S6228 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE May 8, 1995

A second cloture vote will occur tomorrow if cloture is not invoked today.

It is also my hope that we might at

least debate this evening the CIA nomination, Mr. Deutch. I think the administration would like to have that done.

I think it is a 2-hour time agreement.

We can debate that this evening, and

have the rollcall vote tomorrow morning.

I yield the floor.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro temMORNING BUSINESS

fpore. Under the previous order, there

will now be a period for the transaction

of morning business for not to extend

beyond the hour of 12 noon with Senators permitted to speak therein for

not to exceed 5 minutes each.

RECOGNITION OF SENATOR BYRD

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro temfpore. Under the previous order, the

Senator from West Virginia is recognized to speak for up to 30 minutes.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, section 301

THE BUDGET

fof the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 requires

that on or before April 15 of each year

the Congress shall complete action on

a concurrent resolution on the budget

for the fiscal year beginning on October 1 of such year. The failure to meet

this deadline, however, has no effect on

points of order under the Congressional

Budget Act. In fact, Congress has met

the deadline only three times since enactment of the 1974 Budget Act; namely, for fiscal years 1976, 1977, and 1994.

So, it is not unusual that Congress, at

the April 15 deadline, has yet to complete action on the 1996 budget resolution.

It does seem a little unusual that

this year’s budget resolution has not

been reported by the Budget Committee of either House. Perhaps our friends

on the Budget Committees are finding

it somewhat more difficult to come forward with a budget resolution which

will force Congress to make the difficult choices that will be necessary to

achieve a balanced budget, than it was

to sign the mostly empty pledges that

were contained in the vacuous rhetoric

of the so-called ‘‘Contract With America.’’

For a while, everything seemed to be

going along swimmingly for the new

Republican majority in Congress. We

have been told over and over again by

the House Republican leadership that

they would balance the budget by the

year 2002, while at the same time they

would increase military spending, cut

taxes by some $630 billion over the next

ten years, and take Social Security off

the budget-cutting table.

Thus ornament is but the guiled shore

To a most dangerous sea; the beauteous scarf

Veiling an Indian beauty; in a word,

The seeming truth which cunning times put

on

To entrap the wisest.

It was obvious to all who examined

this visionary proposal that it amounts

to a return to the failed policies of supply-side economics undertaken during

the Reagan-Bush years. The problem

with the Reagan plan was that we did

the easy part—we massively increased

military spending and we drastically

cut taxes. But when it came to the

hard part—cutting entitlement spending—everybody balked. We all know

what resulted from those actions—a

string of unprecedented budget deficits

which were the largest the country has

ever seen and which ceased to grow

only after the election of President

Clinton.

In other words, we went on a national

spending spree on credit—not paying

our bills, but charging them to future

generations. As a result, the national

debt rose from $932 billion on January

20, 1981, when President Reagan was

sworn in, to $4.1 trillion on January 20,

1993, the day that Bill Clinton was

sworn in as President.

Immediately following his election,

President Clinton submitted a budget

that cut the projected Bush deficits

drastically and, in fact, in 1993 Congress enacted a massive deficit reduction bill, which President Clinton

signed into law. That package of budget cuts reduced the projected deficits

over 5 years by roughly $500 billion,

and it was passed by both Houses of

Congress without a single Republican

vote.

The economy has responded well to

the deficit reduction that has taken

place thus far under the leadership of

President Clinton. I believe that the

economy will continue to perform well

so long as we continue our efforts to

whittle away at the massive deficits

built up over the dozen Reagan-Bush

years.

Tough decisions will be required to

balance the Federal budget. I know

that it will require drastic action. I believe that the American people, as a

whole, are prepared to face the tough

choices that will have to be faced in

order to balance the Federal budget, so

long as they are certain that their

elected representatives are administering the budget cuts fairly across every

sector of the country. The budget axe

should not be wielded indiscriminately.

This round of budget cutting, to be effective, should involve priority setting;

it should involve separating out the

truly effective and necessary Federal

Government programs from those that

are merely nice to have but not truly

necessary for the Federal Government

to be involved.

Furthermore, if we are to achieve

fairness in our deficit-elimination efforts, we cannot ignore the huge tax

subsidies that are written into the Tax

Code from time to time and are never

looked at again. These kinds of tax expenditures, many of which may well

serve a worthwhile national purpose,

should no longer be allowed to escape

scrutiny along with every other area of

Federal activity.

We are told by the Congressional Research Service that there are over 120

separate tax expenditures in current

law which will cost the U.S. Treasury

$453 billion this fiscal year. That figure

will rise to $568.5 billion in fiscal year

1999—unless Congress and the President enact changes to eliminate and

otherwise cut back the growth in some

of these tax subsidies. If we fail to do

so, then how can we possibly expect the

American people to believe that we

have administered budget cuts fairly?

Incredibly, Mr. President, we have

not seen any indication by the Republican leadership that they are prepared

to even examine these 120 Federal tax

subsidies to see if they are necessary or

if they can be afforded any longer.

Instead, we have seen the House pass

a massive tax cut bill, which will cost

$630 billion over the next 10 years. And,

who will get the benefit of those tax

cuts? According to the Treasury Department:

Nearly half the tax benefits—47 percent—would go to the wealthiest 10

percent of households. These households all have incomes at least somewhat above $100,000, according to the

Treasury measure.

The richest 1 percent of households—

1.1 million households—would receive

20 percent of the benefits from the tax

package, while the bottom three-fifths

of households—65 million households—

would receive only 15.6 percent of the

total tax benefits, according to the

Treasury data.

The average tax reduction for the

wealthiest 10 percent of all households

would be nearly nine times greater

than the average tax reduction for the

middle fifth of households—$4,821 and

$555, respectively.

Mr. President, I am totally opposed

to tax cuts at this time. I will not vote

for President Clinton’s tax cuts, I will

not vote for the House-passed tax cuts,

or any other tax cuts that may be proposed at this time. We need to keep an

eye on the target of reducing the Federal budget deficit until it is eliminated. From press accounts, I understand that Senator DOMENICI, the very

able and experienced chairman of the

Budget Committee, is planning to recommend to the Budget Committee a

budget resolution which, if carried out,

would result in a balanced budget for

fiscal year 2002. It is my further understanding that Senator DOMENICI’s proposal will not include a tax cut. Instead, a tax cut would have to wait

until Congress has enacted the necessary legislation to achieve budget

balance, under CBO scoring, by 2002.

If this is the position of the chairman

of the Budget Committee, I commend

him for his courage and foresight, and

for his integrity in placing the emphasis in this year’s budget resolution