Kent Conrad

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. CONRAD. I thank the Senator. Mr. President, I have just come from a discussion with a number of others who were asked a series of questions about the legislation before Members, and we were asked a series of questions that I did not know the answer to. I would be pleased to have a chance to put them to one of the authors of the legislation. The first question that was put to me some time ago, some moments ago, was, if we pass an increase in the minimum wage, would that require us to reimburse local and State units of government for the expense of that increase in the minimum wage?

Mr. CONRAD. I thank the Senator for that answer. If the Senator would permit. Another question that was just asked of me was a question with respect to the Federal Reserve. If the Federal Reserve took action to increase interest rates and States that were issuing bonds, as a result of that, had an increase in their expenses, would a point of order lie against that action? Would there be the possibility that local units or the State governments could say to the Federal Government: ``You have to reimburse us for the increased costs we experienced because the Federal Reserve Board has ordered an increase in interest rates.''

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I rise to voice my support for legislation that takes one more small step in reforming Congress. While words such as ``accountability,'' ``responsibility,'' and ``restoration'' are used to describe almost every legislative proposal, S. 2 offers us the real opportunity to restore accountability. As you know, Mr. President, S. 2 will apply labor, civil rights, and workplace laws to Congress. I strongly believe that Congress should follow the laws it writes. Congressional coverage is a necessity. Congress is not above the laws that it passes for the rest of the Nation. Mr. President, this is not the first time congressional coverage legislation has been proposed. In the 103d Congress, I supported S. 2071, which was sponsored by Senators Lieberman and Grassley. Unfortunately, the bill was blocked from floor consideration. In fact I have voted for similar congressional coverage on other occasions as well. In 1990 and 1992, during consideration of civil rights legislation, I supported extending many of these laws to Congress. I am deeply disappointed, however, that the amendment regarding gifts to Members of Congress was defeated in a partisan vote. The gift amendment was designed to treat Congress like the executive branch of government; to remove any suspicion that Members of Congress are receiving special favors for legislative activities. That reform amendment would have truly made Congress more accountable to the public. Many say that the November election was about a revolution and that the public has demanded that Congress change the way it does business. We had an opportunity to make such an important change, and I believe we let the public down. I hope we will revisit this issue again this year, and that we will find the courage to adopt real gift reform legislation. I urge my colleagues to support S. 2, and any amendments that will strengthen S. 2 to make it even more true to the concept of accountability. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we might extend the time by 10 minutes, to be equally divided.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Nebraska. As I was pointing out, 3.5 million jobs were created in 1994--3.5 million. I believe one of the key reasons is that a number of us had the courage to vote for a budget package 2 years ago that reduced the deficit by over $500 billion over the next 5 years. Because we did that, because we cut spending, and, yes, raised taxes on the wealthiest 1 percent among us, the result was a reduced deficit. The result of that was reduced interest rates. The result of that was renewed economic growth in this country, increased job creation, and a much stronger economy. That is why we need to move toward a balanced budget, because it will take pressure off of interest rates. It will allow this economy to continue to grow. It will allow this country to get back on track. That is why the amendment of the Senator from Nebraska is so important. Mr. President, I thank, again, the Senator from Nebraska. I yield the floor.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Nebraska. I have come to the floor to commend the Senator for what I think is an excellent amendment, precisely the kind of amendment we ought to consider and we ought to support today. Mr. President, the Senator from Nebraska has offered an amendment which says simply and clearly and powerfully, that if we are going to pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, something that I support, that we ought to match our words and our deeds. That is precisely what the Senator from Nebraska has put before this body. Mr. President, that is what the underlying legislation is all about. Matching words with deeds. Holding Congress accountable. Having Congress follow the laws that it writes. Nothing could be more important with respect to a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution than that we actually start to write a balanced budget. Not just pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, and then do the same old thing and not start to actually balance the budget. The easiest thing in the world is to pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution and then do nothing to start balancing the budget. I cannot think of anything that would be more destructive of public trust than to engage in that kind of cruel public hoax. That is precisely what could happen here. We all know what is politically easy and what is politically hard. What is politically easy is to stand up and say ``I'm for a balanced budget;'' what is politically hard is to actually do the work of balancing the budget. That is what is challenging. That is what is difficult. That is what is politically hard to do. The Senator from Nebraska says ``Yes, let's have a balanced budget amendment; but beyond that, let's actually start to balance the budget.'' What a novel idea. Mr. President, it is precisely what we ought to do. That is exactly what we ought to do. I cannot think of anything that would give this country more confidence in what we are doing than that. Now, Mr. President, one of the things I am concerned about as I watch this debate is we talk about balancing the budget, but we rarely talk about why we should balance the budget. It is not just because it makes us feel good. It is not just because you should match what you spend with what you take in. It is because balancing the budget has real economic consequences that are positive for this country. It makes a difference in the lives of people. Mr. President, we got the evidence today of a package we passed 2 years ago doing something positive in the lives of people. Just today we received news of what has happened with the unemployment rate in this country. It has dropped to 5.4 percent, the lowest level in 4 years, and 3.5 million jobs were created in this country.

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