Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered, deemed read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements appear in the appropriate place in the Record.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, this will be the text which will be amended on Monday, July 10. There will be two amendments. There will be votes, starting at 5 o'clock on Monday.

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

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send a substitute amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DOLE. I advise Members that there will be no more votes today. We are back on regulatory reform. I have been given the authority by a majority of members of the Judiciary Committee and the Governmental Affairs Committee to withdraw the committee reported amendments.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, regular order.

Mr. DOLE. Regular order.

Mr. DOLE. Regular order.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. DOLE. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. DOLE. I make an inquiry. Does the Senator intend to offer it or not? I wish to find out--if we are just going to have a filibuster here with two Senators, that is fine--so we can make other plans. If we are going to offer amendments, we hope Senators offer the amendments so we can have a vote.

Mr. DOLE

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, not only do I have no objection, I applaud-- though I am sorry to see Abby leave--I applaud the resolution.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that at 3 p.m., the Abraham amendment be laid aside and Senator Nunn be recognized to offer the Nunn-Coverdell amendment relative to the Regulatory Flexibility Act and that no second-degree amendments be in order to the Nunn-Coverdell amendment; and that the vote occur on or in relation to the Nunn-Coverdell amendment immediately following the Abraham vote.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 1 p.m. on Monday, July 10, the Senate resume consideration of S. 343, the regulatory reform [[Page S 9477]] bill; that at that point, Senator Abraham be recognized to offer an amendment to the Dole substitute relative to small business and no second-degree amendments be in order; and that the vote occur on or in relation to the Abraham amendment at 5 p.m. on Monday, July 10, 1995.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Con. Res. 20 submitted earlier by myself.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be considered and agreed to; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the resolution appear at the appropriate place in the Record.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Leaders' time was reserved; is that correct?

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, first I want to thank all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. We have had a good debate. We will be voting here in just a few moments, and the conference report will pass. I am just sitting here thinking about President Clinton and what he said on June 4, 1992, about balancing the budget on the Larry King Show. President Clinton was asked if he would submit a balanced budget soon. ``I would present a 5-year plan to balance the budget.'' In an earlier question, he said he balanced the budget 11 times in Arkansas. Of course, that was required by law. If we had a balanced budget amendment, we might have a balanced budget out here in 2 or 3 years. We have one in 7 years. The President started off with 5. Then he sent us a budget earlier this year and we had a vote on it, 99-0, opposing the President's budget. Not a single Democrat would vote for it. And then in June the President had a 10-year plan. I mean, if 5 years was too painful and 7 years was too painful, let us try 10 years. If it is too painful, we will try 12 years, 15 years, 20 years. Before long it does not make any sense at all. So I want to congratulate my colleagues and my colleagues in the House for passing the conference report and what I believe will happen here in a few moments. I listened to my friend from New Mexico, Senator Domenici, talk about July 4th and Independence Day, to gather and celebrate our independence and our freedom. And I really believe, though maybe not every American will talk about the budget resolution on July 4th; I am not certain many will unless they are having a problem, we will talk about it--it is historic--because it is a little bit unexpected, I assume, in some cases, but it is going to bring about more freedom and more independence for all Americans. And the first freedom is going to be freedom from crushing debt. The Senator from New Mexico closed his debate by talking about the children and the grandchildren. And I think most people are concerned about that. Let me share with you some very wise words, which I will quote: If the nation is living within its income, its credit is good. If, in some crisis, it lives beyond its income for a year or two, it can usually borrow temporarily at reasonable rates. But if, like a spendthrift, it throws discretion to the wind, and is willing to make no sacrifice at all in spending . . . if it extends its taxing to the limit of the people's power to pay . . . if it continues to pile up deficits, then it is on the road to bankruptcy. Now, those are not the words of this Senator. They are not the words of the Senator from New Mexico, Senator Domenici, or the chairman of the House Budget Committee, Congressman Kasich. They are instead the words spoken 62 years ago by President Franklin Roosevelt. So this is not something new that cropped up here in the last few years. It has been a concern for a long, long time. He was absolutely right. So we have thrown discretion to the winds. We have had more spending, more taxes, more spending, more taxes. President Clinton gave us the biggest tax increase in the history of the world in 1993 and is proud of it. So I suggest there is just a different philosophy on that side of the aisle: Do not touch any spending; if you have a problem, raise taxes. They believe it, and that is probably the way it ought to be. We have a different philosophy, and we believe it. We believe taxes have been extended to the limits of Americans' power to pay. We have the deficit about as high as we can pile it, and we are well down the road to bankruptcy, as Roosevelt predicted 62 years ago, unless we begin to change directions, and that is precisely what we are doing today. We are going to change directions, avoid bankruptcy, and set a course for a balanced budget by the year 2002. Here it is right on this chart. President Clinton's budget has deficits as far as the eye can see in the range of $200 billion, his budget proposed June 10. Our budget, the Republican budget: Balanced by the year 2002. We do it without cooking the books, without smoke and mirrors, without throwing seniors, children, and the less fortunate out on the street, though it has been suggested by some here today that we are heartless, we lack compassion, we do not care about anybody. We do it by making tough decisions, by slowing the rate of growth of Federal spending. Yes, it eliminates some of the bureaucracies, and a few others will have to learn to make do with less than they receive now. But the vast majority will actually be receiving increases, just not as much as they have been accustomed to. The rate of growth is going to be slowed, as most Americans would suggest we should do. We are going to achieve about $894 billion through reductions in Government spending and savings. Still, Government spending will increase $1.5 trillion this year to $1.876 trillion in the year 2002, as the Senator from New Mexico also indicated just a few moments ago. Let me repeat those numbers, because it is going to continue to grow: From $1.5 trillion this year to $1.876 trillion in the year 2002. Now, that may come as a surprise to some who may have believed what they have been hearing from some on the other side of the aisle. If you believe what they said, you would think the Republicans are shutting down the entire Government once and for all and every Federal program, taking money from education, taking money from Medicare, taking money from Medicaid, taking money from rural America. That is not the truth. That is not accurate. It is not what we proposed. I do not care how often they repeat it, repeat it, and repeat it, and how often the media picks it up, picks it up, picks it up, and spins it. It is not going to sell with the American people. So freedom from crushing debt, number one; freedom from excessive taxation, number two. On this Independence Day, the American people can also celebrate the fact they will have the freedom to save and spend more of their hard- earned money as they see fit. Whoever said the Government had a monopoly on taxpayers' [[Page S 9409]] money, on what you make, whether you are a wage earner or in some other business or some other vocation? So we have a $245 billion tax relief package. The House wanted more. This was the figure we agreed upon. It is large enough to accommodate the family tax credit, which the Presiding Officer has been so interested in in the past several years when he was in the House and also now in the Senate. We believe the American families are overtaxed. Maybe the Democrats do not believe that, and they certainly have every right to say that everywhere they go, ``You are not taxed enough; we want to tax you some more.'' We believe our tax system should encourage rather than discourage investment in job creation. We believe we ought to overhaul the tax system. So we have a tax commission headed by our former colleague, Jack Kemp, to talk about economic growth and tax reform. They will report to the Speaker and majority leader later this year. It is a 15- member commission. So is it wrong to have $245 billion in tax relief for overtaxed Americans? I do not believe so. Marriage penalty relief, opportunity to increase savings and investment, capital gains rate reduction, and I do not believe the Democrats will oppose if we have some estate tax relief for small family-held businesses and farms and ranches across America where if somebody dies, the Government ends up with half the estate. We want to correct that. So it seems to me that we are on the right track. They do not take effect unless and until the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office certifies that we are absolutely on the path to a budget that is balanced in the year 2002. That is the safety valve; that is the safety valve. They do not take effect until that has been certified, as the chairman has pointed out time after time. So freedom from crushing debt, freedom from excessive taxation, freedom from big Government. We are going to make the Government leaner and more efficient and more cost-effective and return more power to the States and the communities and our other citizens. I think also we ought to point out it is going to be freedom from worries of Medicare survival. I was on the 1983 Social Security Commission, a Commission appointed by Senator Howard Baker, the majority leader at that time; by Ronald Reagan, a Republican President; by Tip O'Neill, a Democratic Speaker of the House. Social Security was on the verge of bankruptcy. We had a bipartisan Commission. We rescued Social Security, and it is going to be in good shape, at least until the year 2020 and maybe beyond. We want to do the same with Medicare, because if it goes bankrupt, you cannot pay part A or part B, you cannot pay the doctor, you cannot pay the hospital in about 5 or 6 years. We have an obligation to America's seniors to correct it. We have had a lot of political rhetoric on this floor, but it is less than somewhat since President Clinton's budget proposal acknowledged that we were right; we must slow the rate of growth of Medicare if we are going to protect, preserve, and improve it. There are always those who try to scare the American seniors, always those who engage in class warfare, always those who say we are going to slash Medicare. What are they going to do? What are all those people out trying to scare America's senior citizens going to do? Nothing. What are they going to do in 4 or 5 years when we cannot pay the hospital bill or the doctor bill of some senior in Minnesota, Kansas, New Mexico, or wherever in America? So it seems to me we are on the right track. We are trying to avoid the bankruptcy of Medicare. We are not going to allow Medicare to go bankrupt. We are not going to allow Medicare to be cut to the bone. Indeed, under this Medicare proposal in our budget, we are going to increase beneficiary spending from $4,860 a year to $6,732 by the year 2002--a big increase. Finally, I think what we are doing here in a broad way is safeguarding our freedom and independence. I hope that under this resolution--and this is just the start; the hard part comes after we pass the resolution--Americans will also know that their freedom and independence, which was purchased by the sacrifice of countless Americans who risked and lost their lives, will remain secure. That is what this debate is all about: The future of America, going into the next century in the year 2002. This budget resolution maintains our commitment to national security second to none. So I am pleased with the work that has been done by the budget conferees and by the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Budget Committee. There is a saying that has been around about as long as America has. There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: One is to climb and the other is to find an acorn and sit on it and it will grow into a tree some day and you will be up on top. We are going to do it the first way. We have been sitting on the acorn too long in this Congress hoping that somehow our deficits could be reduced and a balanced budget would be magically sprouted and we would be sitting on top of the world. Americans for a long time, because they have been ahead of us, hoped that we would find a different course. We chose a different course--a balanced budget--to get to the top by climbing the tree, and there is a lot of climbing left to do. Mr. President, let me salute Senator Domenici for his tireless efforts in making this moment possible. He has the toughest job around here. The taxpayers of America have no better friend than the senior Senator from New Mexico. I also want to thank the Senate budget conferees for their dedication and hard work: Senators Brown, Gorton, Grassley, Gregg, Lott, and Nickles, and thanks as well to Speaker Gingrich and House Budget Committee chairman John Kasich and their conferees, because this has been a one-party effort. The other party did not want to participate. They like to raise taxes. They do not want to reduce the rate of growth of spending anywhere, and that is precisely what we did. So I believe we have reached the right result. It is not perfect. A lot of hard work is left, but we are ready for it. I hope that everybody will vote aye on the conference report. closing thanks

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in recess until the hour of 9:30 a.m. on Friday, June 30, 1995; that following the prayer, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that there then be a period for the transaction of morning business until the hour of 10:30 a.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 5 minutes each, with the following exceptions: Senator Craig, 15 minutes; Senator Smith, 15 minutes; Senator Pryor, 10 minutes; Senator Grams, 10 minutes.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, following morning business, it is hoped that the Senate will receive from the House the rescissions bill. As I said before, we should be aware there possibly could be rollcall votes. The two leaders will do their best to avoid any rollcall votes tomorrow. If we cannot reach an agreement, there could be rollcall votes.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that after the statement by the distinguished Democratic leader, Senator Daschle, the Senate stand in recess under the previous order.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. So, I would say to my colleagues, we hope there will not be any votes tomorrow. I cannot promise that. We believe--not certain--but believe on this side we have cleared action on H.R. 1944 without votes. But that could change depending on what the House does. I can say that for certain. We will be working together tomorrow morning--myself and the Democratic leader--to let our colleagues go at the earliest possible time.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, there's a story told about an incident that occurred here on the floor several years ago, when Howard Baker was Senate majority leader. Senator Baker was leading a floor debate, while Republican and Democrat Senators worked out a timetable in back of the Chamber. Finally, Senator Baker could proceed no further until negotiations were finished. He looked to the back of the room, sized up who was involved in the negotiations, and who was key to their successful conclusion, and said for the record, ``We're just here waiting for Abby.'' He was, of course, referring to Abby Saffold, who has served as Secretary for the Democrat side of the aisle for more than 8 years, and who served as manager of the Democrat floor staff for the 8 years prior to that. As has been indicated by my good friend, Senator Daschle, Abby is retiring this Friday afternoon, after nearly three decades of service on Capitol Hill--a career that saw her rise from serving as a caseworker to a Congressman to becoming the first woman in the history of the Senate to occupy the post of Secretary for the majority. I know I speak for all Members of the Senate in saying that she will be greatly missed. We spend a great deal of time here on the Senate floor. And frequently, negotiations and discussions can get a bit tense. Abby has been involved in hundreds of those negotiations and discussions. Even though Abby's duties here on the floor require her to look after the interests of the Democrats, there has never--there has never been a moment where I questioned her professionalism, fairness, or honesty. And through all the discussions and debates, Abby has always exhibited a great deal of courtesy, and an unfailing good humor. In short, as my good friend, George Mitchell, once said, ``Abby helps to make our long days on the Senate floor more tolerable.'' I share the view expressed by my colleague, Senator Daschle, and I know that all Senators join with me in wishing Abby good luck, and in thanking her for her service to the Senate and to America. Thank you. [Applause, Senators rising.]