is a lot of words, especially when you are out playing horse in 
weather that is pretty hot. Today--maybe it is better today so maybe it 
would be a better deal. I couldn't agree more with that. We have been 
down this road before. I think it is unfortunate.
  Last, before I watch him make his last shot and I go down to the T, 
at least on the court I hope I would have made my argument to the 
President that singling out general aviation as ``fat cats'' is simply 
not accurate, it is class warfare. That is a little tough. Maybe I 
wouldn't say that on the court, maybe sort of nudge him a little bit 
when I got underneath the bucket.
  At any rate, it is going to take courage to put this country's fiscal 
house back in order. There is no question about that. But it is 
absolutely essential for us to do it in a responsible manner and not by 
scapegoating, not by singling out important sectors of industry that 
have long played a vital role in the economic development of both my 
home State of Kansas and our country as a whole. I would simply say: 
Your ball, your game, Mr. President, but let's not single out general 
aviation anymore.
  It might have been the case if he were on a corporate jet with Kobe 
Bryant or somebody, maybe a Hollywood actor, maybe going to a 
fundraiser, maybe he got it in his head everybody who has a corporate 
jet, i.e., general aviation, as opposed to going from Kansas to North 
Dakota to check on some farm ground, that that is the case. I hope that 
is not the case anymore.
  That is the end of the ball game but it is not the end of the debate. 
I hope we have a debate without singling out an industry. That is 
unfair and not accurate.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. KERRY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. KERRY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent I be permitted to 
proceed as in morning business for about 15 minutes.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________