[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 2912-2913]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           DEFICIT REDUCTION

  Mr. FLAKE. Madam President, I rise today to talk for a short period 
of time about the magnitude of our budget, debt, and deficit. Against 
the backdrop of a debt ceiling increase, Members of both parties are 
going to today, likely, repeal one of the deficit reduction measures 
included in the bipartisan budget agreement that was approved less than 
2 months ago. How do we convey to the Nation the seriousness about 
solving the debt crisis when at the first sign of political pressure we 
repeal one of the deficit reduction measures?
  As we all know, the Ryan-Murray budget deal included modest 
reductions in some spending programs over the next 10 years in order to 
increase discretionary spending caps in fiscal years 2014 and 2015. I 
voted against this agreement because I thought the spending cuts did 
not go far enough. I do not think we are treating our debt and deficit 
seriously enough.
  Second, I have been down that road of trading spending increases 
today for spending cuts later many times. It does not work. We have 
seen that play before. We know how it ends. Year after year Members of 
Congress simply refuse to stick to the budget discipline we said we 
would stick to. Exhibit 1 is before us today. The Congress is about to 
undo--in fact, repeal--one of those provisions, as I mentioned.
  It is important to note that the cost-of-living adjustment that will 
be repealed--or the reform that will be repealed was a cost-of-living 
adjustment--a COLA--for military retirees resulting in less than a 1-
percent reduction for working-age military retirees. That is 1 percent. 
It stopped far short of the elimination of COLA requirements for 
retirees under the age of 62 that the Simpson-Bowles Commission 
recommended.
  Certainly our veterans deserve the utmost respect and generous 
retirement pay. However, it has been reported that regardless of age, 
members of our armed services could easily, in some instances, receive 
retirement and health benefits for 40 years or more.
  Some of my colleagues have suggested that failing to support measures 
to repeal the COLA reduction is tantamount to turning our backs on 
veterans. This is untrue. This is a mischaracterization of the issue at 
hand. I think we all know that. The U.S. military is at a crossroads. 
Fast-growing retirement pay and health benefits are threatening to 
displace investments in the readiness of our Armed Forces.
  I encourage my colleagues to take a hard look at the fiscal mess we 
face before we vote to roll back one of the few deficit reduction 
measures the President and Congress have agreed to. Our fiscal 
situation is serious. We cannot ignore that forever.

[[Page 2913]]

  This problem will continue to get worse. Yes, we ought to be 
reforming entitlement programs so they will be around for future 
beneficiaries, veterans and others, but for goodness' sake, when 
deficit reduction measures get signed into law, surely at some point we 
need to stand by them.
  I yield the floor and 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. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call 
be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________