Wayne Allard

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. I ask the pending amendment be laid aside and I ask to call up amendment No. 2170.

Mr. ALLARD. I was going to do that, but the chairman can do it.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, first of all, I would like to commend the chairman of the Budget Committee, the Senator from New Mexico, for his very laudable statement, which he made earlier on in the debate this evening. I think we are very fortunate in this body to have somebody who is trying to bring accountability to the process. I hope that America was listening, because I think he made some very good points, and I think as Americans we need to stop to think about our priorities and how we would like to see those priorities come down in the budget and how we would like to see those priorities in the budget reflect how we want to live our lives as Americans. I have an amendment that I would like to see added to the budget plan that this chairman and his committee has put forward, the plan to pay down the American debt. I think back last year when I proposed an amendment to the then- budget, a sense-of-the-Senate resolution, that asked the President of the United States to come forward with a plan on how he might want to pay down the debt that we have. I think we ought to take a little time to define the terms. The deficit is how much more we spend in any 1 year than what we bring in in revenue. The debt is an accumulation of all of that excess spending over the years--the accumulation of all of these deficits. So I am of the view that we need to do something; we need to have a plan before us to pay down that debt. The President ignored the sense-of-the-Senate resolution that was part of the budget resolution last year, and we got into the budget debate this year. There was simply not any plan coming from the President, or anybody else at that point, on how we might pay down our national debt running somewhere around $5.6 trillion. So I have decided I will put forward my plan on how I think we might be able to pay down the debt. As we go through the discussion and the debate, I will show that we will even have some money left over as we pay down the debt to provide some tax relief for Americans. I think we are very fortunate that we have somebody like the chairman of the Budget Committee who really believes we need to work to eliminate the deficit and to balance the budget. It brings forth a certain amount of accountability to the process. I think we need to have leaders like him due to the fact that we do not have a balanced budget amendment. I was very disappointed last year that a balanced budget amendment did not pass, because I think we needed that accountability in order to assure that the Members of this Senate would work hard to set priorities and not ignore deficits that have been accumulating over the years out into the future and to continue to allow the debt to grow year after year. I would like to move forward by beginning to congratulate, again, Chairman Domenici and the Budget Committee on crafting a sensible resolution that maintains the discretionary spending caps previously set forth. I reemphasize that is very key in this debate to assure that we have protected the future for our children and grandchildren by having a responsible budget which holds the promise that we made to the American people. Even though it appears that we will realize a surplus before the year 2002, I believe that it is essential for this Congress to show restraint when it comes to budget surpluses. The future solvency of the Federal Government will likely rest on what we do in the next 3 years. There is simply no doubt that the economy is performing well--much better than anyone has expected. But today's rosy predictions could turn out to be a black future if we do not plan appropriately. We must begin the process of paying down the Federal debt and preparing for an investment-based Social Security system. Some have said that they would like to see the surplus used for Social Security. I say let's do it. The fact of the matter is that making payments on the national debt is the best way to provide flexibility for changes in Social Security in the short term. The last time I came to the floor to discuss the national debt, it stood at $5.476 trillion. Yes, $5.476 trillion. Today, even as the U.S. economy continues to grow, we have added $114 billion to the debt, which is now over $5.59 trillion. I believe to not apply at least a portion of any surplus to pay down the debt is simply unconscionable. In February, Senator Enzi and I introduced the American Debt Repayment Act legislation. It is legislation that I believe is integral to the future of this country. I am a realist. I understand that we cannot retire the Federal debt immediately. What we can do is create a plan which I hope will become a part of the budget plan by which we pay down the debt over a set number of years. This is just a minimal plan. There is nothing in it that says we cannot do more. In fact, I hope we can do more because we need to sign on to a plan to pay down the debt. The American Debt Repayment Act provides such a plan. Senate bill 1608 would amortize and pay off the debt in the year 2028. Frankly, this is as simple as it gets. The plan puts the Federal Government on a 30-year mortgage to pay its creditors and place our country on sound financial ground. Because I believe that we must have a plan when dealing with the debt, I am offering this legislation today as an amendment to the budget resolution. By approving this amendment, we have made the initial commitment to pay down the debt. We are saying to the American people that the Federal Government has finally recognized the time has come to begin to pay off our Nation's credit card balance. I realize that there are many competing interests when it comes to using the surplus, and I am willing to meet my colleagues halfway. Anything above the amortized payment is not affected by my amendment and can be used in any way that Congress may deem appropriate. While I advocate tax relief for the American family from any surplus above the required payment, my colleagues might decide differently. This amendment proves that debt reduction and tax relief are not mutually exclusive. I would like to take just a moment and refer to the chart that I have here on the floor with me and talk a little bit about the chart. This is an amortization schedule, much along the lines of what you would be shown if you were to buy a new home. Say you are a new American family; you have just been married; you decide to make probably the first big investment of your marriage, and you will make a commitment to pay that down over 30 years. Your banker may very well give you a similar chart which shows how you are going make that payment year after year to pay down the mortgage on your home. This is the plan where we talk about paying down the mortgage of the Federal Government year after year. It is a 30-year plan, just pretty much like everybody's home mortgage. To keep things simple, I have just adopted in this proposal pretty much what the Budget Committee has estimated will be the surpluses for their 5-year plan. I say fine, we will not argue with the Budget Committee. We will keep that in place. But after that period of time, we ought to set $11.7 billion a year, in addition to what we did the year before, towards paying down the debt. This accelerates and accumulates over time. If we do that, let's look at the year 2004, after the current plan has been adopted. In the year 2004, we have $616 million left over for tax relief, or maybe program growth or some other needs. When we drop into 2005, that comes up to $2.1 billion over and above what I put together on this amortization part for program growth or to reduce the tax burden. My personal preference, as I stated earlier, is to reduce the tax burden on the American family. What happens over a 30-year period? We save $3.7 trillion. I think that is a pretty substantial step, savings that we can use for Social Security reform or maybe doing something with our Medicare problems. This is a plan that shows how we can begin to address those very serious problems we have before us, but to also keep as a top priority of this Congress and this Senate a commitment to pay down this national debt. This plan reflects the amount of savings we are going to save for the future generations, our children and our grandchildren. The important point I want to make here is to have a commitment to pay down the debt. With even a minor commitment with a 30-year payment, where we are setting aside $11.7 billion a year, we can accomplish this. We can accomplish this with just a simple, straightforward commitment. I remind everybody, our total budget is somewhere around $1.7 trillion. It is not much of the total picture. I believe an excerpt from an article on March 23, 1988, in Newsday strikes right at the heart of the issue. I have a quote out of that particular article. I will read part of it. I have it up here on the floor. It says: * * * if Congress and the President agreed to toe the line and direct all surpluses to pay down the debt for the next 30 years [apparently he has thought about this, too] and if the economy remained on a steady, moderate growth path, the government could pay off its entire debt while covering Social Security and other costs. Mr. President, I have that article. I ask unanimous consent it be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLARD. I thank the chairman for his suggestion. Mr. President, I will amend my unanimous consent request. I will just yield the floor and reserve my time until tomorrow. I may use it at that time.

Mr. ALLARD. I say to my colleagues, this is exactly what my amendment does, what is talked about in this article. It creates future flexibility to deal with the impending Social Security crisis by paying down the debt over 30 years. I understand we cannot budget 30 years out--the free market economy does not allow us to do that--but what we can do is adopt a blueprint for the future, a blueprint that Congress can follow to eliminate the debt and show the American people, with a little bit of discipline, we can do that--and a little bit of accountability. The American people know how difficult it is to make a living and pay the home mortgage. Let's give them a hand by retiring the national debt and thereby decrease the interest rates that we pay on everything from a home loan to a student loan. If somebody asks you, ``How am I going to benefit if you pay down the debt?'' they are going to benefit because we have lower interest rates with tremendous savings for home loans and student loans. A tax cut would most certainly be beneficial, but we cannot cut taxes at the expense of our children's future and our grandchildren's future. I ask that each and every one of my colleagues join me in this effort and make a commitment to retiring the Federal debt by voting to pass this simple, commonsense proposal. Mr. President, if we don't have any further debate on this on either side, I yield back the time, if that is appropriate at this particular point, so the Senator from Idaho can be recognized.

Mr. ALLARD. I am more than glad to work with the floor managers on this. I am set to preside over the Senate until 8 o'clock. I have to set up some charts and I am ready to go. I can be flexible, and any Member who thinks they want to go ahead and make comments, it is all right with me. I just was hoping I could get to go this evening. If there was nobody else that was willing to go, I was ready to go so we wouldn't lose time.

Mr. ALLARD. Take your time, Mr. Chairman. I will be glad to wait until you are finished.

Mr. ALLARD. That is correct.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask that the pending amendment be laid aside.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Business Rights, and Competition, of the Senate Judiciary Committee, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 19, 1998 at 2:00 p.m. to hold a hearing in Room 226, Senate Dirksen Building, on: ``International Aviation Alliances.''

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet on Thursday, March 19, 1998, at 10 a.m., in open session, to receive testimony on NATO enlargement.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Thursday, March 19, 1998, at 9:30 a.m. on tobacco legislation (Governors/retailers).

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be granted permission to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 19, for purposes of conducting a full committee hearing on which is scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony on S. 1488 and accompanying Senate amendment No. 1618, legislation to ratify an agreement between the Aleut Corporation and the United States of America to exchange land rights received under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act for certain land interests on Adak Island, and for other purposes; and S. 1670, a bill to amend the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to provide for selection of lands by certain veterans of the Vietnam era.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to hold an executive business meeting during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 19, 1998, at 5:15 p.m., in the Vice President's office of the United States Capitol Building.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Labor and Human Resources be authorized to meet for a hearing on Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996: First Year Implementation Concerns during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 19, 1998, at 10:00 a.m.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Rules and Administration be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 19, 1998 beginning at 8:30 a.m. until business is completed, to conduct an oversight hearing on the FY99 budget and operations of the Smithsonian Institution, the Kennedy Center, and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 19, 1998 at 2:30 p.m. to hold a closed hearing on intelligence matters.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet on Thursday, March 19, 1998, at 2:30 p.m. in open/ closed session, to receive testimony on the Department of Energy's Science-Based Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program in Review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 1999 and the Future Years Defense Program.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I rise in support of the NATO enlargement proposal of including Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic. I will make a few comments in that regard. Many people will say that the cold war is over and then will continue to argue that we can now dismantle our defenses and look inward. I completely disagree with this assessment. I think that Secretary Albright, in testifying before the Armed Services Committee on April 23, 1997, made the proper statement in relating this to an insurance policy, saying ``If you don't see smoke, there is no real reason to stop paying for fire insurance.'' Because of President Reagan and his desire to see the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics put on the ashheap of history, the United States no longer faces the threat of the U.S.S.R. But this is no time to be complacent. U.S. interests are still being threatened by internal political and economic instabilities; the reemergence of ethnic, religious, and historic grievances; terrorism; and the proliferation of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. However, for nearly 50 years, NATO has been the organization which has defended the territory of the countries in the North Atlantic area against all external threats and today we have an historic opportunity to recommit to this security. I believe we must not turn our back on this historic opportunity. We must embrace these new market democracies and say that the old ways are gone and that we welcome them into the free world. Relative peace should not stop us from being engaged for peace and freedom. I believe expanding NATO to the Poland, Hungary, and Czech Republic is the best way to ensure peace and stability. Over the last few decades, much of the United States' focus has been on the Middle East, the Far East, and Russia. Throughout history, the United States has been closely linked to the stability of Europe. We have been through two world wars and one cold war in Europe. However, since the formation of NATO, not one major war or aggression has occurred against or between member states, except for Argentia's invasion of the British Falkland Islands. Adding these three deserving countries to NATO can do for all of Europe what it has done for Western Europe. It can strengthen emerging democracies, create conditions for continued prosperity, assist in preventing local rivalries, diminish the need for an arms buildup and destabilizing nationalistic policies, and foster common security interests. Just as important, enlargement will signal the end of the cold war. It will further break down the Stalinistic wall. We will reassure the world that these once occupied nations are welcomed free countries. No longer will we validate the old lines of Communism but will begin to secure the historic gains of democracy in Central Europe. Unlike, the Warsaw Pact, these countries are voluntarily wishing to join NATO, without the coercion or force from any NATO member. Not only will the Stalinist wall be gone, but the acceptance of these three countries will positively show that the West will not lock these countries out, but will lock in Central Europe's democracies. Enlargement will promote multinational defense structures and prevent the renationalization of these democracies. Enlargement will fill the security vacuum created with the fall of the Soviet Union. If this vacuum is not filled, there is concern that the area will begin to divide nationalistically and Central Europe could look like the former Yugoslavia. However, just the possibility of membership into NATO has given these countries the incentive to peacefully resolve many of their border disputes. Since 1991, there have been 10 major accords settling differences and much of this progress is credited to the opportunity to join NATO. Even if some of the old disputes arise, NATO membership will help keep the peace, just as it has done in relation to the problems between NATO members Greece and Turkey. I do not believe the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the European Union, or any other international bodies have the ability to keep the peace and promote the stability needed that NATO can bring to the area. We all know that there has been much concern about the Russian response to NATO enlargement. The Russian leaders have been very public in their displeasure about enlargement. I believe that this is do in part to their misperception that the Alliance poses a threat to Russia's security, NATO is not, and never has been an offensive alliance. NATO is a defensive alliance only. We must respect Russia's concerns. But as my respected predecessor Senator Hank Brown has written, ``[W]orking closely with Russia in an attempt to allay their concerns makes sense. Slowing or altering NATO expansion . . . hands the Russian government a veto pen.'' Like Senator Brown, I believe that this would be a mistake. An enlarged NATO only promotes security and stability in an area of Europe that is vital to Russian security. The invited states must clearly know that they are no longer ``eastern bloc nations'' but an integral of the circle of democratic countries. Lastly, with any expansion there is a concern about the cost. There have been wide ranging estimates. The total amount is estimated at $27 to $35 billion for all current members and the invitees over 13 years, from 1997-2009. A bulk of this cost is to modernize and reform militaries and make them operable with NATO. However, with the United States already having the world's premier armed forces, the bulk of the cost will be incurred by our allies and the three invitees, as they upgrade their forces and facilities to meet those standards of the United States and NATO. With the addition of these countries, the U.S. percentage share of the NATO budget will go down, and the resolution before us provides that U.S. costs will be kept under control and not be allowed to subsidize those members that are not putting forward their share of the funds. Adequate defense systems always cost money, but alliances make costs more evenly shared through the alliance. Let me end with this: NATO enlargement is the Western World's way to show that the cold war is over and that we welcome these countries to freedom. The new threats we face can only be met by forming new alliances to ensure that these democracies do not fall prey to nationalistic or terrorist regimes. The Czech Republic, Poland, and Hungary, know life without freedom and now deserve the freedom and security that only NATO can provide. I yield the floor. Mr. LEVIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Rules and Administration be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 18, 1998 beginning at 9:30 a.m. until business is completed, to conduct an oversight hearing on the fiscal year 1999 budget and operations of the Smithsonian Institution, the Kennedy Center, and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on International Economic Policy, Export and Trade Promotion be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 18, 1998, at 10 a.m. to hold a hearing.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Small Business be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate for a hearing entitled ``The President's Fiscal Year 1999 Budget Request for the Small Business Administration.'' The hearing will begin at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, March 18, 1998, in room 428A Russell Senate Office Building.