Jesse Helms

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the skyrocketing Federal debt, which long ago soared into the stratosphere, is in a category like the weather-- everybody talks about it but scarcely anybody had undertaken the responsibility of trying to do anything about it. That is, not until immediately following the elections last November. When the 104th Congress convened in January, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a balanced budget amendment. In the Senate only one of the Senate's 54 Republicans opposed the balanced budget amendment; only 13 Democrats supported it. Thus, the balanced budget amendment failed by just one vote. There'll be another vote later this year or next year. As of the close of business yesterday, Monday, June 13, the Federal debt stood--down to the penny--at exactly $4,901,416,297,287.27 or $18,605.86 for every man, woman, and child on a per capita basis.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, more than 3 years ago I began these daily reports to the Senate to make a matter of record the exact Federal debt as of close of business the previous day. On Mondays, of course, my reports are always as of the previous Friday. As of the close of business Friday, June 9, the Federal debt stood at exactly $4,899,367,488,389.95. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $18,598.08 as his or her share of the Federal debt. It is important to recall, Mr. President, that the Senate this year missed an opportunity to implement a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Regrettably, the Senate failed by one vote in that first attempt to bring the Federal debt under control. There will be another opportunity in the months ahead to approve such a constitutional amendment.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, as of the close of business yesterday, Thursday, June 8, the Federal debt stood at $4,898,195,057,095.85. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $18,593.63 as his or her share of that debt.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, on the evening I learned I had been elected to the Senate in 1972, one of the commitments I made to myself was that I would never fail to see a young person or a group of young people who wanted to see me. It was certainly beneficial to me that I did because I have been inspired by the estimated 60,000 young people with whom I have visited during the nearly 33 years I have been in the Senate. Most of them have been concerned about the magnitude of the Federal debt that Congress has run up for the coming generations to pay. The young people and I always discuss the fact that under the Constitution, no President can spend even a dime of Federal money that has not first been authorized and appropriated by both the House and Senate of the United States. That is why I have been making these daily reports to the Senate since February 22, 1992. I want to make it a matter of record precisely the size of the Federal debt which as of Wednesday, June 7, stood at $4,902,043,504,916.54 or $18,608.24 on a per capita basis. What Congress has already done to future generations is immoral.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the pending amendment requires the Federal Government to jump in and set standards for technology and this will have a chilling effect on new technologies. Not only that it will compromise the security devices used in cable TV that enable parents to protect their children from indecent and violent programming on television. Allowing the FCC to set standards for technologies will have an adverse impact on new technologies being developed. Mr. President, in order to protect their services, cable television operators have used increasingly sophisticated and cost-effective methods to secure that signals against theft. Current technology does this by including the security devices in a converter placed on or near the television set. Security for these programs is essential for parents who wish to protect their children from the deluge of violent and explicitly sexual material so regrettably abundant on many cable channels. If the FCC, for whatever reason, sets a weak or easily compromised standard, it will be much easier for our children to gain access to trashy and violent programming. Let me state for the record a few examples of the type programs to which children may gain access: HBO's program (called ``Real Sex'') in which a former porn state describes sexual acts and how men can dress like women: and the Playboy Channel, the X-rated movies on pay-per-view channels, and the violent R-rated movies. Concerns over the lack of security are very real: the cable television industry is already experiencing a significant level of theft of service-approaching 15 percent in the largest systems. This cost cable operators and owners of intellectual property an estimated $4.7 billion per year. Satellite television was victim to theft of service rates in the late 1980's which approached 65 percent of the market. This amendment would turn over to Federal bureaucrats the responsibility for making the determination as to how much security is adequate. That determination will be binding on owners of intellectual property and network providers. This obviously is unacceptable. The Federal Government should not be charged with setting the standards for technology. Standard setting for technology belongs in the hands of those in the private sector who have the expertise and the incentive to protect intellectual property. A national and uniform security standard actually facilities theft by giving criminals a single target; it also stifles the necessary innovation for security to stay ahead of high-technology hackers. Mr. President, I am unalterably persuaded that property owners, and those acting for them, should have the right and responsibility to determine the level and method of security appropriate for their needs. That is clearly an economic business decision--not a matter for bureaucrats determination. We must let new technologies develop to preserve security, experience the development of increased retail availability of equipment and avoid the consequences of the law of unintended results that usually accompanies regulation. The Cohen amendment should be rejected.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, there is no requirement that one has to be a rocket scientist to know that the U.S. Constitution forbids any President's spending even a dime of Federal tax money that has not first been authorized and appropriated by Congress--both the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. [[Page S7802]] So when you hear a politician or an editor or a commentator declare that ``Reagan ran up the Federal debt'' or that ``Bush ran it up,'' bear in mind that the Founding Fathers, two centuries before the Reagan and Bush presidencies, made it very clear that it is the constitutional duty of Congress--a duty Congress cannot escape--to control Federal spending--which they have not for the past 50 years. The fiscal irresponsibility of Congress has created a Federal debt which stood at $4,904,368,578,709.58 as of the close of business Tuesday, June 6. This outrageous debt, which will be passed on to our children and grandchildren, averages out to $18,617.07 on a per capita basis.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, before contemplating today's bad news about the Federal debt, let us do that little pop quiz once more. Remember-- one question, one answer: Question: How many million dollars are in $1 trillion? While you are arriving at an answer, bear in mind that it was the U.S. Congress that ran up the Federal debt that now exceeds $4.9 trillion. To be exact, as of the close of business Monday, June 5, the exact Federal debt--down to the penny--stood at $4,903,927,957,327.07. This means that every man, woman, and child in America now owes $18,615.39 computed on a per capita basis. Mr. President, back to the pop quiz: How many million in a trillion? There are one million million in a trillion.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, more than 3 years ago, I began daily reports to the Senate to make a matter of record the exact Federal debt as of close of business the previous day. As of the close of business Friday, June 2, the exact Federal debt stood at $4,902,882,032,835.06, meaning that on a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $18,611.42 as his or her share of the Federal debt. It is important to note, Mr. President, that the Senate had an opportunity to implement a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. The Senate failed by one-vote in its first opportunity to bring the Federal debt under control. There will be another opportunity in the months ahead.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, as of the close of business yesterday, Thursday, May 25, the Federal debt stood at $4,891,247,403,074.28. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $18,567.26 as his or her share of that debt.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, there has been a great deal of phony and highly partisan criticism of the Republican budget proposal--criticism which the liberal news media have hastened to circulate. However, polls show that the majority of American people are not misled, except those who insist that they are entitled to something for nothing. To their credit, Republicans in Congress have delivered on their commitment to come forth with a budget to--First, balance the Federal budget in 7 years; second, cut Federal spending by $961 billion; third, eliminate 140 Federal departments agencies and programs; fourth, freeze salaries of Member's of Congress; and fifth, cut the Senate staff budget by 15 percent. Mr. President, the American people obviously realize the dire financial straits into which our Nation has plunged as a result of decades of irresponsibility by those in charge of their Federal Government. But children understand the penalty for spending more money than they have in their piggy banks. I have an example to share, a poignant letter from the sixth grade class of Swain County West Elementary School in Bryson City, NC: Dear Senator Helms: Our teacher shared with us your letter which mentioned the Federal debt as of March 14, 1995, which was $4,846,819,443,348.28. We are amazed to see how large the Federal debt is and understand that anything that is ``free'', the working people pay for. We don't have much, but our class sends this collection to you and ask that you put it in the fund to reduce the Federal debt. Our generation is going to have to reduce this debt and we would like to begin our part now. We really want to help our country and as sixth graders we understand that you can't leave it up to somebody else to take care of what we must begin now.'' Mr. President, enclosed with this letter came a check for $44.75, emphasizing the obvious if these sixth graders in North Carolina can recognize the importance of balancing the federal budget, why can't Congress? Needless to say, I greatly admire these young people and their teachers. Implicit in their letter is an obvious question: If politicians cannot live up to promises to balance the budget, the politicians perhaps should be called home to smell the coffee, if I may be permitted to mix a couple of metaphors. Mr. President, it is difficult to remain silent amidst false charges by the President and various Senators of his party that the Republican budget will cripple Medicare, the health care system upon which so many of our elderly have been encouraged to depend. Contrary to the false prophets, the Republican budget allows Medicare spending to increase each year by 7.1 percent. Mr. President, the American people should always have realized that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Thomas Jefferson said it best: To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. Mr. Jefferson also warned: The question whether one generation has the right to bind another by the deficit it imposes is a question of such consequences as to place it among the fundamental principles of government. We should consider ourselves unauthorized to saddle posterity with our debts, and morally bound to pay them ourselves. Mr. President, that just about says it all, especially when one considers the moral injustice we are heaping upon our children and their children. This year Republicans made a promise to balance the budget. We should keep that promise. Balancing the Federal budget is simply a matter of doing what we were sent to Washington to do.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, on that November evening in 1972 when I learned I had been elected to the Senate, I made a commitment to myself that I would never fail to see a young person, or a group of young people, who wanted to see me. In the nearly 23 years since that election night, I have been inspired by an estimated 60,000 young people with whom I have visited. Most of them have expressed concern about the enormous Federal debt that Congress has run up for coming generations to pay. Almost without exception the young people and I discuss the U.S. Constitution which forbids that any President spend even a dime of Federal money that has not first been authorized and appropriated by both the House and Senate of the United States. Mr. President, I have been making these daily reports to the Senate since February 22, 1992. I began because I wanted to make it a matter of daily record the precise size of the Federal debt. As of yesterday, Wednesday, May 24, the Federal debt stood at $4,887,785,166,023.46-- $18,554.12 for every man, woman, and child on a per capita basis.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, before turning to today's bad news and it is terrible about the Federal debt, let us go through our pop quiz routine once more. You remember--one question, one answer: Question: How many million dollars in $1 trillion? While you are arriving at an answer, let us acknowledge that it was the U.S. Congress that ran up the Federal debt that now exceeds $4.8 trillion. To be exact, as of the close of business yesterday, Tuesday, May 23, the Federal debt--down to the penny--stood at $4,885,334,984,188.51, meaning that every man, woman, and child in America now owes $18,544.81 computed on a per capita basis. Mr. President, how many million in a trillion? There are a million million in a trillion, and the Federal debt now exceeds four million million, 885 billion dollars. Get the picture?

Mr. HELMS

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

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the impression simply will not go away: Today's $4.8 trillion Federal debt is a grotesque parallel to the energizer bunny we see, and see, and see on television. The Federal debt keeps going and going and going--up, of course--always to the added misery of the American taxpayers. So many politicians talk a good game--when, that is, they go home to talk--and ``talk'' is the operative word--about bringing Federal deficits and the Federal debt under control. But, sad to say, so many of these very same politicians have regularly voted for one bloated spending bill after another during the 103d Congress and before. Come to think about it, this may have been a primary factor in the new configuration of U.S. Senators as a result of last November's elections. In any event, Mr. President, as of yesterday, Monday, May 22, at the close of business, the total Federal debt stood--down to the penny--at exactly $4,883,843,317,167.73 or $18,539.15 per man, woman, child on a per capita basis. Res ipsa loquitu.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, more than 3 years ago I began making daily reports to the Senate making a matter of record the exact Federal debt as of close of business the previous day. As of the close of business Friday, May 19, the exact Federal debt stood at $4,883,151,973,639.38, meaning that on a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $18,536.53 as his or her share of the Federal debt. It is important to note, Mr. President, that the Senate had an opportunity to implement a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. The Senate lost its first opportunity to control this debt by one vote. There will be another opportunity in the months ahead.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, on the evening I learned I had been elected to the Senate in 1972, one of the commitments I made to myself was that I would never fail to see a young person or a group of young people who wanted to see me. It was certainly beneficial to me that I did because I have been inspired by the estimated 60,000 young people with whom I have visited during the nearly 23 years I have been in the Senate. Most of them have been concerned about the magnitude of the Federal debt that Congress has run up for the coming generations to pay. The young people and I always discuss the fact that under the Constitution, no President can spend even a dime of Federal money that has not first been authorized and appropriated by both the House and Senate of the United States. That is why I have been making these daily reports to the Senate since February 22, 1992. I want to make it a matter of record precisely the size of the Federal debt which as of Thursday, May 18, stood at $4,885,256,391,108.42 or $18,544.52 on a per capita basis. What Congress has already done to future generations is immoral.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the impression simply will not go away: The $4.8 trillion Federal debt is a grotesque parallel to the energizer bunny we see, and see, and see on television. The Federal debt keeps going and going and going--up, of course--always to the added misery of the American taxpayers. So many politicians talk a good game--when, that is, they go home to talk--and ``talk'' is the operative word--about bringing Federal deficits and the Federal debt under control. But, sad to say, so many of these very same politicians have regularly voted for one bloated spending bill after another during the 103d Congress and before. Come to think about it, this may have been a primary factor in the new configuration of U.S. Senators as a result of last November's elections. In any event, Mr. President, as of yesterday, Wednesday, May 17, at the close of business, the total Federal debt stood--down to the penny--at exactly $4,884,246,600,937.11 or $18,540.68 per man, woman, and child on a per capital basis. Res ipsa loquitus.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, in a moment I shall send to the desk, a resolution urging the President to negotiate a new base rights agreement with the Government of Panama to permit the United States Armed Forces to remain in Panama beyond December 31, 1999. Senators Craig, Coverdell, Thomas, Mack, Smith, and D'Amato are principal cosponsors of the resolution, as are several other Senators who desire cosponsorship, and we will add those names this afternoon. We feel strongly that it is in the United States strategic interest to maintain a military presence in Panama. Millions of Americans feel that the Senate allowed President Carter to give away the Panama Canal to the great detriment of the security of the United States, and it was indeed a perilous mistake. But what is done is done; I am not here today to reopen the Panama Canal Treaty debate. That may come later. For the moment we seek only a simple base rights agreement--the kind of agreement we pursue with other countries in Europe and in Asia. This resolution strongly advocates U.S. presence after the implementation of the existing canal treaties. We believe it to be obvious that a U.S. military presence offers the best means of protecting the canal and ensuring its neutrality. Eighty percent of the Panamanians agree with that. The Panamanian Foreign Minister agrees with that. If nothing is done, then the American flag will be lowered for the last time in Panama at noon on December 31, 1999, after having flown there for almost a century. Thus, absent any change in the matter, a historical and unique relationship between the United States and Panama will come to a close. The United States will withdraw completely its military presence from Panama, and this Senator is absolutely persuaded that should not happen. In the Exchange of Instruments of the Ratification of the Panama Canal Treaties, a protocol--in ``The Treaty Concerning the Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal'' [Neutrality Treaty]-- makes clear that nothing in the treaties precludes Panama and the United States from agreeing to the stationing of United States military forces or the maintenance of defense sites in Panama after December 1999. Specifically, the Permanent Neutrality Treaty states: Nothing in the treaty shall preclude the Republic of Panama and the United States of America from making, in accordance with their respective constitutional processes, any agreement or arrangement between the two countries to facilitate performance at any time after December 31, 1999, of their responsibilities to maintain the regime of neutrality established in the Treaty, including agreements or arrangements for the stationing of any United States military forces or the maintenance of defense sites after that date in the Republic of Panama that the Republic of Panama and the United States of America may deem necessary or appropriate. Latin America is important to the United States, and vice versa. Every few years something dramatic happens in Latin America that has a direct impact on the United States, whether it be a security threat or a natural disaster. The United States needs a strategic military capability in the region, and maintaining United States military forces in Panama will give us the best option and capability. Many Americans have the misleading impression that Latin America is as close and accessible as their back yard. While parts of Latin America are indeed only hours away, the vast majority of the region is not that easily or quickly accessible. Geographically, Europe is not even half the size of South America. Brazil is larger than the continental United States. If total United States military withdrawal from Panama is allowed to happen, we will be left with no significant military presence in the region. Furthermore, it will be both politically difficult and enormously costly to reintroduce U.S. forces into the region. Keeping United States forces in Panama promotes stable democracies and market economies throughout the region; also it helps support United States efforts to counter the flow of illegal drugs. Without question, then, United States forces offer the best protection and defense of the Panama Canal. Although the United States is engaged in a draw-down of our forces both overseas and in the United States, we are, nevertheless, leaving more than 135,000 troops in Europe and almost 100,000 in the Pacific. Maintaining forces overseas is part of the military mission. Congress budgets for this. By the end of this year, however, only 6,000 troops will remain in Panama. This number will continue to diminish. In other words, United States presence in all of Latin America is a mere drop in the bucket compared to our presence in other parts of the world. A continued United States presence is also supported by the Panamanian people. Current polls in Panama indicate that more than 70 percent of Panamanians questioned want the United States to maintain a military presence in Panama. Since a continued U.S. military presence is in the interests of both nations, it is the time to negotiate a new base rights agreement. The Panama Canal treaties provide for a continued United States military presence, and the Panamanian public overwhelmingly favors it. The United States Congress should strongly urge the President to begin negotiating a new base rights agreement to keep United States military forces in Panama. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the results of a recent public opinion poll commissioned by the U.S. Information Agency be printed in the Record.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the skyrocketing Federal debt which long ago soared into the stratosphere is in a category like the weather-- everybody talks about it but almost nobody had undertaken the responsibility of trying to do anything about it until immediately following the elections last November. When the 104th Congress convened in January, the House of Representatives approved a balanced budget amendment. In the Senate only 1 of the Senate's 54 Republicans opposed the balanced budget amendment; only 13 Democrats supported it. Thus, the balanced budget amendment failed by just one vote. There will be another vote later this year or next year. As of the close of business yesterday, Tuesday, May 16, the Federal debt stood--down to the penny--at exactly $4,882,765,436,860.06 or $18,535.06 for every man, woman, and child on a per capita basis.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. I thank the Chair. (The remarks of Mr. Helms pertaining to the submission of S. Con. Res. 14 are located in today's Record under Submission of Concurrent and Senate Resolutions.) Mr. PACKWOOD addressed the Chair.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, before contemplating today's bad news about the Federal debt, let us do that little pop quiz once more. You remember--one question, one answer: Question: How many million dollars are in $1 trillion? While you are arriving at an answer, bear in mind that it was the U.S. Congress that ran up the Federal debt that now exceeds $4.8 trillion. To be exact, as of the close of business Monday, May 15, the exact Federal debt--down to the penny--stood at $4,881,377,281,278.42. This means that every man, woman, and child in America now owes $18,529.79 computed on a per capita basis. Which, I might add, is an increase of $22 million over the weekend. Mr. President, back to the pop quiz: How man million in a trillion? There are a million, million in a trillion.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, more than 3 years ago I began making daily reports to the Senate making a matter of record the exact Federal debt as of close of business the previous day. In the instances of my Monday reports, the information related to the close of business the previous Friday. As of the close of business Friday, May 12, the exact Federal debt stood at $4,859,130,274.89, meaning that on a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $18,445.34 as his or her share of the Federal debt. It is important to note, Mr. President, that the United States had an opportunity to begin controlling the Federal debt by implementing a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Unfortunately, the Senate did not succeed in its first opportunity to control this debt-- but there will be another chance during the 104th Congress.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, as of the close of business yesterday, Thursday, May 11, the Federal debt stood at $4,856,339,258,780.63. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $18,434.75 as his or her share of that debt.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, it does not require one to be a rocket scientist to realize that the U.S. Constitution forbids any President's spending even a dime of Federal tax money that has not first been authorized and appropriated by Congress--both and House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. So when you hear a politician or an editor or a commentator declare that ``Reagan ran up the Federal debt'' or that ``Bush ran it up,'' bear in mind that the Founding Fathers, two centuries before the Reagan and Bush presidencies, made it very clear that it is the constitutional duty of Congress to control Federal spending. The fiscal irresponsibility of Congress has created a Federal debt which stood at $4,856,766,568,058.09 as of the close of business Wednesday, May 10. This outrageous debt (which will become the debt of our children and grandchildren) averages out to $18,436.37 on a per capita basis.