[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 17101-17103]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         FAREWELL TO THE SENATE

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, in 1981, in his first inaugural address, 
President Reagan said:

       Government is not the solution to our problem; government 
     is the problem.

  I came to the Senate 2 years later in 1983 with the firm belief that 
in most cases his statement was wrong. I believed then and I believe 
now that the Federal Government can be a constructive force for good, 
in protecting and maintaining the civil liberties of all Americans, in 
maintaining and strengthening our economy, protecting our environment, 
and in helping Americans live productive and fulfilling lives.
  As I look back over the last 30 years, many of the arguments that 
have consumed our time at the Senate, whether on questions of spending 
or taxes or regulation or fiscal policy, those questions have divided 
between those who saw government as the problem and those who believed 
it could and should be a constructive force for helping the American 
people deal with problems. I consider myself firmly in the second camp. 
In each of the major areas of national concern, I would like to be able 
to report progress for the country since I arrived in the Senate. 
Unfortunately, the record of progress is not so clear. In many areas, 
we have made progress, but there are also instances where we have lost 
more ground than we have gained. As issues continue to be reconsidered, 
I am reminded of the well-known statement that ``success is never 
permanent in Washington.''
  With regard to our Nation's security from foreign aggression, the end 
of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union were clearly the 
most positive developments we have seen in the last 30 years. If the 
end of the Cold War was the most positive national security development 
I witnessed since coming to the Senate, the invasion of Iraq to bring 
about regime change in that country was the biggest national security 
blunder. That blunder cost our Nation dearly in service men and women 
killed and injured and in resources that should have been used to 
strengthen our economy here at home. Last month, I was stopped by a 
woman from northern New Mexico who thanked me for my service in the 
Senate and particularly for my vote against granting President Bush the 
authority to take our country into that war.
  The Nation's fiscal policy is very much the focus of the Senate's 
attention during these final weeks of the 112th Congress. On this 
issue, again, we have made one step forward during the time I have been 
in the Senate, but, unfortunately, we have taken two steps back. I 
arrived in the Senate in January of 1983, a period of large deficits 
compared to anything the country had experienced for several decades. 
Those large deficits grew and persisted through the Reagan Presidency.
  In 1990, a democratically controlled Congress and President George 
H.W. Bush made a significant step forward, reining in those deficits 
with the enactment of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of that 
year, 1990. That law created the statutory pay-go requirement. It also 
increased marginal rates for the wealthiest Americans, and I was proud 
to support the measure. In 1993, another major step was taken when, at 
the urging of President Clinton, Congress enacted the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of that year, 1993. Again, that measure both raised 
taxes and constrained spending. It was denounced by many in the Senate 
as sure to throw the economy into

[[Page 17102]]

recession. In fact, the opposite occurred, and the economy prospered. 
As a result of these policy changes and the strong economy of the 
1990s, we enjoyed a period of balanced budgets and even surpluses in 
1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.
  Unfortunately, those surpluses were not to continue. President George 
W. Bush urged Congress to cut taxes and Congress was all too willing to 
oblige, and although I didn't support the 2001 or 2003 tax cuts, they 
were passed. At about the same time we were cutting taxes more than we 
could afford, we were also going to war in Afghanistan and in Iraq and 
adding a new drug benefit to Medicare. No provision was made to raise 
revenue or cut spending elsewhere to pay for any of these mammoth 
undertakings. Of course, the cost of health care, both the cost to 
government and to families and businesses who purchased private 
insurance, continued to grow at too rapid a pace. So the result was a 
return to large deficits and, of course, those large deficits grew 
substantially larger because of the recession that began in December of 
2007.
  Today, we are trying to strengthen our economy while at the same time 
trying to reduce projected deficits. That long-term deficit reduction 
will, once again, require higher taxes as well as new constraints on 
spending, and I hope that even in these final days of this 112th 
Congress, we can reach agreement to proceed.
  As regards health care, in the longstanding fight to provide 
Americans with access to affordable health care, we have seen 
significant progress. In 1997, we enacted the Children's Health 
Insurance Program which resulted in nearly 8 million American children 
obtaining access to health care. Of course, in 2010, we adopted the 
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This unfairly maligned 
legislation has the promise of moving us much closer to the goal of 
universal health care, and I am proud to have worked with my colleagues 
in the writing of that legislation and in seeing it enacted. Now that 
the recent election is behind us, I hope the efforts to repeal that 
legislation are at an end. I also hope the two parties can find ways to 
improve the legislation with a particular focus on better controlling 
the growth and the cost of health care.
  In addressing the various energy challenges facing the country, 
again, there is progress to report. In 2005 and 2007, Congress enacted 
major Energy bills. Those bills moved us toward a better and more 
comprehensive national energy policy. Those bills promoted an adequate 
and more diverse supply of energy. They increased the efficiency and 
effectiveness of how we use energy in our economy. They promoted strong 
market reforms and consumer protections for electricity, and they 
struck a balance between meeting our energy goals and lessening 
environmental impacts of energy, including overall greenhouse gas 
emissions. As a result of that balanced approach, we have arrested what 
had been an increasing dependence on foreign oil. Coupled with 
technological advances that have opened new sources of supply, we are 
headed to greater levels of energy independence than we had thought 
possible even as recently as 7 years ago.
  The bipartisan consensus that allowed us to enact those bills has, 
unfortunately, eluded us in the current Congress. I hope in future 
Congresses there will reemerge a recognition that climate change is a 
reality and that our policies to meet our energy needs must also deal 
responsibly with environmental issues, including the damage caused by 
greenhouse gas emissions.
  As regards our Nation's policy on education, the good news is we seem 
to have moved past the period where the Republican nominee for 
President announced a commitment to eliminating the Federal Department 
of Education. President Clinton deserves great credit for making the 
support, particularly of higher education, a priority of his 
Presidency. President George W. Bush deserves credit for making a 
serious effort to reform and improve elementary and secondary 
education. Although that effort to improve elementary and secondary 
education has not succeeded as many of us who supported it had hoped, I 
remain persuaded the Federal Government needs to persist in trying to 
play a constructive role in improving education in this country.
  The States and local school districts deserve great credit for 
developing and adopting the Common Core Standards, and I hope future 
Congresses will strongly support the steps and the funding needed to 
upgrade student performance by implementing those standards. President 
Obama and his administration have demonstrated their strong commitment 
to this goal.
  In addition to these areas of concern I have mentioned, we have seen 
some progress in maintaining and advancing the science and engineering 
enterprise in this country. As the Cold War came to an end, we 
successfully found ways to better integrate the strengths of our 
defense laboratories into the civilian economy, through technology 
transfer and partnering. We have also seen some important increases in 
funding for research, particularly in support of the life sciences, and 
that growth has stagnated in recent years. It needs to continue and be 
replenished, but as we continue that support, we must also recognize 
the need to do more to support research and development in the physical 
sciences and in engineering.
  One significant advance I was proud to support was the establishment 
of ARPA-E, the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy within the 
Department of Energy. That effort to identify breakthrough science and 
engineering initiatives to meet our energy challenges holds great 
promise for our Nation and for the entire world.
  We have also seen progress in providing increased protection for 
public lands. One particular bill in that area was the omnibus public 
lands bill that was passed in 2009. It added wilderness protection to 
over 2 million acres, designated 1,100 miles of wild and scenic rivers, 
and added more than 2,800 miles for the national trail system. I was 
proud to be part of the effort to enact that legislation.
  Finally, I will make a few comments on the way we in the Congress 
conduct our own business. Any fair assessment has to conclude that in 
this area, we have lost ground in the last two decades. Public opinion 
of the performance of Congress is at an alltime low and it is not hard 
to see why. I will mention three obvious ways in which the functioning 
of Congress has worsened.
  First is the willingness of some in Congress to shut down the 
government. In 1995, we saw the leadership of the House of 
Representatives demonstrate that they consider refusing to fund the 
government as an acceptable bargaining ploy in their efforts to prevail 
in disputes with President Clinton and Democrats on spending issues. 
Since 1995, that threat to withhold appropriations has been made 
several more times. As we saw then, shutting down the government is 
costly, it is wasteful, and it is harmful to Americans. I hope this 
irresponsible threat will soon be viewed as unacceptable.
  A second way the malfunctioning of Congress became clear was when in 
August of 2011--just less than 18 months ago--the Republican leadership 
in Congress determined that another tool at their disposal was the 
ability to refuse to increase the debt ceiling. By doing so, they could 
deny the Secretary of the Treasury the authority to borrow money to 
meet the obligations the government had already undertaken. To my 
knowledge, this was the first time the congressional leadership of one 
of our major parties had stated their willingness to see our Nation 
default on its debt.
  This threat to force a default on the obligations of the Federal 
Government resulted in the sequester of government spending, which is 
scheduled to begin January 1. It also resulted in a downgrading of U.S. 
debt by one of the leading credit rating agencies.
  We now hear renewed threats to use this so-called leverage as a way 
to demand cuts in Medicare and in Social Security. Once again, I 
believe this is an irresponsible action I hope Congress will get 
beyond.
  Of course, a third way in which the functioning of the Senate--not 
the full

[[Page 17103]]

Congress but the Senate--has worsened is the abuse of Senate rules 
allowing unlimited debate or filibuster. As the Senate currently 
operates, a threat of filibuster is used routinely to obstruct the 
Senate from doing its business, even when the issue before the Senate 
is relatively uncontroversial. Many times following a delay caused by 
obstruction, an overwhelming number of Senators will vote for the 
legislation or the nomination which the Senate has been delayed in 
considering. In the next Congress, I strongly encourage my colleagues 
to make the necessary changes in Senate rules to limit the ability of 
one or a few Senators to obstruct the Senate from doing its regular 
business. My colleague Senator Udall of New Mexico is on the floor with 
me. He has been a leader in this effort to get these rules changed, and 
I commend him for that.
  So the record of our progress both as a country and as a Congress 
over the last 30 years has been mixed. There is progress to report. I 
have mentioned some of that. There are also many missteps and failures 
we need to acknowledge.
  My conclusion remains that many of our challenges as a nation can 
only be met with the help of a strong and effective national 
government. There are times when the actions of the government are more 
a problem than a solution, but there are many more occasions where 
enlightened action by the government is important and even essential.
  I consider it an honor and a privilege to have represented the people 
of New Mexico in the Senate for the last 30 years. I thank the people 
of my State for their confidence in electing me and supporting me 
during the time I have served here. I thank the very capable and 
committed men and women who have worked on my staff, both in Washington 
and in New Mexico, during these 30 years. I thank all my colleagues 
here in the Senate for their friendship and help to me during this 
period. Of course, I thank my wife Anne and our son John and his wife 
Marlene for their support that has allowed me to serve in the Senate.
  To all my friends and colleagues who will be here in the next 
Congress and in future Congresses, I hope you can find the common 
ground necessary for our country to effectively move forward and meet 
its challenges. The endeavor is a worthy one, and I wish you every 
success.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.

                          ____________________