Kent Conrad

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Mr. DOMENICI addressed the Chair.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask for 3 minutes off the resolution.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I repeat the theme of the chairman of the Budget Committee on this question of what we have before us. We have had Members come to us and say: We very much want to conclude our work by noon tomorrow. We want to be faithful to that charge. It is absolutely not possible to do that and to consider all of the amendments that have been reported to us. We have over 110 amendments. If we go into a vote-athon with 110 amendments, that will take 40 hours to complete with 3 votes an hour being conducted. It is very important that the message go out to our colleagues: It is now time for us to exercise self-discipline. Every Senator has the right to offer their amendment and get it considered under the rules of the Budget Act. Unfortunately, that means if individual Members insist on their right to offer each and every one of the amendments that has been prepared, we are going to be here through Monday. That is just the hard reality of calculating the number of amendments, the amount of time, and how long it takes to vote. If people want to be here through Monday, voting every 20 minutes on an amendment, we can do that. Or we can exercise self-restraint and self-discipline and work with the managers and work with the leadership and winnow down the number of amendments and enter into time agreements so we can dispose of amendments as quickly and efficiently as possible. One other thing: It is very important that we not have to hold the vote open for 30 minutes so colleagues who are late have a chance to vote. We want every colleague to have a chance to vote. We hope they will consider their other colleagues. We are going to wind up being very late here night after night if we don't exercise that restraint. I yield the floor.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I yield myself 3 minutes off the resolution.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I commend the Senator from Florida, who is a very distinguished member of the Budget Committee, for his remarks and for the contribution he has made to the work of the committee in this his first year in the Senate. Of course, he is a veteran of Congress because he served with distinction in the House of Representatives. He has been through the 1980s and saw firsthand what happened when very serious fiscal mistakes were made. The Senator from Florida has been one of the strongest voices in the Senate Budget Committee saying: Let's not repeat those mistakes; let's be serious and sober; let's take a look at the fact that these surpluses are projected, they are forecasted; they are not in the bank; and let's dedicate most of that projected surplus to debt reduction. Yes, we can spend some money. Yes, we can have a significant tax cut. Yes, we can provide additional resources for improving education, as we did yesterday, and provide a prescription drug benefit, as we did the day before yesterday. Yes, we can strengthen our national defense, as we did last night, over what is in the President's budget. Those are investments. That is prudent spending. The primary emphasis ought to be: Keep our eye on the ball; keep paying down this national debt. That is what is going to be a time bomb for this country if we fail to keep the pressure on paying down this national debt. That is what this Durbin amendment is about. The Durbin amendment does two things. It says: Reduce the size of the President's tax cut and with that money pay down more of this debt. Second, it says we have money in this year's budget that will permit an immediate fiscal stimulus.

Mr. CONRAD. I yield myself an additional minute. We have money in this year's budget for an immediate fiscal stimulus of $60 billion. On both sides, we have agreed that is necessary, that is important. Let us do it, and let us do it before we leave on the April work break. Let us do it now. Let us inject these funds into the economy to give some lift so that America can regain some sense of confidence that the fiscal affairs of the country are being managed in a way that affects this economic downturn in a positive manner. Again, I thank the Senator from Florida who has been such a valued member of the Senate Budget Committee. I yield the floor.

Mr. CONRAD. How much time would the Senator from Michigan like?

Mr. CONRAD. I yield 5 minutes off the resolution to the Senator from Michigan.

Mr. CONRAD. Reserving the right to object, the previous agreement with respect to the Senator from Illinois was that the 20 minutes he had reserved would come off the resolution, not off the amendment. We will now be changing a previous agreement if we do that. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CONRAD. I object.

Mr. CONRAD. Let me be clear. What the Senator from Illinois is asking, as I understand it, is after Senator Bennett's amendment has been laid down, that he receive the first right of recognition.

Mr. CONRAD. Is that acceptable? Mr. BYRD addressed the Chair.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, will the Chair inform us of the time remaining on both sides?

Mr. CONRAD. Does the Senator from Oklahoma desire going now? The Senator from Connecticut has requested 5 minutes, 6 minutes. I would be prepared to yield 6 minutes to the Senator from Connecticut.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask for 3 minutes off the resolution.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I understand once again today there has been talk that somebody here is for a tax increase. Nobody is for a tax increase. All the proposals on both sides of the aisle are for significant tax cuts. The fundamental difference here is on the question of how much debt reduction we do. On our side we think there ought to be more debt reduction than is being proposed on the other side. We have a total of $3.65 trillion of the $5.6 trillion projected surplus set aside for short-term and long- term debt reduction. President Bush is setting aside $2 trillion. So we have nearly twice as much set aside for debt reduction as does the President. He has a tax cut that is about twice as big as ours. That is the fundamental difference between the two sides. I understand Senator Bennett said you can't do more debt reduction than the President proposes. That is just not so. We had detailed testimony before the Senate Budget Committee by the man who ran the debt reduction program in the U.S. Treasury Department under the previous administration. He says you can reduce far more of the national debt than the Bush administration is calling for. In fact, President Bush says you can only reduce the publicly held debt by $2 trillion. Mr. Gensler, who was in charge of the debt reduction program in the previous administration, pointed out that $2.6 trillion of the debt actually comes due during this 10-year period. You can eliminate all of that. That is $2.6 trillion instead of the $2 trillion the President says is available for debt reduction. But even more than that, we did a detailed cashflow analysis. I yield myself an additional minute off the resolution.

Mr. CONRAD. We did a detailed cashflow analysis of debt reduction. What we found is--this is the President's line, the green line. That saves $2 trillion--reduces the publicly held debt by $2 trillion. The red line is our publicly held debt reduction line. It would reduce publicly held debt--publicly held debt is currently $3.4 trillion. It would reduce that debt by $2.9 trillion--$900 billion more than the President's plan. This line shows the unredeemable debt line. What this chart reveals is there is absolutely no problem of cash buildup, even if you use $2.9 trillion to reduce publicly held debt. I yield myself an additional 2 minutes.

Mr. CONRAD. Somebody watching me may be very quick with figures and say: Gee, Senator Conrad is saying the Democrats believe you can reduce $2.9 trillion of the $3.4 trillion publicly held debt. But on his previous chart he showed the Democrats have reserved $3.65 trillion for debt reduction. How can both those things be true? Simply, they are both accurate, they are both true, because we are dealing with short-term debt and long-term debt. The short-term debt is the publicly held debt, which is $3.4 trillion. We would pay that down by $2.9 trillion. But, in addition to that, we reserve $750 billion more for long-term debt reduction. The long term-debt that is building, that our Federal accounting system does not take account of because of the long-term unfunded liability for Social Security and Medicare, we set aside $750 billion for that purpose. The other side does not set aside a single penny--not a dime--for the long-term debt that is building for this country. That is the fundamental difference between our two sides. We believe we ought to pay down more of the short-term and long-term debt and have less of a tax cut. It is still a substantial tax cut, one that would permit rate reductions, reform of the estate tax, and also address the marriage penalty. That is the fundamental difference. I do not want to lose sight of it in the bric-a-brac and the back and forth. That is the best summary I can provide.

Mr. CONRAD. Reserving the right to object, I think, as it was read, there may be some confusion in the first few lines. It might be helpful to restate it, I say to my colleague; because of changes that have occurred as we have negotiated this, I think it would be useful to restate the first few lines.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I want to be clear: All remaining amendments be limited to 30 minutes each is intended to apply to what occurs between now and 3:30 p.m.?

Mr. CONRAD. And from 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. will be on reconciliation? That what occurs after that, the 30-minute limitation does not apply. The 30-minute limitation applies to what occurs between now and 3:30 p.m.; is that the understanding of the Senator?

Mr. CONRAD. Can we see the list?

Mr. CONRAD. Senators Wellstone and Johnson, if I could add that additional name.

Mr. CONRAD. Is the Senator from New Jersey seeking time?

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we yield back all time on this amendment and we yield 10 minutes to the Senator from New Jersey. Is the Senator from New Jersey seeking 7 minutes?