Rick Santorum

Mr. SANTORUM

Mr. SANTORUM. I suggest that that is exactly what they are doing.

Mr. SANTORUM. I was talking options available. One is a supermajority, one is a simple majority of rescissions.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I suggest to the Senator from West Virginia that the majority of the Members of the House would vote for a rescission package to fund it, which would accomplish the same thing.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, as the Senator from West Virginia knows and as we discussed, the three-fifths override provision in the constitutional amendment is but an option available to this body to fund emergencies. Another option that is available is the one that is detailed in that letter which is to rescind obligated moneys from the prior year. So that is what they have suggested in that letter, which I think, given our deficit state at this point, is the most responsible way to do it. I wholeheartedly support that effort, and I think it is the responsible way to do it. It can clearly continue to be an option under the constitutional amendment.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. SANTORUM. I go back to this clause, ``unless three-fifths of the whole number.'' I was looking the other day at the emergency supplemental appropriations that we have passed in this Congress that violate the caps, and I noticed an amazing thing. That almost all of them passed by more than three-fifths of the whole number of the House and Senate. So we seem to be able to, when faced with some structure of the budget, to come to a consensus and pass it, in very large numbers, with very large pluralities, to respond to a national emergency. (Mr. GRAMS assumed the chair.)

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, will the Senator from West Virginia yield for a question?

Mr. SANTORUM. Would that not at least ameliorate the problem of an estimate 6 months prior to the fiscal year, fully 18 months before the end of that fiscal year, which arguably is not going to be exactly accurate? But, as we all know, as we get closer to the fiscal year and in the fiscal year, we would have a much better idea of what the final outcome of that year would be. So we would be able to react.

Mr. SANTORUM. Would we not have the opportunity to require the Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, the Office of Management and Budget, whatever, to come up with more current monthly, maybe even more often, deficit projections to guide the hand of the Congress in trying to meet the stated purpose of the constitutional amendment, which is that expenditures do not exceed revenues? Could we not do that?

Mr. SANTORUM. Is it not customary that constitutional amendments, after the passage of that amendment, there is usually some legislation enacted to implement that legislation? Is that normally the course?

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, will the Senator from West Virginia yield for a question?

Mr. SANTORUM. I hope so.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, if the Senator from West Virginia would yield, they do that now as part of the estimate process. All I am suggesting is they do it every month as opposed to twice a year so we have a better idea what we will be facing at the end of that year.

Mr. SANTORUM. No, I am not. I am suggesting that the Congressional Budget Office could do monthly estimates as to what the deficit will be for that fiscal year so we might have a better understanding of what we are going

Mr. SANTORUM. Is it not possible, under implementing legislation, for us to require the Congressional Budget Office or the Office of Management and Budget to put forth a monthly calculation of what the deficit will be so we have our finger on the pulse of what the revenues and outlays will be so that, in fact, farther out from that final end of fiscal year, we might be able to adjust if we see from those estimates that we are going to run into trouble? In fact, is that not one of the problems now that we do not do that; we do not react based on what we know from continuing estimates?

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, will the Senator continue to yield for a question?

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

Mr. SANTORUM. Are there not subsequent updates by the Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Management and Budget, and reports from the Treasury as to actual receipts and revenues that one could, if one were in Congress or the Senate, adjust to meet the updated projections so we would have a better idea where we were going to be by the time we reach the end of the year?

Mr. SANTORUM. If I may, my question is--and I think you have answered it in part--that these estimates on your chart reflect an estimate that was done some 6 months prior to the fiscal year; is that correct?

Mr. SANTORUM. It is not unprecedented that we would have an implementing piece of legislation.

Mr. SANTORUM. Is this the January report you are referring to?

Mr. SANTORUM. When you say at the beginning--my understanding is that the Congressional Budget Office issues two reports, one in August and one in January. Which one does that refer to?

Mr. SANTORUM. I would like to refer to your charts talking about the deficit estimates and that they are unreliable. You say they are estimates at the beginning of the fiscal year. By the Congressional Budget Office?

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. SANTORUM. There is a dependent clause after ``Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year . . .'' It then says `` . . . unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a rollcall vote.'' So there is an option clearly stated in the constitutional amendment; is there not?