```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 83 (Thursday, May 18, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6843-S6844]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                           THE BUDGET DEBATE

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, we will begin in a matter of a couple of 
hours the debate on the budget resolution.
  I do not want anyone to despair about the disagreement that will 
exist on the floors of the Senate and the House on the budget. The 
disagreement that exists ought not to be a cause for despair, because 
there is not any disagreement about the destination. We all believe 
that the budget ought to be balanced. We believe it ought to be 
balanced by the year 2002, and I am prepared to support that and vote 
for that.
  There is a vast disagreement, however, on priorities: How do you get 
from here to there? If we agree on the destination, there is certainly 
disagreement on the routes. How do you achieve a balanced budget? This 
is the time and this is the place to have a vibrant and healthy debate 
about priorities.
  Now, I expect there will be some skepticism about statements from 
those of us on this side of the aisle, so I want to today, as we begin 
the discussion, quote from a Republican political analyst, author, and 
commentator, Kevin Phillips. This is not from a Democrat. Here is what 
Kevin Phillips says about the budget that is going to be brought to the 
floor by the Republicans.
  ``Anybody who thought the greed decade ended several years ago,'' Mr. 
Phillips says, ``hasn't yet had time to study the new balanced budget 
proposals put forward by the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House.'' He said 
it is ``special interest favoritism and income redistribution. Spending 
on Government programs, from Medicare and education to home heating oil 
assistance, is to be reduced in ways that principally burden the poor 
and the middle class while simultaneously taxes are to be cut in ways 
that predominantly benefit the top 1 or 2 percent of Americans.''
  Again, this is a conservative commentator writing that fiscal 
favoritism and finagling is what is involved here. If it was not that, 
he said, ``we'd be talking about shared sacrifice, with business, Wall 
Street and the rich, the people who have big money, making the biggest 
sacrifice.'' But Kevin Phillips says:

[[Page S6844]]

       Instead, it's senior citizens, the poor, students and 
     ordinary Americans who'll see programs they depend on gutted, 
     while business, finance and the richest 1 or 2 percent, far 
     from making sacrifices, actually get new benefits and new tax 
     reductions.

  He says:

       In short, aid to dependent grandmothers, children, college 
     students and city dwellers is to be slashed, while aid to 
     dependent corporations, stockbrokers, generals and assorted 
     James Bond imitators survives and even grows. And if the 
     deficit is substantially reduced under a program like this, 
     there'll be a second stage of further upward income 
     redistribution from upper bracket profits in the stock and 
     bond markets.

  Again, Kevin Phillips, a Republican says:

       If the U.S. budget deficit problem does represent the 
     fiscal equivalent of war--and maybe it does--then what we are 
     really looking at is one of the most flagrant examples of war 
     profiteering this century has seen.

  Mr. President, the debate will be about priorities. We ought to 
balance the budget, we ought to do it by the year 2002, but there are a 
lot of ways to get to that destination. You do not have to run down the 
road and stop and pick up a few dollars from those who cannot afford it 
and then make another stop and give to those who have a substantial 
amount already. That is the purpose of, I think, the discussion of the 
Senator from Hawaii.
  We are talking about the Republican party that brings a budget to the 
floor and gives very big tax cuts for the wealthy and takes it from 
things that are important--kids who go to school, working families and 
the elderly. We think that these priorities are not in step or keeping 
with the best interests of this country.
  Mr. President, I yield the remainder of my time to the Senator from 
Hawaii, Senator Akaka.
  Mr. AKAKA addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.

                          ____________________
```