May 19, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE S7009 

MORNING BUSINESS 

Mr. DOMENICI. I ask unanimous 

consent there now be a period for the 

transaction of morning business with 

Senators permitted to speak for up to 5 

minutes. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

Mr. EXON addressed the Chair. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there 

an objection? 

Mr. EXON. Reserving the right to object. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska. 

Mr. EXON. But I will not object with 

this caveat, that the Senator from Nebraska, when we have finished the 

wrap-up procedures, would like to reserve 2 or 3 minutes as if in morning 

business. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

Mr. DOMENICI. Will the Senator 

close the Senate down for us? 

Mr. EXON. I will be happy to, Madam 

President. 

Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I rise in 

support of Senate Concurrent Resolution 13, the fiscal year 1996 congressional budget resolution, as reported 

by the Senate Budget Committee. 

What does this budget resolution do? 

More importantly than anything else, 

it provides for a balanced budget in 7 

years. 

This is the first-ever 7-year budget 

resolution, with the first-ever 7-year 

reconciliation instructions. It will 

produce, when it occurs in fiscal year 

2002, the first balanced budget in 33 

years. The last two balanced budgets 

were in 1969 and 1960. 

In fiscal year 2002, under this budget, 

the accumulated national debt will be 

almost $1 trillion lower than under current law—or, less than $6 trillion, instead of more than $7 trillion. 

That last fact is sobering—it reminds 

us that this budget is a good start, not 

the final victory, against the staggering debt load crippling our economy 

and stealing our children’s future. 

What does this budget resolution do? 

It reduces the rate of growth in Federal 

spending. Under this budget, spending 

still grows an average of 3-percent a 

year, down from the current 5.4 percent 

a year. 

Only special interest groups and liberals inside the Capital Beltway can 

say a 3-percent raise is really a draconian cut. 

Under this budget, total Federal 

spending in fiscal year 2002 will be $382 

billion more than this year—fiscal year 

1995. 

Only in Washington, DC, does anyone 

claim that a $382 billion increase is 

really a $229 billion cut. 

What does this budget resolution do? 

It delivers on the promise of the balanced budget amendment and those of 

us who supported it. 

Back in January and February, some 

opponents—and a few supporters—of 

the balanced budget amendment said 

they wanted to see a plan for exactly 

how to balance the budget. 

Well, here’s our plan: Some of my 

colleagues may have a different plan, 

and I invite them to bring it forward. 

This may not be everyone’s favorite 

plan, but it gets the job done in a fair, 

equitable way. 

Now that those who demanded, 

‘‘Where’s your plan?’’ have been given 

a plan. I expect that 67th Senator 

should come forward and finally help 

us pass the balanced budget amendment. 

What does balancing the budget 

mean in people terms? It means restoring the American dream of economic 

opportunity, starting now and extending to the next generation. 

We’re going to hear moans and complaints about budget cuts, but the cruelest cut of all is the cut in every 

American’s living standard that has occurred because of Government’s failure 

or refusal to balance the budget. 

The damage done by the borrow-andspend status quo must be undone. The 

Concord Coalition estimated that, 

without the Federal deficits and debt 

run up to date, the average family’s income would be $50,000, instead of the 

current $35,000. 

A study by the Federal Reserve Bank 

of New York showed that America lost 

5-percent growth in GNP and 3.75 million jobs from 1978–89 because of deficits and debt. 

Balancing the budget by fiscal year 

2002 means a better future. The econometrics firm DRI/McGraw-Hill said it 

means: 4 to 5 percent more nonresidential investment; 2.5 million new jobs; a 

GDP that is 2.5 percent higher, and another $1,000 in the pocket of the average household. 

GAO’s 1992 report estimated that balancing the budget would raise our children’s standard of living between 7 and 

36 percent by the year 2020. 

What does this budget resolution do? 

It fully protects Social Security. This 

budget makes absolutely no changes in 

the old age, survivors, and disability 

insurance [OASDI] trust funds, consistent with a number of current law 

protections, and consistent with the 

Dole motion passed during debate on 

the balanced budget amendment and 

the Kempthorne amendment adopted 

as part of S.1—the Unfunded Mandates 

Act. 

This budget in no way loots Social 

Security. It protects it by reducing the 

pressure of future debts, and it 

strengthens our ability to keep promises to seniors. 

It takes us two-thirds of the way to 

balancing the non-Social Security 

budget by fiscal year 2002. The Committee budget produces deficit reduction of $229 billion below current law in 

fiscal year 2002; the OASDI trustees 

project a $112 billion Social Security 

surplus for fiscal year 2002. Getting 

two-thirds of the way there is a lot better than the status quo. 

If we just stay on the glide path established by this budget, we can go on 

to balance the non-Social Security 

budget by about fiscal year 2005. That’s 

exactly the timing and the glide path 

suggested by Senator NUNN and others 

back during debate on the balanced 

budget amendment. 

What does this budget resolution do? 

It reforms and rescues Medicare. Under 

this budget, Medicare increases an average of 7.1 percent a year—more than 

twice the rate of inflation. It defies 

common sense to call that a draconian 

cut. 

Under this budget, Medicare spending 

will be $105 billion more in fiscal year 

2002 than in 1995. Where are the slash 

and burn cuts? 

Nothing here cuts services or drives 

up needy patients’ costs. It calls for 

Medicare reform—that more choice and 

market competition and consumer information will slow down the runaway 

costs we see now. That’s an appropriate 

goal to put in a budget resolution. 

A vote for this budget is a vote to 

rescue Medicare. Under the status quo, 

that system goes broke in fiscal year 

2002. Who says so? The Medicare Board 

of Trustees that includes three of 

President Clinton’s Cabinet Secretaries, the Commissioner of Social Security, and two public trustees. 

The trustees also said, in their April 

3, 1995, report: 

The trust fund does not meet the trustees’

short-range test of financial adequacy * * * 

It fails to meet the trustees’ test of longrange close actuarial balance * * * by an extremely wide margin * * * Congress must 

take timely action to establish long-term financial stability for the program. 

Mr. President, I also rise in strong 

opposition to the Lautenberg-Rockefeller amendment that would raid 

Medicare. The amendment would take 

$100 billion of the $170 billion economic 

dividend created by lower interest 

rates resulting from deficit reduction 

and add that back to Medicare spending. 

Make no mistake, this amendment is 

the proposal that would raid Medicare. 

All it does is spend down the Medicare 

trust fund faster than the committee’s 

budget. 

This amendment is another example 

of status quo tunnel vision. The committee’s budget assumes that we fix 

Medicare, reform it. That means seniors who need Medicare won’t be hurt, 

they’ll participate in an improved system. 

This amendment assumes there is no 

alternative to the current policies that 

are rapidly driving Medicare bankrupt. 

The House’s majority whip, Representative DELAY, said it well the other day: 

It’s like one side is talking about a 

cure for cancer and the other side can’t 

think about anything but chemotherapy. 

We want Medicare to continue to be 

there and to start working better for 

seniors today and tomorrow. If we do 

what’s best for Medicare and for our 

seniors, the numbers will come out the 

way the committee’s budget says. 

We still need the balanced budget 

amendment to the Constitution. The 

budget resolution currently before us 

provides for a balanced budget in 7 

mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS

S7010 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE May 19, 1995 

years. That gives some Members of 

Congress and the special interest 

groups 6 years and three elections to 

try and knock us off track. 

Can we balance the budget without 

the balanced budget amendment? The 

first Republican Congress in 40 years is 

proving we can, but ‘‘can’’ is no guarantee. If future Congresses continue on 

the path set out in this resolution, the 

result still will be only one balanced 

budget in 33 years. 

Hitting a target once in 33 years that 

we ought to hit in all but the most extreme circumstances, is not an endorsement of life without the balanced 

budget amendment. 

f 

IN MEMORY AND IN HONOR OF 

FALLEN ARIZONA LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS 

Mr. KYL. Mr. President, this year’s 

National Law Enforcement memorial 

service had great meaning and was 

filled with sadness for the citizens of 

Arizona. Over the past year, four Arizona law enforcement officers were 

killed in the line of duty. The seventh 

annual memorial service and candlelight vigil held here in Washington, 

DC, this week provided an opportunity 

to remember these dedicated officers 

and the contributions they made to the 

people of Arizona. 

I had the privilege of visiting with 

two of the families of these men this 

week. The loss they have experienced is 

still very painful for them. But, they 

know that the death of their loved ones 

was not in vain. They died to ensure 

that others could live—safely. These 

men provide an example of the dedicated service that all other law enforcement officers in Arizona should 

strive to achieve. 

Each of them made a unique contribution to Arizona. They all played a 

significant role in working toward a 

safer and stronger State and Nation. 

Mesa Police Officer Steven Paul Pollard died on November 27, 1994, when he 

was struck by a car and killed while 

conducting a DUI traffic stop in the 

emergency lane of U.S. 60 in Mesa. As 

Steve stood by the driver’s door of his 

vehicle, a motorist traveling eastbound 

apparently fell asleep and drove his vehicle off the roadway striking Steve 

and the police vehicle. He died instantly. 

Steve was born July 5, 1968, in Phoenix to Steven and Ida Garcia. He went 

to Starlight Elementary, Estrella Junior High, and Trevor Brown High 

School. He graduated in 1986. Steve had 

worked for the department of corrections before joining the Mesa Police 

Department. That was the career he 

wanted all of his life, and he died doing 

the job he always dreamed of doing. 

Steve is remembered as man who would 

go beyond the call of duty to help others. No job was ever too big or too 

small for Steve. 

Steve is survived by his mother and 

father, Richard and Ida Pollard; is 

brother and sister, Ruben and Angie; 

and his wife and daughter, Kimber and 

Celine. 

Wildlife Manager Estevan Escobedo, 

who had been with the Arizona Game 

and Fish Department for 9 years, was 

killed in a fiery helicopter crash near 

Coolidge Dam on January 4, 1994. He 

and three other officials, who survived 

the crash, were on a routine assignment to count javelina in a rugged canyon near Winkelman. The area was 

part of Estevan’s district, based in 

Globe. Estevan was the first law enforcement officer killed in the line of 

duty in 1994. It was the first aircraft 

accident involving a fatality for the department since 1980. 

Estevan graduated from Westwood 

High School and Arizona State University. Away from his duties as a wildlife 

manager, Estevan participated in rodeo 

events such as calf roping. He was a 

partner, confidant, and adopted brother 

to his rodeo buddies. 

Estevan is survived by his mother 

and a twin brother. He is remembered 

as a carefree, joyous bother, son, and 

friend, equipped with a playful sense of 

humor and a sense of duty that led him 

to give lovingly of his time and energy. 

Those who knew him say that Estevan 

had a smile that will last forever in the 

memories of those whose lives were 

touched by him. 

Sergeant Patrick (Pat) Riley died on 

March 11, 1994. He was struck by a 

truck while directing traffic at a construction site. He died approximately 2 

hours later. 

Pat joined the Maricopa County 

Sheriff’s Office as a detention officer in 

1983. A year later, he applied for and 

was accepted as a deputy sheriff. He 

spent 4 years in various positions as a 

deputy, ranging from a beat deputy to 

detective, culminating his assignment 

to major felonies as a homicide detective. During this period, he was nominated for the ‘‘Deputy of the Year’’

commendation in 1990. He received the 

B.P.O.E. ‘‘Americanism Award’’ in 1991, 

which was presented by Gov. Rose 

Mofford. Pat was promoted to sergeant 

in September 1992 and served in assignments at the general investigations division, detectives, and in patrol. He 

also received the highly coveted ‘‘Distinguished Service Award’’ in 1994. 

Pat was one of the lead investigators 

in the Temple homicide case, in which 

eight Buddhist monks and two apprentices were murdered. 

Pat married Laurie Davis in February 1987. After a courtship of love, he 

leaves behind his wife and no children. 

Sergeant Patrick Devon Thompson 

died on September 2, 1994. While on 

duty, Sergeant Thompson lost control 

of his police vehicle, collided with an 

oncoming car, and died instantly. 

Sergeant Thompson served with the 

Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Office 

since 1978. He is remembered by colleagues as honest, loyal, reliable, caring, and trustworthy. He was also very 

generous with his time, especially with 

the youth of Santa Cruz County. They 

respected and admired him. He was 

near death in 1991, but had a tremendous will to live, and he survived. A 

second chance can be a wonderful gift, 

and Pat realized this and approached 

his life with a new vigor, a new determination. His last 3 years were dedicated to undertaking new challenges 

and to helping children, especially 

through the D.A.R.E. Program. Pat encouraged the D.A.R.E. kids to live a 

clean and healthy life. 

Sergeant Thompson is survived by 

his mother, wife, sons, and daughters. 

Mr. President, it is an honor for me 

to remember Sergeants Thompson and 

Riley, Officer Pollard, and Wildlife 

Manager Escobedo. They served their 

organizations with distinction and 

with honor. We will never forget their 

sacrifice; we will always remember 

their spirit. 

f 

WAS CONGRESS IRRESPONSIBLE? 

THE VOTERS HAVE SAID YES 

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, on the 

evening I learned I had been elected to 

the Senate in 1972, one of the commitments I made to myself was that I 

would never fail to see a young person 

or a group of young people who wanted 

to see me. It was certainly beneficial to 

me that I did because I have been inspired by the estimated 60,000 young 

people with whom I have visited during 

the nearly 23 years I have been in the 

Senate. 

Most of them have been concerned 

about the magnitude of the Federal 

debt that Congress has run up for the 

coming generations to pay. The young 

people and I always discuss the fact 

that under the Constitution, no President can spend even a dime of Federal 

money that has not first been authorized and appropriated by both the 

House and Senate of the United States. 

That is why I have been making 

these daily reports to the Senate since 

February 22, 1992. I want to make it a 

matter of record precisely the size of 

the Federal debt which as of Thursday, 

May 18, stood at $4,885,256,391,108.42 or 

$18,544.52 on a per capita basis. 

What Congress has already done to 

future generations is immoral. 

f 

MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT 

Messages from the President of the 

United States were communicated to 

the Senate by Mr. Thomas, one of his 

secretaries. 

f 

EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED 

As in executive session the Presiding 

Officer laid before the Senate messages 

from the President of the United 

States submitting sundry nominations 

which were referred to the appropriate 

committees. 

(The nominations received today are 

printed at the end of the Senate proceedings.) 

mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS