Judd Gregg

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Why don't we proceed with Senator Kyl, and after we see your side by side, we can talk about time agreements because we already have an hour.

Mr. GREGG. That is fine with me.

Mr. GREGG. Yes.

Mr. GREGG. On both motions?

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I think we will yield back all time on the Kyl-Conrad motion.

Mr. GREGG. I would like to retain 2 minutes to respond to my spending a trillion dollars.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 4 minutes be equally divided between Senator Conrad and myself when we get to the Kyl-Conrad AMT amendment.

Mr. GREGG. That came from the farm bill.

Mr. GREGG. It must have been asparagus.

Mr. GREGG. We are. I suggest we have 2 minutes equally divided before each vote to explain what we are voting on for our colleagues.

Mr. GREGG. And after the first vote, the votes be 10 minutes.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, it being my motion, I am sure the chairman would like to go first.

Mr. GREGG. Madam President, I am not speaking on Senator Kyl's motion. He has reserved his time. I am going to ask to set aside his motion and send another motion to the desk.

Mr. GREGG. Madam President, I note that the Senator from Louisiana is on the Senate floor. I had planned to offer this motion on behalf of Senator Graham in order to move the process along. He is in accordance with that as he is in a meeting he could not get out of, a briefing on security. I will reserve the remainder of the time on the motion so Senator Vitter can be recognized.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be no further motions to be brought forward.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we turn to two other items that need to be taken up prior to the time limit.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I send two motions to the desk dealing with budget enforcement. I ask they be reported in seriatim.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the second motion be adopted.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, these are two motions, one of which says that under the rules of the budget, there will be a disclosure of the debt owed by the United States in a manner that is comprehensible. Right now the budget is a very hard, very complex document to read for those of us who are involved in it, but it is extremely difficult to glean what actually is the debt and how the debt relates to the overall budget. The first motion says that will be made clearer for the purpose of transparency. The second motion has four elements. The first one is a point of order that says the budget resolution, which will be live, does not put us on a path to a balanced budget over a 5-year period. The second one is a point of order against a reconciliation bill which spends more than 20 percent of what it saves. The third is a point of order against a budget resolution that does not provide a debt disclosure statement, such as the first motion included. And fourth is a long-term deficit point of order that should prohibit any deficit increases outside the budget window. I talked about these with the chairman. The chairman seems amenable to accepting these motions. I hope they can be accepted.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, there is a tax increase in this resolution. If there isn't, then the budget doesn't make any sense because it assumes $1.2 trillion of new revenues in order to reach its targets, and that means 78 million taxpayers who don't pay taxes today are going to end up paying taxes under this budget. It means a working family of four with $50,000 income will end up with a $2,300 tax bill increase in 2011. It means a single mom with two kids earning $30,000 will have a $1,000 tax increase in 2011. It means that 18 million senior citizens will have their taxes increased by over $2,000, and that 27 million small businesses will have their taxes increased by over $4,000 in the year 2011. The simple fact is this budget assumes massive tax increases, the largest tax increase in the history of the world. I hope people will oppose that.

Mr. GREGG. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I have no charts. I simply have a number: $1 trillion. We should draw the line somewhere around here. We should say to the American people: It is time that we exercise fiscal discipline. Let's do it at $1 trillion. That means that in this budget, you only have to reduce it 1 percent to get back underneath that number. We don't have to look to the President to do that. We can't, amongst ourselves, come up with $10 billion of savings on a $1 trillion budget? If we can't, we should all go home. Vote to draw the line at $1 trillion. Vote for the American taxpayer. Mr. President, I yield back my time.

Mr. GREGG. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I understand that as chairman of the committee, Senator Harkin should have the right to complete his statement. I am happy to proceed at this time. I would simply make the point, in response to the discussion about this bill and the budget, there is no way anybody with a straight face can represent that this bill is fiscally responsible in the context of the budget. When this bill left the Senate, it was at $285 billion. It is now at $300 billion. This bill has $18 billion worth of gimmicks in it. The tax years are changed for corporations to pick up money. There is an attempt to adjust programs so some basically disappear after a certain number of years on the theory that then they would not score, knowing full well that those programs are going to be continued. We also have a situation where this bill violated the pay-go rules of the House and would violate the pay-go rules of the Senate, to the extent they are ever enforced around here, if we had passed the Senate budget. The irony is that this bill comes to the floor before the budget, which was voted on and voted in favor of by the Democratic membership. That Democratic budget is violated in this bill. I have to tell my colleagues, if a Democratic budget, which spends a heck of a lot of money, is violated, then, obviously, the bill itself is spending a lot of money. In addition, it uses gimmicks such as custom user's fees. It uses gimmicks such as this adjustment of pay-go. It ends up, even using all those gimmicks, $18 billion worth of gimmicks, still with a budget point of order against it which is legitimate. The budget is violated. This bill spends money outside the budget. That budget point of order should not be waived.