H 4962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE May 16, 1995

that has been perpetrated on the American people, is absolutely no excuse for

Waco.

And I feel for the people of Waco.

Friends of mine that I loved were lost

at Waco. But this is a crisis of leadership. It is ludicrous. And this fascination with guns is not propelled by the

Constitution of the United States. A

concealed weapons law being discussed

in Texas is not called for.

Oh, yes, we have the right to have a

militia to protect the security of this

country, and we should not infringe

upon your right to safely own guns.

But to perpetrate violence, to have

children trying to understand why

adults are calling law enforcement officers just boot-wearing thugs? And putting it in print is not called for.

I call upon this Congress to be responsible. Vote against the repealing of

the assault weapons ban. We have lived

freely without the perpetration of mass

gun warfare in this Nation. Let us not

have a crisis of leadership.

Former President Bush, I thank you,

and I ask you, the American people, to

keep your voices raised high. President

Clinton, I thank you for your opposition to this kind of talk because this is

not a political issue. It is a question of

security and life and liberty. It is a

question of our children. It is a question of responsible speech. It is a question of integrity. And I maintain, have

hearings on the militia now. Understand that gun warfare is not called for

in this Nation, and let us wrap ourselves in the Constitution, yes, for freedom and liberty, but for safety and the

future of this Nation.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under

COMMENTS ON THE BUDGET

fthe Speaker’s announced policy of May

12, 1995, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.

HOKE] is recognized during morning

business for 5 minutes.

Mr. HOKE. Mr. Speaker, I have some

charts that I wanted to share with you

this morning that talk about the budget, because we are going to be talking

about the budget all week and are

going to be passing for the first time

since 1969 a balanced budget resolution.

It will show a very important number

at the end of the year 2002. It is a small

number, it is a round number, it is the

zero number, and that is going to be

the amount of the deficit in 2002.

I want to show you this chart to

begin with because I think it pretty

well delineates where the problems are

with the budget that we have to get

control of. This is essentially the

President’s budget here. What you see

is projections from 1995 to 2002. You

will see the two accounts that are increasing or projected to increase twice

as fast as any others, and those are

Medicare and Medicaid, the medical accounts. Ten percent for Medicare, 10.3

percent for Medicaid. What about Social Security? Five point three percent.

One of the arguments that you are

going to hear this week from the other

side repeatedly is that well, we cannot

possibly slow the rate of growth of

health care spending, Medicare and

Medicaid, because of the demographics,

more people coming into the system,

and because of inflation. Your numbers

do not take that into account.

The fact is that Social Security

takes that exactly and precisely into

account, and, as you can see, the Social

Security number increases at 5.3 percent per year. That is in the projected

budget. This is our number, this is the

President’s number, this is current

law. This is the say that it is, because

we are not touching Social Security in

this budget.

Yet, adding the same new seniors, because you qualify for Medicare at the

same time you qualify for Social Security, and taking into account a cost of

living adjustment, a COLA, and that

does not even reflect the small adjustment we are projecting is going to take

place in CPI, you can see that clearly

Social Security does not run out of

control, but Medicare and Medicaid do.

So this is where the problem is with

the Federal budget. This is where the

challenge is in getting it under control.

The other here, which is everything

else, is at 4.1 percent. If we move that

down to about a 2-percent rate of

growth, we win. Winning means winning for our children, it means winning

for the future of this country, and winning for the next generation.

Let us look at the trust fund itself.

This is the part A trust fund, Medicare.

Empty in 2002. You can see, according

to the projections, if we do not change

things, this is where we will be in 2002.

There will not be any money in that

trust fund account.

I think better than the graphic illustration of it is exactly what the Medicare trustees concluded on April 3, 1995.

This is under the worst case scenario.

They said, ‘‘The fund is projected to be

exhausted in 2001.’’

Now, who said this? Is this a partisan

statement by Republicans who are trying to fearmonger so that senior citizens are worried they will not have

Medicare to look forward to? Is that

who is saying this? Is this created by

Citizens Against Government Waste or

the AARP? Has this been created by

the Heritage Foundation or Cato Institute? Is it an interest group?

No, it is not. It is the trustees, the

President’s trustees, the trustees that

must be appointed to guard the assets,

to safeguard the future of the Medicare

trust fund. Robert Rubin, Robert

Reich, Donna Shalala, three members

of the President’s Cabinet. The fund is

projected to be exhausted in 2001.

So what do we do? What is our solution? What we say is we are going to

increase spending from $158 billion in

1995 to $258 billion in 2002. We are going

to increase spending at the same rate

of growth that Social Security is increasing, is growing. In other words,

the same rate of growth that a very

similar program that is a Federal program is increasing at, 5 or so percent.

That is what we are increasing Medicare. That is not just on a gross basis,

but also on a per capita basis, from

$4,700 to $6,300 per recipient in the

budget we are going to pass this week.

It increases about 5 percent per year,

the same amount as Social Security.

I bring this to your attention because

what you are going to hear from the

other side this week is a repeated chorus, a litany, over and over and over

again, that we are cutting Medicare

and that this is going to hurt seniors.

These are the facts. Keep the facts in

mind.

A SMALLER, LESS-INTRUSIVE

GOVERNMENT

fThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Under

the Speaker’s announced policy of May

12, 1995, the gentleman from Arkansas

[Mr. HUTCHINSON] is recognized during

morning business for 5 minutes.

Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Speaker, the

House Committee on the Budget under

the very capable leadership of JOHN KASICH is to be commended and congratulated for producing for us and for the

Nation a credible balanced budget plan.

As the budget plan was released last

week amid the howls of those who

would defend the status quo, one could

almost sense a collective nationwide

sigh as it sank into the American people that at long last there is a Congress

that is dead serious about balancing

the budget and confronting our debt

problem.

The litany numbers had become all

too familiar to millions of Americans:

Seventeen percent of Federal revenues

for interest on the debt; $200 billion

deficits as far as the eye can see, $1

trillion of new debt in the next 5 years.

We will pay more on interest than on

national defense by 1997. The impending bankruptcy of Medicare is spelled

out by President Clinton’s own trustees; $18,000 in debt assumed by every

new baby born in America.

But there is a glimmer of hope in

America this week as we prepare to

vote on this budget plan. Oh, it is

mixed with a lot of skepticism. Twenty-five years of deficit spending breeds

a lot of skepticism.

But there is a feeling that maybe,

just maybe, this Congress means business. Under the GOP budget plan there

will be a smaller, less intrusive and

more efficient Government. It forces us

to do what scores of corporations have

had to do, and that is downsize and

eliminate wasteful spending. It terminates 283 programs. As I talked about

the budget in my district this past

weekend, it was that line that received

the most applause, above all others, 283

programs eliminated. It eliminates 14

agencies and 68 commissions. It makes

real cuts in discretionary spending.

And the squealing has already begun.

We will hear from the ‘‘Prince of

Wails’’ over and over this week as the

defenders of the past wail ‘‘You can’t

do this.’’
May 16, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H 4963

Sure, there are provisions in the

budget I wish were not there. But that

is the beauty of it. Nothing is excluded.

Everyone will feel the squeeze. While

Federal spending increases each year

under the plan, it increases at a slower

rate to allow revenues to catch up with

spending, or, as William Safire wrote

yesterday of the civil war general, who

instructed a gunner to ‘‘elevate them

sights a little lower.’’

Under the plan, power and money are

shifted back to the States and local

communities. In welfare, Medicaid, nutrition programs, and job training,

there is consolidation, elimination of

needless duplication, and block granting to the States.

The budget plan would save Medicare

from bankruptcy. On April 3d of this

year, the Medicare trustees, three of

whom are Clinton administration appointees, sounded the alarm with their

warning that Medicare part A would

run out of money in 2001. this budget

plan puts a tourniquet on Medicare to

stop the hemorrhaging while a task

force develops long-term solutions.

Meanwhile, the President has been unwilling to assist in finding those solutions. Here again, expect the fear mongers and the scare tacticians to be out

in force.

Under the Committee on the Budget

assumption, spending on every Medicare beneficiary would actually increase, from an average of $4,684 now to

almost $6,300 in the year 2002.

But I believe that the most important feature of this budget plan is the

tax relief for the hard-pressed American family. This budget plan provides

for the full $500 per child tax credit. It

provides for our correction of the marriage penalty. It allows the implementing of the adoption tax credit and the

elder care credited. It allows for the

raising of the earnings limit on Social

Security recipients. These very meaningful pro-family policies will only be a

reality if we pass the House GOP budget plan.

It was Alan Greenspan who, in pointing out some of the benefits that would

happen if we balanced the budget, said

if our economy was not constrained by

Federal deficits, the balanced budget

would mean a lower interest rate, higher productivity, improved purchasing

power, reduced inflation, and accelerated long-term economic growth. Paul

Johnson, the noted historian, asserts

that the legitimization of envy is that

which a stable society should fear the

most. And there are going to be repeated efforts to legitimize envy by

pitting one group of Americans against

another group of Americans.

I think Thomas Jefferson, one of our

Founding Fathers, said it best when he

said, ‘‘To preserve our independence,

we must not let our rulers load us with

public debt. We must make our choice

between economy and liberty, or confusion and servitude.’’

That is the choice that this Congress

will face this week. I believe that most

Americans know in their guts, most

Americans know instinctively, that

balancing the budget is the right thing

to do, and we must do it for our children and for our grandchildren.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under

PRESERVING MEDICARE

fthe Speaker’s announced policy of May

12, 1995, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. FOX] is recognized during

morning business for 5 minutes.

Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, my colleague that just spoke certainly has eloquently expressed the importance of making sure we preserve,

protect, and make sure we continue

Medicare as we know it here in the

United States.

Medicare provides an important

source of health security for 32 million

of our Nation’s senior citizens and 4

million disabled persons. But Medicare

spending has been rising 10 to 11 percent a year, and if costs continue to

soar, everyone will have to pay more.

Medicare can be preserved, protected,

and improved while increasing its

spending, but at a slower rate of

growth. Last year in its annual report,

the Social Security and Medicare board

of trustees projected that part A trust

fund, the hospital insurance trust fund,

starts going broke in 1996. Next year

the Medicare part A trust fund will

spend $1 billion more than it takes in.

The trustees who included Labor Secretary Robert Reich, Health and

Human Services Secretary Donna

Shalala, and then-Treasury Secretary

Lloyd Bentsen, all members of the

Clinton Cabinet, concluded that the

Federal hospital insurance trust fund,

which pays inpatient hospital expense,

will be able to pay for only about 7

years, and is severely out of financial

balance in the long range.

Again, Just last month, the trustees,

including now-Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, replacing Bentsen, issued an

equally gloomy forecast, which indicated that the part A trust fund would

be bankrupt by 2002.

The trustees have called for prompt,

effective, and decisive action to save

the fund from insolvency.

Despite recommendation of this Presidential commission and the disclosure

by his own Cabinet officials, President

Clinton has failed to act on Medicare.

What is more, the financial pressure on

Medicare will only grow when baby

boomers start to retire.

Our efforts to protect Medicare from

bankruptcy and to balance the budget

by the year 2002 are taking place simultaneously. It is crucial that the American people understand that Medicare

has to be reformed, irrespective of the

budget deficit. Even if we had a zero

deficit today, we would still have to

take action that is prevention for

Medicare’s bankruptcy. It is a fact if

Medicare goes bankrupt by law, no

payments can be made for hospital care

for Medicare beneficiaries or from any

other trust fund paid services.

Just a few weeks ago it was not well

known about this impending disaster

because the Clinton administration had

swept it under the rug. As Medicare

travels the road toward bankruptcy,

President Clinton has been AWOL, absent without leadership. He has even

refused to participate in a bipartisan

effort to save Medicare. Not until the

Republicans stepped forward to talk

openly and honestly about the Medicare crisis was anybody aware of the

extent of the problem.

Republicans believe we owe it to our

senior citizens to save Medicare from

bankruptcy. House Republicans have

determined to save Medicare by using

new approaches, new management, and

new technologies, to improve it, preserve it, and protect it. Congress has

an unprecedented opportunity to want

to take a fundament reform of the

Medicare Program. Action on Medicare

will run parallel to and occur during

the same period as action on the budget.

One of the steps we will be taking is

to create a Medicare preservation task

force to look at the various proposals

and determine what steps need to be

taken to eliminate fraud and abuse in

the system, and to make sure it is

more efficient.

One of the other creative thoughts on

the system is to make sure that we

give our senior citizens incentive to

cure the system by paying them 25 percent of any waste or fraud that they

can find in their own bills. It would be

one way to strengthen and empower

our senior citizens in making sure a

better system is improved.

House Republicans will increase Medicare spending, from $4,700 per retiree

today to $6,300 per retiree by 2002. That

is a 34-percent increase in Medicare

spending per retiree. There is no proposed cut in Medicare. We will preserve

the current Medicare system for seniors. No one will be forced into the system. But at the same time we need to

develop a new series of choices so senior citizens can control their own destiny.

We want to enter into a dialog with

the people and to make sure Medicare,

that is important to all of our seniors,

is, in fact, preserved.

We as a nation must undertake this

effort to continue the dialog, to work

together for change, and to make sure

that both sides of the aisle are working

to make sure that Medicare is preserved, protected, and, in fact, is even

stronger in years ahead.

fRECESS

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12 of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess until 10 a.m.

Accordingly (at 9 o’clock and 42 minutes a.m.), the House stood in recess

until 10 o’clock a.m.

The recess having expired, the House

AFTER RECESS

fwas called to order by the Speaker at

10 o’clock a.m.