Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 104 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION

Home , William Few

E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 104 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION

Vol. 141 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, MARCH 23, 1995 No. 54 Senate The Senate met at 9:30 a.m. and was ants, the examples of patriotism to our aster assistance and making rescissions for called to order by the President pro people, and the crusaders for Your best the fiscal year ending September 30, 1995, and tempore [Mr. THURMOND]. for our Nation. In Your holy name for other purposes. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Yahweh and through Christ our Lord. Mr. COATS. I object to further pro- Chaplain will now deliver the morning ceedings of this measure at this time. f prayer. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. RECOGNITION OF THE ACTING COVERDELL). The bill will be placed on PRAYER MAJORITY LEADER the calendar. The Chaplain, the Reverend John The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The f Lloyd Ogilvie, D.D., offered the fol- acting majority leader, the able Sen- lowing prayer: LEGISLATIVE LINE-ITEM VETO ator from Indiana [Mr. COATS], is now Let us pray: ACT recognized. We begin this day on the firm founda- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under tion of the indefatigable faithfulness of SCHEDULE the previous order, the Senate will now God. We exclaim with Jeremiah, Mr. COATS. Thank you, Mr. Presi- resume consideration of S. 4, which the ‘‘Through the Lord’s mercies we are dent. clerk will report. consumed, because His compassions Mr. President, this morning the time The assistant legislative clerk read fail not. They are new every morning; for the two leaders has been reserved as follows: great is Your faithfulness.’’—Jeremiah and the Senate will immediately re- A bill (S. 4) to grant the power to the 3:22–23. sume consideration of S. 4, the line- President to reduce budget authority. Almighty God, we praise You for the item veto bill. The Senate resumed consideration of constancy and consistency of Your Under the consent agreement, any the bill. faithfulness in blessing and guiding the Senator with an amendment on the list Senate of the United States through will have until 10 a.m. this morning to Pending: the years of our Nation’s history. We (1) Dole amendment No. 347, to provide for offer that amendment. At the hour of the separate enrollment for presentation to turn to You again today and know that 10 a.m., the Senate will begin 2 hours of the President of each item of any appropria- You will be faithful to give the women debate on the Daschle substitute tion bill and each item in any authorization and men of this Senate exactly what is amendment. bill or resolution providing direct spending needed in each hour, each challenge, Therefore, Members should be aware or targeted tax benefits. each decision. Often we become bur- that rollcall votes will occur through- (2) Abraham modified amendment No. 401 dened with the heavy responsibilities out the day and that it is the intention (to amendment No. 347), to require the Con- of leadership on our shoulders. When of the majority leader to complete ac- gress to approve the bills prior to trans- we pray: Lord lighten the load or mittal to the President. tion on the line-item veto bill today. (3) Levin/Murkowski/Exon amendment No. strengthen our backs. Your response is f 406 (to amendment No. 347), to clarify the to strengthen us physically, intellectu- definition of items of appropriations. ally, and spiritually. You never fail us; MEASURE READ THE SECOND (4) Hatch amendment No. 407 (to amend- never let us down; never leave or for- TIME—H.R. 1158 ment No. 347), to exempt items of appropria- sake us. tion provided for the judicial branch from Empower us to emulate Your faith- Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I under- enrollment in separate bills for presentment fulness in our responsibilities and rela- stand there is a bill on the calendar to the President. tionships today. May we be people on available to read a second time. (5) Daschle amendment No. 348 (to amend- whom others can depend. Help us to The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The ment No. 347), in the nature of a substitute. (6) Exon (for Byrd) amendment No. 350 (to say what we mean and mean what we Senator is correct. Mr. COATS. I ask for the second amendment No. 347), to prohibit the use of say. We want each decision to be guid- savings achieved through lowering discre- ed by how we perceive You would de- reading of H.R. 1158. tionary spending caps to offset revenue decide. Give us light when our vision is The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The creases subject to pay-as-you-go require- dim, courage when we need to be bold, clerk will read the bill the second time. ments. decisiveness when it would be easy to The assistant legislative clerk read Mr. COATS. Mr. President, again, equivocate, and hope when others are as follows: just for the information of our col- tempted to be discouraged. So we com- A bill (H.R. 1158) making emergency sup- leagues, under a unanimous-consent mit ourselves to be Your faithful serv- plemental appropriations for additional disagreement, we have only until 10 a.m.

∑ This ‘‘bullet’’ symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor.

S4409

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4410 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 this morning for additional amend- I believe that the amendment offered thorized appropriations. That is not in- ments to be offered. Those amendments at the end of yesterday’s session by my significant. must be amendments that have been good friend, the minority leader, and Mr. President, I intend to vote for cleared and are on the list as agreed to the distinguished Senator from Ne- the line-item legislation proposed by by the unanimous-consent agreement. braska [Mr. EXON], goes a long way in my colleagues from South Dakota and Those must be offered by 10 a.m., after achieving that commonsense solution. Nebraska. I want to make sure my con- which we will turn to 2 hours of debate Like my amendment, this approach stituents’ wishes are not subject to the on the Daschle substitute amendment. will allow the President to cut all arbitrary budget axe of the executive So Members can expect votes those 11th hour deals in conference branch. I want to return some ration- throughout the day, but need to be committees. It eliminates the back- ality to this debate. aware of the fact that the time is fast room wheeling and dealing. Mr. President, the American people Mr. President, without this amend- running out for the offering of amend- deserve a balanced budget. When I ar- ment, the Dole substitute to S. 4 goes ments. That time will elapse at 10 a.m. rived at the Senate 2 years ago, I faced too far. It is a radical, unworkable ap- this morning. the daunting task of restoring some I yield the floor. proach to a difficult problem. It gives fiscal restraint to our budget—it was a Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I appre- the President too much power over the budget of runaway spending. It was a ciate very much the Senator from Indi- American people. It is too complicated. budget of misplaced priorities. ana outlining the procedures which are It creates too much bureaucracy. strictly in the order of what the agree- The substitute before us enables the And, as a member of the Budget Com- ment has been. Since I know of no per- President randomly to veto programs mittee, I was tasked by my constitu- son on the floor ready to offer an that the people’s representatives in ents to correct the way our money is amendment, except possibly the Sen- Congress debate, and compromise on, spent. ator from Washington, I think it would and authorize in the name of our con- That is the proper role of Congress. not be out of order if we would proceed stituents. We, as the representatives of the peo- at this time if anybody wishes to offer Yesterday I listened very carefully to ple, have the obligation to form a budg- amendments in order to receive pri- the debate. I heard the comments of et. It is not the President’s job to ap- ority before 10 o’clock. In lieu of that, Senator NUNN and I heard the com- propriate money—it is this branch’s I think it would be in order for statements of my friend and neighbor, the duty. ments to be made for whatever pur- distinguished Senator from Oregon I have learned a great deal about our poses. [Mr. HATFIELD]. Mr. President, the budget over the past 2 years. I have With that, I yield the floor, as I see chairman of the Appropriations Com- worked with great Senators, like the my colleague from the State of Wash- mittee gave a stirring speech, full of former chairman, Senator Sasser of ington. wisdom and common sense about why Tennessee, and the current ranking Mrs. MURRAY addressed the Chair. the line-item legislation is bad public member, the Senator from Nebraska The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- policy. [Mr. EXON]. ator from Washington. In particular, he noted the unprece- Let me say, Mr. President, we are a AMENDMENT NO. 388 TO AMENDMENT NO. 347 dented transfer of power from the peo- richer country for the wisdom of my (Purpose: To limit the rescission of items of ple to the White House. Mr. President, distinguished colleague from Nebraska. appropriation to unauthorized appropria- I urge our colleagues to read the speech I look forward to working with him tions) made by the Senator from Oregon in during the next 18 months, and I will Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I send the RECORD. I cannot support the Dole miss his leadership when he retires an amendment to the desk and ask for substitute—it is the breeding ground from this body. its immediate consideration. for abuse and political horsetrading. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The I want to give the President the abil- Mr. President, my friend from Ne- clerk will report. ity to line-item veto all those portions braska knows, as I know, that crafting The legislative clerk read as follows: of appropriations bills that have not a budget resolution takes courage. The Senator from Washington [Mrs. MUR- been through the hearing and author- Reducing our deficit takes even more RAY] proposes an amendment numbered 388 ization process. All those pork items courage. And, I am proud of the record to amendment No. 347. contribute to our deficit. of the Budget Committee and the ad- Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask This is the spending the American ministration over the past 2 years—as unanimous consent that reading of the people are angry about: the unauthor- you know, we have reduced the deficit amendment be dispensed with. ized buildings, the earmarked research, by nearly $100 billion. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without and the special interest projects. We did that by leveling with the objection, it is so ordered. But, Mr. President, the American American people. By making taxes The amendment is as follows: people are not angry about the pro- fairer. By cutting more than 300 pro- On page 5, line 7, after ‘‘and’’ insert the fol- grams that have been authorized. grams and totally eliminating 100 lowing: ‘‘shall not mean appropriations au- These come to life under the full glare more. thorized in a previously passed authorization of public scrutiny—everyone is given a That is the correct way. bill; and,’’. chance to weigh in. That is why we Trying to attack government spend- Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I had have public witness hearings in the Ap- ing through a radical, unworkable sep- intended to offer this amendment, but propriations Committee. arate enrollment bill is not. in the interest of moving this legisla- And, it is our job, Mr. President, to tion, I will ask unanimous consent, make tough choices and to craft com- Everyone wants to lower the deficit, after I make a brief statement, that promises. Just like we do at home. which blossomed and grew during the my amendment be withdrawn. Mr. President, after all the public ne- 1980’s. And, as I said, we have done a The amendment I was going to offer gotiations, after all the compromises good job of it over the past 2 years. would have allowed the President to re- that make up the congressional proc- I am afraid some of these proposals scind all unauthorized appropriations. ess—we cannot allow the people’s wish- might go too far. We need to keep I feel that this goes to the heart of es to be subject to the arbitrary veto things in perspective. I am afraid as I the concerns of the American people pen of one person. look at the rescission package—these about line-item legislation. The Congressional Research Service are the wrong cuts to the wrong people. Mr. President, we need a common- tells me that it would take them days And, scoring a few political points in a sense solution to cutting out pork, to compile the list of unauthorized ap- debate will have dire consequences for while at the same time, protecting propriations in the fiscal year 1994 millions of average Americans. It those programs the American people Transportation bill. And, I have an- might sound good in a debate to con- really care about. I want to be able to other list from the CRS which shows trol the White House, but it won’t feel be here and fight for the people I rep- that nearly $1 in $5 in the military con- good to the average Americans who sit resent. struction account was spent on unau- around the kitchen table in my house.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4411 Mr. President, I will support line- slicing of the bills that will be required AMENDMENT NO. 348 TO AMENDMENT NO. 347 item legislation, but not the ill-con- by the Dole proposal. Although it may The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. ceived, radical amendment supported sound rational on paper, we do not KYL). Under the previous order, the by the majority leader. know how it will work in reality. Senate will now resume consideration I ask unanimous consent that my No Senator should vote on these proof amendment No. 348 on which there amendment be withdrawn. posals without hearing or reading Sen- shall be 2 hours of debate equally di- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without ator NUNN’s Senate speech of last vided. night. We all know SAM NUNN, his in- objection, it is so ordered. Mr. EXON. I see the Senator from tegrity, his courtesy, his under- So the amendment (No. 388) was Georgia is on the floor. withdrawn. standing of the issues. And we should Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I yield at least listen to him. I would simply say at this time that the floor. In addition, the Dole proposal raises his remarks last night and the remarks Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I suggest serious constitutional questions. There that he is amplifying today are so im- the absence of a quorum. are scholars who come out on each side portant that I have asked that the re- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The of the issue, yet no one can deny that marks printed in the RECORD last night clerk will call the roll. the question will not be fully resolved be laid on every Senator’s desk because The assistant legislative clerk pro- until the proposal is reviewed by the I think every Senator should know ceeded to call the roll. U.S. Supreme Court. about them. Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unan- I have long supported the idea of giv- I now yield whatever time is required imous consent that the order for the ing our President the line-item veto to the Senator from Georgia. quorum call be rescinded. power. We should do so in a manner Mr. NUNN addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without that will most likely stand the test of The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection, it is so ordered. constitutionality. I have been in the Chair recognizes the Senator from AMENDMENT NO. 348 TO AMENDMENT NO. 347 Senate for over 16 years, and this is the Georgia. Mr. EXON. Mr. President, in order to closest we have come yet to actually passing a line-item veto. We should do Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I made a conserve time as much as possible and lengthy presentation last evening re- since we have only 10 minutes left, I the job right. Mr. President, we should do so in a way that effectively covers lating to the defects in this substitute will be glad to interrupt my remarks to that is now before us. I would like to accommodate any Senator with regard special tax breaks and tax loopholes. We have to look at all of the pieces of say at the outset I believe the current to bringing up a measure before 10. practice, where rescissions come over If not, I thought I would make some our budget if we are going to solve deficits of over $200 billion annually, feed- from the President and if we take no statements that I have with regard to action nothing is changed, is unaccept- the matter that we will be going into ing the national debt that is rapidly rising, which is now at or near $5 tril- able. That practice gives the President, controlled time on at 10 o’clock. really, no authority to point out spe- Mr. President, I rise in support of the lion. The Daschle amendment will address cific items in appropriations bills and Daschle substitute and urge my col- to have any hope that they will be cor- leagues to support it as well. Earlier tax loopholes and will assure that tax giveaways receive the same scrutiny as rected if they are wasteful. this year I joined with Senator DOMEN- pork in our appropriations bills. By I have always contended and still ICI in introducing S. 14, which then en- contend that Presidents have enormous joyed the support of the majority lead- covering more of the budget, the Daschle substitute will be a more effec- power if they would just veto the whole er, the minority leader, and, of course, tive tool to help our President bring bill and then indicate to the American the chairman of the Senate Budget some fiscal sanity to the Government. public what is wrong with the bill. Committee, Senator DOMENICI. I be- The Daschle substitute will allow the That would put the onus on Congress lieved then and I continue to believe President to scale back on appropria- to correct it. But apparently Presi- now that S. 14, or a similarly crafted tions, while the Dole substitute does dents do not choose to do that. bill, would be the best course of action. not. S. 14 is now effectively before the Sen- I have listened with care in the last Yesterday I talked about the di- few days to the debate on this so-called ate in the form of the Daschle amend- lemma that the President faces in sign- ment. line-item veto. There are several ing a bill that on the whole is good but things I do not believe we have prop- As Senators know all too well, pass- includes some bad parts. The same ing a line-item veto is only the begin- erly focused on. The first point that I view would apply to individual think people need to understand is the ning and not the end of the debate. We amounts as well. I have found the Dole will need to go to conference with the current appropriation process. There substitute to be an honest proposal are two types of documents that are other body, which has already passed a that merits serious consideration. It line-item veto bill in the form of an en- produced by the Congress in the appro- took a step in the right direction by in- priation process, and I really do not be- hanced rescission bill quite similar to cluding some special tax provisions. I S. 4. lieve the distinction between the two is am pleased that the majority accepted commonly recognized in this Chamber. The facts are, the Daschle substitute my lockbox amendment. The Dole bill The first document is an appropria- essentially is S. 14 and certainly is, in includes a sunset provision and will re- tion bill, which is passed by both my view, far superior to the Dole sub- quire Congress to review the bill in the Houses of Congress. It is signed into stitute proposal that is before the year 2000. body. Unlike the Dole proposal, it was In many ways the Dole substitute, as law by the President, or vetoed—usu- not crafted in a matter of a day or two. amended, comes a long ways toward S. ally signed. Last year’s defense appro- Unlike the Dole proposal, it has seen 14. Yet I remain disappointed by the priation bill, for example, was 61 pages the light of day and was not devised process which has been followed to long. The bill is legally binding on the primarily as a means to obtain party bring the Dole substitute to the floor. executive branch. It becomes law. unity. In fact, S. 14 enjoyed bipartisan Bipartisan cooperation was cast aside The second type of document is a dif- support from the very beginning, and it in the name of party unity. Such ac- ferent type of document altogether and thus represents the middle ground in tion is an ill wind for future coopera- that is the report issued by the Appro- this very important debate. tion in the U.S. Senate. The Daschle priations Committees and the report In my statement yesterday, I out- substitute is a reasonable and respon- issued by the House-Senate conferees. lined some of the concerns that I have sible solution to pork-barrel spending. The three reports issued, just for in- with the Dole substitute. These con- The Dole proposal, with all of its ques- stance, in connection with last year’s cerns remain today. Those of you who tions, remains at best a shot in the Defense bill are 853 pages, covering may have been listening last night dark. It might hit the mark. It might over 2,300 lines. The policy direction in heard an excellent presentation from not. these reports, often known as pork-bar- Senator LEVIN about the difficulties The Daschle substitute will work. rel spending to the critics—some of it— that will be faced by the cutting and Once again, I urge its adoption. is not binding on the executive branch.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4412 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 Much of what is complained about as cific level of detail in the committee or any other Department for that mat- wasteful spending by the President and report. ter, decides they are going to change by the media and by others, including So what are we saying is going to be anything on the budget—and that hap- people in this body, is not even binding on the President’s desk? Nothing, un- pens every year; that happens to the on the executive branch. But people do less the Appropriations Committees tune of billions of dollars—they could not recognize that. Not all of it, but choose to do it voluntarily. We are ba- not do so. Congress has the informal much of it. sically creating a loophole big enough procedure we call reprogramming. There is no requirement in law or to drive all the pork through that has They send over to us a letter to let us Senate rule that an appropriations bill ever passed the Congress, if the Appro- know over a threshold what they are or report must contain any specific priations Committees decide to move doing, lets all four committees sign off level of detail. I want to repeat that be- in that direction. on it. It is not telephone; it is in writ- cause that goes to the heart of what is So that is what is wrong with this ing. All four committees have to sign wrong with this proposal. There is no proposal. There can simply be an ap- on it—Appropriations, and Armed requirement in law and no Senate rule, propriations bill that says so many dol- Services in the case of defense. Then nor would they be if we passed this— lars for Army procurement. Then in- they are able to shift money around. there is no change here—that an appro- stead of having the information in a re- That is good government. It encour- priations bill or report contain any port, the Appropriations Committee ages managing programs right. specific level of detail. can come out on the floor, and they What we are doing is we will now be Mr. President, I want to repeat that. can make a statement saying here is saying they have to come over for a There is no requirement in law nor any what we expect. And that statement statutory change on every single item Senate rule that an appropriations bill would not be subject to being put in that is signed into law. Do you know or report contain any specific level of the bill. The President will not have how many bills they are going to have detail. Most appropriations bills, par- anything to veto. to come over here with every year? ticularly in the defense arena but not The same thing could be done on a Hundreds of them. We struggle to get limited to defense, set forth large lump conference report. This proposal is one supplemental through. sum amounts that are not tied to spe- shooting at a target and missing it This bill here is an absolute joke. It cific programs, projects, or activities. completely, unless the Appropriations is a joke. I really have a hard time be- Looking to an example from last Committees decide to continue to put lieving we are really even considering year’s Department of Defense Appro- all of it in the appropriations report this. priations Act, the act provided a spe- and then to incorporate that in the Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, will the cific sum for Army aircraft procure- bill, which would be an entirely volun- Senator yield? tarily act. ment, $1.164 billion. The text of the act Mr. NUNN. I yield. So the authors of this bill are trying does not require the Army to spend Mr. BYRD. The Senator is exactly that money on any particular type of to reach a compromise and have totally missed the target. right with respect to the reprogram- aircraft. Then the report comes along ming requests. Every year we get com- and indicates how the Congress expects Mr. President, the other big feature that is wrong with this: Let us assume mittee reprogramming requests from the money to be spent. But that is a the executive agencies. These re- matter of political comity. It is not for a moment that the Appropriations Committee decides that, in spite of programming requests do not come to binding. That is the key to under- the Senate floor or the House floor. standing what is wrong with this sub- this legislation, they are going to continue to operate with detailed reports They come to the Appropriations Com- stitute proposal which we have before mittee or the Armed Services Com- us. which will invite the President of the United States to take certain actions mittee, or both. I would say most of the defects I have The chairman of the appropriate sub- pointed out do not apply to either of on items which he does not like. If they do that, what they are going to do then committee on the Committee on Ap- the bills based on rescissions. These de- propriations takes a look at this, along fects do not apply to the Domenici re- is they are going to put all of these line items in a report. They are going to with the ranking member, and they scission bill, which is now before us both sign a letter giving their approval and is known as the Daschle-Exon put it in a bill. It will be enrolled. We will send down to the President thou- of the reprogramming. This allows the amendment, nor to the McCain rescis- agencies to have flexibility in dealing sion bill. Most of the defects I am sands of bills. He will get Band-Aid hands doing it. We will get candidates with matters and changing cir- pointing out here this morning do not cumstances. And it is utter nonsense— apply to either of those. I do have some for the Presidency on TV, and let us see who can sign the things the nonsense—to force the Congress, and in problem with the McCain proposal, as I the first place to force the agencies to said last night, because of the two- quickest because that will be the cri- teria of who will be President. They have to come on bended knees to the thirds requirement and the huge, huge Congress to change the law so that shift of power to the executive branch will have to sign 10,000 or 15,000 bills a year. We will have to get a great signa- they can spend the taxpayers’ money of government, but that is a different wisely. matter. ture guy, or gal, in there for President It all goes to show how utterly insen- What is wrong with this proposal? of the United States. sible this approach is. This bill was This proposal is aimed at cutting out So let us assume, though, that they brought in here on Monday of this pork-barrel spending. That is the aim decide not to drive a pork truck week, this substitute. The Budget Com- of it. I understand that. I share that through this huge loophole. Let us as- mittee and the Committee on Govern- goal. I quote directly from the Dole sume they do not. Let us assume they mental Affairs, on which the distin- substitute: send all of these bills down there. Now guess what happens? The Department guished Senator from Georgia sits, The Committees on Appropriations of ei- studied carefully S. 4 and S. 14 and sent ther the House or the Senate shall not report of Defense then has no flexibility for an appropriations measure that fails to con- reprogramming. What that means in those bills to the floor. They were put tain such levels of detail on the allocation of practical effect is, if the C–17 runs into on the calendar. And neither of those an item of appropriation proposed by that a contractual problem or some kind of bills is before the Senate. House as is set forth in the committee report technical problem and it can spend Mr. NUNN. That is right. accompanying such bill. only $500 million of a $1 billion ac- Mr. BYRD. Neither of those bills is So what is it we are calling for the count, the $500 million that would oth- very likely to be voted on by the Sen- President to have on his desk to be erwise be available to put on readiness ate. able to veto out, to cut out, pork? In or pay or some other urgent need will But this hybrid monstrosity has been the words of the amendment, we are not be able to be reprogrammed be- brought in here on Monday, and on the calling for such level of detail as is set cause you will have a line item in same day that this substitute was of- forth in the committee report. There is there. What does that mean? It means fered a cloture motion was offered, say- no requirement that there be any spe- every time the Department of Defense, ing to the Senate we are going to have

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4413 a cloture vote on the following day but some other bill. We would be going to Mr. MCCAIN. Will the Senator yield? one. a rescission bill or we would be getting Mr. NUNN. We are talking about the Now, several flaws have already been on welfare. This would go back to the balance of power between the branches pointed out. I pointed out the flaw, and shop for repair. of Government. We are talking about several other Senators did, too, with This bill is in bad shape, and it is war powers. We are talking about the respect to the presenting clause of the going to be looked on, it is going to be power of the purse. We are talking Constitution. looked on with scorn if it passes the about serious business. Here we were, about to pass legisla- Senate. We are going to look silly. We Mr. MCCAIN. Will the Senator yield? tion that would give to the enrolling are going to look like we make speech- Mr. BYRD. Will the Senator yield? clerk of the originating House the au- es and pass them into law instead of Mr. NUNN. I yield to the Senator thority and the power to break down legislating. I would say to my friend from West Virginia. an appropriations measure after it has from West Virginia there is another de- Mr. BYRD. I do not intend to—this passed both Houses in the same form, fect. will be my last question. which means the conference report, The Somalia date for a time cer- Would not the President then be and break that bill down into hun- tain—— given a tool whereby he could use the dreds—as I pointed out with respect to Mr. BYRD. Exactly. Exactly. vetoed bill and formulate policy? He the energy and water bill of 1995, it Mr. NUNN. On deploying troops last would not be using the veto pen nec- would be 2,000—around 2,000 small bills, year. It was the only way Congress— essarily to reduce the deficit. ‘‘billettes,’’ and send those to the because the War Powers Act does not Mr. NUNN. Correct. White House. The Senate and the work. We know that. The Senator from Mr. BYRD. He would be using the House would not have passed any one West Virginia and I have alluded to veto pen to formulate national policy. of those bills. Neither the Senate nor that, along with the Senator from Vir- We are giving him that kind of power the House would have passed any one ginia [Mr. WARNER], and others. The in this bill. of those little ‘‘billettes,’’ and they Somalia restriction about how long Mr. NUNN. The Senator is exactly would have been sent down to the troops can be deployed abroad, the right. As this bill is now written, it White House, and the White House President could veto that the way the gives the President the ability to legis- would presumably sign them or veto bill is right now. late by deletion. some of them and then they would be Mr. BYRD. Right. Mr. BYRD. Absolutely. sent back to the originating body. Mr. NUNN. That may be worked on. I Mr. NUNN. There is no doubt about I can just about guarantee the Sen- hope that will be corrected. They just it. I will tell you what else it gives the ator that there will never be an over- found out about it. I do not think that President. We passed a supplemental ride of any of those little bills, never be is what the authors intended. But the appropriations bill last week that had an override, and some of them may be President could take the line item that rescissions in it. Some of the Presi- of utmost importance to a region of the had Somalia troop deployment in it dent’s favorite programs were cut. The country or a few of the States or a sin- and restrictions on it, veto that, spend Technology Reinvestment Program gle State. the money—no power of the purse at was cut $200 million, as I recall. Envi- This is the forum of the States. The all in terms of our foreign troops de- ronmental restoration funds were cut. States are represented in this body. It ployment. Now this proposal is intended to just is the only forum in which the States Another would be the Hyde amend- let him cut spending. That is what the are represented as States. And I can ment. Many people in this body are authors intend. I know that. But it lets just about guarantee the Senator that very much concerned about the abor- him veto rescissions. If we had had this not one of those would ever be over- tion question. When we legislate fund- in effect last week, the President could ridden because there would not be the ing restrictions on abortion in this have vetoed the deletions or the reduc- national interest in one of those that body, one way or the other, whether it tions in his own budget and left the in- there may be when an entire bill is ve- is rape, incest, to protect the life of the creases in. toed by the President. And without the mother, the President can take the Mr. MCCAIN. Will the Senator yield national interest, I pity the poor little money and veto the paragraph. Now, for a question? northeastern region of this country unless that is corrected, that is an- Mr. NUNN. I will be glad to yield. I that can only muster a few votes in the other tremendous, tremendous dimin- just have brief time remaining, and I House if the President were, for polit- ishing of congressional power and in- will yield right at the end of it. ical reasons—if the President for polit- creasing the executive branch power. Mr. MCCAIN. I am sorry that the ical reasons were to veto some of the Mr. BYRD. Will the Senator yield? Senator will not yield to me as he little ‘‘billettes’’ that were of vital in- Mr. NUNN. I hope that will be cor- yielded to the Senator from West Vir- terest to the northeast region. The rected. ginia. northeast region, with its few votes in Mr. BYRD. In other words, the Presi- Mr. NUNN. I say to the Senator, I the House, would never be able to mus- dent may strip out the language that will yield to him when I finish my re- ter a two-thirds majority of that body imposes a condition and make it a non- marks. I will be glad to yield, glad to to override that bill which would be of conditional appropriation. have a discussion. I know there is lim- significance only to a region, or only to Mr. NUNN. Right. ited time and I have to complete my a few States. Mr. BYRD. Is that correct? remarks. Mr. NUNN. That is correct. And the When I called this measure a mon- As drafted, Mr. President, the sub- question now is—I know that my strosity, I aptly named it. I will try to stitute provides: search Webster to see if I can find a friends on the other side from Indiana and Arizona are going to try to correct The Committee on Appropriations of either more accurate definition of the meas- the House or the Senate shall not report an ure. But several flaws such as that that. The Senator from Michigan appropriation measure that fails to contain have been found. pointed out last night they are going such level of detail on the allocation of an Now, the other side is attempting fre- to try to correct it. But in correcting item of appropriation as is set forth in the netically to fix those flaws that have it, can you correct it and still be able committee report accompanying such bill. been brought out. Just think, as the to get at earmarks? I do not think so. The whole thing is tied to the com- distinguished Senator from Georgia I think when you correct that, you are mittee report, but there is no require- said last night, if this bill were to be going to have to unwind the earmark ment for a committee report. This is before the Senate for a few more days, language, which brings us back. This an empty shell unless the Appropria- how many more flaws would be found. bill needs to be thought through. We tions Committee decides they are just Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I say to are talking about serious matters here. going to send a report to the President, my friend from West Virginia if this We are not talking about something incorporate it in a bill, have it en- bill were before the Senate, understood that is going to be in a 30-second ad or grossed, and give him a target to either by people in this body and the Amer- a bumper sticker. This is serious busi- increase or decrease spending, change ican people, we would be going back to ness. policy, whatever he would like to do.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4414 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 I know certain provisions are being Appropriations Committee acts in good priations bill that rescind or reduce worked out to change. We are on the faith, and we are going to put it into a pending. floor of the Senate under a time agree- law. They are going to have no flexi- In other words, if a President chose ment and we are now going to make bility whatsoever unless they come to, under this authority, he could take fundamental changes by amendment in back for statutory changes. We are an appropriations bill that had been a bill that is flawed, badly flawed. We going to have the most bogged down passed by the Congress and he could are going to, in the last hour, deal with legislative process that I can imagine basically increase the amount in that questions of war powers; we are going in the history of this Republic. We are appropriations bill by doing away with to deal with questions of whether re- going to have statutory changes by the or vetoing the rescissions in that bill scissions will be deleted. In effect, if hundreds requested on every single de- to reduce funding. they can delete a rescission, the Presi- fense bill. dent has increased the spending. Quoting again from the majority re- Mr. President, I hope that will be The best indictment against this ap- port: cured. But, again, on something this proach comes from the Republican ma- In cases where the specific amounts de- important, to come out here and have jority on the Governmental Affairs tailed in the appropriations statutes proved to cure these absolutely colossal de- Committee, because they brought out to be insufficient as the fiscal year pro- fects in this bill in the last few hours is bills that deal with rescission. The gresses, agencies could not spend above the really a hard way for me to visualize Domenici bill, now known as the Exon- specified level. Doing so would violate the responsible legislation occurring. Daschle bill, that is based on rescis- law. So just the opposite of what the sions, does not have these flaws in it. It Exactly what we are doing in this sponsors have intended could occur. does not tie the President’s powers to bill. This is just saying to the President: items in the committee report. If it is I will not quote it because I do not We think you are a whole lot better at a letter, if it is a statement of man- have the time this morning, but the agers, the President can delete by re- House Committee on Government Re- this than we are, so we are giving you scission under the Domenici bill. That form and Oversight, the majority Re- congressional authority. We are giving is the bill we ought to be voting for. publicans, said the same thing when you the power of the purse to make de- I know the majority is going to vote they brought out their rescission bill. cisions to increase or decrease. You do against it, but the majority is going to So we have the absolute, unbeliev- whatever you want. We want you to do regret this. able paradox where the majority re- it, because we have proven that we can- Look at what the majority said in ports of the Republicans on the Gov- not. Governmental Affairs Committee in ernmental Affairs Committee, in the Mr. President, the other thing this their report on this bill 10 days ago. House and the Senate, have decried the bill does not do, it does not go after the And this goes right to the heart of the very approach that we are now about real problems with our own process— way we are now proceeding under this to vote on and pass. And it has all been the real problems the Senator from Ar- substitute. This is a quote from the done in the last 2 weeks. izona has pointed out, earmarked majority report of the Governmental This is not a Democratic kind of cri- funds. We could have a point of order Affairs Committee. tique. This is a Republican critique of against that. We could have a point of It is possible, although not desirable, to the legislation now being presented and order against an appropriation that apply the state budgeting system to the Fed- supported by the majority. comes back from the conference that eral Government and give Presidents the Continuing to quote the Govern- was not even in the House bill or the kind of line-item veto available to Gov- mental Affairs majority report: ernors. To maximize item-veto authority for Senate bill. We could have a point of Agencies and departments would have to the President, the details in conference re- order on that. But none of that is in come to Congress and request supplemental ports, agency justification materials, and here. funds for some items and rescissions for oth- other nonstatutory sources could be trans- ers, or request a transfer of funds between We are basically saying, ‘‘We cannot ferred to appropriations bills. . . . accounts. Neither the Congress nor the agen- take care of our problems, so we are That is precisely what the substitute cies want this inflexibility and added work- going to give the President a huge ad- does, precisely. load for the regular legislative process. ditional authority.’’ However, placing an item in appropriations Mr. President, I will conclude my re- Well, the result of that is, believe me, bills would produce an undesirable rigidity marks very briefly. There are at least to agency operations and legislative proce- within a year, everybody will realize dures. five serious problems with the proposed what we have done and then we will substitute. That is a quote. Exactly what this move away from committee reports First, it contains loopholes so large bill does. and we will have statements by man- that proponents of pork will be able to agers. And then there will not be any- If Congress placed items in appropriations insulate whole barrels of pork from a bills, agencies would have to implement the thing for the President to veto, and we bill precisely as defined in the individual Presidential veto if they choose to do will start the process all over again, items. so. and we add to the disillusionment of That is exactly what this bill does. Second, the separate enrollment pro- the American people. They will finally You talk about tying up the Depart- cedure would allow the President to ask: ‘‘Can’t you guys do anything ment of Defense. This bill is going to veto funding limitations as well as right? We thought we were getting rid do more damage to the Department of funding amounts, which would inhibit of spending, but we are not.’’ Defense than anything I can imagine. the ability of Congress to address legitimate policy differences with the That is what is going to happen if They are not going to be able to shift this goes into law. If this goes into money on lapsed contracts or delayed President. Some examples I have already given are abortion and troop re- law—and the President says he is going contracts with the permission of Con- to sign whatever we send down there. gress to pay or to have readiness to strictions on Somalia. He can veto those paragraphs. Maybe that will be That ought to frighten a few people. make up for critical shortfalls. That ought to make us think. Last fall, the Republicans com- changed, but it is my view that you are plained about readiness in the cam- going to have a hard time changing It is a great pleasure to be able to paign. I share some of those concerns. that without deleting the ability of vote for darn near anything, knowing We had a committee this week that re- Congress to do away with earmarks, the President will veto it and you can ported at the request of the Senator the very target the Senator from Ari- make your speeches and it is not going from Arizona. Four retired generals zona has been shooting at. to go into law and you do not have to talked about the problems with the de- Third, this proposal permits the suffer the consequences and the coun- fense budget—not enough funding for President to increase as well as de- try does not. It is another thing enforce structure, not enough funding for crease spending by allowing him to tirely when the President says he is modernization. sign into law those portions of an ap- going to sign it. He is going to sign Now, what are we going to do? We are propriations bill that increase spending what we send down there on this. And going to take all of this material, if the and to veto those portions of an appro- I suppose any President would because,

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4415 at least on paper, if it is abided by in Mr. MCCAIN. By the chairman and regular process on the budget bills and good faith, we are going to give him ranking member. on the appropriations bills. I thought the largest new hunk of Presidential Mr. NUNN. And staff—— my friend from Arizona just had a power that we have given any Presi- Mr. MCCAIN. Neither the Senator hearing—— dent in many, many, many years. from Indiana nor I were ever consulted Mr. MCCAIN. I am sorry the Senator And then, what we will do, because on any of these reprogramming re- does not choose to answer my question. there are loopholes here, we will take quests, him 6 years and me 8 years as My question is, if I may restate the it away by moving the pork out of the members of the committee. question because, obviously, he did not reports and moving it into speeches on Mr. NUNN. Will the Senator yield for understand it or does not choose to an- the floor or statements on the floor, me to respond? swer it: Did the Pentagon ever request and we will be right back where we are Mr. MCCAIN. Yes. a reprogramming and say, ‘‘We can’t with disillusionment. Mr. NUNN. Staff has the responsi- spend this money in the Pentagon. We Mr. President, I yield the floor. bility to circulate the reprogramming want it to go back to the taxpayers’’? Mr. COATS addressed the Chair. request to the respective members on That is my question. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- both sides of the aisle. On the Demo- If the Senator does not choose to an- ator from Indiana. cratic side of the aisle, we do that. If swer that, that is fine. But I hope I Mr. MCCAIN. Can I ask the Senator the staff on the Republican side does made myself clear as to what my ques- from Indiana a question? How many not let the Republican Senators know, tion is. years has he been on the Senate Armed then if I were a Republican Senator on Mr. NUNN. I understand the question Services Committee? that committee, I would be asking the completely, and I hope the Senator will Mr. COATS. Six years. staff some very tough questions. listen to the answer. I can state it but Mr. MCCAIN. Has he ever seen a re- We let our members know about re- I cannot comprehend it for him. Maybe programming request? programming. That is a question that I have been under a false impression. I Mr. COATS. I have not. is up to the Republicans because the thought the Senator from Arizona and Mr. MCCAIN. According to the distin- chairman or the ranking member on my Republican colleagues wanted to guished ranking leader, who served for the Republican side understands re- increase the defense budget. I thought many years as the chairman, that programming requests. Many times my Republican colleagues had that in sometimes entails billions of dollars; is they are pending for 3 weeks to 3 their Contract With America. I that correct? months. Many times there is tremen- thought the Senator from Arizona Mr. COATS. It appears that it does. dous discussion. We even have wanted more money for defense. And In fact there is—— reprogrammings that get folded into now he is saying when a C–17 program Mr. MCCAIN. Although we never have the bill itself because they are con- lapses, do we want to send it back to seen them. So if you were the chairman troversial. the Treasury, or do we want to put it of a committee and ranking member As the chairman of the committee, I on high defense needs? I have been and you were the only one who made a never passed a reprogramming request, under the mistaken impression that decision on reprogramming, you would if I had any member interested on my the Senator from Arizona was con- be very concerned if something like side raise an issue, without a full dis- cerned about readiness, was concerned this—billions of dollars in transfers of cussion. That is the job of the ranking about modernization and felt there funds—was under just your almost di- member on the Republican side and the were deficient funds in the Department rect supervision, would you not? staff. of Defense. Mr. COATS. I think the whole pur- So I think there are some tough Mr. MCCAIN. I regret the Senator pose of this exercise—— questions that ought to be asked of the from Georgia will not answer the ques- Mr. MCCAIN. By the way, I am sorry staff on the Republican side if the Sen- tion. He is entitled not to answer the I did not have a chance to ask the Sen- ator from Indiana and the Senator question. I will repeat it one more ator from Georgia, has there ever been from Arizona have never seen a re- time, but it is obvious—I will not waste a reprogramming request from the programming request. Your staff the time of the Senate, because he is Pentagon that says, ‘‘We can’t spend signed off on it in your name. not going to answer the question. I also this money, so we would like to give it Mr. MCCAIN. It certainly is alarming want to say—— back to the taxpayers’’? that that kind of responsibility would Mr. NUNN. The answer to the ques- Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I ask be placed on staff who are not elected tion is the Department of Defense al- unanimous consent that I yield to the by anybody. ways on reprogrammings asks for the Senator from Arizona so he may ask Mr. NUNN. This is—— money to be shifted to other defense questions of the Senator from Georgia Mr. MCCAIN. And the kind of a sys- needs, and our committee has sup- and he may respond without having to tem where it is up to one or two mem- ported that. go through this convoluted procedure. bers, the chairman and the ranking Mr. MCCAIN. Speaking of com- In fact, I yield the floor so the Senator member, whether they want to notify prehension, I say again, has the Sen- from Arizona can take the floor to ask them or not. I have never seen any for- ator from Georgia ever heard of a re- questions. mal procedure or rule in the committee programming request where the Pen- Mr. MCCAIN. I appreciate the indul- that says that. In fact, in other com- tagon said, ‘‘We can’t spend this gence of the Senator from Georgia, who mittees, it is commonplace that a money. We’d like to give it back to the has obviously for many years been the phone call be sufficient to approve a re- taxpayers’’? person who decided whether billions programming. Mr. NUNN. The answer is no, because would be transferred from one account Mr. NUNN. That is not the way we do the Department of Defense has been to the other without consultation cer- it. underfunded. tainly with these two Senators. Mr. MCCAIN. If the Senator will con- Mr. MCCAIN. Thank you for answer- Mr. NUNN. Will the—— sider answering the question, if he has ing that question. I also regret the fact Mr. MCCAIN. Let me finish; I will ask ever seen a reprogramming request that the Senator from Georgia alleges the question. Has the former chairman from the Pentagon that said, ‘‘We that neither the Senator from Indiana ever, the distinguished ranking minor- would like to not spend this money and nor I understand what we are doing ity of the Senate Armed Services Com- send it back to the taxpayers who sent here. The Senator from Indiana and I, mittee, ever seen a reprogramming re- us the money.’’ for 8 years, have been involved in this quest that said, ‘‘We can’t spend this Mr. NUNN. I will say to my friend issue. We know it very well. It has been money. We’d like to give it back to the from Arizona in response to that, the before the Senate many times, includ- taxpayers’’? committee has the duty as we see fit to ing 1985. Mr. NUNN. Let me say to the Sen- turn down reprogrammings, in which I did not accuse the Senator from ator, all reprogrammings are approved case the money would not be spent, in Georgia of not understanding an issue by the majority and by the minority. which case the money could be reallo- when we had different positions. I did That was the case when—— cated to any other Department in the not accuse the Senator from Georgia of

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4416 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 not understanding the situation in the has been cosponsored by a Republican ways made for legitimate purposes, I Persian Gulf when he opposed our mili- Senator, the Senator from Alaska, Sen- think there might be some validity to tary involvement there. ator MURKOWSKI. It has been accepted the arguments presented here this The question is not whether we un- by the managers of the bill on both morning. But I think we all know that derstand it, it is whether we have a le- sides. It has been accepted by Repub- they are not always made that way, gitimate difference of opinion here, and licans, and it is designed to clarify a that little side deals are concocted and, that is what it is all about. provision in the original language that yes, phone calls are made; but phone I think that the Senator from South there is some ambiguity on, or at least calls are made after hours, and special Dakota raised some legitimate con- some are concerned about some ambi- requests are made from certain Mem- cerns. The Senator from West Virginia guity. It was never the intent of the bers to other Members for—Heaven for- did. But to allege that the Senator separate enrollment legislation to sep- bid—political purposes, and not nec- from Indiana and I do not understand arate legislative language, to have leg- essarily for legitimate new expendi- what we are doing, I think does not ele- islative language vetoed by the Presi- tures or shifted expenditures, but made vate the debate. dent. Those were the dollars that are for political purposes. I yield the floor. attached to it. That was debated at The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- length. The Levin-Murkowski amend- Mr. MCCAIN. Will the Senator yield? ator from Indiana. ment, which is going to be accepted on Mr. COATS. I yield to the Senator Mr. COATS. Mr. President, some of both sides, clarifies any question in from Arizona. the logic and reasoning of those who that regard. Yet, we find ourselves Mr. MCCAIN. I ask my friend, is not are opposing the line-item veto meas- being criticized for a legislation which the issue here programming and not re- ure offered by the Senator from Ari- we have agreed to improve and accept programming? The fact is that this zona and the Senator from Indiana is the amendment of the very Senators may be a straw man. We are talking curious. On the one hand, they say that who have raised the question of criti- about whether we are going to elimi- the bill is flawed and that if Repub- cism. licans would simply reach out and at- So I do not understand how our oppo- nate the waste, and if we want to use tempt to correct what they perceive to nents on this issue want us to proceed. the word ‘‘pork-barrel’’ spending and be the flaws, we will have a better bill. Do they want us to work with them or put some fiscal discipline in the proc- They come to the floor and say, we not? Do they want us to improve the ess. Is that not really what we are talk- need a line-item veto, we need to have bill or not? Do they want us to clarify ing about here? And the reprogram- a process in place whereby the execu- ambiguities or not? If they do—and it ming issue is something that could be tive branch has the option or the abil- appears that most do—then others solved through simple changes in the ity to check the excess spending habits should not come to the floor and say, rules or even in how we do business. of Congress that design spending or tax see, that points out that the bill is I agree with the Senator from Indi- breaks that do not serve a broad pur- flawed. The Murkowski-Levin amend- ana that there are abuses in the re- pose, and that they support that effort, ment protects all legislative language programming process. That is not real- from being separately enrolled and ve- but that some of the provisions of the ly the fundamental issue, and I do not toed. The policy language is protected. bill, which the Senator from Arizona think we should be spun off into that and the Senator from Indiana have of- That is the intent and that is the result of the amendment which has been relatively unimportant side issue as fered, need to be modified. compared with the larger argument When the points they make are le- agreed to and will be accepted as soon here. And the reason why I think both gitimate points, because we never as, procedurally, we can get to that you and I are somewhat agitated is, for claimed that our bill was perfect, as no point. somebody to say that this is a joke, one really claims their bill is perfect— The Senator from Georgia also points that is why we have an amendment out that if we go with the separate en- that this is not thought through, that process, that is why we have a debate rollment process, it will require an in- we do not know what we are doing—I process—and when a Senator from the flexibility in terms of various agencies have never accused any opponent on other side who happens to want to sup- being able to reprogram funds and, this floor of not being serious about an port it but simply wants to strengthen therefore, it will hideously confuse the issue, nor have I said that a proposal of the bill points out a particular provi- legislative process. All it will do is theirs was a joke, nor did I accuse sion that is not designed or drafted as change the way in which funds are able them of not thinking through a par- to be reprogrammed. Instead of the accurately as they think it should be ticular amendment when they had it current practice of a phone call or a suggests that and we agree with them on the floor. letter to a committee chairman and/or that it addresses a problem in a more the ranking member, instead of a proc- I give them credit for having done accurate way, then they turn around ess which involves two, and at most their homework and doing what they and say, ‘‘See, that is proof that the four Senators out of 100, we will have a think is for the good of their State. I bill is flawed.’’ process which will involve all 100 Sen- think it demeans the debate for any- Well, what are we to do? On the one ators. one, either on this side of the issue or hand, they criticize us because the bill, We spend a great deal of time that side of the issue, to say somebody they say, is flawed and needs to be im- crafting an authorization for the use of has not thought through an issue, and proved. On the other hand, when we funds, and we spend a great deal of to say somebody is not serious about say, ‘‘OK, we’ll accept that improve- time appropriating funds for that au- it, and to say that what we have been ment, that’s a legitimate improve- thorization. We spend a great deal of working on for 6 or 8 years is a joke. I ment,’’ they say, ‘‘See, there’s proof time debating those decisions on this think it is wrong and it does not do that it is flawed; therefore, we can’t Senate floor. Clearly, situations and anything for the debate. I would be vote for that.’’ That is circular rea- circumstances change. So that it is ap- glad to and have continued to, since soning and circular logic that this Sen- propriate for agencies to come forward last Thursday—and many years be- ator finds hard to understand. and say that circumstances have fore—debate this issue on its merits, One of the points that the Senator changed, spending was greater in this rather than demeaning the motivation from Georgia has made is that as the area than we anticipated 6 months ago or the knowledge or the experience or bill is currently constructed and is cur- when this was negotiated, or spending rently presented, policy decisions the talent of those who support it, as I is less in that area, and we would like have not those who are opposed to it would be subject to a Presidential veto to shift some funds from one area to are. and, therefore, it would require a two- the other. But what will have to take thirds override. But that issue has been place now is that that request will I ask the Senator from Indiana if he debated and discussed at length. An have to be made available to all 100 agrees that that might be a good idea amendment has been offered by the Senators. I think that is appropriate. for us to elevate this debate back to Senator from Michigan, Senator LEVIN, If the reprogramming request was al- where it has been, frankly, up until to clarify that that will not happen. It ways made on an objective basis, al- just a short time ago.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4417 Mr. COATS. I thank the Senator and abused by Members of the House. Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I will from Arizona for his comments. For And, as I said before, we are not here to use my leader time to make comments Members to suggest that this is some point fingers. We have all taken advan- on the Democratic substitute and re- surprise that is being sprung on Mem- tage of this process. serve the balance of the time allotted bers of Congress, I simply ask, where It is not to our credit that we have to the substitute to the distinguished have they been for the last decade? done so. It is a time-honored—I now ranking member, the manager of our This issue has been debated, the merits call a ‘‘time dishonored’’—practice of bill on our side, the Senator from Ne- of this issue have been debated at trying to slip some goodies in for the braska. length on the floor. The Senator from folks back home, or for one individual, Mr. President, the Senator from Arizona and the Senator from Indiana or a tax break for one person, or one Georgia raised a number of very helpful have offered time after time various special interest. points. He makes a powerful case for proposals to deal with the fundamental Members have spoken eloquently underlying issue. about that practice. We read about it the substitute that Democrats have As the Senator from Arizona has in the news, hear about it on the news. proposed. The Senator from Indiana said, the fundamental underlying issue It happens all the time. It is wrong. It has understandably responded as best is the ability of Congress, under cur- ought to stop. We are trying to provide he could to many of these questions. rent law and current procedures, to a tool and basis to allow it to stop. The fact remains that there are serious spend the taxpayers’ dollars either in For goodness sake, the sky is not concerns about the proposal, as well-in- appropriated expenditures or in tax going to fall on Federal spending if we tended as it might be, that the Repub- benefits, in a way that serves no na- make it a little harder to reprogram licans have offered. tional purpose, in a way that is not something, if, instead of just a letter The Senator from Georgia did a real made available to Members to debate that comes over or a phone call be- service, I think, in pointing out so well and discuss and to cast their yeas or tween an agency and a couple Members what the Governmental Affairs Com- nays on that particular item. It is an of Congress, if we say it will be a little mittee and the Budget Committee have bit tougher to make that decision, Con- egregious practice that has cost the said about these proposals. Republicans gress is going to have to look at it a Treasury and the taxpayers tens of bil- in the Senate have expressed in writing little bit longer, Members are going to lions, if not hundreds of billions of dol- fundamental concerns about what the have the right to raise a few questions lars. It is, as former President Harry proposal now put forth by Senator and say, ‘‘Is this a legitimate transfer?″ Truman said, ‘‘legislative blackmail.’’ MCCAIN and Senator COATS. We all know how the process works, I think it is unfortunate that the C– so we can argue some of the fine details 17—or maybe it is fortunate—the C–17 Senator NUNN has clearly recognized about the current practice and what a is a program that has been in serious what others have recognized—that this wonderful practice it is, and we can trouble from the beginning. I am not proposal is flawed. As everyone prob- even talk about reprogramming. But saying we should not have it. I support ably now appreciates, it has a sunset of this Congress would easily adapt to and it. I think we all have the right to raise the year 2000. I predict this morning accept the requests of various agencies, questions about whether or not money that this bill will not last until the shifted from one account to bail out a if they were legitimate requests. There year 2000, if it were to pass into law. I problem with the C–17 is a legitimate is nothing to prevent committees from make that prediction. I will predict we shift of money. will be back here at some point before routinely reporting out reprogramming There are ways in which Congress bills en bloc by voice vote at the end of the year 2000 to vote on a bill very can deal with routine, legitimate re- similar, if not identical, to the one a markup and bringing it to the Sen- programming requests without tying ate. There is nothing to prevent rou- that we are now proposing, the so- this place in knots. For goodness called Domenici-Exon bill. tine reprogramming requests from sakes, we are legislators. There are leg- being placed on the calendar and pass- islators here who know more about I say so in large measure because I ing by voice vote. how to expedite and loophole things— think many people recognize that in But if a reprogramming request is they have forgotten more—than this spite of the fact that the other side has controversial, if a Member of the Sen- Senator can possibly learn. come a long way on a number of con- ate or a Member of the House wants to My concern is not that this process is cerns that we have expressed over the say, ‘‘Wait a minute, what do you going to hamstring the process. My course of this debate, very serious dif- mean you are shifting that money from concern is that people in back rooms ficulty problems remain. First, there this account to that account? What do right now are trying to find end runs are loopholes in the amendment,— you mean there is a problem with around what we are trying to do. there is no requirement that a con- spending on the C–17,’’ maybe we ought Let Members at least do something. ference report contain a line-item level to look into that. Why is there a prob- Let Members at least make it tougher of detail. We can get around the line lem? Do we want to routinely, on the to spend the taxpayers’ dollars. Let item almost entirely by putting the de- advice of four Senators, simply say, Members give the public a better op- tails in floor statements or letters to well, that is OK; this program needs portunity to look at the way we spend. agency heads. We do not have to put it more money; let us shift it from this Let Members at least put our ‘‘yes’’ or in detail. That is one loophole. account to another account? Should ‘‘no’’ on record so that the taxpayers The alternative to that problem is to Members of the Senate have the right and our constituents can hold us ac- create so many separate bills, rep- to say, ‘‘May I ask some questions countable. Let Members end this prac- resenting so many thousands of line about that? Can we debate that on the tice of saying, ‘‘I could not figure out items, that it will make the operation floor? Can we have some light shed on what was in the bill because it was of every agency excessively rigid. If the reasons this reprogramming is re- 2,000 pages long and that stuff was bur- each item becomes separate law, the ri- quested?’’ That is all we are seeking to ied or slipped in in conference.’’ Let gidity of that process becomes so cum- accomplish with this procedure. Members make it tougher to spend bersome people will say it just is not Again, this whole issue comes down money, because we have been irrespon- to status quo versus change. Is there a going to work and the whole system sible in the way we have spent money will break down. better way to do business? Or do we around here. want to do business the old way? Well, Mr. President, I see there are other A third problem is that the President if business done the old way had been speakers on the floor. Let me inquire of can actually increase spending under satisfactory, if it had not been done in the time allocation. the Dole substitute by vetoing line a way which demeans the credibility of The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. items that actually represent rescis- individual Senators and demeans the INHOFE). The Senator from Indiana has sions or general reductions. I know credibility of this institution, we ought 361⁄2 minutes remaining; the minority that the distinguished Senator from to stay with it. Unfortunately, it has. leader has 301⁄2 minutes remaining. Michigan, Senator LEVIN, is hoping to It is an egregious practice that has Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I yield address that concern later on. Perhaps been abused by Members of the Senate the floor. we can work something out.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4418 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 Mr. President, these are very serious member, have worked on this issue, as care of that. Our amendment says, concerns. I hope that, as we have with has Senator COATS, for a long time. within a designated period of time, 20 many of the other concerns raised Senator DOMENICI and Senator EXON days, the President notify Congress throughout the course of the last sev- have looked at all the alternatives and after passage of a spending or a tax bill eral days, we can address those prior to concluded some time ago that the most of the things he wants to see cut. That the time we vote on final passage, as- practical approach, the most logical is all he has—20 days. Then 2 days later suming the substitute is not passed. I way with which to address this issue is a bill with the President’s proposal has am hopeful it will be passed. I will ad- to suggest a line-item rescission. to be introduced and within 10 days dress my reasons for that hope in just Forty-three States, including South after that, the Congress has to vote. a moment. Dakota, already have a line-item veto. That is it. Let me also address some of the con- It is time for the Federal Government In 1 month’s time it is all over; 20 cerns that have, in our view, been ad- to adopt one as well. days the President has to notify Con- dressed at least in part. Our conclusion That bill not only had practicality, gress. Two days later a bill is intro- was that the original tax legislation in and it was most likely to be upheld duced. And 10 days later it is over. Dur- the McCain bill that was originally constitutionally, but it also included ing that 10-day period during which proposed did not go far enough. The the broadest base of a Democratic and Congress takes it up, we have 10 hours other side has come a long way in Republican consensus—broad bipar- to deal with this issue and be done with meeting some of our concerns in adopt- tisan consensus that this was the ap- it. ing a broad provision allowing the proach that could actually work. Mr. President, it is very clear. Our President to veto special-interest tax I have supported a line-item veto. I legislation is as simple as simple can breaks. I read a colloquy into the floor supported this concept. I cosponsored be. It is constitutional. It is a process last night between the Senator from it, as did the majority leader. Many that would work exceedingly well. We Indiana and the Senator from New Jer- others who have cosponsored this legis- know it will work here. sey [Mr. BRADLEY] about the intention lation this morning or this afternoon I believe our amendment has at least of the Senator from Indiana to broaden will now have an opportunity to vote four advantages over the pending Re- the scope to include the issues that on a bill that they cosponsored. They publican substitute. Clearly it is more were raised on many occasions on this clearly saw the wisdom in using this workable; clearly it is more constitu- floor by the Senator from New Jersey. approach or they would not have co- tional; clearly it protects majority Our amendment is clear and more sponsored it. rule; and, finally, it leaves no question forceful in that regard. We will talk The President has been very helpful that tax breaks are on the table. It en- about that. The fact is that at least the in advocating a line-item veto, and has sures that tax breaks will be subject to Republicans have begun to accept the been helpful in moving this process for- review just like any other form of realization that we do not have a true, ward. spending. broad scope in our line-item authority When the chairman and the ranking There is no question about the sim- unless we have tax breaks on the table member proposed S. 14, obviously they plicity argument. The Appropriations as well. felt, and they had good reason to feel, Committee has estimated that 13 ap- In addition, an amendment by the that based upon broad bipartisan con- propriations bills enacted in fiscal year ranking member of the Budget Com- sensus, based upon constitutionality, 1995, sent down now for 13 signatures, mittee has been adopted that directs based upon practicality, that we really will require 10,000 separate minibills all savings from the line-item veto to had a bill that we have the confidence under the Dole amendment. So we are deficit reduction. A similar provision could be passed. In fact, every single going to go from 13 bills to 10,000 bills was in the Domenici-Exon bill but left Republican who voted supported this in just the appropriations process out of the Dole substitute. Now, it is legislation in a bill that was offered alone. That is what we are talking back in. We are pleased with that. last year—by a vote of 342 to 69. That about. Coming on the heels of the Pa- Without this amendment, savings from was the vote. Mr. President, 169 Repub- perwork Reduction Act, this legisla- the line-item veto could be used to pay lican Members of the House supported tion goes in exactly the opposite direc- for other Government spending. One a bill nearly identical to the substitute tion. That is, the Republican sub- pork-barrel project could be cut to pay that we are offering right now. So we stitute belies all of our public outcry for another. That will not happen now have every expectation that this bill about paperwork and the concerns we as a result of the legislation offered by has enjoyed support on a broad, bipar- have raised time and again about how the Senator from Nebraska. This was a tisan basis in the past and there ought we want to reduce paperwork, reduce truth-in-advertising amendment. If we to be no reason why we could not en- the level of redtape, whether it is in promise deficit reduction, we have to sure that the same level of bipartisan passing bills or the effect the bills have deliver it. It ensures that savings from support could be found again as we on people afterward. vetoes of entitlements and tax breaks vote later on this afternoon. A good example, of course, is the one go to reducing the deficit as well. So That is really what we have all said I have raised before. This is a 17-page that, too, was an improvement. we want. We want a line-item veto. We appropriations bill, the Energy and Then, of course, I am pleased that want one that is practical. We would Water Appropriations Act of last year. the amendment by the Senator from like one to see broad bipartisan sup- It is a bill that has 17 pages. That is all Wisconsin was adopted to create a port when it passes. This substitute of- it has, 17 pages of line by line appro- budget point of order against any non- fers all of that and more. Basically, priations. This is a simple little docu- emergency spending included in an there is no secret, no mystery to how ment that for 200 years we have sent emergency supplemental propositions this works. I talked about this a little down to the President for signature bill. This will ensure that bit last night, but let me make sure ev- and that is it. He signs it, he vetoes it, supplementals are truly used for emer- erybody understands how simple the it is over. gencies and are not vehicles for extra- process is. That is really one of the ad- Mr. President, this is 1,746 pages. neous projects, as we have seen in our vantages to our approach, it is so sim- This is what we are going to change it recent defense supplemental. ple. It gives the President the author- to if the Dole substitute passes. We are There are improvements in the legis- ity to force Congress to vote on spend- going to go from that 17-page bill to lation since Monday. We can be grate- ing and tax provisions that he con- this. And the whole story is that when ful for that. The real improvement, the siders wasteful. That is all it does. And the President gets it, page by page, one real opportunity to make substantive it sets a timeframe within which that after another, he has to get his pen out. progress is to go back to where we must happen. He will probably have to get hundreds started, to go back to what the real ex- We all know the situation now. We of pens out. But he is going to have to perts on this issue have proposed for all recognize that we can ignore line sign every one of these. many, many years. Senator DOMENICI, items as they are rescinded now. There Of course the distinguished President the chairman of the Budget Com- is no requirement that Congress needs pro tempore, our dear friend, Senator mittee, and Senator EXON, the ranking to respond. But our amendment takes STROM THURMOND, will have to sign

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4419 this. The Speaker of the House will are proposed by the President, and that tax language or constitutionality on have to sign it as well. It takes three majority rule has been something we any of those. signatures, and this is what we are have supported for 200 years. Under the So, Mr. President, I do not think going to be signing: one page after an- Dole alternative, the President wins, if there is any question, I do not think other—1,746 pages. Do we really want he gets the support of just one more there is any doubt, that the Demo- that? Is that really paperwork reduc- than a third of either House of Con- cratic substitute is the superior alter- tion? Is that simplicity? Is that the gress. Either House of Congress can up- native. I do not think Senator DOMEN- kind of practical kind of legislating we hold a Presidential decision. If that ICI and Senator DOLE would have spon- all espouse? I do not think so. I really does not create policymaking poten- sored this legislation had they not had do not think we want to go to 1,746 sep- tial, if that does not shift the balance confidence that this is a very workable, arate signatures every time we pass a of power towards the White House, I do simple, practical, constitutional solu- simple appropriations bill. not know what does. In my 16 years in tion. They would not have put their We have a choice of passing a small Congress, I have never seen a greater names on a bill if they did not feel that bill or a large stack of paper. That is opportunity for the President to be- good about it. It is workable. It is con- our choice. And that is just one bill. come a legislator than this will provide stitutional. It projects majority rule. We have also, of course, indicated our him in the future. It clearly puts tax breaks on the table. concern about the constitutionality of So I am very hopeful that, as we con- It has solved the problem that we have the Dole substitute. The last time this sider the question of Presidential raised now for days on this side of the issue came up in committee, the Rules power, the balance between the legisla- aisle. It clarifies our situation while Committee in 1985 voted out a similar tive and the executive branches, that protecting our rights. proposal unfavorably by a unanimous we recognize the magnitude of the op- So it is that simple. We have an op- vote. The separate enrollment proposal portunity the President will have to portunity to vote on something that was considered then, and voted out un- set policy for the first time as a result has history, to vote on something that favorably, with the recommendation of his ability to line item any one of has been carefully considered by two of that it should not pass, by a unanimous thousands of specific provisions that our committees, the Governmental Af- vote, under a Republican Rules Com- may ultimately not only affect spend- fairs Committee and the Budget Com- mittee chaired by a Republican. The ing but affect policy as well. mittee. It has a history on both sides of constitutionality was raised again and The fourth issue, as I said, affects tax the aisle, with our most esteemed lead- again. The view then was what we were break language. I indicated that the ership on both sides of the aisle. So proposing here was not only imprac- constitutionality question is unclear. without any doubt, with real expertise, tical but unconstitutional. The tax language is even more unclear. our leaders on this issue have come As I said, we are going to address The tax language, in spite of the best forth and produced a document that I that issue of constitutionality with the efforts through colloquies and through feel enthusiastic about, that I know expedited judicial review and I am changes in the legislation itself to will work, that I know will found to be hopeful that at some point in the not make the tax language clear, is still constitutional. too distant future the courts will de- ambiguous. We still are not sure what So I hope that as we consider our termine for us the constitutional via- ‘‘similarly situated’’ is. I hope that we vote, and our colleagues will come bility of this approach. As others, espe- are not creating a provision that would back to their original positions on this cially the distinguished Senator from allow us to pass special tax breaks for issue, come back to their original in- West Virginia, have indicated, it is very small groups of people because terpretation that indeed this does work going to take more than legislative they are ‘‘similarly situated.’’ well, and support the Democratic sub- clarification for us to resolve the con- I know no one here would support a stitute. stitutionality questions. I am hopeful tax break that only went to Members I yield the floor. the concerns raised by the junior Sen- of Congress or to members of our staff. Mr. CONRAD addressed the Chair. ator from Michigan in his proposed But under the language, that is a possi- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- amendment will address some of these bility. Under the language, ‘‘similarly ator from North Dakota. concerns as well. situated’’ could actually mean that we Mr. COATS. Mr. President, may I ask But the fact is that, in spite of as are allowing tax breaks that would af- the clerk how much time remains? much legislative clarification as we fect a group as small as the Members of The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- can make, we are still rolling the dice this body or our staffs to not be subject ator from Indiana has 361⁄2 minutes, when it comes to constitutionality. No to Presidential review. and the Senator from Nebraska has one can say unequivocally that what Through the colloquy and assurances 191⁄2 minutes. we are now proposing will pass con- given to us by others, that is becoming Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I yield 5 stitutional muster; that we have over- less of a threat, I hope. I think we can minutes to the Senator from Arizona. come all of the constitutional hurdles now be somewhat confident that indeed The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- that have been raised over and over it is the view of our colleagues on the ator from Arizona. again in spite of the changes we have Republican side that they want broad Mr. KYL. Thank you, Mr. President. made. As I predicted, this bill will not language here, that they anticipate I appreciate the Senator from Indiana survive until it sunsets. We will not having the ability or giving the oppor- yielding. have to wait until the year 2000 to re- tunity to the President to review items To review the bidding here on this view this again because whether it is that are broad in their scope. But it is substitute, naturally I support the the courts or whether it is the Con- a roll of the dice. We are not sure what Dole-McCain-Coats line-item veto be- gress, somebody is going to come back they mean. The language is vague. The cause I think it represents a better ap- and say: We made a mistake. It may language in my view is convoluted. We proach, the approach that the Amer- take that. But ultimately we are going can do better than that. The way we do ican people understand. to come back here and address it and I it better than that is to pass the Demo- In the first place, in civics class in am sure at some point that will hap- cratic substitute. the eighth grade, we all learned that a pen. And certainly the constitu- Our language is very clear and very veto requires a two-thirds override. tionality question is one of the biggest direct. It puts special interest tax That is what veto is all about. That is reasons why I think it could happen, breaks on the table, period. It is over. what this provision has, unlike the sooner or later. We can be very clear, if the Democratic version offered by the distinguished Mr. President, the third issue has to substitute passes, that every special in- minority leader, which would only re- do with majority rule. Our substitute terest tax provision is going to be sub- quire a 50-percent override. That is not protects majority rule. Our substitute ject to a line-item veto. Every appro- what we think of when we think of a ensures a central tenent of democracy priations bill will be subject to line- veto. So that is the first important dis- will be here even after this legislation item veto. There is no question there. tinction. passes. Our amendment requires a ma- So we will not have to roll the dice Second, with respect to tax breaks, it jority of Congress to approve cuts that when it comes to the interpretation of has never been the concept, in lining

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4420 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 out pork-barrel spending through the that is called for in the legislation. or not, with the Dole substitute, the line-item veto, that we would add tax What this argument assumes is that President would be able to veto any ex- breaks to the line-item veto legisla- Members of the House and Senate, in isting entitlement spending. tion. But in order to accommodate effect, will cheat; that we will decide Mr. COATS. The answer to that is no. some of our friends on the other side, to get around the line-item veto by not Mr. CONRAD. The answer to that is we did say that if there is an omnibus putting in the specific line items, thus no? tax bill, and somebody decides to slip for the President to veto if he does not in a tax break for their friend back like them. Mr. COATS. No. It only applies to home, the President could strike that It is possible that we could try to new spending. out just as he would an item of spend- conjure up ways of getting around this. Mr. CONRAD. Well, I am interested ing, of pork-barrel spending, because a That is what happened with the bal- in that response because I really ques- tax break for a very limited group or anced budget proposals. That is what tion whether it is right. I have here the individual would be similar to pork- happened with Gramm-Rudman, and Senate committee report on last year’s barrel spending. with other kinds of legislation. VA/HUD appropriations bill. Included So that is included in the Republican I suspect, however, that good faith in this bill was budget authority and version of the line-item veto. will prevail and that the majority, outlays for veterans’ pensions and com- But what we do not think is appro- which in fact favors the line-item veto pensation. This indicates that the Sen- priate is to put more than necessary and favors it working, will ensure that ate bill contains $17.6 billion for vet- roadblocks in the way of reducing as this legislation does work over the erans’ compensation and pensions. This taxes for all Americans, as the Demo- next 5 years, it will be handled in such is mandatory spending which nonethe- cratic approach would do. If we are a way and will operate in such a way less gets included in the VA/HUD going to give Americans a $500 child that the President will be given the spending totals every year. My specific tax credit, or if we are going to provide ability to line out specific items as is question would be, would the spending a capital gains tax relief, or reduce the the intention under the legislation. authority for veterans’ pensions and marginal rates, we think that is a mat- Of course, with respect to the argu- compensation be enrolled separately ter that we ought to be promoting and ment that there is a difference between and subject to Presidential veto under not putting roadblocks in the way. The the majority position here of a two- the Dole substitute separate enroll- truth is that in most of these major thirds override and the minority view ment bill? tax changes, it is a regular bill that that there should only be a 50 percent Mr. COATS. The answer to that—if comes out of the House and Senate. It override, that there is a great deal of is subject to Presidential veto, anyway. the Senator will yield, Mr. President, power being given to the President, the answer to that is no, unless it is So the President can veto it. It would that is a legitimate argument. Reason- require a two-thirds override by the new spending or a change in the ben- able people can differ about this. That efit, it would not be subject to the line- Members of the House and Senate. is why the sunset provision is in the So really, this argument, I think is a item veto. legislation. This legislation does not straw man. On most tax legislation, Mr. CONRAD. Well, the difficulty I automatically continue forever. After 5 there will be the two-thirds override, have with that answer is, I say to my anyway. On that which does not re- years, it is over, and it will not be re- colleague, these are appropriated enti- quire that, we should not be throwing instituted unless we decide it was a tlements. These are entitlements that up more roadblocks in the way of tax good idea and we pass it again. are in appropriations bills, and the breaks for the American people except That is where this issue can be evalu- Dole substitute provides for the sepa- for those that represent special inter- ated. And if Presidents have abused rate enrollment of all appropriated ests which are taken care of. their authority, I am sure you will not measures, does it not? In some respects, it seems to me that see the Senate passing this kind of legislation again. But if Presidents have Mr. COATS. It does provide for the the Democrats are not willing to take separate enrollment of all appropriated yes for an answer. They wanted the done what they should, if they have acted responsibly, then I suspect we measures. But the application of the issue of the tax breaks included. We did bill, application of the veto, the power it. They wanted the so-called ‘‘lock will be reinstituting this legislation. That is what sunset is all about. We given to the President only goes to the box’’ so that any savings will be ap- new spending or expansion of benefits plied to deficit reduction. We did that. will have an opportunity to look at it. So the bottom line, Mr. President, is available under the entitlement pro- They want to ensure that the President gram. could not veto rescissions. We are really whether we want to continue to going to be doing that. conduct business as usual or not. The Mr. CONRAD. So the answer as I hear In other words, most of the primary American people obviously do not want it is that, even though these appro- concerns that were raised about the us to do that. They want us to change priated entitlement accounts are in ap- Republican version of the line-item the way Congress conducts its business propriations bills, specifically included veto have been agreed to. We are tak- and the business that it conducts. The in appropriations, all existing entitle- ing care of those. Let us take yes for line-item veto is a significant improvement spending would not be subject to an answer. We are willing to make this ment in the way the Congress conducts Presidential veto? a bipartisan and better bill. its business. Mr. COATS. The mandatory spending Of the issues remaining, some are I Mr. CONRAD addressed the Chair. must go out under the law as it is cur- think matters of legitimate dispute. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- rently written—mandatory spending. The issue of reprogramming that the ator from North Dakota. Only new spending is subject to the Senator from Georgia mentioned I Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask line-item veto. think represents a potential problem. the Senator from Nebraska to yield me Mr. CONRAD. Well, let me go further It may be somewhat cumbersome. We 5 minutes. if I can. For example, then, in last will have to see whether Members of Mr. EXON. I yield 5 minutes to the year’s agriculture appropriations bill the House and the Senate are willing to Senator from North Dakota. there was $29 billion provided for the The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- deal with each other in a matter of Food Stamp Program. Would this ator from North Dakota. comity and in a matter of expedition in amount be enrolled separately and Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I would getting these rescissions through. But could the President veto it? there is nothing wrong with having all ask the Senator from Indiana if he Members of this body consider them as could answer some questions that I Mr. COATS. I am sorry; would the opposed to just a few on the com- have. Senator restate that question? mittee. So I think that is something Mr. COATS. The Senator from Indi- Mr. CONRAD. There was in last we will have to see how it works. But ana will be happy to try, depending on year’s agriculture appropriations bill it should not be a big problem. the complexity of the questions. $29 billion provided for the Food Stamp There is the possibility that commit- Mr. CONRAD. Well, the thrust of my Program, an entitlement program, but tees will not provide the specificity questions goes to the issue of whether it was an appropriated entitlement.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4421 Would this amount be enrolled sepa- to entitlements applies, in terms of able to veto not only new entitlements, rately and could the President veto it? spending, in terms of dollars that are but also the funding for our existing Mr. COATS. The amount appro- subject to line-item veto, applies only entitlement commitments. And I think priated must go out under the existing to new spending under a change in the we should make that abundantly clear law. The only way in which the Presi- law which would change the benefit. and have an understanding of that. If dent could veto a provision is if the un- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- we want to do that, fine. derlying law were changed to increase ator’s time has expired. Mr. CONRAD. Will the Senator yield the amount of spending as the result of Mr. COATS. And if that change in for a question? an expanded or new benefit. So addi- the benefit would require increased Mr. EXON. Certainly. tional spending to meet the mandatory spending. Mr. CONRAD. Would not included in requirement under the law would not Mr. CONRAD. I have run out of time. these categories be such things as qualify for a line-item veto. But if I have other questions I would like to guaranteed student loans, higher edu- there were additional spending as the pursue. But I just say to my colleague cation facilities loans? result of a change in the underlying and friend, I think we have a real legal Mr. EXON. Absolutely, absolutely, law which increased spending as a re- problem with the definitions. absolutely. And I have seen your list. sult of that change, that increase is Mr. EXON. How much time do we It is right down the line. subject to the line-item veto. have remaining on this side? Mr. CONRAD. Medicaid, health care Mr. CONRAD. So the Senator is as- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Twelve trust funds, Federal payments to rail- serting that only the increase in these minutes and fifty seconds. road retirement accounts. appropriated entitlements could be Mr. EXON. Let me see if I can begin The President of the United States subject to Presidential veto? to clear up some of the very legitimate would be able to veto every one of Mr. COATS. I am sorry; again I was questions that have been asked by the these programs, every agriculture pro- speaking to staff. Senator from North Dakota and others. gram, including rural electric and tele- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- I believe, with all good intentions, phone loans, conservation, temporary ator’s 5 minutes have expired. there has been some confusion here. emergency food assistance programs, Mr. CONRAD. I ask the Senator from And that is the problem that occurs Federal crop insurance corporation, all Nebraska if I might have 2 additional when we have something that comes up payments to veterans. minutes. on Monday and, boom, a cloture mo- Would not all these be included? Mr. EXON. I grant 2 additional min- tion is filed against it, then the we find Mr. EXON. Absolutely. utes, and then I would also like to fol- the bill’s language locked in concrete, Mr. CONRAD. And yet we cannot low up on and try to give my perspec- chiseled in stone. veto the capital gains tax cut? The tive of the very legitimate questions Certainly, we have made some im- President cannot veto the capital gains that are being asked. provements on some problems in the tax cut? Two more minutes to the Senator Dole substitute. And some of the Mr. EXON. He cannot do it. from North Dakota. amendments that have been addressed Mr. CONRAD. I just say, in conclu- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- here are likely to be accepted and to sion, it seems to me it does not make ator from North Dakota. improve things. much sense. Mr. CONRAD. I would then ask the I want to go to the heart of the mat- Mr. EXON. I say to my friend from Senator from Indiana, is the Senator ter that has been brought up by the North Dakota, again, I am not sure from Indiana asserting that only the Senator from North Dakota. I think that that is the intent of the Dole sub- increase in appropriated entitlements the problem is that there has been a stitute, but that is what the Dole sub- would be subject to Presidential veto? misinterpretation or a misunder- stitute does. Mr. COATS. The entitlement could standing on the bill itself. Mr. COATS. Will the Senator yield? be separately enrolled and subject to a I refer to the Dole substitute bill, Mr. EXON. I am glad to yield on your line-item veto, but the funds that were page 5, lines 1 through 6. ‘‘The term time. obligated to be spent under the law ‘Item’ means—(A) with respect to an Mr. COATS. First of all, it would not would have to be spent. appropriations measure’’. And down make sense for the President to do Mr. CONRAD. Well, that sounds to below on line (B), ‘‘with respect to an that. Theoretically, he could under the me like a contradictory answer. How authorization measure.’’ bill. But it would not have the effect of could it be that the funds could be Now, many of the questions that the changing expenditures under those en- spent if the President can veto the Senator from North Dakota phrased titlements because those entitlements item? and were answered by our colleague are contractual obligations entered Mr. COATS. Because it is direct from Indiana mixed back and forth the into by the United States and they spending which comes directly from difference between appropriations and must be paid. the Treasury, it is a protected expendi- authorizations. First of all, I do not know why a ture under the law. I simply believe that—and I am not President would want to do that, but Mr. CONRAD. Well, I have great res- for a moment indicating that the Sen- particularly he would not want to do ervations about that answer. I would ator from Indiana is trying to mislead that because he knows it would have ask the Senator from Indiana, are ap- anyone at all—I just think there is a no legal effect. Those are entitlements propriated entitlements included in the very legitimate difference of opinion. I that have to be paid under a contrac- definition of ‘‘item’’ under the terms of suspect, when this is looked at in ret- tual obligation. And while they would the Dole substitute? rospect, most of the legal scholars will be separately enrolled and theoreti- Mr. COATS. Any allocation of money agree with the thrust being made by cally subject to a Presidential veto, is an item, so the answer to that is yes. the Senator from North Dakota, which such veto could not have legal effect Mr. CONRAD. So then that suggests I think has not been fully appreciated. because it is a contractual obligation to me they would be available for Pres- If I can, let me dwell on that a little which the Treasury must pay. idential veto under the terms of the further. It would only apply, as it is stated, to Dole amendment. The Dole substitute would require all new expenditures under entitlements Mr. COATS. The Senator from Indi- appropriations items to be enrolled or where the benefits package has been ana would answer as he has answered separately. Now, remember, that is en- changed to expand the entitlement. before, that is, that the mandatory rolled separately. Among the items Those who suggested this argued, I spending, the amount of dollars ex- that it would require to be separately believe rightfully so—and in fact many pended to fulfill the requirements of enrolled are appropriations for pro- Members on the Democratic side, or the law under an entitlement—existing grams that many consider entitle- those opposing this effort—that one of requirement of the law under an enti- ments. Congress funds these entitle- the original problems was that it was tlement—would be spent by the Treas- ments through appropriations acts. too narrowly drafted; it only applies to ury in accordance with the law. The With respect to these appropriated appropriated expenditures; it did not separate enrollment language relative entitlements, the President will be apply to targeted tax benefits and it

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4422 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 did not apply to entitlements, particu- Mr. EXON. I yield to the Senator Mr. BYRD. Where in the regular larly the new entitlements. from West Virginia 3 minutes. order is the amendment which I have So the habit that Congress has been The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- had made in order for calling up today? in, even though an entitlement pro- ator from West Virginia. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- gram is running amok with spending, Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank ator is advised that will be the next we cannot begin to pay for it without the distinguished manager of the bill, amendment following the disposition incurring substantial additional debt. Mr. EXON. of the Daschle amendment. We keep expanding the reach of the en- I take the floor at this time merely Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair. Mr. titlement programs and the benefits to express my support for the sub- President, I ask unanimous consent promised under the entitlement pro- stitute that has been offered by Mr. that that amendment that I am quali- grams. We think those should be sub- Daschle. The Daschle measure provides fied under the agreement to offer may ject to a Presidential review and, if that any rescissions that the President be called up at such time as I wish to necessary, veto of that item, and Con- may recommend to the Congress will call it up. I do not wish it to appear in gress having a greater hurdle to cross receive a vote by the Congress. The the regular order. in terms of passing that with a two- President’s rescissions may be stricken The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there thirds veto. but, in being stricken, the rescissions objection to the unanimous-consent re- Additionally, I trust that President will be given a vote. quest? Clinton and all the other candidates Under the current law, when the Mr. COATS. Reserving the right to seeking that position would never seek President sends up rescissions, the object, Mr. President, I wonder if I can to veto these items. Congress may, by not acting, force the inquire of the Senator, I want to just Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I thank my President to proceed with the obliga- make sure I understand what the Sen- friend from Indiana. We are talking tions of funds, or the Congress may ator from West Virginia has requested. about fine legal points here that, un- act. The Congress may accept some of I thought I heard the Chair to say fortunately, may have to be decided by the President’s recommendations, the that under the regular procedure, the the courts at some time. Congress may substitute its own rescis- next order of business following dis- But let me give you some examples sions, or it may do nothing, in which position of the Daschle amendment about annual appropriations bills and case, as I say, the President’s rec- would be the amendment of the Sen- the enrollment process that has to do ommendations will amount to nothing. ator from West Virginia. with that. And over the years, Congress has re- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- As the Senator from North Dakota scinded, as the record will show, more ator is correct. has said, the President, under this bill, in terms of dollars than the total re- Mr. COATS. And is the request of the could veto the Commodity Credit Cor- scissions that have been submitted by Senator from West Virginia that that poration fund, the Food Stamp Pro- the several Presidents in that period of amendment be subject to being called gram, the Child Nutrition Program, time. up in a different order at the Senator’s the Guaranteed Student Loan Pro- So the Congress has actually re- request? gram, Federal unemployment benefits, scinded more moneys than have been Mr. BYRD. Yes; I am not prepared to Medicaid, Federal payments to railroad requested to be rescinded by the Presi- call it up next, and I merely ask that I retirement, and a number of other pro- dents. But under the Daschle sub- be allowed to call it up when I am grams under which individuals have stitute, a President may be assured ready to call it up. legal rights to obtain benefits. that he will get a vote, and there is a Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I would With regard to these programs, the very well-honed, expedited procedure have no objection to that within the separate enrollment procedure—now set forth in the substitute. If at the end constraints of the overall agreement. we are going back to that dog in the of the day, the conference committee is Mr. BYRD. It certainly would be manger again—the separate enrollment unable to meet an agreement—that is within the constraints of the overall procedure would allow the President to the final step—then any Member of ei- agreement. veto the funding for our existing com- ther body may call up the President’s Mr. COATS. Can I inquire of the Sen- mitments. original rescissions and offer them, and ator from West Virginia, will he be pre- So the President could veto the fund- the President will be given a vote up or pared to call up that amendment ing, let us say, for Medicaid. I do not down. today? think he probably would, either, but it It seems to me that is fair. The Mr. BYRD. Well, I may or may not is a case in point, and only one. But Daschle substitute does not result in be, but I can assure the Senator that what would the beneficiaries then do? any shift of power from the legislative within the constraints of the overall Well, they, of course, would go to court branch to the executive. It is clear cut. agreement, that amendment will have and get an order getting the Govern- It gives the President the opportunity to be called up before the substitute by ment to pay their benefits. This money to get a vote. Mr. DOLE is voted on. would then flow from the claims and Mr. President, I yield myself 1 Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I cer- judgments act. As a result, we would minute out of the 2 hours that have tainly understand that. I guess my con- save no money whatsoever and indeed, been yielded to me by special order. cern is that the majority leader has in- probably spend much more on legal ex- The President is assured a vote, and dicated that it is his intent, and I penses. it seems to me that is fair. That is fair think it was the agreed-upon intent of All that I think it points out is how to the President. It gives the President the managers of the bill as well as the poorly drawn this proposition is. It an opportunity, in the face of changing minority leader, that we conclude all should be given much more consider- circumstances, to suggest certain re- action on the line-item veto and bring ation. Rather than rushing the Dole scissions, which perhaps the Congress it to final passage today. substitute through as a solution to all will agree to. Mr. BYRD. I do not think that was of our problems we should go to a sim- So I am 100 percent behind the sub- the agreement. It was my under- plified, direct procedure such as the stitute by Mr. DASCHLE, and I ask standing it would be concluded this Daschle amendment, which is S. 14. unanimous consent that my name may week. I do not think there was any as- Both S. 4, and the enhanced rescission be added as a cosponsor. surance that action would be finalized bill that the House of Representatives The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without on the line-item veto today. has already passed, are better drawn objection, it is so ordered. Mr. COATS. Mr. President, the state- and preferable to the Dole substitute Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, while I ment of the Senator from West Vir- we are debating here. have the floor, where in the pecking ginia is correct. How much time do I have remaining, order is my amendment? Mr. BYRD. I will just try to—— Mr. President? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Mr. COATS. The original decision did The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- ator is advised it will come up after we carry through until Friday. Given the ator from Nebraska has 61⁄2 minutes re- adopt the Daschle amendment. progress that we have made and the maining. Please restate the question. short list of amendments that was left,

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4423 I guess it was the thinking that it spent, and they could pull that out and It may look the same, but one taste could be concluded today, and, obvi- say, ‘‘Aha.’’ See, the question is not tells the difference. A true line-item ously, many Members hope that will be whether or not the rescission process veto,’’ the editorial said, ‘‘would mean the case, but it is not determined and suggested by the minority leader is that the President will receive a spend- there is no particular agreement says more convenient; the question is not ing bill from the Congress and would that it has to be. even whether or not it spends less or have the right to strike out items he Mr. BYRD. That is right. I have no more money; the question is, How is considered unnecessary spending. Con- intention of trying to lay the matter that money spent? The question that gress could restore the spending but over until next week. If I had that in- the American taxpayer is raising is: only by a two-thirds vote of both the tention, I would not have agreed to the How is my money being spent? They House and the Senate. The push to re- agreement. I have no intention of that. care a lot more about the details of the place the line-item veto with a sham Mr. COATS. Mr. President, this Sen- specific expenditure than they do the substitute is typical of how Congress is ator has no doubt that had the Senator overall total, although I do not mean dealing with reform in this session. It from West Virginia wanted to carry to suggest the overall total is not im- is faking it.’’ this over into next week or even be- portant. The substitute that is offered by the yond, he certainly has the ability to do So, if a rescission is brought to the minority leader simply does nothing to that. I take him at his word and with- floor and the claim is made that this change the way in which we spend peo- draw my reservation. rescission saves as much money as ple’s money. It does not alter the bal- Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair. what the President requested, it does ance in favor of savings. The same sim- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without not answer the question of how is that ple majority that voted to spend the objection, it is so ordered. money spent. And is it spent for a le- money in the first place is all that is Mr. BYRD. Did the Chair put the gitimate purpose? And so we annually required to continue the spending. Pro- question? run into the question of the expendi- cedure in the minority leader’s bill The PRESIDING OFFICER. The tures for the Lawrence Welk Home— says that Members on this floor can unanimous-consent request has been the studies that most Americans feel take the President’s rescission which, agreed to. are inappropriate uses of their tax dol- yes, does now have to be brought to a Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair, and I lars, the special little projects and vote under expedited rescission, but thank all Senators. spending that goes to benefit maybe a with just a simple majority can strike The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who particular Member of Congress and en- any rescission that the President sends yields time? hance his or her reelection but really up. So the same majority that passed Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I inquire does nothing for the individuals that the bill in the first place can take the as to the time remaining. the majority in Congress represent. President’s rescission and strike it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- We annually have to deal with how Although the title of the minority ator from Indiana has 271⁄2 minutes left; the money is spent. So it is not just a leader’s bill is the Legislative Line- the Senator from Nebraska has 31⁄2 question of how much; it is how much Item Veto Act, this is false advertising. minutes left. is being spent and is that in the tax- There is no veto contemplated any- Mr. COATS. Mr. President, earlier payers’ interest? And is there account- where in the bill, none whatsoever. The the minority leader, Senator DASCHLE, ability to the Member who has pro- President is given the chance to veto whose amendment is currently pend- posed such an expenditure? spending, and Congress is not forced to ing, once again made the point that the Mr. President, last November, anger muster the two-thirds to override the complexity of the separate enrollment against this institution burned white veto. process is a reason to vote against the hot. With their votes, the American In 1992, former President Reagan DOLE amendment, because it would people decisively demonstrated their said, ‘‘There is talk that the congres- take a fairly simple, several-page piece deep frustration with the status quo. sional leadership may offer the new of legislation that would be sent to the Just weeks ago, I suggest that the Sen- President expedited rescission author- President and translate it into a stack ate fueled that anger and betrayed ity. This will not do the job,’’ he said. of individually enrolled items, any one their trust by failing to pass a balanced ‘‘Although it would permit the Presi- of which or several of which the Presi- budget amendment, demonstrating dent to strike budget-busting expendi- dent could veto. that we are an institution more con- tures, they could easily be reinstated The strength, I will suggest, of the cerned with preserving our power than by a simple majority vote of the Con- separately enrolled procedure is the with protecting our Nation’s posterity. gress. A true line-item veto,’’ President very fact that each particular item is That is really the issue that is before Reagan said, ‘‘must require a two- separately enrolled into a separate bill. us today. Are we going to preserve the thirds vote to override. Not only does And the purpose of that is so that the status quo? Are we going to preserve the substitute fail to give the Presi- Congress, the President, and the Amer- the power of spending, so that we can dent veto power over spending ac- ican public knows just exactly what is continue to spend the way that we counts, it does little to address the contained in this thin little booklet as have spent the taxpayers’ dollars in the failures of the Impoundment and Con- to how their money is going to be past? Or are we going to change the trol Act.’’ spent. procedure so that we can be held more Since 1974, Congress’ record on acting It is not a matter of convenience for accountable to the American taxpayer on Presidential impoundments has Congress. It will be somewhat less con- for how we spend their dollars? That is been embarrassing. The minority lead- venient to go to separate enrollment, the question that is before us under the er said as much. By simple inaction, we although we have demonstrated that minority leader substitute. Will this have ignored tens of billions of dollars the enrolling clerk now possesses the institution decide to protect our pow- in Presidential requests for rescission technology through computerization to ers and preserve the status quo? Or are or impoundment authority. It has been process separate enrollment in a very we willing to take bold steps to end the will of Congress not to act. It has expeditious way. So it is not the night- business as usual? been the will of Congress to fail to act. mare that it might once have been. It The Wall Street Journal editorial- And Members of the minority leader’s is not the nightmare monstrosity that ized, in 1993, expedited rescission, party have as much as said so. They has been described. which is the minority leader’s alter- have come down here and said, ‘‘We I wonder what the American people native proposal before us that we will have to stop the current practice.’’ The would say if they were polled on the vote on shortly, an alternative to the problem is, their bill will not stop the question of whether, to determine how tough measure that the President has current practice. All the substitute their tax dollars are spent, they want- requested, that Senator MCCAIN and I does is expedite a vote. It does nothing ed a booklet of about 8 or 10 or 12 pages have brought forward. ‘‘Expedited re- to change the presumption in favor of which talked in very broad categories, scission,’’ the Wall Street Journal said, savings. It takes no step toward restor- or whether they would like the ability ‘‘is to the line-item veto what chicory- ing the impoundment powers which the to see how each particular item is flavored water is to Colombian coffee. President exercised prior to 1974. And

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4424 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 since 1974, we have seen rescission after Have no doubt, this is probably the the United States has stated—a strong rescission after rescission of the Presi- crucial amendment of this debate be- line-item veto which he supports. I am dent rejected by this Congress. cause we are back, frankly, where we a little disappointed that my friends on The separate enrollment legislation were at the beginning of this year, the other side of the aisle do not sup- before us, on the other hand, would re- when a line-item veto was going to be- port the President of the United States store authority to the President. It come a reality, very frankly, because on their own party’s position. would allow him to veto spending and of the results of the November 8 elec- require two-thirds of both Houses to I would also like to say, Mr. Presi- tion. dent, that the debate we have been in- override it. The substitute offered by As the Senator from Indiana pointed volved in on this issue—especially the the minority retains the current proce- out, he and I, for the last 8 years, have thoughtful comments by the Senator dures, with the one exception that Con- attempted time after time to bring the from South Dakota and the very gress could no longer bury the im- line-item veto up for debate and thoughtful and indepth questioning on poundments, but they must vote. amendment. If there was a better idea the part of the Senator from West Vir- Quite frankly, Mr. President, their on that side as to how to do what the ginia—I believe, has made a record idea is too little too late. Nothing but distinguished Democratic leader has here that will help the people in the fu- the threat of a true line-item veto has said, and that is, that we all want a ture if we pass this legislation—I be- even prodded their opposing our efforts line-item veto, it is rather amazing to lieve we will—as to the exact meaning into a vote on expedited rescission. me that we were never able to get a of this legislation, what it entails, and Where were they when Senator MCCAIN line-item veto to the floor of this Sen- what is circumscribed by it. and I were on the floor year after year ate for consideration. Each time, it was after year offering enhanced rescission, blocked on a parliamentary tactic I think it has been a very healthy de- offering some way to deal with the called a budget point of order, which bate. I look forward to obviously con- problem that they all admit exists? A prohibited Members from bringing up cluding action on this bill in a reason- handful of Democrats—you can count the amendment. able time, but at the same time I think them on one hand—were supporting With all due respect to my friend that perhaps the entire body and our efforts. Now it is only the legiti- from South Dakota, I wish that he had maybe the Nation have been illumi- mate, real threat of a true line-item taken this attitude some years ago. I nated and informed by this very sig- veto that brings them to the floor say- believe that we would have saved the nificant debate. ing, ‘‘We are for line-item veto, we are American people billions and tens of I want to say, again, I respect the just not for your line-item veto. Let us billions of dollars in waste and pork- do it our way.’’ Well, their way basi- views of the Senator from West Vir- barrel spending. ginia. I know that they are deeply held cally continues the practice that We really are, Mr. President, getting brought us to this place in the first beliefs. I respect the views of the Sen- down to the crucial aspect of this en- ator from South Dakota. I know they place. tire issue, as the Senator from Indiana They have never brought up, since are deeply held. We have a funda- said, whether a legislative line-item my time in Congress and in the Sen- mental difference of opinion here as to veto will mean the definition that is ate—or Senator MCCAIN’s time in Con- whether the executive branch should written in the Constitution of what a gress and the Senate—a freestanding have power restored to it. This, in my veto is, a two-thirds vote by both bill. The majority leader, Senator view, was taken away in 1974. Houses to override the President’s Mitchell, never brought up a free- veto, or whether it will simply be a ma- This is really, fundamentally, what standing bill to deal with this problem. jority vote in either House. this is all about. I believe that the No- Expedited rescission does nothing to Mr. President, the argument that the vember 8 election clearly showed that restore power to the Executive which majority vote in either House will do the American people are sick and tired Congress grabbed in 1974. Congress, the job flies in the face of the experi- of business as usual in the Congress. If which chose to spend the money in the ence that I have had for many years we pass this legislation, especially first place, retains complete control now, as I have come down here and after having failed to pass the balanced under expedited rescission. budget amendment, I think that we The only argument for expedited re- tried to eliminate clearly, clearly, wasteful and unnecessary spending will at least restore some confidence in scission is that it might shame the the American people, recognizing that Congress with a public vote. But the that is devoted to the interests of a few, rather than the interests of the it is no panacea. The only real panacea, time for shame is over. With a $4.8 tril- as even the Senator from Georgia said, lion debt, with our children facing a American people. I will provide for the RECORD at some is we have to discipline ourselves. I do lifetime tax rate that is unconscion- not see how in the past we have been able, shame is simply not enough. We point the many times I have come here and lost amendments to try to remove able to discipline ourselves without the are already shamed. We need more necessary tools to do so. than a sense of shame; we need to give these incredibly unacceptable appro- the Executive power to challenge our priations, many times in the most Mr. President, I would also like to spending habits. We need a true line- egregious manner, stuffed in in con- talk about the fact that there are ways item veto. I urge my colleagues to reference between the two bodies, never to get around this. Mr. President, there ject the amendment offered by the mi- being brought up in either House. are ways to get around every law we nority leader and vote for a true line- Last year, in the VA/HUD conference pass. There is no better example of item veto. report, there was a couple hundred mil- that than the War Powers Act. This Mr. President, may I inquire how lion dollars stuffed in at the very end, body passed the War Powers Act and much time remains? none of which we had ever had any op- then repassed it over the veto of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- portunity to scrutinize or look at. President. We routinely ignore it. 1 Mr. President, that practice will ator from Indiana has 13 ⁄2 minutes and I have no doubt, if the Congress of 1 stop. That practice will stop. Just by the Senator from Nebraska has 3 ⁄2 bringing it to the attention of the Sen- the United States wants to ignore the minutes. line-item veto, they can somehow find Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I yield ate and by seeking a majority vote to overturn it, it is clear that my efforts ways to get around it. What kind of the floor. message is that we would send to the Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I yield and others, the Senator from Indiana American people? myself 4 minutes. and others, have been unsuccessful. It The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- took a majority vote of both in order The intention of the legislation is ator from Arizona. to put it in; it seems to me that a ma- clear. The provisions of the legislation Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I would jority vote of one House would clearly are clear. No, I cannot guarantee the like to thank the junior Senator from keep it in. American people that we will comply. Arizona for a very detailed exposition We really are talking about what a But I suggest that if we do not comply of our position on this pending amend- line-item veto really is, whether we are with laws that we pass, as we have not ment. going to make it—as the President of with the War Powers Act, we do it at

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4425 great risk not only to the institution, stitute would allow the President to question that is being asked when we but to the entire system and fun- veto the existing obligation of appro- consider the Daschle amendment. damentals of democracy, which is the priated entitlements, leading to legal I might remind my colleagues, that expectation of the people that sent challenges. The Dole substitute raises amendment was overwhelmingly re- their representatives to Washington constitutional concerns that do not jected by the other body in the form of that we would comply with the laws exist with regard to our substitute. the Stenholm amendment. that we pass. And our substitute provides an orderly Mr. President, I find no further need Mr. President, I want to thank my procedure. No 10,000 bills, no new bur- for time, I say to my friend from Ne- friend from Indiana. I want to thank dens on the President or the Congress braska. the other participants in this debate, or the Members of the Congress who I yield to the distinguished majority and I look forward to continuing it have to sign those bills, in contrast to leader. after we finish this vote. I do not think the Dole substitute which would make The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized. there should be any doubt in the minds a hash of the legislative process. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I thank of my colleagues that this is really the In closing—and I ask for an addi- both my colleague from Arizona and crucial vote of this debate. tional 1 minute if necessary—— my colleague from Indiana. I have been Mr. President, I might suggest to the The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. watching at home on C–SPAN, while Senator from Nebraska we might move ASHCROFT). Without objection, it is so they have been here in the evening, the to a vote. I think we planned around ordered. remarkable work they have been doing. noontime, anyway. The Senator has 30 seconds. I appreciate it very much. No one on Mr. EXON. May I inquire how much Mr. EXON. In closing, let me say this side has worked harder and longer time is left on each side? that there are so many things that than the Senator from Arizona and the The PRESIDING OFFICER. The mi- have not been considered. In a short pe- Senator from Indiana on what I think nority side has 31⁄2 minutes; the major- riod of time, we have come up with so now is within reach. That is the good ity side has 6 minutes. many shortcomings. One of the most Mr. EXON. I will use at least 3 min- news. important, I think, was demonstrated The good news is, while we may dis- utes, and then maybe we can move on. by Senator NUNN when he talked about agree on how to achieve it, I think it Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I yield the action of the Senate not long ago appears we are about ready to give the the floor. with regard to the issue in Somalia. authority that should be provided. I Mr. EXON. Mr. President, Let me Here was a situation where we felt that guess the disagreement is really what sum up, if I might, in the remaining Somalia should be put behind us. We constitutes a line-item veto. Our pro- time. I will simply say, Mr. President, put in an appropriation and we said posal would require certain items in that although I did not support S. 4 in that appropriation could be used, but appropriation, authorization, or tax its original form—which was very the troops had to be removed by a spe- bills to be enrolled as a separate act, much akin to what came over from the cific date—let us say April 1, I do not clearly allowing the President to veto House of Representatives—I would be remember what the date was. Under these items. And these vetoed meas- far more satisfied with S. 4 in its origi- the Dole substitute, the President ures are then available for consider- nal form than with what has been put could have simply kept the money, ve- ation by Congress as any other vetoed together in a hasty fashion, as dem- toed out the April 1 date, and all of the measure is today. We can choose to onstrated by the lengthy debate and outreach and control that legitimately override or not. many amendments that have been ac- is found in the legislative body would In the case of the Daschle proposal, cepted with regard to the Dole sub- go out the window. I do not think that the distinguished Democrat leader, stitute. is what they intended, but that is what there are fast-track procedures for con- I will simply say that I suspect that happens when you put together legisla- sideration of the President’s proposals there are few times in the history of tion in the fashion that this was put to rescind, but unlike our proposal, a the Congress of the United States when together. simple majority can defeat the Presi- the Congress of the United States is I hope we approve the Daschle sub- dent’s efforts. Is the Daschle proposal about to give, in rather shabby fashion, stitute. better than current law? Probably yes, give away the prerogative to the Presi- I yield the floor. on the margin, as it does require us to dent of the United States. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- at least consider the rescission. But it Maybe if this passes, if the Dole ator from Arizona. also only takes a majority to defeat. In amendment finally passes, we could Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I would the case of our proposal, the Presi- clean it up in some legitimate way in just point out to my colleague from dent’s action stands unless two-thirds the conference between the House and Nebraska, the pending Levin-Mur- of us overturn that exact decision up or Senate. kowski amendment will make adjust- down, yes or no. No confusion. I believe I simply say I cannot understand how ments to take care of the problems this is a much stronger test. any true conservative could want to which have been highlighted time after Separate enrollment is not simple. I give away, to the extent that the Dole time here. That is why we have bills acknowledge that. But I believe we substitute as originally proposed would for consideration. That is why we go should give the President, be it this give away the authority of the powers through an amending process, to im- President or any other President, the of the purse, to the President of the prove legislation. If we did not do that, opportunity to use this authority. If it United States, whoever that President then clearly a bill would be deemed is abused, if the executive branch takes is. perfect and we would not even have to the opportunity to subvert our inten- Let me sum up some of the advan- pass it through the floor of the Senate. tions, we can remove this new author- tages of the substitute offered by Sen- The fact is, though, this legislation ity as we have granted it. Of course, ator DASCHLE, which is the original was not hastily put together. It has there is a sunset of the year 2000, so we Domenici-Exon bill. Our substitute al- been considered in its various aspects have the time between now and then to lows the President to veto part of an for many, many years dating back to see how the process works. appropriation, giving the President 1867, I believe it was, when a Member of Is our substitute perfect? Probably added flexibility. Theirs does not. Our Congress from West Virginia proposed not. But I believe it is much stronger substitute allows the President to veto a similar separate enrolling legisla- and moves us much further in the right pork that is caused by colloquies on tion. direction. I hope we may defeat the the floor and other mechanisms, in- We would be glad to consider other Daschle proposal. Then I am assuming, cluding measures put in the conference amendments which would further im- according to my conversations with report but not forwarded into the lan- prove this legislation, but we are going the Democratic leader, we will con- guage in the statutes. Theirs does not. to get down to, in this vote, whether it clude action on this bill today. That is Our substitute has a clear, broad defi- is a two-thirds majority to override a my understanding and the under- nition of tax loopholes that plainly veto of the President by both Houses or standing of the Democratic leader, and covers all tax loopholes. The Dole sub- not. That is really the fundamental I

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4426 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 would like to conclude action on it by As the ranking member of the For- thority to target for repeal all wasteful mid-afternoon so we can move to the eign Operations Subcommittee of the tax benefits in revenue bills. self-employed tax measure and com- Appropriations Committee, I am fre- I find it ironic that the proponents of plete action on that tomorrow. Then, quently called upon to travel abroad. the McCain bill and now the Dole sub- on Monday, move to the modified mor- When I visit emerging democracies, stitute—who claim that their line-item atorium on regulations. one of the universal praises I hear veto is the only version that will effec- Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I com- about our system of checks and bal- tively cut pork-barrel programs—are mend the Democratic leader for his ances is the power to spend residing in afraid to give the President the ability substitute line-item veto amendment. the legislative branch, not the execu- to cut pork-barrel tax breaks too. Why It strikes the worst features of Senator tive. should the President be given the MCCAIN’s version of a line-item veto Many officials from new democracies power to veto spending for school and the majority leader’s separate en- believe that a legislature’s power over lunches and not for tax deductions rollment version. Instead, it adds the the purse is the best weapon to fight claimed by businessmen for three-mar- best features of Senator DOMENICI’s and the tyranny of a dictatorship. tini lunches? Senator EXON’s original version of a The McCain line-item veto and the line-item veto. Dole substitute hand over the spending Whether pork-barrel spending is in a The Daschle amendment restores ma- purse strings to the President. program or in a tax break, it is still jority rule to the line-item veto proc- The President would have no burden wasteful. To paraphrase Gertrude ess. Under this amendment, the Presi- of persuasion while a Member would Stein: A pork barrel is a pork barrel is dent would have 20 days after signing have the Herculean task of convincing a pork barrel. an appropriations bill or a revenue bill two-thirds of his or her colleagues in Over the years, big business and to send Congress a draft bill cancelling both Houses to care about the vetoed other special interests have lobbied any line item. Congress then would project. It is truly a task for Hercules hard for tax subsidies for specific in- have 10 days to vote on the rescissions to override a veto. Just look at the dustries. And, unfortunately, they have bill. record—of the 2,513 Presidential vetoes been successful on occassion. If Congress passes the bill by a sim- in our history, Congress has been able These wasteful special interest tax ple majority and it is signed by the to override only 104 times. subsidies do not increase economic President, all savings must go to re- The McCain and Dole supermajority growth. To the contrary, wasteful spe- ducing the deficit. veto procedures would fundamentally cial interest tax subsidies only add to This procedure honors the intent of change the balance of powers between our deficit, which puts a drag on our our Founders by embracing the funda- the two branches and result in a mas- whole economy. mental principle of majority rule. sive shift of power to the executive By contrast, the McCain bill and the branch from the legislative branch. Like an old-fashioned pork sausage, Dole substitute would undermine this The Daschle amendment, on the it is amazing what is in our Internal fundamental principle by imposing a other hand, maintains the constitu- Revenue Code. Let me give you an ex- three-fifths supermajority vote in both tional balance between the executive ample of the corporate pork in our tax houses to overturn a line-item veto. and legislative branches. laws today. Our Founders rejected such super- For a Presidential rescission to be- Our tax laws allow U.S. firms to majority voting requirements on mat- come effective, both Houses of Con- delay paying taxes on income earned ters within Congress’ purview. gress must approve it within 10 days. by their foreign subsidiaries until the James Madison condemned super- The burden is on the President to con- profit is transferred to the United majority requirements in Federalist vince a simple majority in both the States. Many U.S. multi-national cor- Paper No. 58. Madison warned that: House and Senate to agree to his line- porations naturally drag their feet In all cases where justice or the general item veto. The President is guaranteed when transferring profits back to their good might require new laws to be passed, or a vote, and Congress is forced to con- corporate headquarters to take advan- active measures to be pursued, the funda- sider the rescission. tage of this special tax break. mental principle of free government would If the President cannot convince a be reversed. It would be no longer the major- majority of us that a targeted project But the millions of small business ity that would rule: the power would be is unnecessary and frivolous, then his owners—who make up over 95 percent transferred to the minority. veto should fail. of businesses in my home State of Unfortunately, the McCain bill and Like Senator DOMENICI’s original Vermont—do not have the luxury of the Dole substitute would do exactly version, this substitute line-item veto paying their taxes later by parking what Madison warned against—it will sunset at the end of the 1998 fiscal profits in a foreign subsidiary. The bi- would transfer power to a minority in year. I strongly support a sunset provi- partisan Joint Committee on Taxation either the House or Senate. sion since any line-item veto legisla- estimates that the U.S. Treasury will Moreover, supermajority require- tion is like walking on Mars—it has lose close to $6 billion from this tax ments hurt small States, like Vermont, never been done before. loophole over the next 5 years. by upping the ante to take on the Let us try it out for a few years and The Progressive Policy Institute, a President. see what happens. middle-of-the-road think tank, along No matter how worthy a project, it Senator DASCHLE has improved the with the liberal Center On Budget And will be difficult for States with only a original Domenici-Exon bill. The Policy Priorities and the conservative few Members to overcome a line-item Daschle substitute protects Social Se- Cato Institute, recently identified 31 veto. curity—America’s true contract with tax subsidies that will cost U.S. tax- Under Senator McCain’s proposal and its senior citizens. The Daschle amend- payers almost $102 billion over the next Senator Dole’s substitute, it would re- ment exempts the administrative ex- 5 years. A few of these subsidies have quire Members from small States to penses of Social Security from a line- merit, but many more are just plain convince two-thirds of Members in item veto. wasteful. each House to override the President’s But the most significant feature of veto for the sake of a project in an- the Daschle amendment is that it Robert Shapiro, the author of the re- other Member’s district. closes a multi-billion-dollar loophole in port, concluded that ‘‘tax subsidies, With Vermont having only one Rep- the McCain bill and Dole substitute. like their counterparts on the spending resentative in the House, why would The McCain bill ignores tax break side, reduce economic efficiency.* * *’’ other Members risk the President’s loopholes. And the Dole substitute has Budget experts on the right, center and wrath to help us with a project vetoed such a convoluted definition of tax left all agree that pork-barrel tax loop- by the President? breaks that no one knows which tax holes are just as wasteful as pork-bar- The Daschle amendment keeps the loopholes the President may strike. rel programs. power of the purse with Congress— The Daschle substitute fixes these Not only does the Daschle amend- where it belongs. flaws by giving the President clear au- ment vastly improve the McCain bill

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4427 and Dole substitute, but it also would posal would not protect Social Secu- ducted to determine if individuals con- clear up a murky area in the line-item rity. A provision, however, in the tinue to be eligible for disability bene- veto bill that recently passed the Democratic substitute would exempt fits, and, if not, to terminate them House. In the House passed version, moneys used to administer the Social from the rolls. H.R. 2, the President has authority to Security program from the President’s Just yesterday the Subcommittee on veto targeted tax benefits, which are line-item veto power. Social Security of the Senate Finance defined as providing a Federal tax de- This provision is almost identical to Committee held a hearing on the duction, credit or concession to 100 or an amendment that I successfully of- growth in the Social Security dis- fewer beneficiaries. fered to one of the line-item veto bills ability program. This growth stems, in Is this definition of targeted tax ben- during our recent Governmental Af- part, from the lack of resources the So- efits a practical joke by our House col- fairs Committee markup. This amend- cial Security Administration currently leagues? I can think of only a handful ment was unanimously accepted. The has to conduct these important re- of tax breaks that fit into this very Democratic proposal simply states views. The resources provided for the narrow definition. that, Social Security Administration are im- In fact,the nonpartisan Congressional The term ‘‘budget item’’ means an amount, portant to ensure that benefits only go Budget Office agreed that defining tar- in whole or in part, of budget authority pro- to those individuals who are truly eli- geted tax breaks in such a limiting vided in an appropriation Act except to fund gible. manner would produce laughable sav- direct spending programs and the adminis- In fact, the General Accounting Of- ings. trative expenses of Social Security. fice has estimated that administrative The CBO, in typical understatement, Under the separate enrollment pro- budget cuts at Social Security have re- said that repealing a tax break that posal new direct spending for Social sulted in significant reductions in dis- benfits fewer than 100 people is un- Security would be subject to the line- ability reviews and that the failure to likely to generate large savings. item veto. But my primary concern is conduct these reviews will cost the This extremely limited definition about the annual appropriation that is trust funds $1.4 billion over 5 years. would protect almost all wasteful tax used to administer the Social Security Proper administrative funding also loopholes and invite tax evasion. program. These funds, for the most means that we can combat fraudulent Any accountant or lawyer worth his part, come from the Social Security Social Security claims. Social Security or her high-priced fee will be able to trust funds, are reviewed annually, and is not immune to fraud and abuse. find more than 100 clients who can ben- are appropriated by the Appropriations Without proper funding, it is possible efit from a tax loophole. If more than Committees of the Congress. The Presi- that there could be an increase in 100 taxpayers can figure out a way to dent, armed with line-item veto au- fraudulent claims filed by citizens that shelter their income in a tax loophole, thority, could eliminate, or by will try to cheat the system. the President would not be able to leveraging a veto, limit these adminis- Mr. President, before the committee touch it. trative funds. mark-up of the line-item veto legisla- The bigger the loophole in terms of As it currently stands, the Social Se- tion my amendment was endorsed by the number of people who can take ad- curity Administration’s operating the American Association of Retired vantage of it, the safer it is from being budget is over $5 billion. The greatest Persons. I have a letter from the AARP cut. portion of these funds come from the which makes several important points The Daschle amendment gives the Social Security trust funds and are that I would like to emphasize today. President real authority to go after used to administer the Social Security They point out, and I quote, that ‘‘So- wasteful tax breaks. Under the Daschle retirement and disability programs. cial Security is a self-financed program substitute, every wasteful tax break Operating expenses for these two pro- and does not contribute one penny to would get the same Presidential scru- grams represent only 0.9 percent of the deficit.’’ They also state ‘‘since So- tiny as every wasteful program. total program costs, but are the key to cial Security takes in more revenue I believe the Daschle amendment em- effective distribution of Social Secu- than is needed to pay benefits, Con- braces the best parts of various rity payments and efficient operation gress deliberately took it off budget in versions of a line-item veto. It honors of the Social Security system. If we order to shield it from unwarranted re- majority rule. don’t have sufficient operating funds to ductions.’’ I ask that the full text of It keeps the power of the purse with properly fulfill the mission of the So- this letter be printed in the RECORD Congress while still giving the Presi- cial Security Administration, we fail following my statement. dent new authority to target wasteful to honor our commitment to protect The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without spending. It protects Social Security. Social Security. objection, it is so ordered. And it gives the President authority to One of the many functions carried (See exhibit 1.) target all future tax loopholes for re- out by the Social Security Administra- Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, by ex- peal. tion is to make sure that beneficiary empting Social Security administra- The Daschle line-item veto sub- checks are correctly calculated and tive funds as incorporated in the Demo- stitute is a reasonable and comprehen- promptly mailed out. This is vital to cratic amendment, we can honestly tell sive measure. I urge my colleagues to the 42.6 million recipients of Social Se- the American people that their Social adopt it. curity who deserve to get their benefits Security checks are secure and that ad- Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I rise on time and also to receive the right ministrative functions and services today to speak for a moment on behalf benefit amount. In my State alone, ac- will not be interrupted, reduced, or of the line-item veto proposal that the cording to the Social Security Admin- eliminated. minority leader has offered. I support istration, 489,330 Arkansans receive So- EXHIBIT this reasonable alternative to the social Security benefits. This is 20 per- called separate enrollment line-item cent of the Arkansas population. I can AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF veto legislation. Just one of a number RETIRED PERSONS, AARP, only imagine the outcry and confusion Washington, DC, March 2, 1995. of problems with the separate enroll- if these citizens were to not receive Hon. DAVID H. PRYOR, ment measure is that it makes funds their benefits on time due to a Presi- U.S. Senate, for operating the Social Security Ad- dent’s line-item veto of Social Secu- Washington, DC. ministration vulnerable to the Presi- rity. DEAR SENATOR PRYOR: The American Asso- dent’s line-item veto authority. Administative funds also ensure that ciation of Retired Persons (AARP) supports It is clear that the public expects us citizens who apply for benefits under your amendment to S. 4, the ‘‘Legislative to protect the integrity of the Social the disability program are reviewed for Line Item Veto Act of 1995,’’ that would en- Security System for current bene- eligibility and that benefit denials can sure that Social Security is exempt from the line item veto. Although AARP believes a ficiaries and for the millions of current be appealed. But perhaps even more limited line item veto or other mechanism workers and employers worried about importantly, these operating funds are that allows for appropriate Congressional re- the future of Social Security. The ma- also used to conduct continuing dis- view may be warranted to help control un- jority leader’s separate enrollment pro- ability reviews. These reviews are con- justified tax breaks or spending programs,

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4428 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 we strongly believe that the administrative Mr. DOLE. It may not be binding, but Helms Lugar Shelby expenses of the Social Security Administra- this is an understanding the two lead- Hollings Mack Simpson tion (SSA) should be excluded for the fol- Hutchison McCain Smith ers had. We will just leave it at that. Inhofe McConnell lowing reasons: Snowe Mr. EXON. I think Senator BYRD Kassebaum Murkowski Social Security is a self-financed program Specter could adequately defend himself on Kempthorne Nickles Stevens that does not contribute one penny to the Kennedy Packwood that. Thomas deficit. In fact, since Social Security takes Kerry Pressler Thompson Kyl Robb in more revenue than is needed to pay bene- Mr. DOLE. I am certain he could. Thurmond Lieberman Roth fits, Congress deliberately took it off budget Mr. EXON. I will not do so. Suffice it Warner in order to shield it from unwarranted reduc- to say the Byrd amendment then, Lott Santorum tions. whenever it is called up, is one remain- NAYS—38 SSA’s administrative expenses are fi- ing. Akaka Exon Mikulski nanced from the Social Security trust funds. Baucus Feingold Moseley-Braun These trust funds are financed by the payroll The Levin and Murkowski, two amendments, have now been combined Biden Ford Moynihan tax contributions workers and their employ- Bingaman Glenn Murray ers make. into one, so we have that one left in ad- Boxer Harkin Nunn SSA’s administrative costs are already less dition to Byrd. Breaux Inouye Pell than 2 percent. Further cuts could harm the Mr. MCCAIN. It is my understanding Bryan Jeffords Pryor agency’s ability to meet its obligations. Bumpers Johnston Reid also—I think it is my understanding Byrd Kerrey Rockefeller Cutting SSA’s administrative costs does that is acceptable to both sides. Is that Conrad Kohl Sarbanes not always lead to savings. Past under- Daschle Lautenberg your understanding? Simon funding had forced the agency to reduce the Dodd Leahy number of Continuing Disability Reviews Mr. EXON. That is correct. So that Dorgan Levin Wellstone (CDR) it conducts. The General Accounting should be easily taken care of. Then we have the Hatch judiciary So the motion to lay on the table the Office (GAO) estimates that SSA’s failure to amendment (No. 348) was agreed to. conduct CDRs will cost the trust funds about amendment that has not yet been dis- $1.4 billion over 5 years. posed of and will likely require a vote. Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I move to AARP appreciates your commitment to Is that the Senator’s understanding? reconsider the vote. Mr. COATS. I move to lay that mo- the welfare of older Americans and the pro- Mr. MCCAIN. Yes, it is. tection of Social Security. If we can be of Mr. DOLE. If it is pursued. tion on the table. further assistance, please do not hesitate to The motion to lay on the table was Mr. EXON. And as far as I know, that call me, or have your staff call Evelyn Mor- agreed to. is all I have on my list. Does the Sen- ton of our Federal Affairs Department at Mr. ABRAHAM addressed the Chair. ator have anything else? (202) 434–3760. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Sincerely, Mr. MCCAIN. Yes, I would say to my ator from Michigan. JOHN ROTHER, colleague from Nebraska, the Abraham Director, amendment, which I also believe would AMENDMENT NO. 401, AS FURTHER MODIFIED TO AMENDMENT NO. 347 Legislation and Public Policy Division. be accepted by both sides. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Mr. EXON. I missed that. I think Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I call ator from Arizona. that is agreed to also. We are pretty up my amendment No. 401, and I have Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, I move close. a further modification of my amendment, which I send to the desk. to table the Daschle amendment and Mr. MCCAIN. Could I then say to my The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there ask for the yeas and nays. friend from Nebraska, without taking objection to the modification of The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a much more time of the body, obviously amendment No. 401 by Senator ABRA- sufficient second? we could finish this today with great HAM? Without objection, the amend- Mr. EXON. Mr. President, before we ease, perhaps by mid-afternoon. So I ment is so modified. call for that, could we maybe make an hope the Senator from West Virginia The amendment (No. 401), as further agreement here on what we have left, I might appreciate that and help us modified, is as follows: ask my friend? move forward. But, as my colleague Mr. MCCAIN. I will be glad to. said, that is an issue that the Senator On page 3, line 17, strike everything after word ‘‘measure’’ through the word ‘‘gen- Mr. EXON. According to my list, we from West Virginia would want to dis- have the amendment left by Senator erally’’ on page 4, line 14 and insert the fol- cuss. lowing in its place: ‘‘first passes both Houses BYRD, which we talked about a few mo- Does that complete our colloquy? ments ago. He reserves the right to call of Congress in the same form, the Secretary The PRESIDING OFFICER. The of the Senate (in the case of a measure origi- that up sometime today or tomorrow. Chair rules there was a sufficient sec- nating in the Senate) or the Clerk of the We have the amendment offered ond. House of Representatives (in the case of a by—— The yeas and nays were ordered. measure originating in the House of Rep- Mr. MCCAIN. May I interrupt my resentatives) shall disaggregate the items as VOTE ON MOTION TO TABLE AMENDMENT NO. 348 friend for a minute? referenced in Sec. 5(4) and assign each item Mr. EXON. Is that right? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under a new bill number. Henceforth each item Mr. MCCAIN. It is the understanding the previous order, the question occurs shall be treated as a separate bill to be con- on this side of the aisle, articulated by on the motion to table amendment No. sidered under the following subsections. The 348, offered by the minority leader, Mr. remainder of the bill not so disaggregated the majority leader, the agreement be- shall constitute a separate bill and shall be tween the majority leader and Demo- DASCHLE. The yeas and nays have been ordered. considered with the other disaggregated bills cratic leader was that we could con- pursuant to subsection (b). clude this bill today. So we may have The clerk will call the roll. (2) A bill that is required to be to discuss that. The legislative clerk called the roll. disaggregated into separate bills pursuant to Mr. EXON. I would certainly say, at The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there subsection (a)— least one of the principles in this—I un- any other Senators in the Chamber (A) shall be disaggregated without sub- derstood there was a goal to conclude who desire to vote? stantive revision, and (B) shall bear the designation of the meas- this today. But I believe Senator BYRD The result was announced—yeas 62, nays 38, as follows: ure of which it was an item prior to such is absolutely correct that when he did disaggregation, together with such other not object earlier, the gentlemen’s [Rollcall Vote No. 112 Leg.] designation as may be necessary to distin- agreement was we would finish it this YEAS—62 guish such measure from other measures week. So I would say, despite any Abraham Cochran Frist disaggregated pursuant to paragraph (1) with agreement that might have been en- Ashcroft Cohen Gorton respect to the same measure. Bennett Coverdell Graham (b) The new bills resulting from the tered into by the majority leader and Bond Craig Gramm minority leader, that did not receive disaggregation described in paragraph 1 of Bradley D’Amato Grams subsection (a) shall be immediately placed Brown DeWine Grassley unanimous consent and therefore on the appropriate calendar in the House of would not be binding. Is that right? Burns Dole Gregg Campbell Domenici Hatch origination, and upon passage, placed on the Mr. MCCAIN. I will yield to the ma- Chafee Faircloth Hatfield appropriate calendar in the other House. jority leader on that one. Coats Feinstein Heflin They shall be the next order of business in

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4429 each House and they shall be considered and No. 406, offered by the Senator from Mr. LEVIN. Let me first back up and voted on en bloc and shall not be subject to Michigan. then attempt to answer the Senator’s amendment. A motion to proceed to the bills Mr. BINGAMAN addressed the Chair. question. shall be nondebatable. Debate in the House The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- of Representatives or the Senate on the bills ator from New Mexico. The problem that this amendment shall be limited to not more than 1 hour, Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I just addresses is that there are many items which shall be divided equally between the under the definition in the bill which majority leader and the minority leader. A had a few questions to ask to try to un- motion further to limit debate is not debat- derstand amendment No. 406. I was are not spending items, which are not able. A motion to recommit the bills is not hoping to address those questions to items where Congress is adding on in order, and it is not in order to move to re- one or any of the sponsors. I note the funds, where we are not appropriating consider the vote by which the bills are Senator from Michigan is here. He has money, but where we are restricting or agreed to or disagreed to. previously indicated he would be glad rescinding or limiting, where we are Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, the to try to respond to these questions. saying, ‘‘None of the funds appro- purpose of the modification is to ad- So let me just state those questions priated in this bill may be spent to dress technical concerns which were and then, if the Senator from Michigan keep troops’’ in a certain country after raised by the distinguished Senator or anyone else would want to respond, a certain date, or where we are saying, from West Virginia and others. I would appreciate it. ‘‘No more than,’’ a certain amount of These concerns pertain to whether Let me first just put this in some dollars, ‘‘can be spent on travel,’’ or we parts of a bill that do not constitute an context, because I am trying to under- are saying, ‘‘None of the money that item under the definition set out in the stand the bill that is pending and also has been appropriated here can be substitute would have to be understand it in light of this amend- disaggregated. The effect of this modi- spent on first-class travel,’’ or where ment. we are saying, ‘‘Not to exceed,’’ a cer- fication is to make clear that only new As I understand the bill that is pend- tain amount, ‘‘could be spent on con- direct spending or new targeted tax ing, it essentially tries to focus in on sultants.’’ benefits must be disaggregated. items of appropriation and provides Mr. President, I thank the distin- that an item of appropriation has to be Where Congress in an appropriations guished Senator from West Virginia for separately enrolled and sent to the bill, which we do all the time, is re- raising questions that led to this clari- President in separate form so that the stricting the use of funds by the execu- fication. And I wish to thank my col- President has the discretion to either tive branch or limiting the use of funds leagues from Indiana and Arizona for sign or veto that item of appropriation. by the executive branch, if those re- their willingness to work with me on I recognize that it is both items of strictions and limits are items, then to this matter. appropriation, and then it is direct give the President that special veto Mr. President, I yield the floor spending and one other matter which is power, if he uses it, will not save the Mr. EXON addressed the Chair. covered. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Treasury any money but will give the But I guess my concern is this: When ator from Nebraska. President more flexibility exactly the we get back to the finding of what an Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I call for opposite way than we intend. regular order with regard to the Levin item of appropriation is, what does the term ‘‘item’’ mean? We say that it So we will have failed in restricting amendment No. 406. the use of funds and we will not have Mr. President, I remind my col- means any numbered section, any un- benefited the Treasury one dollar. That leagues that this amendment addresses numbered paragraph, any allocation or is the problem that is sought to be ad- the enrollment restrictions and limita- suballocation of an appropriation. tions. And then the amendment that we are dressed by this amendment. I notice the presence of the Senator now discussing tries to write in an ex- So in order to avoid at least some of from New Mexico, Senator BINGAMAN, ception to that and say, as to items of that, as much as we can, as much as we on the floor. I know that he wishes to appropriation, that an item: were able to get cleared and support address this amendment. I also note Shall not include a provision which does on, what we are saying is, in the cases that the sponsor of the amendment, not appropriate funds, direct the President to expend funds for any specific project, or to enumerated here, those are not to be Senator LEVIN, is here, and I believe create an express or implied obligation to ex- treated as separate items. That is the Senator MURKOWSKI, who is a cospon- pend funds and— background of it. sor, was here a moment ago. (i) rescinds or cancels existing budget au- The Senator then says, ‘‘Well, how I yield the floor. thority; The PRESIDING OFFICER. The (ii) only limits conditions, or otherwise re- will they be treated?’’ I have a twofold pending question is the Abraham stricts the President’s authority to spend answer. One is that they will be at- amendment, which is amendment No. otherwise appropriated funds; or; tached to the item to which they re- 401. (iii) conditions on an item of appropriation late. not involving a positive allocation of funds Mr. EXON. I request that be tempo- For instance, if you say, ‘‘Here is $10 rarily laid aside. by explicitly prohibiting the use of any The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there funds. million, HUD, but no more than $1 mil- objection? That is complicated to me, Mr. Presi- lion may be spent for’’ a particular Mr. McCAIN. Reserving the right to dent. I may be the only Member of the purpose, the ‘‘but not more than $1 object. Senate who has difficulty under- million for’’ a particular purpose, Does the Senator from Nebraska in- standing that, but, I have to tell you, I would then, my intention is, be attend to take up the Abraham amend- have some difficulty. tached to the larger item. It would not ment? Let me just ask a couple of ques- be an allocation or a suballocation in Mr. EXON. The Abraham amendment tions. the words of the bill. It would be con- is being temporarily laid aside at the First of all, what happens to all of nected to the larger item that other- request of myself on behalf of Senator these that we are talking about here, wise it would be separated from. BYRD, who wishes to address it before all the items which are not included in Now, if for some reason you cannot it is voted on. I suspect that we will the definition of items? For example, have a chance to voice vote that, but what happens to the limits, conditions, do that—and there may be cir- there has been a request on this side to or other restrictions on the President’s cumstances that you cannot do that— address it before we proceed. authority to spend otherwise obligated then, as I understand the bill, there Mr. McCAIN. I thank the Senator. funds? will be a place where all the items that I do not object. If those are not to be enrolled as sep- are not separated out and separately The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without arate items and sent to the President enrolled will be packaged together. I do objection, it is so ordered. for his signature, what does happen to not know what that paragraph would AMENDMENT NO. 406 TO AMENDMENT NO. 347 them? Is there anybody—the Senator be called, but there will necessarily be The PRESIDING OFFICER. The from Michigan or anyone else—who such a paragraph, and these items pending question is now on amendment would like to respond to that question? would then be part of that paragraph.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4430 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 Let me say to my friend from New that bill before it became subbills and the Endangered Species Act. We adopt- Mexico, I have a lot of problems with pieces of bills, and so forth. ed that last Thursday. Another would this bill and with the separate enroll- I tried to answer the question, and I say you cannot spend more on the B–2. ment. I think we are going to find very now yield to the Senator. Another would say you cannot go into soon that this is not going to work Mr. McCAIN. I do not want to take Bosnia. We can add those together and very well for lots of reasons. And I the time of the Senator from New Mex- put them into a bill—I think that is think one of them is going to be the en- ico. A couple of practical examples permitted under this—and send it to rollment process itself and the fact have been raised. For example, I ask the President and the President could that then, after they are separately en- the Senator from Michigan, suppose veto it. He gets his money and he does rolled under the Abraham amendment, that the appropriations bill said $10 not get any restrictions. What is wrong they would come back to us, they are million for aid to El Salvador but no with that? Does it say that cannot be unamendable, up or down, so forth, and funds for any military training. done? we are going to be sending the Presi- Mr. MURKOWSKI. I wonder if the Mr. MURKOWSKI. It is in the amend- dent a thousand bills to sign instead of Senator from Arizona will allow me to ment as offered by the Senator from one. I do not know how the President answer that question as a cosponsor of Michigan and myself, specifically stat- can even veto an appropriations bill this amendment. I have a specific ex- ing that ‘‘conditions on an item of ap- under this approach. If he wants to ample that will hopefully enlighten propriation not involving a positive al- veto the whole appropriations bill, and address that question. location of funds by explicitly prohib- there is no bill to veto. He would have On a defense appropriations bill, say iting the use of any funds.’’ That is the to veto 1,000 bills. we have a provision that provides fund- amendment. Mr. McCAIN. Will the Senator yield ing for the Department of Defense for Mr. BINGAMAN. But, Mr. President, for a question? military personnel, $75 billion, pro- Mr. LEVIN. Yes. vided that none of the funds appro- the condition that we are talking Mr. McCAIN. Back on the question priated will be available to deploy about has to be enrolled someplace, if that the Senator from New Mexico United States Armed Forces to partici- it is going to become law. It has to be asked, can I ask him for a practical ex- pate in the implementation of a peace sent to the President if it is going to ample and how this amendment would settlement in Bosnia unless previously become law, and he has to sign it if it address it, if that would be agreeable? authorized by Congress. is going to become law. I am just ask- Mr. LEVIN. I will be happy to accept Under the Dole substitute, the Presi- ing, is there anything in this amend- that, but I want to be sure first that I dent basically gets two bills. The first ment or this bill which keeps us, the have done the best job I can in address- would be a bill to appropriate $75 bil- Congress—or the appropriators, more ing the Senator’s question. lion for military personnel. The second specifically, because they are the ones I happen to agree with, I think, the would bar United States troops in Bos- who determine this—from just saying, thrust of the questions, that we are nia peacekeeping. The President can OK, we are going to take all of these going to have a huge amount of prac- sign bill 1 and veto bill 2. He, thus, will restrictions and we are going to pack- tical problems, in any event, I believe, be able to receive the $75 billion with- age them together and send them up with the separate enrollment process. out restriction and can send troops to there and call them a bill, just like we What my amendment may do is create Bosnia without congressional approval. call each item a bill? That would be a an additional—could be—an additional Under the amendment of the Senator natural thing to do if we want to get it practical problem so that there will be from Michigan and myself, the Presi- to the President for signature. 51 practical problems instead of 50. But dent gets one bill. Since the restriction Mr. LEVIN. If the Senator will yield, what it is aimed at is a very critical in the appropriations bill completely is he saying that right now we could do substantive point, and that is the bars the use of any funds in Bosnia that, and this amendment does not pre- power of the purse of the U.S. Con- peacekeeping, the President gets only vent that same thing from happening? gress. one bill which contains the appropria- Mr. BINGAMAN. Yes, we could do We have used the power of the purse tion of $75 billion and the Bosnia re- that now. This amendment, as I read throughout history to be sure that the striction. it, and this bill, as I read it, calls for President did not exceed certain limits So that is the intent and an example the separate enrollment of the specific that the Congress has set. We do it all specifically. The President must either dollar allocations or appropriations, so the time. We say, ‘‘No later than’’ a sign the bill and accept the Bosnia re- that the President can cross out the al- certain date. ‘‘None of the funds in this striction, or he must veto the bill and locations or appropriations. There are bill may be used to keep troops in So- not have the $75 billion available. a lot of conditions we stick into appro- malia after’’ a certain date. That is an Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, can I priations bills which are not tied to a absolutely essential congressional just ask a follow-up question? specific allocation or appropriation. power, and we should not give that up. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- When we adopted, last Thursday, the We are giving up some power in this ator from New Mexico. prohibition against doing anything bill in order to gain some money for Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, more to enforce the Endangered Spe- the Treasury, in order to limit spend- where in the amendment or the bill cies Act—or whatever the precise lan- ing which Congress asks. So there is a does it say what the Senator from guage of the Hutchison amendment tradeoff. Are we willing to give the Ex- Alaska just described? As I see it, the was—why would that not be a separate ecutive additional power in order to re- condition that none of the funds in this item? duce the additional spending which bill can be spent to support activities Mr. LEVIN. This amendment does Congress sometimes puts in appropria- in Bosnia, or whatever the condition not cure that problem. tions bills? But in these cases in this would be, might just as easily be sepa- amendment, there is no additional rately enrolled, along with a lot of Mr. BINGAMAN. So you are saying spending. This is limits on spending. other conditions. that there are conditions which would This is where we rescind spending. This I do not see why you could not have, be enrolled separately from the appro- is where we restrict spending, and in as a result of this process, in the de- priation itself and which would go to those cases, it hopefully is not our in- fense area, for example, 2,000 bills go to the President, and he could either defer tention to be giving power to the Presi- the President. Each one of those would to the Congress and say they do not dent to override our policy where there be bills that qualified under the defini- want me to do anything more on the is no gain to the Treasury. tion in here for ‘‘item.’’ Endangered Species Act, therefore, I So my answer is twofold: One, that Then you could have another bill go will sign their bill; or he could say, I the intent of this amendment is that to the President which incorporated all am going to veto that part and use the the restriction be connected to the ap- of the various conditions that Congress money that they have appropriated as propriation item it refers to, and where has put on the President in the expend- I see fit? that is impossible, that it would then iture, and one of them would say you Mr. LEVIN. Well, the amendment ad- be packaged with any other parts of cannot do anything more to enforce dresses those situations where there is

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4431 a limitation, a condition, or a restric- the expenditure might be a separate condition that is not tied to a specific tion on the President’s authority to bill, as well, might be presented as a appropriation would be there for the spend otherwise appropriated funds. If separate bill, and we might put them President to sign or veto as he saw fit. there is no appropriated fund in that all together. I do not know what we Mr. LEVIN. The Senator is correct. bill, then it could not be attached to would call it, but that might be the re- Mr. BINGAMAN. And there would be that. You would not be addressing the sult. The President would have the some incentive. problem the Senator raises. But that choice of vetoing each and every appro- Mr. LEVIN. The Senator is correct. exists right now. That is a problem priation, and then he would be pre- Mr. BINGAMAN. Let me ask the Sen- that exists right now. This amendment sented with sort of a catch-all remain- ator from Michigan another question: does not solve, at all, all of the prob- der kind of a bill which has all these Taking the example that the Senator lems with this bill, or all of the cir- conditions in it. And there would be a from Arizona was referring to, suppose cumstances under which we now legis- great incentive on the part of the in the defense appropriation bill we late. What this does is what I have de- President to say, ‘‘I will sign every- were to say, ‘‘Of the funds appropriated scribed. thing but the conditions. I do not like in this bill, not more than $100 million If we say to the President, here is Congress telling me what to do. They can be spent by the Department of De- $100 billion for the United States do not know anything about Bosnia up fense to go into Bosnia unless and until Army, and none of these funds may be in Congress.’’ the President certifies to the Con- used to have any of these soldiers in Mr. MCCAIN. If the Senator will gress’’—whatever. That would be the Somalia after a certain date, this yield, I do not believe Congress would provision. would require, under this amendment, be so foolish as to enroll it that way Now, the Senator is saying that that the restriction on the funds in because it would leave it as a target. would be separately enrolled if we had that bill be connected to it, or else we The Congress would enroll the restrict- that kind of a reference to a specific are giving the President power without ing language along with the money, so amount of money, which was the top any benefit to the Treasury. If you that the President had no choice. I can- amount that could be spent out of a allow him to veto the restriction, he not imagine that the Congress, if they much larger appropriation? then has the $100 billion unrestricted, wanted restrictions enforced, would Is that a separate item which would the Treasury has not gained a penny, have one line item with the money and then be enrolled? and we have lost our policy. some in a different paragraph—al- Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, if I The Congress will have ceded to the though the language of the Senator might say, the conditions that would President that power of the purse, with from Michigan also provides for that, be tied to any specific amount of no financial benefit whatsoever. And I as well. money are inseparable. happen to have great problems with So this bill provides for the fencing Mr. LEVIN. Inseparable. Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, the Dole substitute. There are all kinds language, and the amendment provides my question, though, the money ref- of problems, I believe, with the sepa- for the fencing language that affects erence in the example I just gave is not rate enrollment which this amendment that appropriation to go together and a reference that appropriates money. does not solve, including, I believe, the be inseparable. We have a bill that says we will give Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, if I one the Senator from New Mexico has the Department of Defense $250 billion; may ask the Senator from New Mexico come up with. If we are going to have that is the appropriations language. a question. In my colloquy, which is separate enrollments, which I oppose— Then we put in a provision that says going to be made a part of the RECORD, I think they are unconstitutional, un- not more than $100 million of the funds with the Senator from Alaska, we wise, and everything else—at least we appropriated in this bill can be spent make it clear that where you cannot should not be giving up the power of for activities in Bosnia. connect a restriction to an appropria- the purse, where there is no benefit to Is that a separate item? the Treasury, where it is a restriction tion, it would be put in the kind of Mr. McCAIN. That is correct, but if it on spending. package that the Senator from New has restricted language associated with I have used the example—and I will Mexico describes. There is no other it, then that language is associated use it again—where we give an agency way to do it. But why should we, be- with it, also. money and say: This is for your general cause there is no alternative but to do Wherever there is a line where money operations, but you may not spend it that way. Where there is no appro- is mentioned, that is a separate item. more than $10 million on consultants. I priation to connect the restriction, Mr. BINGAMAN. That, to my mind, do not think there is any intent—there why should we give up the congres- would be a restriction. That would be a should not be in this amendment, and I sional power to restrict, limit, and re- limit or condition or otherwise restrict will make sure there is no intent—to scind the use of funds, where there is the President’s authority to spend, be- let the President separately veto the no benefit to the Treasury, just because it would say, ‘‘You cannot spend restriction on the use of consultants cause it is impossible to add all restric- more than $100 million.’’ and then have all the money without tions to an appropriation? To connect Mr. LEVIN. Of money appropriated such restriction. all of the limits to an appropriation herein. (Ms. SNOWE assumed the Chair.) does not mean we should not try where Mr. BINGAMAN. To do anything—of Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, there is an appropriation in the bill to money appropriated herein—to do any- let me once again go at this and see if do so? thing in Bosnia, and we are saying that I am clear. I am concerned about this. Mr. BINGAMAN. Well, Madam Presi- is something that would not be sub- Under the existing procedure—and it dent, let me try to put this in into spe- mitted to the President as a separate has lots of flaws, and I am as critical of cifics here, and see if I understand it. bill. it as many in this body are—we send As I understand it, what the Senator Mr. LEVIN. That is correct. the President a bill and it has money from Illinois and the Senator from Ari- Would the Senator want it to be? appropriated and it has conditions at- zona are saying is that if we put a gen- Mr. BINGAMAN. I do not know. I am tached, and those are all together; the eral restriction on a bill which cannot trying to understand what the Presi- President either takes it or leaves it be tied to a specific appropriation, then dent is ultimately going to be pre- and, clearly, there are major defi- that could be, or should be, separately sented with. ciencies with that system. enrolled as another bill, along, perhaps, Mr. LEVIN. I have a lot of problems What I am concerned about with this with other restrictions. with this bill, as the Senator knows, amendment and this new bill that we Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, the refor exactly that same reason. It is our are talking about here is that we are strictions which are not tied to specific effort here to tie the restriction to the requiring that the dollar figures be sep- appropriations would necessarily have appropriation. arately presented as bills. And it would to go in somewhere. Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, if seem logical to me that if those are all Mr. BINGAMAN. So they would go that is the case that we are trying to items that are separately presented, into another bill, which the President tie the restriction to the appropriation any conditions we want to attach to could either sign or veto, so that any so as to keep the President from

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4432 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 vetoing the legislation separately, spent, it is a strong signal by the Con- What do we mean by ‘‘existing’’ and what is meant by the phrase ‘‘other- gress that we intend that $100 million what do we mean by ‘‘budget author- wise appropriated funds’’? be available and spent. Is that an ear- ity’’? Are we talking about just this It says here, ‘‘only limits, conditions, mark which we are trying to eliminate current fiscal year’s rescissions? And, or otherwise restricts the President’s by this legislation? if so, is it appropriate to just limit or authority to spend otherwise appro- Mr. LEVIN. The language of the just exclude from the definition of priated funds.’’ Does that mean I can amendment is that if it does not create ‘‘item’’ rescissions of budget author- put a restriction in the defense bill an expressed or implied obligation to ity? Or should we also be excluding which relates to funds appropriated in spend the $100 million, then the answer from the definition of ‘‘items’’ rescis- the energy and water appropriations would be ‘‘no.’’ sions of appropriations, as well? bill? Is that what that means? Now, in my judgment, the way that Mr. LEVIN. First of all, to answer Why do we intend to exempt from was read, the answer would be ‘‘no.’’ question No. 1, it is not limited to the Mr. BINGAMAN. So the view of the this separate enrollment process lim- current year. Second, appropriations, Senator from Michigan is that that its, conditions, and restrictions on the as I understand it, are a budget author- kind of a proviso does not constitute President’s authority to spend other- ity. The words ‘‘budget authority’’ in- an implied obligation to expend those wise appropriated funds? Why is that? I clude appropriations, I am informed by funds? do not understand. the technical experts here on our staff. Mr. LEVIN. The provision that the Mr. LEVIN. That is right. Mr. BINGAMAN. Let me ask, on the It surely is intended to include appro- Senator is referring to is not a provi- third subsection of this where it talks priations. sion which appropriates funds. If it about—again, we are trying to define Mr. BINGAMAN. So it would not be were, it would have to be separately items and saying that items do not in- limited just to the current fiscal year; enrolled. clude conditions—language which is that correct, Madam President? Mr. BINGAMAN. So the point is not ‘‘conditions on an item of appropria- to require that the limits and condi- Mr. LEVIN. That is correct. tion not involving a positive allocation tions and restrictions on the Presi- Mr. BINGAMAN. And therefore a 5- of funds.’’ year budget resolution is what would dent’s authority apply to funds appro- Madam President, my concern is that priated in other bills; it is rather to re- be the determining factor, is that I thought all items of appropriation right, in whether or not a rescission quire that the limits, conditions, and were, by definition, positive alloca- restrictions on the President’s author- would be exempt from the definition of tions of funds. That is what I thought ‘‘item’’ for purposes of this section? ity instead apply to funds that are in a an appropriation was. It was an alloca- Mr. LEVIN. It would cover the rescis- separately enrolled portion of the bill. tion of funds for a purpose. Is that what it is? Here we are saying that we are not sion of existing budget authority for Mr. LEVIN. If they are already to- going to include in the definition of whatever year that it has been adopt- gether, then there is no need for this item language which ‘‘conditions on an ed. paragraph. This paragraph only says item of appropriation not involving a Mr. BINGAMAN. OK. that we will not separately enroll the positive allocation of funds. * * * ’’ I do Madam President, I have delayed the restriction where we can link it to an not understand that language. It Senate long enough. Let me just con- appropriation. If we cannot link it to sounds to me entirely contradictory. I clude by making a general statement. an appropriation, if it is in another am obviously missing something. I think what we are faced with, with bill, it will then have to either be sepa- Mr. MURKOWSKI. If I may respond, this amendment—and I think it is a rately enrolled or packaged as a sepa- it is the implied purpose that no money conscientious effort by the Senator rate enrollment. can be spent. It says ‘‘not involving a from Michigan and the Senator from There is no cure for that problem positive allocation of funds and explic- Alaska to come up with some way of under the current law. That is a prob- itly prohibiting the use of any funds.’’ sorting out a separation of the appro- lem which exists in our current law, Does that answer the question? priating process from the policy- that we restrict in one appropriation Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I making process. That is what they are bill the President’s authority to spend guess I still have a concern in talking trying to do here, as I understand it. money in another appropriation bill. about language that ‘‘conditions * * * They are trying to preserve to the Con- This does not solve that problem. It an item of appropriation not involving gress the ability to make policy while does not worsen the problem. a positive allocation of funds.’’ I did granting to the President dramatic In other words, this does not do a lot not know there were any items of ap- new powers with regard to the actual of the things that I think the Senator propriation that did not involve posi- appropriating of funds or the preven- would like to see done. It does not do a tive allocations of funds. I thought—— tion of funds from being appropriated. lot of the things I would like to see Mr. MURKOWSKI. If I may respond, That is what I understand is going on. done. What it does do is make sure that my example given on the Department I think it is very, very difficult to where there is a restriction on an ap- of Defense of $75 billion provided that sort those things out. I think it is very propriation in a bill, that we do not none of the funds appropriated be difficult to grant to the President one separate the restriction from the ap- available to deploy Armed Forces to power and reserve to the Congress the propriation, because then again we participate in implementation. None of accompanying power—which is what would be giving up a power over the the funds. this amendment is trying to do. I think purse for no advantage to the Treas- Mr. McCAIN. May I add to that? It it may go a short distance in getting us ury. refers to any ‘‘conditions on an item.’’ to that, but I think the grant of au- Where we can do that, we should do Not to the item, I say to the Senator thority, if the bill which is pending be- that. from New Mexico; any ‘‘conditions on fore us is adopted, as I gather it is Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, an item of appropriation not involving going to be—the grant of authority is let me go at this slightly differently. a positive allocation of funds.’’ broad and the President, I think, would And I am not trying to delay my col- There are many conditions that are find that he has very broad authority leagues here. I do have legitimate ques- placed that do not have anything to do to countermand policy decisions by the tions that I wanted to ask. with allocation of funds. We are talk- Congress through the use of this new If I could get one other example for ing about the condition, not the item, veto power that we would be granting the Senator from Michigan to respond in the amendment. to. Considering this option, ‘‘Of the $1 Mr. BINGAMAN. All right. Let me in this legislation. billion appropriated for research and ask one other question here, Madam Mr. LEVIN addressed the Chair. development, not more than $100 mil- President, just to try to get a clear no- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- lion shall be spent on’’ a specific tion. The language of the amendment ator from Michigan. project. Is that an earmark? I guess talks about language which ‘‘rescinds Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, first that is the question. Even though it or cancels existing budget authority.’’ let me say I agree with my friend from does not mandate that $100 million be I guess I have two questions on that. New Mexico. This is an effort here to

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4433 not give to the President, to avoid giv- it. I think there will be significant larly interesting that the Senator from ing to the President, power which does questions. As the Senator from New Michigan opposes this bill, yet he is not lead to a reduction in spending. Mexico pointed out, this is a very sig- willing to spend an enormous amount The purpose of the line-item veto is to nificant and fundamental change in the of time and energy in trying to make try to give the President additional au- way that business is done. So these ex- this bill better. thority over spending where the Con- amples, and the questions that are in My sincere appreciation goes to the gress adds spending. But where the the RECORD, I think, will be helpful Senator from Michigan for his at- Congress is restricting spending, lim- when we proceed—I put that perhaps a tempts and for what I think he and the iting spending, rescinding spending, little too optimistically—when we pro- Senator from Alaska have done. Frank- conditioning spending for policy pur- ceed to implement the line-item veto. I ly, that is what the amending process poses that we believe are good and thank the Senator from New Mexico. on the floor of the Senate is all about: valid, we surely do not want to give the I would like to point out that, as I to make legislation better. The Sen- said earlier, we have proved to any- President the veto authority over ator from Michigan saw a potential se- one’s satisfaction here that the Con- those restrictions, limitations, condi- rious problem. I believe that his gress can ignore or violate any law tions, and rescissions. amendment addresses the vast major- that it passes. The most outstanding The Senator from New Mexico is ex- ity of it. actly right. That is the purpose of this example, of course, is the War Powers Act. The Congress of the United States, Madam President, I yield. amendment. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, let me I do not support the underlying sub- over the veto of the President of the thank my friend from Arizona, first of stitute to which this amendment will United States, passed the War Powers all, for his comments and for his sup- hopefully be attached. I think we are Act. We routinely ignore that legisla- port. I want to thank Senator MUR- going to create an absolute nightmare tion—routinely; perhaps one of the most fundamental principles of the KOWSKI because he also noted a very for the legislative process, for the exec- separation of powers as embodied in significant problem with this approach. utive branch, in splintering up an ap- our Constitution. We worked out this common solution propriations bill into all kinds of So I am fully aware that if the Con- to it. shards and little pieces. But it appears gress wants to violate this law when we I thank Senator EXON for his cospon- clear that is what the Senate is about pass it, they can. They can find loop- sorship and support. to do. I do not support that approach. holes. They can find ways around it. But if we are going to do that, for Madam President, I also thank the But this language in the Levin-Mur- Senator from New Mexico. He raises heaven’s sake, let us not go beyond the kowski amendment I think makes it purpose of a line-item veto, which is to some very important questions which very clear that the President of the will help create a record which, hope- give the President, presumably, the au- United States cannot and should not be thority to veto additional spending. fully, will in turn help to implement able to veto an item of condition or this legislation, if it is ever passed. Let us not give the President the au- money—moneys that the Congress ap- I yield the floor. thority to wipe out our restrictions on propriated under those conditions, and spending. Let us not give the President be able to separate the two. I think Mr. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, that additional authority to wipe out this amendment is very clear in that I have worked with the distinguished our conditions on spending, our rescis- direction. senior Senator from Michigan, Senator sions of spending. There is no reason to Senator LEVIN very thoughtfully LEVIN, in developing some examples of do that. points out other problems he has with the implications of amendment No. 406. While this only cures one of the prob- the bill. I think many of those prob- I think these examples provide our col- lems, in my book, with the underlying lems are legitimate. I had a long ex- leagues with a clearer picture of the substitute—and there are plenty of change yesterday with Senator BYRD, limitations that will be imposed on en- others that give me cause to oppose the who raised some legitimate concerns. rolling line items. underlying substitute—I think we sure- But I believe there are two ways to Mr. LEVIN. I appreciate the help of ly ought to do this much, and do what look at this legislation. One is to go at my colleague from Alaska in devel- we can to avoid unintended con- what the intent is, what the language oping these examples and I believe sequences. is, what I think is very clear and has they reflect our intent in drafting this I believe the sponsors of the under- been interpreted on this floor as to amendment. lying substitute support this because it what it is. Or we can go at it and say Example I: Absolute funding prohibi- is not their intention to give the Presi- we will find some loopholes here and tion as part of an appropriation; a De- dent authority to wipe out our restric- we will appropriate $50 billion—$234 bil- fense appropriations bill contains a tions on spending and our rescissions of lion for defense, period; or maybe even provision that provides: spending. Since that is not, I hope, break it up into the Army, Navy, Ma- Funding for the Department of De- their intent, we can do the best we can rine Corps, and Air Force. fense: For military personnel $75 bil- to correct the bill in this regard. But We can also better shape legislation lion: Provided that none of the funds without this amendment, the bill so the intent of legislation is clear, so appropriated be available to deploy would give the President a separate it is very easy to enroll and, frankly, United States Armed Forces to partici- piece of a bill, of an appropriations bill, Madam President, with some of the ex- pate in the implementation of a peace and that piece would have just the lim- traneous matter taken out of it which settlement in Bosnia unless previously itation or just the restriction or just I believe will make these bills much authorized by Congress. Under the the condition, allowing the President smaller than they are today, because I pending substitute, the President to separately veto that and then to be do not think we get away with some of would be presented with two bills: the items that are now put in which able to spend all of the money without Bill 1 appropriates $75 billion for some of us only discover weeks or restriction. military personnel. So I think the Senator from New months after the passage of the legisla- Mexico pointed out what the purpose of tion. Items that are put in in con- Bill 2 bars United States troops in the amendment is and is accurate in ference between the two bodies, no Bosnia peacekeeping. saying it does not solve a number of Members except those members of the The President can sign bill 1 and veto additional problems. I would agree conference, a small number of people, bill 2. He thus will be able to receive with him. But it does solve some of the ever see until we are presented with the $75 billion without restriction and problems. I hope it will be adopted. that legislation, and we only have two could send troops to Bosnia without The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- choices: yes or no, up or down on that congressional approval. ator from Arizona. bill. That is not what the participation Under our amendment, the President Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I of Members of the body in shaping leg- receives one bill: would like to thank Senator BINGAMAN islation is all about, in my view. Since the restriction in the appro- for bringing these issues to the atten- So I again want to thank the Senator priations bill completely bars the use tion of this body as we are considering from Michigan. I think it is particu- of any funds in Bosnia peacekeeping,

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4434 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 the President would receive only one tion chooses to spend money on such braska that it is my understanding, bill which contains the appropriation equipment, it can expend no more than now that this amendment has been of $75 billion along with the Bosnia re- $55 million. taken care of, that Senator HATCH is striction. The President must either The President would receive only one now ready to propose an amendment. I sign the bill and accept the Bosnia re- bill containing the $350 million appro- believe that he may decide to withdraw striction or he must veto the bill and priation along with the restriction lim- that amendment. not have the $75 billion available. iting the amount of money that can be Then remaining, as far as I can ascer- Example II: Funding Prohibition as a expended for procurement of labora- tain, will be the Abraham amendment tory equipment. Free Standing Provision; other limits which I believe Senator BYRD wanted Similarly, a provision stating that and conditions on appropriations are discussed, and then finally the Byrd ‘‘not to exceed $8,000’’ of an overall ap- frequently placed at the end of an ap- amendment itself. propriations bill. For example, in last propriation may be expended for offi- year’s Commerce, Justice appropria- cial reception and representation ex- So perhaps we could notify the Sen- tions bill, provisions were included pro- penses would be enrolled with the ap- ator from West Virginia that his in- hibiting the expenditure of funds for propriation that is so limited, and not volvement on the two remaining specific purposes including: publicity as a separate bill. amendments will be what remains after and propaganda purposes not author- Example IV: Implicit obligation to Senator Hatch finishes. ized by the Congress; expenditures for spend; the same legislation as in exam- Mr. EXON. We will certainly tell the consulting services that are not a mat- ple II appropriates $350 million for pro- Senator from West Virginia what is ter of public record; the purchase of curement of laboratory equipment, taking place so that he will be fully ad- certain equipment outside the United supplies, repair and renovation of fa- vised. My conversations with him indi- States; and the implementation of cer- cilities contains a proviso that three cated that he may want to make some tain EEOC harassment guidelines based research facilities be constructed in a comments with regard to the amend- on religion. particular State at a cost of no more ment that is going to be discussed by Similarly, last year’s Defense appro- than $30 million. Such a condition our colleague from Utah. would not be covered under our amend- priations bill contained provisions pro- Also, the Senator from Arizona is ment. That’s because the proviso re- hibiting the expenditure of any funds correct. I believe very likely we could quires the construction of such facili- for specific purposes, including: To agree to the Abraham amendment that ties and therefore implicitly obligates build a specific radar system; to estab- Senator BYRD wanted to talk on. I do lish or support a specific type of main- the expenditure of funds. The President would receive two not know what his position is. But he tenance support activity for the B–2 wants to talk on it. After we dispose in bomber; or to carry out specified re- bills. One would contain the $350 million appropriation for laboratory some fashion of the Hatch amendment, search projects involving the use of the only thing, as the Senator from Ar- animals. equipment, supplies, repair and renovation of facilities. The second bill would izona said, that I know of is the Abra- Other examples of limits and condi- ham amendment that Senator BYRD tions on appropriation that are free contain the provision specifying that three research facilities be constructed wishes to address, and the Byrd amend- standing sections within an appropria- ment itself. I think that indicates that tions bill include last week’s Defense in a particular State at a cost of no more than $30 million. The President we have moved in great fashion by supplemental bill passed by the Senate. working together in moving this. We Section 108 contains a requirement could sign or veto the first bill and could sign or veto the second bill. are much further along than most of us that none of the funds appropriated by thought we would be on Tuesday last. the act may be made available for op- Mr. EXON. Madam President, I thank Mr. MCCAIN. I thank my friend from erations in Haiti more than 60 days my friend and colleague from Michi- Nebraska for his totally cooperative after the date of enactment, unless the gan. I think this is a very, very good spirit in this effort. Perhaps Senator President complies with specified re- amendment. It certainly does not cover BYRD would want Senator ABRAHAM on porting requirements. all of the concerns I have in this area, Under the substitute, as originally but a considerable number of those the floor when he discusses his amend- drafted, each of these limitations concerns. ment. So perhaps we can coordinate would be placed in a separate bill, and I am very pleased to be a cosponsor that. could be vetoed by the President. For of the amendment, and once again I ap- Mr. EXON. Senator ABRAHAM told me example, the President could sign the preciate my colleague’s attention to about one-half hour ago that he, by ne- supplemental appropriation bill pro- the details. I think the amendment cessity, had to leave the Hill and would viding the money for operations in makes the proposition, although I still be back in about an hour, which I Haiti and veto the limitation. have some concerns, much more palat- thought would be around 2 o’clock or Under our amendment, the general able. I thank him for offering the something like that. He asked me to limitations in a bill would not be amendment. I believe we are ready to tell Senator BYRD that he was sorry items, and would be enrolled together act on it. that he had to leave. So we will pass I yield the floor. in a single bill. Thus the limitation on along the information to Senator BYRD Mr. MCCAIN. Madam President, I was funds for Haiti would not be a separate on the fact that Senator ABRAHAM will admonished yesterday by the distin- item. Because it pertains to multiple be back around 2, and whether or not guished Senator from West Virginia appropriations, it would be enrolled he wants to come up and talk about that it is not appropriate to say I move with the general limitations described the next business, the amendment by the amendment. I do not say that. But above. the Senator from Utah, and we will see I note that there is no further debate Example III: Limitation and condi- that all parties are properly advised. at this time as far as I can tell. tions; a VA–HUD bill appropriates $350 The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there I yield the floor. million for research and development is no further debate, the question is on Mr. MCCAIN. Madam President, I activities including procurement of agreeing to the amendment. note the presence of the distinguished laboratory equipment and supplies and The amendment (No. 406) to No. 347 chairman of the Judiciary Committee repair and renovation of facilities. A was agreed to. on the floor. proviso in that bill states that no more Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, I move I yield the floor. than $55 million of these funds shall be to reconsider the vote by which the available for procurement of labora- amendment was agreed to. Mr. HATCH addressed the chair. tory equipment. The proviso does not Mr. EXON. I move to lay that motion The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- mandate that money be spent on lab- on the table. ator from Utah. oratory equipment. Nor should it be The motion to lay on the table was considered as creating an express or agreed to. AMENDMENT NO. 407 TO AMENDMENT NO. 347 implied obligation to expand funds. It Mr. MCCAIN. Madam President, I say Mr. HATCH. Madam President, I call only provides that if the administra- to my colleague and friend from Ne- up amendment No. 407.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4435 The PRESIDING OFFICER. That branch, Congress would have a keen in- arate enrollment, subjecting it to the amendment is the pending question at terest in defending itself against such a line-item veto could not possibly have this time. veto if it believed the veto unwise, and any significant impact in terms of Mr. HATCH. I thank the Chair. would have at its disposal the direct budget reduction. Madam President, my amendment to means through which to override a Normally, I would say subject every the Dole substitute version of S. 4 ex- Presidential veto. The judicial branch, line item covered by the bill to Presi- cludes items of appropriation for the however, cannot defend itself. dential veto. But I believe that an ex- judicial branch from enrollment as sep- John Adams stated that ‘‘The judi- ception for the judicial branch is arate measures prior to presentment to cial power ought to be distinct from uniquely warranted on principle. The the President. It provides instead that both the legislative and executive, and judiciary is a separate and co-equal items of appropriation for the judicial independent upon both, so that it may branch of Government that does not branch shall be enrolled together in a be a check upon both.’’ Just as the ju- have the institutional power to look single measure. This amendment would diciary is separate from the executive after itself under separate enrollment. help ensure the independence of the ju- and legislative powers in our constitu- The Congress can safeguard itself diciary from the executive branch, and tional system, so its independence through the use of the veto override would not detract from what this bill should be safeguarded through the process. The judiciary, however, pos- seeks to accomplish. budgetary process on which it depends. sesses no similar safeguard. The amendment is designed to pro- Current law already protects the ju- To be sure, Congress would have the tect the judicial branch from attempts diciary’s budget from Presidential ac- authority to override a veto of any by the President to influence or punish tion, in large part to insulate the judi- item in the judiciary’s budget. I feel the judiciary—or otherwise undermine ciary from political manipulation very strongly, however, that the judici- its independence as a co-equal branch through the budget process. By statute ary should not be placed in the position of Government—through exercising the [31 U.S.C. § 1105(b)], the Judicial of depending on that action. That is line-item veto power with respect to branch’s budget is accorded protection too slender a reed on which to rest the particular judicial appropriations. from Presidential alteration. When the independence of the judiciary. This While I would hope that no President President transmits a proposed Federal amendment will better ensure the judi- would think to exercise the line-item budget to Congress, the President must ciary’s independence and protect it as a veto in such a manner, it remains a forward the judicial branch’s proposed co-equal branch of Government. very real threat that we can easily budget to Congress unchanged. That Mr. President, my amendment does safeguard against at this stage through process has been in operation since not alter the basic operation of the un- adopting this amendment. 1939. It was adopted in part because of derlying legislation. Nor would its The amendment I propose would do unilateral action taken by the execu- adoption be a precedent justifying that by excluding items of appropria- tive branch in the 1930’s to cut the ju- other exceptions: no other entity or tion for the judicial branch from en- diciary’s funding. The Chairman of the part of our system of Government rollment as separate measures for pre- Judicial Conference, Chief Judge Gil- funded by Congress stands on the same sentment to the President. The excep- bert Merritt of the U.S. Court of Ap- footing as the Federal Judiciary, a co- tion would cover all salaries and ex- peals for the Sixth Circuit, testified be- equal branch of the central Govern- penses related to the operation and ad- fore the Senate Governmental Affairs ment. ministration of the Federal courts. The Committee, that in the 1930’s executive I hope my colleagues will join me in exception would not extend to court- branch action forced the firing of court acknowledging the status of the judici- house construction, which does not ap- staff and cut in half the salaries of ary as a branch of Government co- pear in the judiciary’s budget and judges’ secretaries. That kind of action equal in status to the Congress and the which would remain subject to the to influence our Federal judges cannot President, and will support this amend- line-item veto. Under my amendment, be tolerated, and it should not be al- ment. if any of the covered items appeared in lowed to creep back into the system. Let me give my colleagues a hypo- an appropriations measure, those items Under the present system, that does thetical which illustrates my concern. would be enrolled together into a sin- not mean that the judiciary is immune It involves private property rights. gle measure. from budget cuts. The judiciary must The U.S. Court of Appeals for the The amendment is carefully crafted independently justify its budget to Federal Circuit is a separate line item, to avoid creating a loophole through Congress, and must operate within the currently at $13 million. Among other which other expenses could be shielded budget appropriated for it. It would matters, this court currently handles from the line-item veto. A budgetary continue to do so under the amend- all appeals in property rights cases item would only qualify for the excep- ment I propose. In addition, Congress under the takings clause of the fifth tion from separate enrollment if it is would continue to be as free to legis- amendment. Suppose this court hands for one of the functions of the judiciary late the judiciary’s budget under my down a string of cases favoring prop- as those are listed or described in the amendment as it is today. The Presi- erty owners, and against the Federal current appropriations act. Thus, Con- dent would also remain free to veto the Government. Suppose further that this gress could not seek to hide an item Judiciary’s entire budget. To subject angers the President. Without my from the line-item veto by slipping it the judiciary’s budget to separate en- amendment, he could veto the $13 mil- into the judiciary’s budget. rollment, however, risks undermining lion line item—with the exception of I believe that the judiciary needs this the current approach—and the balance the salaries of the judges, which the protection. In the absence of this ex- of power between the executive and ju- constitution protects, return it to Con- ception, the judicial branch would be dicial branches—and risks exposing the gress, and object that the item should particularly vulnerable to the Presi- judiciary to targeted, politically moti- be reduced to $10 million, citing, not dent’s whim. In one form or another, vated retaliation. The President should the private property rights cases, but the executive branch is the largest liti- not be permitted to veto specific appro- some ostensible good Government, gator in the Federal courts. Federal priations for the judiciary where those cost-saving reason. Now, Congress can courts frequently weigh in on the legal- appropriations have been carefully either override the veto or pass a new ity of executive branch action. It is not shielded from Presidential alteration bill giving this court only $10 million, difficult to appreciate how the judicial in the first place. hampering its ability to function. Or branch would be vulnerable to the line- Moreover, an exception for the judi- worse yet, the President could veto it item veto because of that. Perhaps ciary would have virtually no impact all and just take the whole $13 million. more important, the judiciary would be on the Federal budget. The entire What is likely to happen? Most relatively powerless to defend itself budget for the judiciary is two-tenths Americans, and probably most Mem- compared with the legislature. Al- of 1 percent of the entire Federal budg- bers of Congress, have never heard of though a President could conceivably et. While the judiciary could be dev- this court. No one is going to get use the line-item veto to target par- astated by the line-item veto if por- worked up about this unknown court ticular functions of the legislative tions of its budget were subject to sep- and $3 million. The judges of the court

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4436 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 are hamstrung from speaking frankly Mr. HATCH. I would prefer to wait, power to exert pressure on the judicial and accusing the President of under- holding out on the yeas and nays for branch by the withholding funds for mining them because he dislikes their just a short period. necessary judicial staff salaries, equip- opinions—that gets them too involved Mr. BYRD. Very well. ment or communications, for example. in the political process. Mr. HATCH. If the Senator desires Of course, I am not asserting that this We do not want judges moving back them, we will get them. President, or any President, would use and forth in accordance with every Mr. BYRD. Very well. the line-item veto authority granted blink or whimsy of the President of the Madam President, the distinguished by this bill to exert such improper United States or the Congress also. We Senator from Utah has to be off the pressure, but the fact is that the power want judges judging things on the mer- floor for a few minutes to attend a to do so would exist under this bill. We its, the way they should be judging press conference. I would prefer that he should keep in mind that the Executive matters. be here. I do have a few things to say branch always has more lawsuits pend- Moreover, if enough congressional about this amendment and I have some ing in the Federal courts than any members of the President’s party share questions to ask. So I would prefer to other litigant. his disapproval of how this court has suggest the absence of a quorum and Since 1939 the Budget and Account- ruled on these matters, a two thirds give the Senator an opportunity to ating Act has provided that requests for override will not happen. Congress will tend the press conference. appropriations for the judicial branch be forced to cut the court’s budget and In the meantime, if the distinguished shall be submitted to the President and the independence of the judiciary has Senator from Wyoming [Mr. SIMPSON] transmitted by him to Congress ‘‘with- been undermined. could be contacted, he perhaps could out change’’ [31 USC 1105 (b)]. This leg- If all of the judicial branch’s appro- make his statement before further dis- islation was adopted because of the in- priations are in one bill, however, in- cussion on this amendment. evitable conflicts that arose in having cluding the Supreme Court, the other So, unless the distinguished Senator the Department of Justice cut funds re- courts of appeal, the district courts, from Arizona or any other Senator quested by the judiciary before the ju- and so on, the President couldn’t get wishes to speak, I suggest the absence dicial budget was submitted to Con- away with this. We all know what the of a quorum. gress. That legislation is still in effect. Supreme Court and the other courts The PRESIDING OFFICER. The It seems anomalous to prohibit the ex- do. If the President wanted to tamper clerk will call the roll. ecutive branch from changing the judi- with the Court of Appeals for the Fed- The assistant legislative clerk pro- ciary’s budget prior to submission to eral Circuit, he would have to veto the ceeded to call the roll. Congress, but then to give the Presi- Supreme Court’s funding and the fund- Mr. ROTH. Madam President, I ask dent unilateral authority to revise an ing of all of the other Federal courts. unanimous consent that the order for enacted budget. This would alarm people. I doubt very the quorum call be rescinded. Does this mean that if our amend- much that a President would veto a The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without ment is adopted the Judiciary gets a $2.7 billion bill for the sake of knock- objection, it is so ordered. free ride to spend as much as it likes? ing out $3 million for this obscure Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise in Of course not. The judicial budget court. If he does so, I think Congress support of the Hatch-Roth amendment. would still be subject to congressional would override it so the Supreme This amendment would exempt por- approval and Presidential veto, just as Court, for example, is able to function. tions of the budget used to support the it is now. Moreover, it should be noted I make this argument only in defense Federal judiciary from the line-item that the judiciary’s budget does not in- of a coequal branch of Government veto by directing that the entire appro- clude funding for courthouse construc- which has no direct means of propriation for the judicial branch be en- tion. Budget requests and appropria- tecting itself. I am not being critical of rolled in a single bill. tions for building construction are the line-item veto in other contexts, From the outset, I want to make it within the province of the executive and I will support it. clear that I support the idea of the branch and the Congress, and are not I understand that Senator BYRD line-item veto. I believe that it is im- affected by our amendment since the would like to speak on this amend- portant to give the President the au- judiciary has no role in the funding of ment, so I will yield the floor at this thority to selectively eliminate ex- such construction. time before making any further mo- penditures of taxpayer funds which are For all these reasons, this amend- tions on it. not in the public interest. I believe the ment makes a great deal of sense. It is Mr. BYRD addressed the chair. legislation we are considering will do the prudent and responsible thing to The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- that, and that this legislation is a big do, and I urge its adoption. ator from West Virginia. step toward fiscal responsibility. Madam President, I suggest the ab- Mr. BYRD. It is my understanding But when it comes to the funding of sence of a quorum. that the distinguished Senator from the Federal judiciary, we are dealing The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Wyoming [Mr. SIMPSON] wanted to with very sensitive constitutional clerk will call the roll. speak as if in morning business for 10 issues. An independent Federal judici- The assistant legislative clerk pro- minutes. Would it be agreeable—— ary was so important to the Founders ceeded to call the roll. Mr. HATCH. That is certainly agree- that the Constitution itself not only Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unan- able with me. gives Federal judges lifetime tenure, it imous consent that the order for the Mr. BYRD. With the Senator from specifically prohibits any reduction of quorum call be rescinded. Utah? If Mr. SIMPSON would like to salary during a Federal judge’s term of The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. come down now, I would like to ask office. ABRAHAM). Without objection, it is so some questions of the distinguished Our amendment would exempt the ordered. Senator from Utah but I do not want to Federal judiciary from the line-item Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the amend- be in a position of keeping Mr. SIMPSON veto. Unless this amendment is adopt- ment by Mr. HATCH reads as follows: waiting. If it does not inconvenience ed, the vast majority of the judiciary’s On page 3, line 21, after ‘‘separately’’ insert the distinguished Senator from Utah, I appropriations would be subject to a ‘‘except for items of appropriation provided would be happy to wait until the Sen- line-item veto by the President. Only for the judicial branch, which shall be en- ator from Wyoming makes his state- the salaries of article II and bank- rolled together in a single measure. For pur- ment. ruptcy judges and retirement-related poses of this paragraph, the terms ‘items of Mr. HATCH. That will be fine. I need programs would be excluded. appropriation provided for the judicial to go to another meeting for a few min- If the Founders were concerned branch’ means only those functions and ex- enough about the independence of the penditures that are currently included in the utes anyway. And I will come right appropriations accounts of the judiciary, as back as soon as I am through. Federal judiciary to prohibit reduc- those accounts are listed and described in Mr. BYRD. All right. tions in salary during a judge’s tenure, the Department of Commerce, Justice, and Could we get the yeas and nays on we ought now to be extremely cautious State, the Judiciary, and Related Appropria- the Senator’s amendment now? about giving the executive branch the tions Act.’’

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4437 May I ask the very distinguished Thus, Congress could not seek to hide lieve that justice is really being done chairman of the Judiciary Committee, an item from a line-item veto by slip- with this piece of legislation on such the author of this amendment, why are ping it into the judiciary’s budget. We short notice and under such limita- we seeking to exempt the judiciary feel this is an appropriate thing to do tions of the time. from the four corners of the measure since the judicial branch of Govern- I agree with the Senator and recog- that has been introduced by Mr. DOLE ment is a co-equal, separate branch of nize what he says with respect to the as a substitute for S. 4? Government and is supposed to be kept independence of the judiciary. I fully Why do we seek to exempt the judici- out of politics. agree with the need for the judiciary to ary from the reaches, from the require- If, for instance, we allow line-item be independent. I do not quarrel with ments of the substitute? Why should vetoes on salaries and the administra- that at all. The constitutional Framers the judiciary be exempted? I know tion of the courts, then it seems to me thought likewise, and rightly and wise- these are questions that not many Sen- almost impossible to keep the judges ly. There is nothing we can do with re- ators are very likely to come to the out of politics. That is not the direc- gard to the salaries of judges. Under floor and ask, but I think they should tion we want to go. And, frankly, I the Constitution, they cannot be re- be asked. I would like to have the dis- think this an appropriate amendment duced. And I call attention to history tinguished Senator’s response to that under those circumstances. in this regard, which is anathema, ap- question. Mr. BYRD. Well, Mr. President, I cer- parently, to a good many Members of Mr. HATCH. I think it is a good ques- tainly respect the views of the distin- the legislative branch. I am not just re- tion. Of course, keep in mind that the guished Senator in this area, as well as stricting my statement to this House. judiciary is one of the three separated in all other areas. I have had a long powers in our Constitution. The execu- But history is something that, if we and cordial association with the distin- read it all, it must be a revisionist his- tive branch of Government has plenty guished Senator from Utah that ex- of power under this amendment to veto tory. It cannot be the history that I tends over a period of many years. I sat studied. It cannot be Muzzey’s history, the line items. The legislative branch on the Judiciary Committee at one has the power to send the appropria- because that history is not politically time with the Senator, and he is a very correct. Muzzey. The very first sen- tions bills and other bills to the execu- distinguished chairman of that com- tive branch in and of its own; if items tence of Muzzey says: ‘‘America is the mittee. child of Europe,’’ or something to that are vetoed, the legislative branch can But here we are, we are purporting to defend itself by, of course, overriding effect. Of course, that is politically in- send to the President legislation that correct today to say that. But inas- that veto. The judicial branch, how- will allow the President to veto any ever, has no power under the line-item much as you cannot teach an old dog one, or more, of the hundreds, perhaps new tricks, I still believe in Muzzey. veto in comparison with the other two. even thousands of minibills—or Without a judicial branch exception ‘‘billettes,’’ as I prefer to call them— I studied Muzzey by the old kerosene to separate enrollment, the judiciary is which will flood the President’s desk as lamp back in the hills of West Virginia, more vulnerable than the other two co- a result of the requirements of this Mercer County. I memorized my his- equal branches of Government. tory lessons at night by the light of substitute by Mr. DOLE. Under the line-item veto, the judici- It seems to me that all of the that old kerosene lamp. So I remember ary could be highly vulnerable to tar- branches of Government should be gov- that the Founding Fathers decided geted budget cuts if its budget were erned equally in the enrollment of that the judiciary should be inde- subject to separate enrollment. Con- ‘‘billettes,’’ thus giving the President pendent, and they were preeminently gress, as I have said, can protect itself an opportunity, if he thinks there correct in that they had studied his- from such use of the line-item veto should be reduced expenditures in any tory also, and they, I am sure, noted through the legislative process in over- of the accounts, with respect to any of that in the English Bill of Rights— riding a Presidential veto. The judici- the items, allocations, suballocation which started, may I say to the distin- ary, however, does not have the means sections or paragraphs. It seems to me guished Senator from Alabama [Mr. to protect itself. HEFLIN], the English Declaration of In order to preserve the judiciary’s that the taxpayers would expect to be fully protected with reference to all Rights became the English Bill of place as a coequal branch of Govern- Rights in 1689. In that English Declara- ment, the appropriations items in the three branches of Government and not just two, not just the executive branch tion of Rights, there were certain pro- judiciary’s budget should be excluded visions to which William III of Orange from separate enrollment and should and the legislative branch. For all practical purposes, I would and Mary II had to agree before Par- instead be enrolled as a separate meas- liament would make them joint ure. imagine that the President, in line- iteming the ‘‘billettes,’’ will probably sovereigns. Can you imagine that? Can Let me just say this. The exception you imagine Parliament saying to that we are asking for—and I am a sup- not be very severe with respect to these two eminent personages, ‘‘You porter of the line-item veto measure items that are in the executive branch. will have to agree to this Declaration before this body—the exception I am If the judicial branch is to be exempt- of Rights before we, the Members of asking for would cover all salaries and ed, then it further seems to me that Parliament, will enthrone you. Before expenses related to the operation and the legislative branch is the one branch we will put that crown on your heads, administration of the Federal courts. of the three that is going to feel the you will have to agree with these pro- It would not extend to courthouse con- fall of the scimitar, the fall of the ax. visions, one of which is that judges struction, which does not appear in the It is going to be the object of the wet shall enjoy life tenure. They cannot be judiciary’s budget, and which would re- veto pen of a President. derobed or defrocked or lose their ca- main subject to the line-item veto. So while I realize that most Sen- Under my amendment, if any of the ators, maybe all except one, will vote pacity as judges just by the whim and covered items appeared in an appro- for this amendment—I start out by pre- fancy of the king. They are there on priations measure, those items would suming that I will be the only Senator their good behavior.’’ So William and be enrolled together into a single that will vote against it. I presume all Mary agreed to the provisions that measure. of the other Senators will vote for it. were laid out in that Declaration of We feel we have carefully crafted the But that does not trouble me in the Rights. amendment to avoid creating loopholes least. I have been in that situation be- Another provision in the Declaration through which other expenses could be fore. I cannot believe that justice is of Rights was that the Members of Par- shielded from the line-item veto. A being done in relation to this hurriedly liament had the right of speech, right budgetary item would only qualify for written substitute, which was appar- to free speech. They could not be ques- exemption from separate enrollment if ently cut and pasted together over the tioned in any other place. We have the it is for one of the functions of the ju- spread of a few hours, brought in here, same provisions in our own Constitu- diciary as those are listed and de- laid down on Monday of this week, and tion to protect us, the Members of the scribed in the current appropriations upon which immediately was trained U.S. Senate. We can say whatever we act. the cloture-motion gun. I cannot be- want on this floor. I can criticize the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4438 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 President of the United States, and years are able to stand on this soft Presidents, not by the Congress, not by there is not a thing he can do about landing, but I recognize and fully sup- anybody. what I say. There is not a thing any- port the independence of the judiciary. Mr. BYRD. But the Senator has not body else can do about it. I have the I hope that the author of the amend- answered my question. What do the right of freedom of speech right here on ment has not grown tired already of words ‘‘currently included in the ap- this floor, and I have no compunction what is just the beginning of what I propriations accounts’’ mean? What with criticizing, in a constructive way, want to say, and asks about this about new functions? a king, a shah, a prince, or a President. amendment. Mr. HATCH. They would not be cov- Those are rights that were won for Mr. President, I was going to ask the ered. Englishmen, by Englishmen over a pe- distinguished Senator what is meant Mr. BYRD. New functions would not riod of centuries. by the words ‘‘currently included.’’ I be covered. That is one of the things I am con- will read the sentence again: ‘‘For pur- Mr. HATCH. Just the ones currently cerned about in the so-called line-item poses of this paragraph, the term items covered. We want to have a definition veto. This is not a line-item veto. One of appropriations provided for the judi- in time, so if we are going to add fea- of the things that concerned me about cial branch, means only those func- tures, they would not be covered. They the line-item veto is the fact that a tions and expenditures that are cur- could be enrolled as a separate item. President might be able to cower a rently included in the appropriations Mr. BYRD. Let us take a look at Member of the Congress, and cause accounts and the Judiciary. . . ’’ what those current items are, what we that Member to be inhibited from voic- ‘‘Currently included,’’ only those are talking about. ing criticism of the President for fear that are currently included in the ap- Mr. HATCH. Maybe I could—will the that a project or program affecting the propriations accounts of the judiciary Senator yield? Member’s State or the Member’s dis- as those accounts are listed and de- Mr. BYRD. Yes. I would like to point trict—talking about a Member of the scribed in the Department of Com- out an error that appears to me imme- other body—would be jeopardized if merce, Justice, and State, the judici- diately. that Member were to speak critically ary and related agencies of the appro- Mr. HATCH. OK. of the President. priations act. Mr. BYRD. Which again—which So to that extent, it is not a measur- I promise the distinguished Senator I again is indicative of the hurry in able extent, but to that extent, a Mem- will repress my appetite for launching which this substitute was put together. ber may be to some extent inhibited into the vast realms of history during The Senator’s amendment refers to from exercising his freedom of speech. the remainder of my discussion of this Public Law 104–317. It refers to the De- So these are just a few of the things amendment. What is meant by those partment of Commerce, Justice, and that I call attention to that have been words ‘‘For purposes of this paragraph, State, the Judiciary and Related Agen- derived from the English Bill of Rights, the term items of appropriations pro- cies Appropriations Act. the English constitution. vide for the judicial branch means only Mr. HATCH. I agree with the Sen- The English constitution is an un- those functions and expenditures that ator. It ought to be 103. written constitution except that it is are currently included in the appro- Mr. BYRD. It has the wrong citation composed of various documents, the priations accounts of the judiciary.’’ here. Magna Carta, the Petition of Right, Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, my dis- Mr. HATCH. It ought to be 103–317. Declaration of Rights, other important tinguished colleague is as knowledge- Mr. BYRD. Error. Instead of Public documents, statutes, court cases, cus- able as anybody on the history of this Law 104–317, it is 103–317. toms, traditions, and so on. All these body with respect to appropriations. That is a minor error. But just think things go up to make the English con- Of course, he is currently the ranking of the thousands of errors that will be stitution, the British constitution. member of that committee and he has committed in the name of the enrolling I am sure such a law would not be chaired that committee. He knows clerk of the originating body once this constitutional, but I would like to see what we are trying to do with that lan- monstrosity becomes law. That is just a law that would place a requirement guage. We are trying to define the ex- a small error. That can be cured easily on every Member of the Senate and the emption so that this will not become a by unanimous consent. House of Representatives to study loophole through which Congress could Mr. HATCH. Will the Senator yield? American history and to study the his- avoid a Presidential veto. Mr. BYRD. Yes. tory of England. Why? Because not As I have explained, we believe that Mr. HATCH. That is a technical only was England the mother country the judiciary, which is a truly sepa- error. I think that can be easily rem- of our early forebears for the most rated power and a co-equal branch of edied. part—Benjamin Franklin’s father was Government, has no real power unless But let me just say this—— an immigrant from England; Robert it starts to politicize itself. I think Mr. BYRD. Would the Senator like Morris, the financier of the Revolution that is what would happen if this right now by unanimous consent to was from England; and James Wilson, amendment is not adopted and the cure that error? one of the delegates of the Convention line-item veto passes. If we do not give Mr. HATCH. Yes. I ask unanimous on the Constitution from Pennsyl- some protection here, we will politicize consent it be cured at this time and it vania, was born in Scotland. the judiciary. be modified. What I am saying is that every Mem- I think we need to have this protec- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without ber of this body ought to have a great- tion. What this amendment does is objection, it is so ordered. er appreciation of the American Con- take the vulnerable judicial branch, The amendment (No. 407), as modi- stitution. He should note the phrases which is a small percentage of the fied, is as follows: and the clauses that are in the Amer- budget, and exclude it from separate On page 3, line 21, after ‘‘separately’’ insert ican Constitution that have their roots enrollment. We exclude it in accord- ‘‘, except for items of appropriation provided deeply embedded in the soil of the ance with the language in this amend- for the judicial branch, which shall be en- English constitution. Many of those ment, with reference to appropriations rolled together in a single measure. For pur- rights were gained by Englishmen after for the judiciary as listed and described poses of this paragraph, the term ‘items of centuries of struggle. Many of them in the Department of Commerce, Jus- appropriation provided for the judicial tice, State, and Judiciary and related branch’ means only those functions and ex- were won at the top of the sword. penditures that are currently included in the So I will save any filibuster on this agencies Appropriations Act of 1995. appropriations accounts of the judiciary, as matter until later, if I am forced to. If We define it in that way so that we those accounts are listed and described in I should be forced to have to filibuster, limit it so that there are no loopholes. the Department of Commerce, Justice and I think most Members recognize by We think it is a crucial matter. It is State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies now that I would not have to carry a critical to do this because it is such a Appropriations Act, 1995 (Public Law 103– bundle of notes to the floor. As long as small part of the budget yet so easily 317)’’. my poor old feet that have been car- politically manipulable. I do not want Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, if I could, rying me around now for more than 77 the courts manipulated, not by the with the forbearance of my colleague

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4439 from West Virginia—he asked the ques- organization and operation would in- veto, or if it cannot, it could pass a tion what really is covered here. Let volve the types of services that are cur- new bill. Instead of providing $11 mil- me just cover it briefly. rently embodied in the appropriations lion, it might provide half of that. The judiciary’s budget is broken up process. So the Senator’s amendment, it into a number of sections and sub- Again, I commend the distinguished seems to me, would let the judiciary go sections. In the Judiciary Appropria- Senator from West Virginia and the scot-free with no questions asked. The tions Act for 1995, the current act that distinguished Senator from Oregon and judicial branch is to be a preferential is being referenced in the amendment— other members of the Appropriations branch. The fact is that it is to be an those accounts are, 1995 amounts, as Committee for handling these matters independent branch. There is no reason follows: as well as they have. why it should be a preferential branch First, Supreme Court of the United Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank when it comes to the line-item veto. It States. The 1995 appropriation is $27 the distinguished Senator. is a preferential branch under the Con- million, which is almost a minuscule What about these items that are in stitution by virtue of the fact that the amount when you look at the total the Department of Commerce, Justice salaries, title III judges’ salaries, can- Federal budget of the United States. and State, Judiciary and Related Agen- not be cut. Second, Court of Appeals for the Fed- cies, 1995 Appropriations, and 1994 Sup- How many Senators are aware of eral Circuit. Their appropriation is $13 plemental Appropriations? What about that? How many Senators are aware million. such items as these: that when judges retire, they retire at Third, the U.S. Court of Inter- $2,340,127,000 (including the purchase of full salary? How many Senators are national Trade’s appropriation is $12 firearms and ammunition); of which not to aware that judges do not pay one thin million. exceed $14,454,000 shall remain available dime into their retirement—not 10 Fourth, the courts of appeals, the until expended for space alteration projects; cents, not one copper penny, not one district courts, and the other judicial of which not to exceed $11 million shall re- Indian head penny do the judges pay services. This account covers the sala- main available until expended for furniture into their retirement. When they re- and furnishings related to new space alter- ries and expenses of all Federal district ations and construction projects; and of tire, they get full pay. courts, courts of appeals, and bank- which $500,000 is to remain available until President Nixon talked once upon a ruptcy judges. This account also in- expended for acquisition of books, periodi- time about nominating me to the Su- cludes subaccounts for defender serv- cals, and newspapers, and all other legal ref- preme Court of the United States. I ices, fees of jurors and commissioners, erence materials, including subscriptions. was flattered by his consideration. and court security. Salaries and ex- Mr. President, we are talking about That may be one reason why President penses equals $2.340 billion; fees of ju- chicken feed here, I realize that. But Nixon is my favorite Republican Presi- rors and commissioners equals $59 mil- we are also talking about taxpayers’ dent during my lifetime. But I decided lion; court security equals $97 million; money. We are going to send to the that was not the place for me. But, gee defender services equals $250 million. President thousands of little billettes whiz. I would not have to pay anything Fifth, the Administrative Office of every year, any one of which he may into the retirement. I could retire at the U.S. Courts’ appropriation is $48 line-item out. He can veto it. Any one full pay. I would not have to run in any million. of the legislative branch’s items he can election. I would not have to worry Sixth, the Federal Judicial Center’s strike. about those 30-second ads, would not appropriation is $19 million. Under the amendment of the distin- have to raise any money for elections, Seventh, the judicial retirement guished Senator, as far as the judicial would not have to purchase the serv- funds are $28 million. branch is concerned, everything is to ices of consultants, and would not have Eighth, the U.S. Sentencing Commis- be in one package. That package is not to undergo the negative ads. I some- sion’s appropriation is $9 million. to be broken down. The enrolling clerk times wonder if I did not make a mis- This amendment only involves the can go out and take a walk. He gets a take. No, I did not make a mistake. I judiciary’s total 1995 budget, which is rest. When he comes to that item he like the legislative arena. I do not like $2.9 billion. That is two-tenths of 1 per- will not have to worry about breaking to be quite that independent. I do not cent of the Federal budget. those out and enrolling those several want to be quite that independent. I would like my colleagues to note little billettes. That is not said in derogation of the the salaries and retirement expenses But to the taxpayer, $11 million is $11 judges. We have to have them. They for article III Federal judges are con- million. The President might feel he have to be independent. But we are stitutionally mandated expenses. ought to save some money and the ju- talking about a matter here that goes The question might be, why should dicial branch should not be exempt. to the heart of the legislative power of the exception be linked to today’s judi- Money is tight. We have a $5 trillion the purse. We are going to some extent cial expenditures? What if there are debt. The interest on the debt is run- to shift the power over the purse from technological changes or substantial ning over $200 billion a year. The Presi- the legislative branch, where it has changes in the organization of the dent may feel—and perhaps with good been reposed for 206 years, since the be- courts? Could that not mean in the fu- reason—that some of those items ought ginning of this Republic, we are going ture some central judicial functions to be questioned. He may feel they to expand the powers of the President would be left out? ought to be reduced. There is $11 mil- and, of course, we do not operate in a If I interpret the question of the dis- lion that vacuum when we expand the power of tinguished Senator from West Virginia, . . . shall remain available until expended the President. In this sense, we are it is along those lines. I would respond for furniture and furnishings related to new going to lessen the powers of the legis- this way: The judicial expenses in- space alterations and construction projects; lative branch. cluded today are broad enough that and of which $500,000 is to remain available Looking further, under ‘‘defender they should cover most technological until... all other legal reference materials, services.’’ advances that might have an impact on including subscriptions. . . . provided that not to exceed $19.8 mil- the courts and court support services. I realize that the judges have to con- lion shall be available for Death Penalty Re- As for any fundamental organizational tinue to read books, periodicals, and source Centers. changes in the courts, I agree that cer- newspapers, and there may need to be I do not know. Who am I to say that tain changes might in fact be so funda- some space alterations, and so on. But every President, Republican or Demo- mental that they would be left out. If the President may feel that this is too crat, is going to be in favor of Death that is the case, however, the defini- much money. Penalty Resource Centers? Does that tion of the excepted judicial expenses Why should he not have the same au- have anything to do with the independ- for purposes of separate enrollment thority and rights to scrutinize the ence of judges? Does that have any- could be amended by statute to accom- budget for the judicial branch and thing to do with the independence of modate any fundamental changes. question those items, and even strike judges? Death Penalty Resource Cen- I do not foresee that as being likely, them out? He could strike them out. If ters? Suppose the President wants to however, since most changes in court Congress does not want to override the whack that $19.8 million. That is not

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4440 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 going to interfere with the independ- tice—that is what the judicial system Senator’s in-depth discussion, but I ence of the judges, is it? is all about; rendering of justice. So would just wondered if he had any esti- Let the RECORD show that there is no why not do justice to the taxpayers in mate on it? answer, no response. making subject to the wet veto pen, Mr. BYRD. I do not have any esti- Let us go down to the Administrative the wet and ready veto pen of the mate on the time. I certainly do not in- Office of the United States Courts. President of the United States, when tend to take all afternoon on this one There we find advertising and rent in we send all of this multitude of little item. I am just curious as to the the District of Columbia and elsewhere, orphan billettes down to President of amendment. $47.5 million, of which not to exceed the United States? Mr. MCCAIN. I thank the Senator. $7,500 is authorized for ‘‘official recep- I suppose my questions are being Mr. BYRD. I assure the Senator I will tion and representation expenses.’’ viewed as rhetorical questions, because not be long. What is that? What is meant by ‘‘offi- I hear no answers. Mr. MCCAIN. I thank the Senator. cial reception and representation ex- Let me ask the distinguished Senator Mr. BYRD. As a matter of fact, I penses’’? Does that mean we can spend from Utah a question that cannot be have already asked enough questions money on throwing a party, treating viewed as a rhetorical question. to indicate that we cannot expect full people to a few cocktails? In section 303 of Public Law 103–317 justice, we cannot expect equal treat- I cannot believe that if the President there is a provision that reads as fol- ment under the law among the various wanted to cut that item, that he would lows: branches of the Government if the be impairing the independence of Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropria- amendment by Mr. HATCH is agreed to judges. What about those people up tion made available for the current fiscal here. there in the hills of West Virginia, who year for the Judiciary in this Act may be Let’s see now. Where was I? Back on help to pay the taxes? I believe they transferred between such appropriations, but section 303. would say, ‘‘Well, we are going to have no such appropriation, except as otherwise So what we are saying then, if I may this so-called line-item veto; why specifically provided, shall be increased by ask the distinguished Senator from more than 10 percent by any such transfers. should we exempt moneys for official Utah, with respect to the Department receptions and representation expenses What will happen to that provision in of Defense, with respect to the Depart- in the judiciary, or in the legislative section 303? Does this mean that the ment of Justice, with respect to the account, or in the executive branch? judiciary would be the only branch FBI, with respect to any of these other Why should that be exempted?’’ that would still have the benefit of re- departments, while they will not be al- Then there is the Federal Judicial programming authority? As Senator lowed to transfer moneys from one ac- Center. I see under ‘‘General Provi- NUNN stated this morning and on yes- count to another, while they will not sions, the Judiciary,’’ section 304: terday and as I stated a few days ago be allowed to reprogram, they will no Notwithstanding any other provisions of our concerns with respect to re- longer be allowed to come to the Con- law, the salaries and expenses and appropria- programming and how there can no gress, to the chairmen of the Appro- tions for district courts, courts of appeals, longer be reprogramming done, if the priations and Armed Services Commit- and other judicial services shall be available substitute amendment becomes law, tees and the ranking members and ask for official reception and representation ex- there cannot be any more reprogram- permission to reprogram certain mon- penses. ming. If agencies get stuck with the eys, the Justice Department can go on Here is another of the same item, need to reprogram moneys, they will its merry way and continue—the judi- ‘‘Official reception and representation just have to come back to the Congress ciary, not the Department of Justice. I expenses’’ of the Judicial Conference of and there will have to be a new law am sorry about the Department of Jus- the United States, provided that such passed. tice. It will not be able to do that. The available funds shall not exceed $10,000. But now what about this provision crime fighting departments, the FBI, Well, $10,000 is $10,000, whether it is here that gives the judiciary the au- and so on, will not be able to transfer in the judicial branch or whether it is thority to transfer—not to exceed 5 between appropriations that are made in the legislative branch; $10,000. You percent of any appropriation made available. Yet, the judiciary can go on cannot brush that aside with a wink available for the current fiscal year for its merry way—the judiciary, not the and a nod. That is $10,000. That is more the judiciary in this act may be trans- Justice Department, the judiciary will than some people earn in a year in this ferred between such appropriations? be able to continue to transfer between country. Yet, under the amendment of- Mr. MCCAIN. Will the distinguished appropriations. fered by the distinguished Senator Senator from West Virginia yield? Mr. HATCH. As long as future bills from Utah, the President cannot touch Mr. BYRD. I was just going to say, as have this provision in them, that is that. The President cannot touch that I see it, as I understand the amend- true. We have the right as a Congress item because it is in the judicial ment by Mr. HATCH—then I will yield— to not give them that power. In other branch. as I understand the amendment by Mr. words, the full judiciary, a little over Why should we give this kind of pref- HATCH, the judiciary is going to be ex- $2 billion—two-tenths of 1 percent of erential treatment to the judicial empt from the claws and clutches and the total Federal budget —will be sub- branch in a line-item veto bill? For one jaws and teeth of this substitute. And ject to congressional review every thing, it is not a line-item veto. But we if it is thus exempt, are we to under- year. If Congress decides, as it did in will be truly approving exempting one stand that the judiciary would be able this particular instance, in Public Law of the three branches of Government. to continue to reprogram, it would be 103–317, to have a section 303, then it That has nothing to do with the inde- able to continue to make transfers be- can. But if Congress decides not to pendence of judges. tween appropriations? Am I correct? have a section 303, Congress has the I have as much respect for the mem- Mr. HATCH. If the future appropria- power to stop the judiciary from hav- bers of the judicial branch of the Gov- tions bills have section similar to sec- ing that right that is defined in section ernment as anybody else does here. I tion 303 in them, it would work the 303. have some very, very good friends. As a same way as it will in fiscal year 1995. Mr. BYRD. Do I hear the distin- matter of fact, Mr. Nixon appointed Mr. MCCAIN. Will the distinguished guished Senator saying that notwith- one of my very best friends to be a Fed- Senator yield for just one question? standing the passage of the Dole sub- eral district judge. That is another rea- Mr. BYRD. Yes. I promised to yield. stitute, notwithstanding it is agreed to son I liked Mr. Nixon. He was a Repub- Mr. MCCAIN. I have had several rein conference, if it is, notwithstanding lican President who nominated a quests from my colleagues who are in- that the conference reports go down to Democratic judge, and he has been a terested in what the legislative sched- the President untrammeled, un- good judge, an excellent judge. He is ule is going to be. Does the Senator by changed, unblemished, and unstained, now on the circuit court of appeals. I chance have an estimate as to how that Congress can come along next have other friends. much longer he is going to be with the year without the Senator’s amend- I am not out to whack the judges. Senator from Utah on this issue? I am ment—could Congress then next year But I want to see justice done. Jus- not trying to in any way curtail the write into the appropriations act, the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4441 act making appropriations for the judi- Mr. BYRD. Yes. legislative branch and when it comes ciary, could Congress write into that (Mr. GREGG assumed the chair.) to the executive branch, so he is going act next year section 303 that not to Mr. HATCH. If he line items a provi- to look twice or three times before he exceed 5 percent of any appropriations sion, a small, obscure provision in the vetoes something that pertains to the made available may be transferred— judiciary, a coequal branch of Govern- White House or certain other areas of notwithstanding that the Dole sub- ment that has no real ability to defend the legislative branch. stitute becomes the law of the land, itself, Congress may not feel the need The legislative branch appropriations can Congress thwart that act next year to do so. And if that is so, the judiciary is less than the appropriation for the by writing into the appropriations for could suffer some crippling line-item judiciary, is it not? the judiciary this language that allows vetoes if we get a President who acts Mr. HATCH. I think that is correct. the judiciary to transfer moneys? officiously, or who is mad at the judici- Mr. HATCH. It is my understanding ary for one reason or another, or who Mr. BYRD. I believe the Senator said Congress can do whatever it wants to. wants to give them a rough time. the appropriation for the judiciary is All the rest of the provisions would be There would not be the same lack of $2.9 billion? subject to the line-item veto except for vulnerability that, say, the Defense De- Mr. HATCH. Yes, $2.9 billion. the judiciary’s budget as we have department would have. Mr. BYRD. And he spoke of that as a fined it. Mr. BYRD. I am not sure the Senator rather small amount, not exactly triv- Mr. BYRD. Then if Congress can do and I are talking on the same wave ial, but a small amount. Yet, for the that in the case of the judiciary, next length. I think he is talking with re- legislative branch, I am advised, the year under the influence of Senator spect to his amendment, if his amend- total is $2.3 billion. NUNN and Senator STEVENS, Senator ment is agreed to. But I am asking a INOUYE, Senators who are most knowl- question notwithstanding his amend- Mr. HATCH. Will the Senator yield edgeable with respect to defense appro- ment. on that point? priations and needs of the country, Mr. HATCH. If my amendment is not Mr. BYRD. Yes. Congress can come along next year and agreed to, then the President would Mr. HATCH. Well, I do not think any- write into the appropriations for the have the right to line item any aspect body in his or her right mind believes Department of Defense language that of the judiciary as well. that the legislative branch would not will allow the Department of Defense Mr. BYRD. Yes. fight with all of its power to sustain its to continue to reprogram as in the Mr. HATCH. Which I think would be own branch of Government. But who past? very detrimental to the judicial system fights for the judiciary if the judiciary Mr. HATCH. Not as in the past. If the of this country. branch has been treated unfairly by the Mr. BYRD. Congress is responsible President has the veto, the President President for some political reason? I for the appropriations for the judici- has a right to veto or not to veto. Con- am hopeful that no President would be ary, as well. gress can do pretty well what it wants that way, but we have all seen some Mr. HATCH. If the Senator would to. pretty petty things in this town. Mr. BYRD. So the President could yield, as much as I respect the Depart- veto? ment of Defense, it is not a co-equal I just want to make sure that this Mr. HATCH. The President could branch of Government. The judiciary very small, coequal branch of Govern- veto. is. We are trying to keep the judiciary ment—which is small but is important Mr. BYRD. Could the President veto less political than the other two as the least political branch of Govern- a congressional approval of transfer of branches. That is the reason I would ment—is kept that way. authority? like to have this protection. It is a Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I cannot Mr. HATCH. As in section 303? very small part of the appropriations think of any Senator who has merited Mr. BYRD. Yes. process. the Purple Heart for standing up for Mr. HATCH. The President could And if a President feels strongly the legislative branch in recent years. veto that by vetoing the complete judi- about some aspect of the judiciary, the As a matter of fact, it has been pretty cial appropriations bill. He would have President can veto the whole judiciary much open season on the legislative to veto the whole bill. bill. But at that point I think Congress branch around here. We enjoy self-flag- Mr. BYRD. He would have to veto the will come back and defend the judicial ellation, nicking our skins, cutting our whole bill? system. throats. Mr. HATCH. He could not line item Mr. BYRD. Why does the Senator not I thank the distinguished Senator for that one. include in his amendment the Justice Mr. BYRD. He could not? his patience and his responses. He is Department? Why does he not include Mr. HATCH. Not under my amend- sincere, he is conscientious, and he be- the law enforcement arm? Why does he ment. lieves in what he is saying and what he Mr. BYRD. He could not line item not include the FBI? Why does he just is doing. that one item out? single out the judicial branch? Mr. HATCH. If the Senator will let I happen to be one who believes that Mr. HATCH. That is right. If the Con- we should not give the judicial branch gress chooses to put it in there, then, me answer, I believe the reason we have not done that is because we be- this kind of preferential recognition in under my amendment as I have crafted a bill of this kind. We are talking it, if Congress chooses to do that, then lieve that the executive branch of Gov- ernment is very capable of defending about a so-called line-item veto in the President could not line item it which the items in the legislative ap- out. The only way he could get it out itself. Those branches are not the judicial propriations bill would be subjected to would be to veto the whole bill. the scrutiny of the Chief Executive. Mr. BYRD. Could he do the same branch, which is supposed to be the with respect to the defense appropria- least political branch of Government. I There is no reason that is contained tions bill? believe we ought to keep the judiciary within the four corners of the legisla- Mr. HATCH. He could line item out as separate, as distinct, and as apo- tion, no reason, there is nothing in any provision. litical as we possibly can. there that will keep the President from Mr. BYRD. He could line item any Mr. BYRD. Well, I respect the Sen- lining out items in the legislative ap- provision out of that one? ator’s viewpoint. I share with him the propriation. He will have that right. He Mr. HATCH. Right. belief in the need for complete inde- can line them out. True, Congress may, Mr. BYRD. But he could not line pendence on the part of judges. But I if it ever returns to its senses, develop item any provision out of appropria- cannot understand how, in protecting the courage to override one of those ve- tions for the judiciary? that independence, we need to protect toes by the President. But it has been Mr. HATCH. That is correct. items such as furniture, recreation, pretty much bereft of reason in late But if he line items the defense ap- moneys for travel, limousine service. years and I doubt that it would have propriations bill, Congress is here to Such items are subject to the veto pen the collective guts to muster two- protect defense appropriations. of the President when it comes to the thirds vote.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4442 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 I think that the judicial branch Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask branch. This doctrine is recognized in should undergo the same scrutiny as unanimous consent that the order for article III of the Constitution which any other branch. the quorum call be rescinded. protects salaries of article III judges. Mr. BROWN. Will the distinguished The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Similarly the Budget and Accounting Senator from West Virginia yield for a objection, it is so ordered. Act provides that requests for appro- question? Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask priations for the judicial branch shall Mr. BYRD. Yes; I am about ready to unanimous consent that I be allowed to be submitted to the president and yield the floor, but I am glad to yield. proceed as in morning business for 5 transmitted by him to Congress with- Mr. BROWN. I do not mean to inter- minutes concerning the NATO Partici- out change. Thus it would be incon- rupt the distinguished Senator. My pation Act Amendments of 1995. sistent to prohibit the President from hope was to take 2 or 3 minutes to ex- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without changing the budget of the judicial plain the new NATO Participation Act. objection, it is so ordered. branch prior to submission to the Con- I was wondering if there would be a Mr. BROWN. I thank the Chair. gress, but then by the line-item veto point that the Senator might yield for (The remarks of Mr. BROWN and Mr. legislation to give the President the me to do that. I do not wish to inter- SIMON pertaining to the introduction of authority to change the judiciary’s ap- rupt his flow of thoughts on this sub- S. 602 are located in today’s RECORD propriation line-by-line. ject matter. under ‘‘Statements on Introduced Bills A little history may help explain the Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I will not and Joint Resolutions.’’) basis for our bipartisan amendment. detain the Senator. Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I am very Congress created the Administrative I did want to make one other point, serious about this amendment. I think Office of the U.S. Courts in 1939 which and that is that the amendment by Mr. it is a correct amendment and a good now has the responsibility for budget HATCH not only puts the judiciary in a amendment. I would like to go forward submissions through the President and preferential position, it also provides with a vote on it. on to the Congress. Prior to that time the loophole against the requirement I have to say that a number of my budget submissions were provided by that every appropriation account be di- colleagues have requested that I with- the Department of Justice, which is an vided into separate bills, including draw the amendment. I ask my dear executive branch agency. During the items in the accompanying report. friend from West Virginia if he would 1930’s, according to testimony given to Let us take courthouses, for example. have any objection to my withdrawing the Senate Governmental Affairs Com- Ordinarily, I believe, they are included the amendment at this time? mittee by Chief Judge Gilbert Merritt, in the Treasury-Postal bill. They are Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I think chairman of the executive committee included in the Treasury-Postal appro- this would be the first time in my of the Judicial Conference of the priations bill, and under the so-called going on 37 years in the U.S. Senate United States, the Justice Department line-item veto legislation that the Sen- that I would object to withdrawing an often rejected the judicial branch’s re- ate will be voting on, that bill will be amendment. I do not like to object to quests for funds, denied requests for subjected to the scrutiny and possible a Senator otherwise having the right new judges, cut travel funds, and de- vetoing by the President of certain line to withdraw an amendment. nied other requests for appropriate items which could include courthouses. In this case, I will object to with- staff support. There is nothing to protect them. drawing the amendment, and I will in- Congress reacted to this situation by But it seems to me that if the amend- sist on a yea and nay vote on the creating the Administrative Office of ment by the distinguished Senator amendment. It is not that I think I the U.S. Courts and by directing it to from Utah is agreed to, which will pro- have any chance of carrying the submit the budget of the judiciary tect the judicial branch against vetoes amendment. It is not that at all. I do without change by the executive of items, it would not take long around not know whether I will get another branch. Congress acted to protect the here for ingenious minds to decide that vote besides my own. But I think the independence of the judicial branch, if so-and-so wants a courthouse to put U.S. Senate ought to be ready and will- and I believe this protection should it into the judiciary appropriation, put ing to have a showdown as to whether continue. it in there, because it will be scot-free, or not we believe there is a special The protection should continue be- there could be no tampering with that, branch of Government that is above cause often the executive branch of there could be no vetoing of items and beyond the other two and as to government is a litigant, both as plain- there. whether or not the appropriations for tiff and defendant, in lawsuits in the So then that will open up a loophole that branch ought to be exempt from Federal courts. Subtle or otherwise, whereby Senators may get courthouses the scrutiny and the possible veto by a the judiciary should be insulated from in their States under the loophole. I President of certain items in an appro- undue presssure from the executive would be surprised if that is beyond the priation bill which the President may, branch. reach of the ingenious brains of Mem- with every justification, feel ought to Further, and most importantly, we bers of this body. be vetoed. are not giving the judicial branch a But this legislation opens up a loop- And so I do object to withdrawing the blank check for any appropriation it hole there. I bet we will start seeing amendment. I apologize to the Senator. wants. The judiciary’s budget will con- Federal courthouses with earmarks Mr. HATCH. I think the Senator has tinue to be subjected to full congres- showing up under the judiciary if this every right to do so. sional review and scrutiny. The judi- exemption is allowed to create such a Mr. McCAIN addressed the Chair. cial branch will still have to appear be- loophole. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- fore the Appropriations Committee and So the judiciary then would be the ator from Utah has the floor. defend its budget request, and we in only part of Government allowed to re- Mr. HATCH. I believe the Senator Congress can amend or change that retain reprogramming authority. has every right to do so. I am dis- quest as we deem necessary. The Senator has been very patient, if appointed that he has. I believe that failure to exempt the he wishes to respond; if not, I will yield Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I have judicial branch from the provisions of the floor. joined my colleague Senator HATCH of the pending line-item veto legislation Mr. HATCH. May I suggest the ab- Utah in proposing an amendment to ex- will do violence to the separation of sence of a quorum for a minute? empt items of appropriations provided powers that was established by our Mr. BYRD. I will yield for that pur- for the judicial branch from enrollment Founding Fathers who wrote the Con- pose, yes. in separate bills for presentment to the stitution. Mr. HATCH. I suggest the absence of President. Mr. DOLE addressed the Chair. a quorum. The doctrine of separation of powers The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The recognizes the importance of pro- ator from Kansas, the majority leader, clerk will call the roll. tecting the judicial branch of govern- is recognized. The assistant legislative clerk pro- ment against improper interference Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I happen to ceeded to call the roll. from the legislative or executive believe that we are going to have a

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4443 line-item veto that will apply to every- Robb Simon Thomas We may doubt that the bicentennial dis- one. I listened to the arguments of the Rockefeller Simpson Thurmond cussion will attain to anything like the level Santorum Smith Warner of discourse two centuries ago. We are short Senator from West Virginia. I agreed Sarbanes Snowe on Madisons and Hamiltons and Jays. But it with him before he made his state- Shelby Stevens is possible to hope that we may acquire a ment. I have already had a call from a NAYS—15 more general understanding of what it was friend of mine who is a Federal judge Abraham Hatch Pryor those men were discoursing about. Else all who said, ‘‘Leave us out.’’ Why not Bennett Hatfield Roth will be lost to fireworks and faith healing. leave somebody else out? This is seri- Biden Heflin Specter The argument was whether government Bumpers Helms Thompson ous business, in my view, and if we are Feingold Kennedy Wellstone could be founded on scientific principles; serious, everything has to be on the those who said it could be, won. So the motion to lay on the table the table from A to Z, with the exception At the risk of reproach from persons more amendment (No. 407), as modified, was of Social Security. Therefore, I am learned than I, let me state in summary the constrained to move to table the agreed to. intellectual dilemma of that time. The vic- Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I move to amendment of my colleague from tors in the Revolution could agree that no reconsider the vote by which the mo- Utah, my good friend—or former good one wanted another monarchy in line with tion was agreed to. friend—and I ask for the yeas and nays. the long melancholy succession since Caesar. Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to lay that Yet given what Madison termed ‘‘the fugi- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a motion on the table. tive and turbulent existence of * * * ancient sufficient second? The motion to lay on the table was republics,’’ who could dare to suggest that a There is a sufficient second. agreed to. modern republic could hope for anything bet- The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. MOYNIHAN addressed the Chair. ter? Mr. BYRD. Before we vote on the mo- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Madison could. And why? Because study tion, would the majority leader allow ator from New York. had produced new knowledge, which could me to say I had no idea the majority Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, for now be put to use. To cite Martin Diamond: leader was going to support my posi- the second time in less than 1 month, ‘‘This great new claim rested upon a new tion on this. If I had known that, I the Senate is confronted with a pro- and aggressively more ‘realistic’ idea of would not have said that in all likeli- posal to alter our constitutional sys- human nature. Ancient and medieval hood mine would be the only vote tem in the name of fiscal responsi- thought and practice were said to have failed bility. On March 2, the Senate declined disastrously by clinging to illusions regard- against the amendment. I do appre- ing how men ought to be. Instead, the new ciate it. to adopt a balanced budget amendment science would take man as he actually is, Mr. DOLE. I hope we have a major- to the Constitution. Today, we are con- would accept as primary in his nature the ity—— sidering a proposal which, although not self-interestedness and passion displayed by The PRESIDING OFFICER. The drafted as an amendment to the Con- all men everywhere and, precisely on that question is on agreeing to the motion stitution, nonetheless has important basis, would work out decent political solu- to table. and far-reaching constitutional impli- tions.’’ Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I do not cations. This was a declaration of intellectual inde- want the Senator to be broken off in The separate enrollment bill would pendence equal in audacity to anything done have Congress surrender fundamental in 1776. Until then, with but a few excep- the middle of a sentence. tions, the whole of political thought turned Mr. DOLE. If my colleague will yield, constitutional prerogatives to the Ex- ecutive. I hope the Senate will recog- on ways to inculcate virtue in a small class I think it is pretty hard to make an ar- nize the constitutional and practical that would govern. But, wrote Madison, ‘‘if gument that we ought to exempt the men were angels, no government would be defects of this proposal, and I hope we judiciary. I know we have separation of necessary.’’ Alas, we would have to work will again have the wisdom to say no. with the material at hand. Not pretty, but powers, but we are all spending the Just as importantly, I would hope taxpayers’ money. something far more important: predictable. the Senate would consider the prac- Thus, men could be relied upon to be selfish; Mr. BYRD. Exactly. tical consequences of this radical pro- nay, rapacious. Very well: ‘‘Ambition must The PRESIDING OFFICER. The posal. I would have the temerity to be made to counteract ambition.’’ Where- question is on agreeing to the motion suggest that the White House pay heed upon we derive the central principle of the to table. as well. Constitution, the various devices which in The yeas and nays have been ordered. In 1986, on the occasion of the bicen- Madison’s formulation, offset ‘‘by opposite The clerk will call the roll. tennial of the U.S. Constitution, I had and rival interests, the defect of better motives.’’ The assistant legislative clerk called the honor to deliver a lecture at the the roll. Smithsonian Institution entitled, The lecture thereupon considered the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there ‘‘ ‘The New Science of Politics’ and the development of what seemed to me to any other Senators in the Chamber de- Old Art of Governing.’’ I take the lib- be the ‘‘defining failure of the Reagan siring to vote? erty of repeating the opening passages. era * * * that of political economy.’’ The result was announced—yeas 85, Anyone who has studied American govern- Specifically, the accumulation in a nays 15, as follows: ment or taken some part in its affairs will brief span of a huge national debt, [Rollcall Vote No. 113 Leg.] often have asked: ‘‘How goes the science of much at variance with any peacetime YEAS—85 the thing?’’ period in our then two-century experi- As we approach the bicentennial of the ence. That debt has continued to grow, Akaka Dole Kerrey Constitution, which is not to say our Inde- Ashcroft Domenici Kerry pendence, but our form of government, largely the result of compound inter- Baucus Dorgan Kohl leafing through ‘‘The Federalist Papers,’’ est, and is the presumed motivating Bingaman Exon Kyl factor behind the legislation before us Bond Faircloth Lautenberg pondering the unexampled endurance of the Boxer Feinstein Leahy Constitutional arrangements put in place in now. Even as it was the concern that Bradley Ford Levin those years, we are reminded of the role the led to the proposed balanced budget Breaux Frist Lieberman ‘‘new science of politics,’’ as the founders amendment to the Constitution, which Brown Glenn Lott liked to call it, played in devising those ar- we dealt with recently. Bryan Gorton Lugar rangements. Burns Graham Mack It appears to me that the significance of In point of fact, that era is behind us. Byrd Gramm McCain In 1993, the Congress enacted the Omni- Campbell Grams McConnell this bicentennial is predicated on the extent Chafee Grassley Mikulski to which the perception is widened that the bus Budget Reconciliation Act which Coats Gregg Moseley-Braun government of the United States was not provided for deficit reduction over a 5- Cochran Harkin Moynihan fashioned out of ‘‘self-evident truths,’’ but year period of some $500 billion—the Cohen Hollings Murkowski rather was the work of scholar-statesmen Conrad Hutchison Murray largest deficit reduction measure in who had studied hard, learned much, and be- the half-century since the deficit was Coverdell Inhofe Nickles lieved they had come upon some principles— Craig Inouye Nunn uniformities—in human behavior which reduced following the end of World War D’Amato Jeffords Packwood II. Such was the size of the program Daschle Johnston Pell made possible the reintroduction of repub- DeWine Kassebaum Pressler lican government nearly two millennia after cuts and—yes—tax increases provided Dodd Kempthorne Reid Caesar had ended the experiment. in the 1993 legislation that interest

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4444 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 rates fell sharply—the so-called deficit Answer. There would be no deal. Why, then, are we now giving serious premium dropping off dramatically. Which is to say, no deficit reduction. consideration to measures that would The result was lower debt service and a Even as we have shown that we are ca- radically alter our constitutional pro- cumulative deficit reduction of near to pable of deficit reduction, and only cedures? have to keep at it for another 5 years $600 billion. The line-item veto is not a new idea. Citizens who might wonder at this or so to erase the legacy of the 1980’s. President Ulysses S. Grant first pro- will recall how many individuals, their Those are the practical consider- neighbors, themselves perhaps, refi- ations. But now to the constitutional posed it in 1873. In 1876, Representative nanced their mortgages following the ones, which are scarcely impractical. Charles James Faulkner of West Vir- 1993 legislation and the sharp drop in The Framers were well aware of the ginia introduced an amendment to the interest rates. That affected our costs importance of the power of the purse, Constitution to provide for a line-item as well—our costs, their costs, the and accordingly made the conscious de- veto. Some 150 line-item veto bills have costs of Government. cision to vest this power in the branch been introduced in the interim, but In consequence of this, Mr. President, of government closest to the people: Congress has never seen fit to adopt we have in fact returned to a primary Congress. In Federalist No. 58, James any of them. surplus in this year’s budget. A pri- Madison wrote: Today we are told that cir- mary surplus or primary deficit is de- This power over the purse may, in fact, be cumstances, including the failure of fined as the difference between reve- regarded as the most complete and effectual the balanced budget amendment, have nues and outlays for purposes other weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, given the line-item veto a new urgency. than debt service. It is argued that we need this because I pointed this out on February 8 in for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and congressional spending and the na- the course of the debate on the bal- salutary measure. tional debt are out of control—pre- anced budget, to wit: Spending on Gov- According to Madison’s notes of the cisely the same rationale offered by ernment programs is less than taxes Constitutional Convention of 1787, proponents of the balanced budget for the first time since the 1960’s. Roger Sherman of Connecticut said amendment. And mistaken for the May I repeat that. Spending on Gov- that: same reasons. ernment programs is less than taxes In making laws regard should be had to the for the first time since the 1960’s. sense of the people who are bound by them We ought to be asking ourselves how Not a bad performance. But how did and it is more probable that a single man and when these deficits were created, it come about? should mistake or betray this sense than the and whether they are permanent fea- Given the critical issue that con- legislature. tures of our governmental operations, fronts us, I will be candid with the Sen- Thus, article I, section 9 of our Con- or merely temporary. After a month of ate. More, perhaps, than is usual; more, stitution plainly states: debate on the balanced budget amend- perhaps, than is prudent. No money shall be drawn from the Treas- ment, I would hope the Senate knows In 1993, I was chairman of the Senate ury but in consequence of appropriations the answers to these questions. Finance Committee. The task of rais- made by law. The point has been made over and ing taxes by a quarter of a trillion dol- In a brilliant article on the power of lars, and the lion’s share of an equal over again on this floor by the Senator the purse in the Georgia Law Review in from New York, and by the distin- amount in spending cuts, thus fell to 1986, Judge Abner J. Mikva, then of the our committees and to its chairman. guished Senators from West Virginia U.S. Court of Appeals for the District and Maryland, our revered Senator How did we do it? We did it the way of Columbia Circuit, now counsel to the Framers of the American Constitu- ROBERT C. BYRD and Senator PAUL President Clinton, wrote SARBANES. Insofar as the national debt tion envisioned. We made accommoda- . . . if we wish to live in a pluralistic and tions that made up for the defect of is a problem in our fiscal affairs, it is free society, we will strive to ensure that a problem that was created—in some better motives. Congress retains exclusive control of the na- Item. Gasoline and diesel fuel taxes tion’s purse. Only in that event will the deli- measure intentionally—during the were raised 4.3 cents per gallon. Offset. cate balance of our constitutional structure 1980’s, the single decade of the 1980’s. I Airlines were given a 2-year exemption be preserved. do not wish to belabor this point. The from the increased tax. We also took I do hope Judge Mikva has not for- facts have been well documented by away the tax benefits previously ac- gotten his paper. David Stockman, President Reagan’s corded exporters of raw timber. The line-item veto legislation before Budget Director, by the journalist and Item. The business meal tax deduc- us would disturb—profoundly disturb— historian Haynes Johnson, and others. tion was reduced from 80 percent to 50 that delicate balance. It would have us It ought to be considered well-settled percent. Offset. Restaurant owners deviate from the explicit procedures by now. The debt accumulated during were given a tax credit for the FICA for passage and enactment, or veto, of the Reagan era was an historical anom- tax they are required to pay on their legislation, set forth in detail in article aly. Again, were it not for the interest employees’ tips. I, section 7, which states: on the deficits created during those I could go on at some length. But Every Bill which shall have passed the years, the Federal budget would be in there must be a point where prudence House of Representatives and the Senate, balance today. If we recognize this, we intervenes. I simply make a point shall, before it becomes a Law, be presented will realize there is no need for the leg- known to every experienced legislator to the President of the United States; If he islation before us. in the Congress. Compromise and approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House Even if there were a need for a line- trade-offs are the key. item veto, the separate enrollment leg- And now I make the further point. If in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Jour- islation is surely unconstitutional. It these exchanges cannot be sealed in nal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after would require the enrolling clerks to legislation—all or nothing—the accom- such Reconsideration two thirds of that dismantle bills passed by the House modations will be vastly more dif- House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be and Senate before the bills are pre- ficult, if not indeed impossible to sent, together with the Objections, to the sented to the President, as provided by reach. other House, by which it shall likewise be re- the Constitution. You do not need to be The chairman will say to a Senator: considered, and if approved by two thirds of a constitutional scholar, or even a law- ‘‘If you will go along with this provi- that House, it shall become a Law. yer, to recognize that this procedure sion not much to your liking, we will The Supreme Court has referred to would violate the Constitution. be able to get you another provision this part of article I, section 7 as ‘‘a that will in some measure make up for single, finely wrought and exhaustively The presentment clause in article I, what you legitimately consider a loss.’’ considered procedure.’’ There is noth- section 7 requires ‘‘every Bill which But what if the other Senator knows ing ambiguous about it, nor is there shall have passed the House of Rep- that his or her provision will end up as any uncertainty about why the Fram- resentatives and the Senate’’ to ‘‘be a separate item of legislation which ers vested the power of the purse in presented to the President’’ before it could very well be vetoed? Congress. becomes a law. Under this provision of

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4445 the Constitution, the bill presented to a legislative branch official. ‘‘Under- tors to shift more of the responsibility the President must be the same bill lying both decisions,’’ according to a for the fiscal process to the Execu- passed by Congress—not a series of Congressional Research Service anal- tive,’’ instead of keeping it in the Con- smaller bills created by the enrolling ysis, ‘‘was the premise * * * that ‘the gress where it belongs and where, in clerks, or ‘‘billettes,’’ as they have powers delegated to the three branches 1993, we showed we could exercise such been called by our learned colleague are functionally identifiable,’ distinct, responsibility. If I may say, Mr. Presi- from West Virginia. The separate en- and definable.’’ I should add that a sec- dent, without meaning in any way to rollment proposal would delegate to ond en bloc vote on the itemized mini- be partisan, every vote for the 1993 $600 the House and Senate enrolling clerks bills would not cure the constitutional billion deficit reduction measure came a legislative function explicitly as- defects of this proposal. I refer of from this side of the aisle. signed to Congress by article I: decid- course to an amendment offered to this The distinguished chairman of the ing what bills say. legislation yesterday. A second en bloc Appropriations Committee, Senator The Association of the Bar of the vote on the itemized mini-bills would HATFIELD, testified along the same City of New York recently produced an not cure the constitutional defect of lines before the Judiciary Committee exhaustive analysis of the constitu- this proposal. We vote on one bill at a in 1984 of his experience with the line- tionality of the line-item veto. The as- time in the U.S. Senate. Professor item veto when he was Governor of Or- sociation’s report was written by David Gerhardt of Cornell has said that a sep- egon: P. Felsher and edited by Daniel J. arate vote would have to be taken on We also know that the legislators in States Capra, who is chairman of the associa- each of those bills in order to satisfy which have the line-item veto routinely tion’s committee on Federal legisla- Article I. ‘‘pad’’ their budgets, and that was my experi- tion. The report finds that under either If we wish to enact legislation in ence, with projects which they expect, or ‘‘enhanced rescission’’ or ‘‘separate en- which we passed a bill for each item of even want their Governors to veto. It is a rollment,’’ the President would in ef- the kind now put together in an appro- wonderful way for a Democrat-controlled fect be authorized to restructure legis- priations bill, that would be perfectly legislature, that I had, to put a Republican constitutional. It would require us to Governor on the spot: Let him be the one to lation after its passage by Congress. line-item these issues that were either po- This is unconstitutional because it is pass perhaps 10,000 bills a year, which litically popular, or very emotional. the province of Congress and Congress we could do, but it would be constitu- alone, to determine the contents of tional. What you cannot do is pass There is no reason to think these bills; the sole power of the President 10,000 bills with one vote. problems would be avoided at the Fed- under the article I, section 7 is to sign Clearly, the great weight of author- eral level if we adopt the line-item or veto legislation. According to the ity indicates that ‘‘separate enroll- veto. If the state experience is any in- association’s analysis, ‘‘it is irrelevant ment’’ is unconstitutional. Yet even if dication, the line-item veto might even whether the itemization needed to im- it is not, it is still a bad idea. Its pro- create more difficulty in the Federal plement the line-item veto is effec- ponents argue that 43 Governors have budget process. This has been our tuated by the President or the enroll- used this power to great effect in the science of politics, this has been our ment clerk in Congress.’’ States. This argument demands closer experience of politics. I might add that this opinion is scrutiny. The substitute amendment before us shared by other prominent constitu- Recall that a similar claim was made will not impose discipline on Congress. tional scholars, including Prof. Mi- during our debate on the balanced Nor will it erase the national debt. It is chael J. Gerhardt of Cornell Law budget amendment: that balanced very likely unconstitutional. It will School, who has written me to say that budget requirements have enforced fis- undoubtedly be litigated, and the the ‘‘separate enrollment’’ legislation cal discipline in the States. But word courts will have to decide. is unconstitutional because it eventually got out that this was not I have great confidence that they will . . . effectively enables the President to quite true: States also have capital decide the measure before us is uncon- make affirmative budgetary choices that the budgets which are not required to be stitutional and the entire exercise will Framers definitely did not want him to balanced which are, by definition, fi- have been for nothing. make. nanced by debt, even as they return I hope the Senate will say no to sepa- These scholars have concluded that benefits over time. Claims about the rate enrollment. I hope the Senate will ‘‘separate enrollment’’ is unconstitu- effectiveness of the line-item veto in decline this invitation to relinquish tional because the Supreme Court has the States may be equally misleading. important constitutional prerogatives been scrupulous in requiring strict ad- The late, beloved Prof. Aaron to the executive branch. It was why the herence to the legislative procedures Wildavsky of the University of Cali- American Government came into set forth in Article I. In INS versus fornia at Berkeley wrote in 1985, with being, Mr. President, in response to Chadha in 1983, the Court struck down characteristic insight, that much of what we saw as the abuses in fiscal a statutory provision that permitted the ‘‘savings’’ attributed to use of the matters of the executive branch in one House of Congress to exercise a line-item veto in the States may be il- Great Britain. ‘‘legislative veto.’’ Chief Justice Burg- lusory. He cited the experience of Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- er wrote that the requirements of arti- Pennsylvania, where one study found sent that the letter from Prof. Michael cle I, and I quote: that spending bills were deliberately J. Gerhardt of Cornell Law School and inflated in order to compensate for ex- . . . were intended to erect enduring checks the report of the Association of the Bar on each Branch and to protect the people pected item vetoes, or simply to serve of the City of New York, of which Dan- from the improvident exercise of power by political ends. Thus it does not nec- iel J. Capra is chair, be printed in the mandating certain prescribed steps. To pre- essarily follow that X million dollars RECORD. serve those checks, and maintain the separa- are ‘‘saved’’ merely because a Governor There being no objection, the mate- tion of powers, the carefully defined limits line-item vetoes that amount. They rial was ordered to be printed in the on the power of each Branch must not be were not meant to be enacted in the eroded. RECORD, as follows: first place. CORNELL LAW SCHOOL, And there I end the passage from Dr. Louis Fisher of the Congressional March 20, 1995. Chief Justice Burger. Three years Research Service and Prof. Neal Devins Hon. DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN, later, in Bowsher versus Synar, the of the Marshall-Wythe School of Law U.S. Senate, Washington, DC Court invalidated the provision in the at William and Mary concur in DEAR SENATOR MOYNIHAN: I greatly appre- Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit con- Wildavsky’s assessment, writing that ciate the chance to express my opinion on trol law giving the Comptroller Gen- ‘‘[g]ubernatorial reductions may mere- the constitutionality of a proposed scheme eral of the United States authority to ly cancel spending that the legislature directing the clerk of the House in which an appropriation bill or joint resolution origi- execute spending reductions under the added because the governor possessed nates to disassemble the measure and enroll act. The Court held that this violated item veto authority.’’ Fisher and each item as a separate bill or joint resolu- the separation of powers because it Devins conclude that ‘‘ * * * the avail- tion, which is then presented to the Presi- vested an executive branch function in ability of an item veto allows legisla- dent for approval or disapproval. As I explain

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4446 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 below, I consider this proposal to be uncon- one)—as well as all of the early presidents, in the legislative process beyond what the stitutional because it (1) violates Article I by for that matter—have shared the under- framers intended. Such aggrandizement allowing the President to sign or veto a standing that only Congress has the author- would be at the expense of Congress, which measure in a form never actually by both ity to decide how to package legislation, would lose its basic authority to present ap- houses of the Congress; (2) involves an ille- that this authority is a crucial component of propriation bills to the President in the pre- gitimate attempt by the Congress to redefine checks and balances, and that the Presi- cise configuration or compromises produced statutorily the constitutional term ‘‘Bill’’; dent’s veto authority is strictly a qualified by the deliberative processes of the two (3) contravenes both Supreme Court author- negative power that enables him to strike Houses. The proposal would demote Con- ity severely restricting congressional discre- down but not to reconfigure whatever the gress, which the Constitution makes the tion to delegate a core legislative or law- majorities of both Houses have sent to him master of the purse, to the role of giving fis- making function and longstanding congres- as a bill. cal advice that the President would be effec- sional understanding of the prerequisites for Another major constitutional deficiency tively free to disregard. The framers granted a legitimate bill; and (4) radically alters the with the proposal is that the enrollment the President no such special veto power fundamental balance of power between the process—the phase in which the proposal al- over appropriation bills, despite their aware- Congress and the President on budgetary lows for the fragmentation of a bill to ness that the insistence of colonial assem- matters. occur—is not mentioned in the Constitution blies that their spending bills could not be At the outset, I find that merely describing as a step in the bicameral development of a amended once they had passed the lower the proposal’s intended operation dem- bill or resolution to be presented to the house had greatly enhanced the growth of onstrates its basic constitutional short- President. Nor it is considered an aspect of legislative power.8 comings. Suppose that an appropriation bill the ‘‘step-by-step, deliberate and delibera- The proponents of separate enrollment containing 200 separate appropriation items, tive process’’ by which the two Houses con- argue, however, that the parsing and refor- which was considered and passed by both sider and pass a legitimate bill or resolu- mulating of bills by an enrolling clerk in- 3 Houses as a single, whole bill, would be tion. Enrollment is supposed to be merely volves ministerial rather than legislative translated at the enrollment stage into 200 the meticulous preparation of ‘‘the final tasks. The problem with this contention is separate bills for presentment and veto pur- form of the bill, as it was agreed to by both that Congress simply does not have the con- 4 poses. Yet, none of those 200 bills would have Houses, for presentation to the President.’’ stitutional authority to redefine the nec- ever been separately considered, voted on, or Yet, when an enrolling clerk disassembles a essary ingredients for legislative action for passed by the two Houses of Congress. The unitary appropriations bill passed by both its own convenience. No case makes this problem is that Congress cannot pass or Houses and rewrites it into many separate point more clearly than Chadha, in which enact 200 separate appropriation bills with- bills, the clerk is not enrolling what was in the Supreme Court declared that any action out subjecting each of those 200 bills to the fact ‘‘agreed to by both Houses.’’ Rather, the deemed legislative must be undertaken full deliberative processes of the two Houses. clerk is dividing the bill into 200 separate ‘‘only in accordance with the procedures set 9 The enrollment procedure is simply not a bills—a task that can only be performed by forth in article I.’’ Unless both houses of part of the carefully designed procedures for both Houses, acting in the customary bi- Congress have enacted each item in an ap- lawmaking set forth in Article I. cameral manner. propriations bill as separate bills, it would In addition, Congress’s delegation of its au- More specifically, the proposal violates the be unconstitutional for a clerk of either thority to enact each item of a bill into sepa- plain language of the presentment clauses of House to do so and to submit his handiwork rate bills is illegitimate. The basic decision Article I. According to the latter, a bill or as a ‘‘Bill’’ to the President for approval or whether to adopt and then present one or resolution that is to be presented to the disapproval. many bills to the President is a legislative In summary, the explicit prescription for President can become a law only if it has choice that is, according to the Supreme lawmaking set forth in detail in Article I, ‘‘passed the House of Representatives and Court, the ‘‘kind of decision that can be im- whereby Congress is allowed to present to the Senate.’’ 1 The purposes of this require- plemented only in accordance with the pro- the President only those bills that have been ment were to circumscribe Congress’s law- cedures set out in Article I.’’ 5 Congress can- subjected to the full deliberative process of making powers and to define the scope of the not delegate to an enrolling clerk the core both Houses, cannot be amended by legisla- President’s veto authority. It tortures the legislative function of deciding how many tion, as this proposal tries to do. Nor can English language, however, to maintain appropriation bills will be presented to the Congress, by statute, redefine the constitu- that, in the hypothetical above, both the President or the form each of those bills tional term ‘‘Bill’’ to include each and every House of Representatives and the Senate ac- should take. item in a duly enacted unitary bill. This con- tually passed 200 separate bills. A frag- The seminal case on this point is INS v. clusion is supported by the plain and original mented bill that is never subjected for con- Chadha,6 whose reasoning is directly applica- meaning of Article I, longstanding congres- sideration and approval by both Houses of ble to the proposal under consideration. sional understanding, and clearly applicable Congress is not a bill or resolution within Chadha held that Congress cannot delegate Supreme Court authority. the plain and original meaning of the pre- to a single house any kind of legislative It has been a privilege for me to share my sentment clauses. function that must be performed by both opinions about this proposed law with you. If Moreover, the framers deliberately re- Houses, such as the enactment of a bill or you have any other questions or if you need stricted the President’s role in the law- resolution that changes the status quo or af- any further analysis, please do not hesitate making process to a qualified negative rath- fects the interests of those outside the legis- to let me know. er than to have him exercise an affirmative lature. Because an appropriation obviously Very truly yours, power to redraft or reconfigure a bill. Be- affects existing relationships, it is the kind MICHAEL J. GERHARDT, cause the President is able under the proof legislative judgment both as to form and Visiting Professor. posal to pick and choose which budgetary substance that Congress cannot delegate to items he would like to see enacted, the pro- an enrollment clerk. The proposal deals with FOOTNOTES posal allows him to sign various items into an integral part of the deliberative bi- 1 U.S. Const. art. I, section 7, clause 2. law in forms or configurations never actu- cameral process. As the Court explained, 2 The Federalist No. 58 at 300 (J. Madison) (M. ally approved as such by both houses of Con- ‘‘[t]he President’s participation in the legis- Beloff ed. 1987). gress. This kind of lawmaking by the Presi- lative process was to protect the Executive 3 INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919, 959 (1983). dent clearly violates Article I, section 1, branch from Congress and to protect the 4 C. Zinn, How Our Laws Are Made, H. Doc. No. 509, 94th Cong., 2d Sess. 44 (1976). which grants ‘‘[a]ll legislative powers’’ to whole people from improvident laws. The di- Congress, and Article I, section 7, which 5 Chadha, 462 U.S. at 954. vision of the Congress into two distinctive 6 gives Congress the discretion to package 462 U.S. 919 (1983). bodies assures that the legislative power 7 Id. at 951. bills as it sees fit. would be exercised only after opportunity for 8 See Note, Is a Presidential Item Veto Constitutional? The proposal effectively enables the Presi- full study and debate in separate settings. 96 Yale L.J. 838, 841–44 (1987). dent to make affirmative budgetary choices The President’s unilateral veto power, in 9 Chadha, 462 U.S. at 954. that the framers definitely did not want him turn, was limited by the power of two-thirds THE ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR to make. The framers deliberately chose to of both Houses of Congress to overrule a veto OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, place the power of the purse outside of the thereby precluding final arbitrary action of New York, NY, February 24, 1995. executive because they feared the con- one person. It emerges clearly that the pre- Re Line-item Veto Legislation. sequences of centralizing the powers of the scription for legislation in article I rep- Hon. DANIEL P. MOYNIHAN, purse and the sword. As James Madison resents the framers’ decision that the legis- U.S. Senate, wrote in the Federalist No. 58, ‘‘This power lative power of the federal government be ex- Washington, DC. of the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the ercised in accord with a single, finely DEAR SENATOR MOYNIHAN: I am the Chair most complete and effectual weapon with wrought and exhaustively considered, proce- of the Committee on Federal Legislation of which any constitution can arm the imme- dure.’’ 7 the Association of the Bar of the City of New diate representatives of the people.’’ 2 Every Undoubtedly, the proposal would also sig- York. Our Committee, after exhaustive re- Congress (until perhaps this most recent nificantly alter the balance of power be- search, has reached the conclusion that leg- tween the President and Congress. The pro- islation providing for a line-item veto is pro- Footnotes at end of article. posal would expand presidential involvement hibited by at least three provisions of the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4447 Constitution. We hope that you will consider come at the expense of disturbing a healthy trol a Congress dominated by [the] opposing the unconstitutionality of line-item veto tension between the Legislative and Execu- political party.’’13 Sixth, because judicial in- legislation in your upcoming deliberations in tive branches. There is a real danger that the terpretation, at the state level, has yet to the Senate. item veto might be used to promote Execu- delineate the scope of the item veto powers Very truly yours, tive branch interests unrelated to the budg- possessed by the various governors, caution DANIEL J. CAPRA, etary process. A President could use the is necessary before an item veto is adopted Professor of Law, item veto to punish those who oppose him at the Federal level.14 Seventh, the item veto Fordham Law School. (by singling out an opponent’s project for a could accelerate the use of budgetary leger- veto), or he might use the veto as a ‘‘club’’ demain, i.e., accounting tricks such as mov- REVISITING THE LINE-ITEM VETO to promote partisan causes generally. ing items off budget or privatizing various (By the Committee on Federal Legislation Each member of Congress represents and is programs. Association of the Bar of the City of New answerable to a local constituency, while the The argument that an item veto would York) President has a national constituency. This help Congress curb its spending excesses is, difference in representative basis results in a INTRODUCTION we believe, overstated.15 Currently, only 39 different cost-benefit analysis for legislation During the last two decades every Presi- percent of the Federal budget may be classi- and ultimately different policy choices. The dent and Congress has attempted to reform fied as ‘‘discretionary spending’’ and subject President therefore considers the interests of the federal budgeting process. The 104th Con- to the Congressional appropriations process. a larger and more diverse group than an indi- gress and President Clinton are no exception. This figure is expected to decline even fur- vidual member of Congress when taking posi- One perennial proposal has been to provide ther. By the year 2003 interest and manda- tions on budgetary matters. Congress, like the President with a line item veto. This tory spending will account for more than 72 any legislature, is an institution that is con- Committee last reported on a legislative line percent of the Federal budget, thus leaving ducive to vote trading and log-rolling activi- item veto eight years ago.1 Without coming only 28 percent for discretionary spending.16 ties. To be enacted into law, any proposed to any conclusion at that time, this com- On the other hand, in order to be reelected, legislation requires that a majority coalition mittee did believe that there existed sub- members of Congress will often log-roll legis- be formed. Consequently, members of Con- stantial practical, and possibly constitu- lation they desire into the budget in order to gress often engage in cooperative legislative tional, impediments to the implementation get their pet projects approved. Their deci- activities in order to further their individual of a line item veto. This Committee has re- agendas. As a result of this ‘‘horse trading,’’ sions to increase spending will often be cam- visited the issue because the proposed legis- aggregate spending levels tend to be greater ouflaged by the creation of automatic spend- lation, H.R. 2, differs in some respects from than they would be otherwise.5 The line-item ing increases in various entitlement pro- 17 the line item veto previously analyzed by veto would undoubtedly alter this process. grams. this Committee and because the changed po- Advocates of the item veto often justify Despite the suggestion that the advent of litical environment may allow the line item their positions by claiming: (1) the favorable omnibus legislation makes the President’s veto to finally pass; indeed, as of this writ- experience of 43 states that provide their use of his (or her) veto too costly, it appears ing, the line-item veto has been passed by governors with an item veto; (2) the inability that when a President has been willing to the House of Representatives and is pending of Congress to curb its own spending ex- use the veto power, that President has in the Senate. cesses; and (3) modern congressional tech- gained tremendous negotiating leverage over We conclude that a line-item veto may not niques (e.g. riders and eleventh hour omni- Congress. For example, when President be implemented by statute. Rather, the Con- bus appropriations bills) that create ‘‘veto- Reagan vetoed two omnibus measures in stitution must be amended, because a Presi- proof’’ legislation—i.e., a bill which, if ve- 1982, parts of the Federal government were dential line item veto would fundamentally toed in its entirety, could effectively shut shut down. Consequently, Congress was alter the legislative and veto process cur- down the federal government.6 forced to revise those bills to comply with rently written into the Constitution and In contrast, opponents of the item veto his wishes.18 would unduly limit the power of Congress to argue: that the state analogy is inapplicable As a result, in later years, President enact legislation. (or at the very least, of limited applicability) Reagan merely had to threaten to use his ITEM VETOES GENERALLY to the federal situation; that the federal veto in order to win important concessions The line item veto, or more precisely des- packaging of appropriations bills is not ame- from Congress. Because President Reagan ignated, the item veto, is a device that nable to the effective use of an item veto; was willing to and did use his veto power, would, if enacted, enable the President to that the vast majority of federal expendi- the ‘‘all or nothing’’ stakes of omnibus legis- veto particular items in a bill without hav- tures are mandatory and would be immune lation actually increased rather than de- ing to veto the entire bill. In theory, an item from the item veto; and that an item veto creased his power relative to Congress with veto would enable the President to accept would substantially alter the Separation of respect to the content of legislation. bills without having to accept expensive rid- Powers Doctrine written into the Constitu- CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE LINE-ITEM VETO ers. Such riders are typically attached tion.7 though the process of ‘‘log-rolling.’’ Pro- At least 43 states have enacted line item We expressed concerns above that the line- ponents believe that an item veto would sig- vetoes in an effort to give their governors item veto was an unnecessary measure that nificantly reduce Congressional spending some control over spending. This has enabled might in fact be counterproductive in ob- while simultaneously allowing the President some states, at least on the face of it, to save taining fiscal efficiency, and that it might be to sign otherwise desirable bills.2 significant sums of money.8 To date, none of unfairly used by the President to punish par- For over one hundred years, Congress has those 43 states has acted to repeal those pro- ticular members of Congress. Yet even if the considered and consistently rejected at- visions. Despite these positive indicators, line-item veto made sense as a policy mat- tempts to provide the President with a line the state experience is not dispositive of ter, it should not be adopted, because it vio- item veto. These repeated rejections have whether a line-item veto is workable on the lates several provisions of the Constitution. been based on the belief that the item veto federal level. First, state constitutions differ What follows is a discussion of the Constitu- would gravely undermine the fiscal author- significantly from each other and from the tional provisions which are in conflict with ity of Congress and would greatly augment Federal Constitution. As two commentators the line-item veto. the ability of the President to impose his po- have stated, ‘‘[t]here is a much greater state VETO PROCEDURES litical agenda on the nation.3 bias against legislatures than exists at the There is legitimate concern that if an item national level.’’9 Second, state budgetary in- Article 1, Section 7, clause 2 of the Con- veto were implemented, the results might be stitutions and procedures vary in key re- stitution sets forth, in considerable detail, the opposite of what was intended. Profes- spects from each other and from those in the the procedure for exercising and overriding sors Crain and Miller indicate that a line- Federal government.10 Third, appropriations the President’s veto of legislation. The pro- item veto would lead to an increase in undis- bills in the states are structured to facilitate cedures set forth in H.R. 2 do not conform ciplined federal spending: item vetoes by governors. In contrast, Con- with these constitutional requirements. ‘‘With the item veto at its disposal, the ex- gressional appropriations bills contain rel- Section 7 of Article I of the Constitution ecutive branch assumes more responsibility atively few items, rendering the utility of provides, in pertinent part, that: for eliminating wasteful spending programs. the line item veto (for anything other than ‘‘Every Bill which shall have passed the This invites legislative irresponsibility be- political coercion of individual legislators) House of Representatives and the Senate, cause legislators will tend to rely on the ex- more suspect.11 Fourth, legislators in states shall, before it becomes a law, be presented ecutive branch to cut out wasteful provisions which have an item veto have been known to to the President of the United States: If he with the item veto. By discouraging legisla- ‘‘routinely ‘pad’ their budgets,’’ resulting in approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall tive discipline, critics argue that the item savings that are illusory.12 Fifth, the item return it, with his Objections to that House veto actually could discourage fiscal effi- veto functions more as a partisan political in which it shall have originated, who shall ciency.4 tool, increasing tensions between governors enter the Objections at large on their Jour- Even if the line-item veto would improve and state legislatures, than as an effective nal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after fiscal efficiency, any improvement could means for reducing expenditures. In fact, the such Reconsideration two thirds of that experience in at least one state suggests that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be Footnotes at end of article. ‘‘the President may use the item veto to consent, together with the Objections, to the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4448 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 other House, by which it shall likewise be refor the President. Before the American Revo- Moreover, as a practical matter, the legis- considered, and if approved by two thirds of lution, legislative acts of the colonies were lative option of promulgating a rescission/re- that House, it shall become law. . . .’’ subject to two vetoes. Both the Governor of ceipts disapproval bill is made difficult by Under the proposed line-item veto, a dif- the colony and the King of England could the provisions of H.R. 2. Such a bill must re- ferent ‘‘bill’’ would be enacted than was pre- veto legislation. Both vetoes were absolute instate all of the items vetoed. Thus, if the sented to the President. Furthermore, sub- and not subject to override by the legisla- President vetoes several items from a single section 5(a) of H.R. 2 provides that tures. It is not surprising that the colonists bill, the practical reality is that a rescission/ ‘‘[w]henever the President rescinds any resented these veto powers.20 In fact, the receipts disapproval bill is unlikely to be budget authority . . . or vetoes any provi- first two grievances listed in the Declaration forthcoming from Congress. And even if such sion as provided in this Act, the President of Independence deal with this issue. They a bill is passed, the President can veto that shall transmit to both Houses of Congress a are: that ‘‘He [George III] has refused his as- bill, and a two-thirds vote in each House of special message . . .’’ Subsection 5(b) resent to laws . . . He has forbidden his Gov- Congress is required to overcome that veto. quires that each special message be trans- ernors to pass. . . .’’ It is thus clear that, Furthermore, under H.R. 2, unless Congress mitted to both Houses on the same day. during and immediately after the American overrides the President’s veto of a rescission/ Thus H.R. 2 appears to directly contradict Revolution, there was a strong disposition receipts disapproval bill within the time section 7 in several ways. First, and most against any Executive veto power.21 We be- specified in the statute, the rescission of dis- importantly, Section 7 contemplates that lieve that a strict construction of the de- cretionary budget authority or the veto of a the Bill be either approved or disapproved in tailed veto provisions in the Constitution is targeted tax benefit becomes effective. Thus, its entirety by the President. Under the Con- consistent with the intent of the Framers to the veto of the rescission/receipts dis- stitution, when the President approves a bill, provide a relatively limited, rather than gen- approval does not trigger a reconsideration he signs ‘‘it.’’ When he disapproves of a bill erous, veto power. of a law passed by Congress and vetoed by he is not permitted to rewrite it—that may BICAMERAL AND PRESENTMENT REQUIREMENTS the President, but rather triggers the auto- only be done by Congress through the legis- One of the most troubling aspects of any matic implementation of a law presented by lative process. The Constitution does not item veto bill is that an item veto would the President to Congress unless Congress permit the President to rewrite the bill ex- augment the President’s veto power by per- enacts another law. This stands the Con- cept to the extent that Congress incor- mitting him to veto appropriation bills that stitutionally-mandated legislative process porates his Objections into a new or amended were never considered by the House or the on its head. bill. Rather, in connection with a non-ap- Senate in such fragmented form. Executive THE RULES CLAUSE proved bill, the Constitution directs the veto power over part of a Bill is, in this re- President to return the bill in its entirety, spect, inconsistent with the bicameral and The Rules Clause of Article I of the Con- together with his objections to the House presentment requirements of the Constitu- stitution provides that ‘‘Each House may de- that originated the bill. At that point that tion. As the Supreme Court pointed out in termine the Rules of its Proceedings....’’ 24 House, and not both Houses, shall enter the I.N.S. v. Chadha,22 legislative actions require We believe that a line-item veto is incon- President’s objections into its Journal. The approval of both Houses, in a bicameral fash- sistent with the Rules Clause. Under a line- Constitution then instructs that House, and ion, and presentment to the President. There item veto, the form, content and subject not both Houses, to reconsider the bill. is no language in the presentment clause, or matter of bills will be determined by some- Under the Constitution, it is only after that anywhere else in the Constitution, that per- one other than the members of the House House has reconsidered it, and only if two mits the President to approve or veto a bill and Senate. thirds of its members agree to pass the bill, other than in the form in which it passed Moreover, Subsection 5 of H.R. 2, which that it shall be sent, along with the Presi- both Houses and was presented to him. As deals with ‘‘Consideration in the Senate’’ dent’s objections, to the other House, where Professor Gressman puts it: ‘‘The Present- and ‘‘Points of Order,’’ appears to explicitly it shall be reconsidered. It is only after re- ment Clauses state that the bill which is to violate the Rules Clause by controlling Con- consideration of the Bill by the second be presented to the President, the bill he gress’ internal rules and procedures. For ex- House, and only if approved by two thirds of may veto or approve, is the bill ‘which shall ample, Subsection 5(d) of this bill attempts the members of that second House, that a have passed the House of Representatives to limit debate on rescission/receipts dis- non-approved bill can become law. and the Senate.’’’23 approval bills, debatable motions and ap- In sum, Article I, Section 7 prohibits par- Under Chadha, when a legislative power is peals in connection therewith. it also pro- tial vetoes. The literal language of the sec- exercised—such as in the case of a one House vides that a motion to further limit debate is ond clause of this section strongly suggests veto—the legislative act is subject to the ex- not debatable and a motion to recommit is that bills are to be approved, disapproved plicit provisions of the presentment clauses, not in order.25 Such a provision imposes an and reconsidered in toto and not in part. Article 1, section 7, clause 2 and 3, and the obvious limitation on the rulemaking au- This is apparent from the repeated use of the bicameral requirement of Article 1, section 1 thority of each House of Congress. terms ‘‘it or its’’—12 times, ‘‘the bill’’—2 and Article I, section 7, clause 2. With a line- It is true that, to the extent item-veto leg- times, and ‘‘reconsider or reconsideration’’— item veto, the President clearly would be ex- islation imposes limitations on Congres- 3 times, and from the context in which those ercising legislative power insofar as he per- sional rule-making, it is a self-inflicted terms are used. Both ‘‘it’’ and ‘‘the Bill’’ forms the legislative act of determining the wound. Congress, if it passes the line-item refer to ‘‘Every Bill which shall have passed final content of an appropriations bill and veto, will have constricted its own rule- the House of Representatives and the Sen- does not merely accept or reject the bill as a making authority. Yet the Rules Clause does ate.’’ They do not refer to any modified or unit. It is irrelevant whether the itemization not permit such a self-inflicted limitation on amended version of the bill and do not refer needed to implement the line item veto is ef- Congressional authority. It has been settled to portions of any bills passed by both fectuated by the President or the enrollment law for more than a century that: Houses. Consequently, pursuant to Section 7, clerk in Congress. The effect is the same. A a non-approved bill is returned to Congress line item veto will permit the President to ‘‘The power to make rules is not one which for reconsideration. The President does not restructure legislation after its passage. If once exercised is exhausted. It is a contin- return a modified version. He is instructed to the President were to exercise an item veto, uous power, always subject to be exercised return the bill passed by the House and the the bill that would be enacted into law would by the house, and within the limitations sug- Senate along with his Objections thereto. It not have been voted upon and passed by the gested, absolute and beyond the challenge of 26 is the bicamerally passed bill that is recon- two Houses of Congress. One bill would be any other body or tribunal. ’’ sidered. Various forms of the word ‘‘recon- passed by the two Houses of Congress and Thus each House has the power and author- sider’’ are used not once but three times to presented to the President and a second bill ity to set its own rules regarding a variety of refer to ‘‘it’’ or ‘‘the bill’’ in connection with would end up being enacted into law without internal matters. The problem with passing the return to Congress of a non-approved passage by both Houses of Congress and pre- legislation that restricts the rulemaking bill. Furthermore, the framers and ratifiers sentment to the President. As the Supreme power of either House is that the legislation did not choose various forms of the words Court explained in Chadha, a law enacted is passed by both Houses and can only be ab- amend, change, alter, modify, or some simi- pursuant to this process would be unconsti- rogated through subsequent legislation by lar word. Instead they chose to provide that tutional because it failed to pass both House both Houses. This is inconsistent with the Congress could ‘‘reconsider’’ a non-approved of Congress and was not presented to the Rules Clause, which provides that each bill, in order to give Congress a chance to ap- President after such passage. House has the authority to determine ‘‘its’’ prove the bill as it was originally passed, to It is true that H.R. 2 subsection 3(a) per- own proceedings. Legislation affecting the modify it or to pass a completely new bill. mits an item veto to be overridden by way of internal rulemaking power of either House The veto provision is one of the most de- a rescission/receipts disapproval bill. How- results in one House of Congress ceding con- tailed and precisely worded provisions in the ever, while a rescission/receipts disapproval trol over its internal rules to the other entire Constitution. This suggests that the bill can restore the legislation to what it was House. The power granted in the Rules procedures outlined therein should be care- before the exercise of the line item veto, a Clause was granted to each House of Con- fully followed and not artfully evaded.19 problem is created because it is the Presi- gress in order to make the legislative powers Considering America’s history, it is re- dent who actually changed the law and not of each House more effective. That power markable that the Constitutional Conven- both Houses of Congress with the approval of may not be channelled or regulated by a tion of 1787 included any kind of veto power the President. statute passed by both Houses and signed by

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4449 the President. As one commentator has stat- creases the President’s power at the expense 6 See Stearns, supra, at 387. ed, the Rulemaking power ‘‘granted in the of Congress would alter this scheme and 7 Id. at 387–88. Constitution is above all law, and cannot be therefore should be disfavored. 8 See Neal Devins, Budget Reform and the Balance of Powers, 31 William & Mary L. Rev. 993, 1005 (1990). 27 In considering whether Congress may cede taken away or impaired by any law.’’ 9 Fisher & Devins, supra, at 162. THE APPROPRIATIONS CLAUSE any of the Power of the Purse to the Execu- 10 Crain & Miller, supra, at 1033. In addition to all the constitutional con- tive, Chief Justice Taft states that: 11 Devins, supra, at 1005–06, quoting the 1984 testi- ‘‘it is a breach of the National fundamental cerns addressed above, an appropriations bill mony of Senator Mark Hatfield, Governor of Oregon law if Congress gives up its legislative power that is modified by an item veto is probably from 1978–1986. and transfers it to the President. . . This is 12 Devins, supra, at 1005 n.67 and accompanying unconstitutional on another ground as well: not to say that the three branches are not text. the ‘‘approved’’ appropriations would not be 13 coordinate parts of one government and that Devins, supra, at 1005. approved ‘‘by law’’ as required section 9 of 14 each in the field of its duties may not invoke Fisher & Devins, supra, at 182. Article I of the Constitution. That section 15 See, Anthony R. Petrilla, Note, The Role of the the action of the two other branches in so far provides that: ‘‘No Money shall be drawn Line Item Veto in the Federal Balance of Power, 31 as the action invoked shall not be an as- from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Harvard J. Legis. 469, 471 (1994). sumption of the constitutional field of action 16 Appropriations made by Law.’’ The problem Letter dated August 4, 1994 from United States of another branch.’’ 32 Senators J. Robert Kerrey (D.–Neb.) and John C. created by a line-item veto is that the re- It could be argued that a line-item veto Danforth (R.–Mo.) to members of the Bipartisan sulting appropriations would not be made by does not in fact cede legislative power over Commission on Entitlement and Tax Reform con- law, but rather would be made by the Presi- the purse to the President, given the fact taining ‘‘Draft Findings.’’ dent with the tacit approval of Congress. 17 Petrilla, supra, at 470. that the President already has the power to 18 Devins, supra, at 1016. THE POWER OF THE PURSE BELONGS TO veto appropriations legislation in its en- 19 Two other possible constitutional problems for CONGRESS tirety. The fact is, however, that the ability H.R. 2 may arise under Article 1, Section 7. First, Providing an item veto to the President to veto specific items in a larger bill will H.R. 2 subsection 3(b) sets a specific time period in could fundamentally alter the balance of definitely increase Executive control of the which Congress is permitted to override the Presi- power between Congress and the President. budget process, at the expense of legislative dent’s non-approval. However, the Constitution sets Commentators have stated: prerogative; indeed, that is the very reason no time limit for reconsideration of a non-approved bill. Second, according to Section 7 of Article 1, the ‘‘the adoption of what might appear to be that supporters are pushing for a line-item a relatively modest reform proposal could re- President’s special message (his objection) would ap- veto. pear to belong in the Congressional Record and not sult in a radical redistribution of constitu- The legislative process is a complex, politi- the Federal Register as provided in H.R. 2. tional power***At stake are the power cally-driven process; one item often gets 20 See Alan J. Dixon, The Case for the Line-Item relationships between the executive and leg- passed in ‘‘trade’’ for another as part of a Veto, 1 Notre Dame J. L. Ethics & Pub. Pol’y 211, 218 islative branches, the exercise of Congress’ general piece of legislation. This kind of (1985). historic power over the purse, and the rel- ‘‘horse-trading’’ or ‘‘log-rolling’’ was clearly 21 For example, when the Constitution was ratified, ative abilities of each branch to establish not unknown to the Founders of the Con- no state, except for Massachusetts, gave its Gov- 28 ernor any kind of veto. budgetary priorities.’’ stitution. To the contrary, legislative bar- 22 The Constitution places the ‘‘power of the 462 U.S. 919 (1983). gaining is essential to the Constitutionally- 23 Eugene Gressman, Is the Item Veto Constitu- purse’’ in the hands of Congress and outside mandated process and to Congressional con- tional?, 64 N. C. L. Rev. 189 (1986). the grasp of the President because of the fear trol over the purse.33 24 U.S. Const., art. 1, sec. 5, cl. 2. of combining the power of the purse with the The line-item veto would upset this care- 25 Similarly, Subsection 5(e) indicates that it shall power of the sword.29 Section 9 of Article I of fully-calibrated legislative process by allow- not be in order for either the Senate or the House of the Constitution provides that ‘‘No money ing the Executive to pluck out a piece of the Representatives to consider: (1) any rescission/receipts disapproval bill that re- shall be drawn from the Treasury but in con- Congressionally-passed puzzle and reject it. sequence of appropriations made by law.’’ lates to any matter other than the rescission of The line-item veto is therefore qualitatively budget authority or veto . . . transmitted by the James Madison wrote that ‘‘ [t]his power of different from the veto power enacted in the President. the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the Constitution. It represents an aggressive ex- (2) any amendment to a rescission/receipts dis- most complete and effectual weapon with tension of the veto power, and therefore con- approval bill. which any constitution can arm the imme- tradicts the qualified use of the veto power 26 Wolfson, supra, at 853 quoting United States v. diate representatives of the people.’’30 that was envisioned by the Framers. Ballin, 144 U.S. 1,5 (1892). Roger Sherman said at the Constitutional 27 Wolfson, supra, at 856. See also. Gressman, CONCLUSION convention that ‘‘[i]n making laws regard supra, at 821. 28 Fisher & Devins, supra, at 162. should be had to the sense of the people who Because the line-item veto conflicts with the veto provisions of the Constitution, with 29 Mikva, Congress: The Purse, the Purpose and the are bound by them and it is more probable Power, 21 Ga. L. Rev. 1,2–3 (1986) (the decision of the that a single man should mistake or betray the Rules Clause, with the bicameral and presentment clauses, and with the suprem- Framers to grant Congress the Power of the Purse this sense than the legislature.’’ These words reflected their belief that a proper governmental apply in the area of fiscal decisions where acy of Congress over fiscal matters, we con- system would have the legislature at its core.) See the decisions regarding taxation and spend- clude that the line-item veto may only be also The Federalist, No. 30, at 188 (A. Hamilton) (J. ing depend on the government having taken enacted through Constitutional amendment. Cooke ed. 1961) (‘‘Money is, with propriety, consid- THE COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL LEGISLATION ered as the vital principle of the body politic, as into account the diverse interests of its citi- that which sustains its life and motion, and enables zens. No institution is better suited, able or Daniel J. Capra, Chair.* it to perform its most important functions.’’ willing to accommodate these diverse inter- Marianne Fogarty, Secretary. 30 The Federalist Papers, No. 58. ests than Congress. Based upon this view, the Andrea J. Berger, Stacey E. Blaustein, 31 See Mikva, supra, at 4. Framers chose to give supremacy in budg- Richard A. Briffault, Louis A. Craco, Jr., 32 J.W. Hampton, Jr. & Co., v. United States, 276 etary power to Congress. In fact, only the Lawrence P. Eagel, David P. Felsher,** Leon U.S. 394, 405–06 (1928) quoted in Congressional Re- House—the chamber closest to the Friedman, Mark L. Goldstein, Helen Gredd, search Service, The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation 64 elctroate—was given the right to initiate Peter C. Hein, Madelynn S. Heintz, Michael E. Herz, Beth Jacob, Maria Bainor Keane, Ni- (1972) (S. Rep. 92–82, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972)). revenue bills. Clearly, the Framers believed 33 Stearns, supra, at 397, 399; Wolfson, supra, at 851– that decisions affecting the pocketbooks of cole A. LaBarbera, Sylvia A. Law, Stephen 52. the citizens should be made by the govern- M. Lazare, Thomas J. Lilly, Jr. mental institution that is closest to them.31 Lewis J. Liman, Robert S. Marsel, Jill Mr. COATS. Mr. President, it is al- All this does not mean that the President Moskowitz, William M. Pinzler, Victor Ri- ways enlightening listening to the Sen- is prohibited from taking an active role in vera, Kathleen M. Scanlon, Susan Stabile, ator from New York. He always pre- Congress’ appropriations decisions. For ex- Debra M. Torres, Maya D. Wiley, Shawna sents a thoroughly researched and Yen. ample Article II provides that the President thoroughly examined and well-articu- may recommend to Congress measures that * Editor of this Report. he deems ‘‘necessary and expedient.’’ And of ** Author of this Report. lated argument for his positions. And I course the President possesses a qualified 1 Committee on Federal Legislation of the Associa- enjoy his presentations immensely. veto over all legislation, including appro- tion of the Bar of the City of New York, The line- Item Veto, 41 The Record 367 (1986). As the Senator from New York priations measures. 2 See Maxwell L. Stearns, The Public Choice Case knows, there is a difference of opinion Nevertheless, with respect to the budget, Against the Item Veto, 49 Washington & Lee L. Rev. under the Constitution, the President’s role 385, 386 (1992); Eugene Gressman, Is the Item Veto on the constitutionality of separate en- is subordinate to that of Congress. Despite Constitutional?, 64 N.C.L. Rev. 819 (1986). rollment. Distinguished constitutional the President’s recommendation and veto 3 See Louis Fisher & Neal Devins, How Success- scholars have come to opposite conclu- powers, it is Congress that must make the fully Can the States’ Item Veto be Transferred to sions, one of which is Laurence Tribe, a final decisions regarding funding levels and the President?, 75 Georgetown L.J. 159, 162 (1986). 4 Mark Crain & Jim Miller, Budget Process and constitutional scholar frequently the expenditure of appropriated funds. It is Spending Growth, 31 William & Mary L. Rev. 1021, quoted by members of both parties, but Congress that must decide the extent to 1031–32 (1990). which the President’s views and proposals 5 See Paul R. Q. Wolfson, Is a Presidential Item particularly by members of the party are accepted. Budgetary ‘‘reform’’ that in- Veto Constitutional, 96 Yale L.J. 838, 851–52 (1987). of the Senator from New York. The

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4450 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 American Law Institute and Congres- I thank the Senator from New York an improvement, this piece of legisla- sional Research Service have given infor his statement here today, in which tion is beyond the stage of improving dication that they believe the separate he pointed to the acknowledged Father in such a way that it will not impair enrollment procedure is constitutional, of the Constitution, James Madison, the power of the purse which, under the and Senator BIDEN, currently a Mem- who in Federalist Papers No. 58 said, Constitution, has been lodged in the ber of this body and ranking member of ‘‘This power over the purse may, in legislative branch. Judiciary, has argued articulately for fact, be regarded as the most complete If the Senator wishes to have a voice the constitutionality of such proce- and effectual weapon with which any vote on his amendment, I yield for that dure. Constitution can arm the immediate purpose. So, clearly, there are opinions on representatives of the people * * *’’ Is AMENDMENT NO. 401, AS FURTHER MODIFIED TO both sides of this issue. Ultimately, of that not what he said? AMENDMENT NO. 347 course, the court will make that deter- Mr. MOYNIHAN. Yes. Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I mination. We have adopted expedited Mr. BYRD. This power over the would call up amendment No. 401. procedures, traditional procedures of purse. What escapes my comprehension which that determination can be made. is how we, as Senators, can so lightly The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is This Senator hopes and trusts that the pass that cup; how we can so lightly the pending amendment. opinions of Mr. Tribe and Senator vote to transfer some of that power Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I BIDEN, the American Law Institute, over the purse to the Executive. thank the Senator from West Virginia and others, will prevail and be persua- Whether he be a Democrat or a Repub- for the comments he made yesterday sive with the courts. But we will find lican, I have never wavered in my oppo- and the questions which he raised with out in due course what that is. sition to the line-item veto. respect to this amendment. I appre- I thank the Senator from New York Mr. MOYNIHAN. Will the distin- ciate his help on that. for his contributions, which are always guished and revered Senator yield for a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The valuable contributions and thought- question? question is on agreeing to the amend- provoking contributions. Mr. BYRD. I am delighted to. ment. Mr. MOYNIHAN. If the Senator will Mr. MOYNIHAN. Would he happen to So the amendment (No. 401) was yield for a question, I am sure the Sen- know that in the 1988 text of ‘‘Amer- agreed to. ator would agree that when the Court ican Constitutional Law,’’ which Pro- AMENDMENT NO. 350 TO AMENDMENT NO. 347 decides, we will abide by the decision. fessor Tribe wrote, he stated that sepa- That is the great fact of the American (Purpose: To prohibit the use of savings rate enrollment was probably unconsti- achieved through lowering the discre- Government. tutional? Mr. COATS. There is no dispute on tionary spending caps to offset revenue de- Mr. BYRD. Was probably? creases subject to pay-as-you-go require- that point. Mr. MOYNIHAN. Probably unconsti- ments) Mr. BYRD. Will the Senator yield? tutional. I think he was right then. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I have an Mr. BYRD. Well, that statement is in ator from Indiana has the floor. amendment at the desk which has been Mr. COATS. I would like to yield the stark contrast to the letter which I be- qualified for a call up. I shall call it up floor if the Senator from West Virginia lieve he wrote to Senator BIDEN. at this point. seeks the floor. The Senator from New York, who has The PRESIDING OFFICER. The The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- A heart as stout as the Irish oak clerk will report the amendment. And as pure as the Lakes of Killarney ator from West Virginia. The bill clerk read as follows: Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank has taken the right stand in my judg- Amendment numbered 350: ment. He took the right stand on the the distinguished Senator from New At the appropriate place insert the fol- York for his very scholarly statement ‘‘unbalanced budget amendment,’’ lowing: today. I am only sorry that more Sen- commonly referred to as the balanced SEC. . USE OF THE REDUCTIONS IN DISCRE- ators are not on the floor to have heard budget amendment. And he has TIONARY SPENDING CAPS. what the Senator had to say. We know unwaveringly defended the position (A) CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT.— what the Constitution says, and the that that document which has come to (1) BUDGET RESOLUTIONS AND LEGISLA- Constitution says ‘‘every bill which bear the aura of immortality should TION.—Section 301 of the Congressional Budg- shall have passed.’’ Constitutional not be demeaned and debased and, as a et Act of 1974 is amended by adding at the scholars may differ, but I think that matter of fact, defaced by such an end the following: we have to retreat to the Constitution amendment. ‘‘(j) USE OF REDUCTIONS IN DISCRETIONARY itself, first of all, to attempt to con- He takes the right stand today. He is SPENDING CAPS.—It shall not be in order in strue and interpret that document and a man of obstinate veracity. I appre- the Senate or House of Representatives to read the plain language of the Con- ciate the fact that he has taken the consider any concurrent resolution on the budget, bill, joint resolution, amendment, stitution itself. time here today to make this state- motion, or conference report that decreases We have, as Senators, a responsi- ment. I wish all Senators heard it. I the discretionary spending limits unless the bility to make some judgment our- hope they will read it. I heard part of concurrent resolution on the budget, bill, selves as to the constitutionality of a it. It will be my intention to read Sen- joint resolution, amendment, motion, or con- measure before we pass on it. In the ator MOYNIHAN’s statement, and I will ference report provides that such decrease final analysis, it will be the courts that keep it. I thank the distinguished Sen- may only be used for deficit reduction and will decide. But we cannot pass that ator for his service. may not be used to offset all or part of an in- cup to others. We have to make that Mr. MOYNIHAN. I thank the Sen- crease in direct spending or decrease in re- judgment here. ator. ceipts under section 252 of the Balanced I read the letter by Professor Tribe. Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I believe of 1974.’’. It was written 2 years ago, I believe, to the distinguished Senator from Michi- (2) SIXTY VOTE POINT OF ORDER.—Sub- Senator BILL BRADLEY, if I am not mis- gan wanted to modify his amendment. sections (c) and (d) of section 904 of the Con- taken. I have great respect for Pro- Has he modified it? gressional Budget Act of 1974 are amended by fessor Tribe. But I must say, I was dis- Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I have inserting ‘‘301(j),’’ after ‘‘301(i).’’. appointed in reading that letter. I was modified it. (b) GRAMM-RUDMAN.—Section 252 of the disappointed that such an eminent Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, let me Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit scholar of the Constitution would take compliment the Senator on having im- Control Act of 1985 is amended by adding at that view of this measure. I say that proved the language of the amendment. the end the following: with apologies to Professor Tribe. He is I certainly have no objection to adopt- ‘‘(f) USE OF REDUCTIONS IN DISCRETIONARY a constitutional scholar and I am not. ing the amendment on voice vote. SPENDING CAPS.—A decrease in the discretionary spending limits may only be used for But I was astonished that he took that It is an improvement. He has contrib- deficit reduction and may not be used to off- view and indicated that in his judg- uted a very worthwhile service. I just set all or part of an increase in direct spend- ment that would pass the constitu- wanted to compliment him and say ing or decrease in receipts under this sec- tional test. that even though his action constitutes tion.’’.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4451 The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. have come in here, 11 of them, 11 new Let us see what old Henry Clay said. GRAMS). The Senator from West Vir- Senators, all Republican Senators. I I do not use that word as a word of dis- ginia. get the impression that these, not only respect. I am getting along in years Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank new Senators but several of the Sen- myself and I expect I am older today the Chair. I thank the able clerk for ators who have been around here long than Henry Clay was—I know by a long reading the amendment in its entirety. enough to know better, consider that shot—than he was when he spoke in the Mr. President, I am one Senator who as a conservative position. I know Senate. Let us see what Henry Clay believes that it would be foolhardy to there are some real conservatives on had to say. enact tax cut legislation this year. In- that side of the aisle, but I am at a loss He was not talking about the line- to understand how a true conservative stead, I believe that we should con- item veto. He was talking about the can advocate giving to the President a centrate all of our efforts and our re- veto, the veto, which we all know is in line-item veto and can advocate a bal- sources toward reducing the deficit. I the Constitution. Here is what Mr. anced budget amendment to the Con- am aware that President Clinton has Clay said. I will not read his whole stitution. called for a middle-class tax cut and I speech. I had thought, if I were forced am sorry that he did so. I am aware I have been around here now 36 years in this body, going on my 37th year. I to stand on my feet and take a good bit that the so-called Contract With Amer- of the Senate’s time I just might read ica pledges a much larger tax cut than have known a lot of conservatives, conservative Senators, conservative Re- the whole speech of Henry Clay, but I that which has been called for by Presi- will not do that. Just a little of it will dent Clinton. publicans. I cannot imagine the conservative Republican Senators who give you the flavor. Here is what he The so-called Contract With America said in part. pledges a much larger tax cut, would be were in this body when I came here 36 mostly for America’s wealthiest tax- years ago advocating a line-item veto, After speaking of the veto power generally, payers. I am opposed to both of those advocating a balanced budget amend- and more particularly of its exercise by a proposals because I believe that deficit ment to the Constitution. I cannot be- late President of the United States, the speech proceeded to say. . . . reduction ought to be our first priority lieve that Norris Cotton, George Aiken, or Everett Dirksen, or Bob Taft, I can- at this time. You see, this is the reporter of the I think the President was on the not believe that Senators of that day Congressional Globe who is writing in right track when he worked with the would not roll over in their tombs the third person, so he is saying this is Democratic leadership in the 103d Con- today if they heard what I have been what Mr. Clay had to say. The Official gress to enact a budget deficit reduc- hearing. Conservative Senators—this is Reporter today will not refer to the the great conservative cause. ‘‘Stand tion package that amounted to some- Senators as in the third person. up for the conservative cause. Put in where between $400 and $500 billion the President’s hand a line-item veto. ‘‘After speaking of the veto power over a period of 5 years. He was on the Power of the purse vested in the legis- generally and more particularly of its right track. He should have stayed on lative branch? Why, article I, section 9 exercise by a late President of the that track. of the Constitution—I don’t believe a United States, the speech proceeded to According to the Center on Budget word of it. I don’t believe that the say’’—now this is Henry Clay. This is and Policy Priorities, the tax bill Framers of the Constitution knew not ROBERT C. BYRD. This is Henry passed by the House Ways and Means what they were doing when they wrote Clay. Committee would reduce revenues by into the Constitution section 9 of arti- nearly $180 billion over the next 5 The first and in my opinion the most im- cle I, which says, ‘No money shall be portant object which should engage the seri- years. That, I believe, is bad fiscal pol- drawn from the Treasury, but in Con- ous attention of a new administration is that icy. sequence of Appropriations made by of circumscribing the executive power and Here we are, we are debating today, Law.’ And, of course, the first article, throwing around it such limitations and and we have been debating since Mon- the first sentence in the Constitution safeguards as will render it no longer dan- day, a piece of legislation that purports gerous to the public liberties. tells us who makes the laws. ‘All legis- to do something about the budget def- lative Powers herein granted shall be Hear me: Henry Clay. We do not hear icit. It purports to do something about vested in the Congress of the United talk in the Senate about public lib- the budget deficits. ‘‘Oh, we have to do States, which shall consist of a Senate erties anymore. We do not talk about something to get these deficits under and House of Representatives.’’’ the liberties, the people’s liberties any- control. We have to do something And here we are, we are being told more. We only talk about what is good about our horrendous budget deficits. that the conservatives—this is sup- for the next election. What party is We have to put the tools in the hands posed to be this great new revolution going to prevail in the next election. of the President of the United States. here being carried on by the conserv- Who is going to get the upper hand in We have to give him the line-item atives, being brought to the floor of the next election. There is no time and veto.’’ both Houses, this new revolution—the no place here to talk about the people’s President Reagan often said, ‘‘Give conservatives are out to advocate that liberties. me the line-item veto. When I was Gov- the constitutional framers were not as ernor of California I had the line-item wise as we had been heretofore taught With the view, therefore, to the fundamental character of the government itself, veto. Give me the line-item veto. I will they were, and that the President of take on the challenge. I will make the and especially of the executive branch, it the United States should have part of seems to me . . . cuts.’’ the power over the purse; we should And I hear—it is only hearsay, or place in his hands the line-item veto. This is Henry Clay of Kentucky. ‘‘read-say,’’ I hear and I read that the I wish that Henry Clay were still in . . . to me that either by amendments of so-called Contract With America—if I the Senate. I wish that Henry Clay the Constitution, when they are necessary, ever refer to that as a ‘‘Contract With were still in the Senate. or by remedial legislation when the object America’’ I hope the Official Reporters It is kind of old fashioned around falls within the scope of the powers of Con- will make a correction in my tran- here, I know, to go back and read the gress, there should be, first, a provision to script, to put the words ‘‘so-called’’ as old dusty records of the Congresses of render a person ineligible to the office of the antecedents to the words ‘‘Contract yesteryears. But I hold in my hand President of the United States after a service With America.’’ here some pages from the Congres- of one term. The so-called Contract With Amer- sional Globe containing sketches of the Not ‘‘three strikes and you are out.’’ ica, I understand—I hear and I read— debates and proceedings of the Second One term, then you are out. that one of the planks in that so-called Session of the 27th Congress, volume Second, that the veto power . . . contract is a line-item veto. So the so- 11, Blair and Rives, editors, City of called Contract With America purports Washington, printed at the Globe office Listen to this. that a line-item veto should be placed for the editors in 1842, exactly 153 years Second, that the veto power should be in the hands of the Chief Executive. We ago. And the date, to be very exact, more precisely defined and be subjected to have all these fine new Senators who was January 24, 1842. further limitations and qualifications.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4452 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 He is not talking about broadening all events, the power was inserted as one fea- veto itself, every man acquainted with the veto power. He is not saying that ture, not only in the general Constitution of human nature would be ready to admit, that we should give the Chief Executive a the Federal Government, but also in the if nothing could set it aside but a vote of line-item veto. Clay thinks that the Constitutions of a portion of the States. two-thirds in both Houses, it might as well have been made absolute at once. framers went too far in giving the I will not tire Senators with reading President the veto and requiring that, from the Congressional Globe and read- And there have been only 104 vetoes if a veto is overridden, it be overridden ing from the words of one of the all- in the history of this Republic that by two-thirds vote. time great Senators. His picture is out have been overridden—104 in 206 years. here in the anteroom where we meet So it is virtually an absolute veto. It was his purpose . . . with constituents; Henry Clay. Think of what it will mean. I daresay, This is the reporter again talking in Anyone at all acquainted with the contem- once this legislation becomes law, if it the third person. poraneous history of the Constitution must ever does become law, which God It was his purpose— know that one great and radical error which avert—I wish it would not be done with Meaning Clay’s purpose. possessed the minds of the wise men who my help—I daresay there will not be drew up that instrument was an apprehen- to go but very briefly into the history and any vetoes of items, any vetoes of sion that the executive department of the origin of the veto power. It was known to all these little orphan ‘‘billettes.’’ I dare- then proposed government would be too fee- to have originated in the institution of the ble to contend successfully in a struggle with say that there will not be any vetoes tribunitian power in ancient Rome; the power of the legislature. Hence, it was overridden because not one of those lit- Well, sweet speak of rhetoric. Here is found that various expedients had been pro- tle orphan ‘‘billettes’’ will have the a man 153 years ago who is talking posed in the convention with the avowed pressure and the power that may be about the tribunitian power in ancient purpose of strengthening the executive arm. brought to bear on a matter of national Rome. I have been talking about that And the Federalist Papers so state significance. also. that one reason why the President, Little West Virginia in the House of Senators could learn a little more why the Executive was given the veto, Representatives has three votes. There about the tribunitian power in ancient was to protect himself and his office are many other States likewise that Rome. from the incursions by the legislative are represented by few in numbers in Henry Clay said. branch. the other body. And as I have already . . . that it was seized upon and perverted All these propositions had their origin in said, let something be of interest—take to purposes of ambition when the empire was the one prevailing idea: that of the weakness the Northeast region here because established under Augustus; and that it had of the Executive and its incompetence to de- there are a cluster of States up there, not been finally abolished until the reign of fend itself against the encroachments of leg- very important States. Most of them Constantine. There could be no doubt that it islative domination and dictation. were States before the Constitution ex- It was an axiom in all three governments had been introduced from the practice under isted. They had a part to play in writ- the empire into the monarchies of Europe, in that the three great departments—legisla- most of which, in some form or other some tive, executive and judicial—should ever be ing that Constitution and a part to modification or other, it was now to be kept separate and distinct, and a govern- play in the revolution, the Revolu- found. But, although it existed in the na- ment was the most perfect when most in tionary War. But if there is something tional codes, the power had not, in the case conformity with this fundamental principle. in an appropriation bill that is of of Great Britain, been exercised for a cen- But it was said that the framers of our Con- major significance to those few little tury and a half past; and, if he was correctly stitution had nevertheless been induced to States but not of importance to the informed on the subject, it had, in the place the veto upon the list of executive pow- rest of the Union, it would be very, ers by two considerations. The first was a de- French monarchy, never been exercised at very difficult for those few States to all. During the memorable period of the sire to protect the executive against the French Revolution, when a new Constitution powers of the legislative branch, and the muster the votes necessary to override was under consideration, this subject of the other was a prudent wish to guard the coun- a Presidential veto of some of the little veto power has been largely discussed, and try against the injurious effects of crude and orphan ‘‘billettes’’ that will parade had agitated the whole country. Everyone hasty legislation. But where was the neces- across the President’s desk once this must recollect how it had been turned sity? Clay asked. Where was the necessity to piece of legislation is enacted. protect the executive against the legislative against the unfortunate Louis XIV. Mr. Clay contended, that really and in department? Were not both bound by the sol- practice this veto power drew after it the Well, that is an error. The official re- emn oath to support the Constitution? The power of initiating laws, and in its effect porters made an error in the Congres- judiciary had no veto. If the argument was a must ultimately amount to conferring on sional Globe when they referred to sound one, why was not the same protection the executive the entire legislative power of Louis XIV. Clay was talking about extended to the judiciary also? the Government. Louis XVI. He was not talking about Ah, Clay speaks of the solemn oath You wait until he gets this. Clay in Louis XIV. He was talking about Louis to which we swear with our hands on his dreams probably would never have XVI. It is easy to see how a mistake God’s gospel and our other hand raised conceived of such a massive transfer of can be made. Instead of XVI the official to Almighty God. We do not pay much power of the purse that we are about to reporter wrote XIV. But be that as it attention to our oaths anymore. But enact here. He was talking about the may. Clay evidently felt differently about it. veto that is in the Constitution, which . . . Louis XVI, who had been held up to the Some of the pages are gone from my has been in there for 206 years, which ridicule by the populace, under the title of faxed copy of the Congressional Globe. was thoroughly discussed at the Con- ‘‘Monsieur Veto’’, as his wife, the Queen, had But I will continue reading excerpts vention, thoroughly discussed in the been called ‘‘Madame Veto’’ . . . from the same speech by Clay on the ratifying conventions of the States. He So it had to be Louis XVI. abolition of the veto power in the Sen- could not have dreamed of this kind of . . . although, after much difficulty, the ate January 24, 1842. veto that we are about to hand to the power had finally found a place in the con- Clay had hitherto viewed the veto power stitution, not a solitary instance had oc- simply in its numerical weight, in the aggre- President. curred of its actual exercise. Under the colo- gate votes of the two Houses; but there was With the power to initiate and the power nial state of this country, the power was another and far more important point of to consummate legislation, to give vitality transplanted from the experience which had view in which it ought to be considered. He and vigor to every law, or to strike it dead— been had of it in Europe, to the laws relating contended, that practically, and in effect, Or to strike it dead. to the colonies, and that in a double form, the veto, armed with such a qualification as at his pleasure, the President must ulti- for there was a veto of the Colonial Governor now accompanied it in the Constitution, was mately become the ruler of the nation. and also a veto of the Crown. neither more nor less than an absolute Clay went on to say that: power. It was virtually an unqualified nega- And he will also become the ruler of tive on the legislation of Congress. the Members of the House and Senate. No doubt the idea of engrafting this power Bow down to this new Caesar, bow upon our own Constitution was adopted by That was Henry Clay. the Convention from having always found it In such circumstances, when all the per- down to this power. I wish there were a as a power recognized in European Govern- sonal influence, the official patronage, and Henry Clay in this body today. ments, just as it had been derived by them the reasoning which accompanied the veto, Mr. Clay warned the nation, that if this from the practice and history of Rome. At were added to the substantial weight of the veto power was not arrested, if it were not

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4453 either abolished or at least limited and cir- Where are the true conservatives of Means Committee’s reduction in the cumscribed, in process of time, and that be- today? You are looking at one. I am a proportion of Social Security benefits fore another such period had elapsed as had conservative when it comes to pre- that are subject to taxation would give intervened since the Revolution, the whole legislation of this country could become to serving the constitutional system, the a tax break to the top 13 percent of So- be prepared at the White House, or in one or Constitution of the United States. I am cial Security beneficiaries. other of the Executive departments, and not above many. I have voted for five Similarly, the changes proposed by would come down to Congress in the shape of amendments, as I have said. But never the House Ways and Means Committee bills for them to register, and pass through would I vote—I would be shot before a the forms of legislation, just as had once in rates of depreciation and the repeal firing squad before I would vote—to de- of the corporate Alternative Minimum been done in the ancient courts of France. stroy the structure of this Constitu- Tax would substantially reduce taxes There was the voice of prophecy. tion. paid by the Nation’s largest corpora- There, there, was the security, [Clay said] Talk about our children and grand- tions. and not in this miserable despotic veto children. We shed crocodile tears about power of the President of the United States. children and grandchildren when it All of these new tax breaks, Mr. That is what he thought of the veto comes to reducing the budget deficit. President, will have to be paid for. power, ‘‘the miserable despotic veto Well, then, let us start helping our Over the next 5 years alone, we would power of the President of the United children by taking a forthright stand have to find $180 billion in spending States.’’ against the tax cut. cuts; $630 billion over the next 10 years; You might take a mechanic from the ave- If we want to really help our children and, every year thereafter, $110 billion nue and make him President, and he would and grandchildren, let us take a stand per year in cuts in order to bankroll instantly be surrounded with the power and against a tax cut. these subsidies for the well off people influence of his office. . . The unpretending name, President of the It would put us in the hole by an- in this country. That level of cuts United States, was no security against the other $180 billion in this year’s 5-year would have to be made if we were to extent or the abuse of power. . . Whether he budget resolution before we even start enact the House Ways and Means Com- were called emperor, dictator, king, lib- to work on a plan to reduce the deficit. mittee tax bill. Having made these erator, protector, sultan, or President, of the To make matters worse, these revenue cuts, we will just be breaking even. We United States was of no consequence at all. losses would skyrocket over the subse- will not have reduced the deficit at all. Look at his power; that was what we had to quent 5 years to $450 billion, making guard against. The most tremendous power We have heard all this crying out here known to antiquity was the shortest in dura- total revenue losses over the next 10 on the Senate Floor over the cruel ef- tion. years equal $630 billion. Ultimately, fects of budget deficits on our children That was the power of the dictator. when all of the provisions of the House and grandchildren. Yet, when it comes Under the Republic, a dictator was cho- Ways and Means Committee bill are right down to it, the grandchildren do sen for a maximum of 6 months or phased in—now. this is the so-called not vote so we will just wait a little until such time as the crisis for which contract with America—the revenue longer to get serious about the deficit. the dictator was chosen had run its losses every year would be more than Meanwhile we can dole out a little course, whichever was the lessor. $110 billion. more tax pork for the privileged few. Who would get the lion’s share of the Cincinnatus was chosen dictator be- It is silly; utter folly. They talk, on benefits of these tax cuts? Again, ac- cause there was a Roman general the one hand, about reducing these cording to the latest analysis by the whose army was surrounded by the deficits so that we can finally get down Center on Budget and Policy priorities, tribes of the east. Cincinnatus heeded to paying something on the principal of the call, took off his toga, took on the these large revenue losses, which would total $630 billion over the next 10 years, the debt, stop having to pay interest on cloak of the dictator, defeated the that debt, reduce the deficits, take de- enemy in 16 days, gave up the dictator- are largely attributable to provisions that heavily benefit upper-income fense off the table—do not touch de- ship, and went back to plowing with fense—even increase defense, and, at his oxen on his little 3-acre farm beside households and large corporations. In fact, according to a Treasury De- the same time, balance the budget and, the Tiber. lo and behold, enact a tax cut. Enact a But what power he had. He had all partment analysis, less than 16 percent tax cut—what a joke. the power, omnipotent power, over of the benefits of the fully phased-in every man, woman, boy, and girl in tax provisions as passed by the House I like to vote for tax cuts. That is Rome while he was dictator. He could Ways and Means Committee would go easy. That does not take any courage. execute without trial; all power. So the to the 60 percent of all families with in- Where are these cuts to come from? dictatorship of Rome continued but for comes below $50,000. The top 1 percent The Ways and Means Committee will a brief period. Yet, while it lasted, the of families with incomes of $350,000 or not tell us the specifics; but, according whole state was in his hands. He did more a year would receive 20 percent of to a Washington Post article of March the tax benefits, while more than half whatever he pleased, whether it was 17, 1995, the House Budget Committee of the tax goodies would go to the top life, liberty, or property. has approved the ‘‘broad outlines of 12 percent of families—those with in- I will close with this last extract of $190 billion in spending cuts over the comes over $100,000 per year. the speech of Clay on January 24, 1842. next 5 years ‘‘—for what?—’’ to finance ‘‘Before the power should be utterly Of the major provisions in the House a massive GOP tax cut. Nearly half the abolished, he’’—meaning Clay— Ways and Means Committee bill, the reductions would come from Welfare ‘‘deemed it prudent, that an experi- changes in IRA’s capital gains tax- and Medicare and the rest from hun- ment should be made in a modified ation, and the taxation of Social Secu- dreds of other government programs form; and instead of requiring a major- rity income are heavily tilted in favor and foreign aid.’’ So, we cut programs ity of two-thirds of both Houses to su- of high-income people. for the poor, we cut programs for the persede the veto of the President, he Past analyses indicate that about 95 sick, we cut programs for the elderly. thought it sufficient to require the percent of the benefits from the cur- For what? So that another Rolls Royce concurrence of a majority of the whole rent IRA proposal would go to the top can appear in the driveway of some fat number of members elected to each fifth of the population. cat. Well, that ought to get your blood House of Congress.’’ According to an analysis by the So that was Henry Clay, one of the Treasury Department, over half the pressure up. I have no problem with the great trio of all time, one of the Mem- benefits from the House Ways and idea of slicing foreign aid, but the sav- bers of the Senate when it was in its Means Committee’s capital gains pro- ings ought to go toward reducing the golden age. visions would go to the wealthiest 3 deficit. What would he say today? What percent of families who have incomes That same Washington Post article would he say today of this hydra-head- over $200,000, while three-fourths of the also lists what are called ‘‘suggestions ed dragon? We are about to sow the benefits would go to the top 12 percent in the House Budget Committee’s pro- dragon’s teeth and the country will of families who have incomes over posal to cut discretionary spending by reap the whirlwind. $100,000 a year; and the House Ways and $100 billion over 5 years.’’

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4454 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 I ask unanimous consent to print on cutting the maximum income of eligible Reduce programs in vocational and this article in the RECORD. families from $200,000 a year to $95,000 ac- adult education ...... 0.9 There being no objection, the article cording to several signers. Reduce assistance to Eastern Eu- rope, former Soviet Union ...... 0.8 was ordered to be printed in the ‘‘We took a little bit silly passing tax cuts when we don’t have any money,’’ said Rep. Eliminate wasteful rehabilitation RECORD, as follows: Ray LaHood (R-Ill.), who declined to sign the of severely distressed public [From the Washington Post, Mar. 17, 1995] Contract With America because he opposes housing ...... 0.8 HOUSE PANEL PLANS BIG SPENDING CUTS— its tax cuts. Cut contributions to international $190 BILLION WOULD OFFSET TAX BREAKS Yesterday, Sens. Dan Coats (R-Ind.) and peacekeeping ...... 0.8 Reduce funding for Goals 2000 and (By Eric Pianin and Dan Morgan) Rod Grams (R-Minn.) introduced a $500-per- child tax credit proposal that is similar to School in Work programs ...... 0.7 The House Budget Committee yesterday the version approved by the House Ways and Reduce funding for construction of approved by the broad outlines of $190 billion Means Committee earlier this week and pro- Agriculture, Interior facilities in spending cuts over the next five years to vides benefits to families making up to and trails ...... 0.7 finance a massive GOP tax cut. Nearly half Reduce domestic volunteer pro- $200,000 a year. the reductions would come from welfare and grams ...... 0.7 While the drive for a major tax cut con- Medicare and the rest from hundreds of other Reduce Energy Department’s fossil tinues to enjoy widespread support among government programs and foreign aid. energy research and development 0.7 House Republicans, Democrats and Senate Budget Committee Chairman John R. Ka- Apply cost-benefit test to Super- Republicans are wary of devoting precious sich (R-Ohio) boasted that his plan would as- fund projects ...... 0.5 resources to a tax cut when polls indicate sure that Republicans fully pay for a tax Reduce General Accounting Office that voters are more concerned about deficit package providing three times as much relief funding by 15 percent ...... 0.3 reduction and many economists say a tax as one proposed by President Clinton and Cut number of political appointees 0.2 cut is a bad idea. begin to put the government on ‘‘the glide Reduce Peace Corps funding ...... 0.2 But House GOP leaders refuse to back path’’ to a balanced budget. Replace dollar bills with dollar Republicans issued the proposals hours be- down on their campaign pledge to slash taxes coins ...... 0.1 fore the House passed a separate bill that for families and businesses, and yesterday Eliminate Small Business Adminis- would pare $17.1 billion from the current Kasich unveiled his blueprint for financing tration’s tree planting program budget. Republicans had pledged that all the the package. (in millions of dollars) ...... 75 Terminate State justice Institute long-term savings from that package would About $100 billion of the proposed savings (in millions of dollars) ...... 54 go for deficit reduction and not to help pay would be achieved by extending and lowering legally mandated limits on discretionary Other programs (in billions of dol- for their tax cut. But early yesterday, Ka- lars) ...... 37.0 sich acknowledged that the promise had been spending over the next five years and leaving nothing more than a ‘‘game’’ to attract con- it up to the appropriate House committees to determine where the specific cuts would be Total ...... 100.4 servative Democratic support for the bill, Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, in other provoking a storm on the floor of the House. made. Suggestions in the House Budget words, the House Budget Committee The House approved the spending-cut pack- has proposed a list of suggested discre- age, 227 to 200, despite widspread defections Committee’s proposal to cut discre- by fiscally conservative Democrats who tionary spending by $100 billion over tionary spending cuts, totaling $100 bil- claimed they had been duped. The uproar five years: lion over the next 5 years, which would further soured Republican-Democratic rela- Budget committee’s five-year plan be used, not for deficit reduction, but tions and distracted from the COP leader- to pay for more than half of the 5-year ship’s message that they were paying for tax [In billions of dollars] cost of the tax breaks proposed by the relief with ‘‘real’’ spendng cuts. Reduce funding for ineffective House Ways and Means Committee. ‘‘They lied in order to pass a bill they training and employment pro- Mr. President, the use of cuts in dis- grams ...... 9.3 couldn’t pass otherwise,’’ Minority Leader cretionary spending to pay for tax cuts Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said. Eliminate Low Income Home En- Yesterday’s contentious, sometimes con- ergy Assistance Program ...... 7.2 is not permitted under the provisions fusing budget drama underscored the House Reduce federal agency overhead ..... 5.0 of the Budget Enforcement Act. Rath- Republicans’ challenge in juggling a number Reduce violent crime trust fund ..... 5.0 er, that act sets annual discretionary of converging fiscal initiatives—proposing a Terminate support for the Inter- spending limits which, if they are ex- huge tax cut just as they are promising a national Development Associa- ceeded, will cause across-the-board se- balanced budget—with time running out on tion ...... 2.8 questers sufficient to ensure that total their 100-day ‘‘Contract With America’’ time- Cut funding to Agency for Inter- discretionary spending stays within national Development ...... 2.7 table. the caps. Similarly, pay-as-you-go pro- The $17.1 billion spending-cut package ini- Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act (sets tially was devised by Republicans to offset wages for federal contracts in cedures in section 252 of the Budget En- the cost of disaster relief for California and construction industry) ...... 2.6 forcement Act control mandatory to make a down payment on the cost of the Cut National Institutes of Health spending and taxes. This is good policy tax package, although later they promised to funding by 5 percent ...... 2.5 because domestic discretionary spend- use most of it for deficit reduction. Sepa- Reduce energy supply research and ing, in large measure, goes to benefit rately, Kasich and his staff prepared the plan development ...... 2.3 the Nation in general. It should not be for $190 billion of spending cuts to finance Reduce mass transit operating sub- allowed to be ravaged in order to pay sidies, capital grants ...... 2.3 the bulk of the tax cuts, along with a 10-page for tax favors—tax favors—for the well- list of ‘‘illustrative Republican spending Eliminate programs in National cuts’’ to show where most of those savings Telecommunications and Infor- to-do. could be found. The five-year plan would mation Administration ...... 2.2 What the House Republicans are ac- take effect in 1996. Phase out Amtrak operating sub- tually proposing will require a change In the coming weeks, Kasich must also sidies ...... 1.6 in the Budget Enforcement Act to fol- complete work on yet another initiative, a Phase out funding of Legal Services low reductions in discretionary spend- seven-year plan for balancing the budget. All Corp...... 1.6 ing limitations to be used to pay for told, GOP leaders must come up with as Reform management of NASA’s tax cuts for the wealthy. That is bad much as $1.2 trillion of cuts and savings to human space flight programs ...... 1.5 policy. That is not just some obscure eliminate the deficit and pay for the tax cuts Terminate funding for the National by 2002, as they have pledged to do. Endowments for the Arts and Hu- Budget Act process change. That is bad Meanwhile, about 100 moderate and fiscally manities ...... 1.4 policy, and it ought not be sanctioned. conservative Republicans have joined in a Place five-year moratorium on con- I note among the suggestions here, mini-revolt aimed at forcing the leadership struction, acquisition of federal one, reduce violent crime trust fund, $5 to peel back the cost of the proposed $500- buildings ...... 1.3 billion. It was my proposal that we per-child tax credit—the most expensive Restructure National Oceanic and have a crime trust fund, and I think I piece of the GOP tax plan—and target the Atmospheric Administration ...... 1.2 found $21 billion or $22 billion or $23 benefits more narrowly to middle-class fami- Eliminate the Economic Develop- billion to put in that trust fund when lies. ment Administration ...... 1.2 The Republicans have signed a letter cir- Eliminate the U.S. Travel and we passed the crime bill—$30 billion. So culated by freshman Rep. Greg Ganske Tourism Administration and here they are going to whittle out $5 (Iowa) and House Agriculture Committee trade promotion ...... 1.1 billion from the trust fund. Chairman Pat Roberts (Kan.) asking Speaker Privatize the Corporation for Pub- Reduce funding for ineffective train- Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) to assure a floor vote lic Broadcasting ...... 1.0 ing and employment programs. Well, it

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4455 says ‘‘ineffective.’’ Whether or not they tax cut believe. Talk about dis- other, let flow from our lips the utter are ineffective we will know. regarding history. Talk about a flat folly of advocating a tax cut. For what Eliminate Low Income Home Energy learning curve. We have not learned reason? To get votes. Assistance Program; cut National In- anything from recent history. Some Let us not stretch our already fragile stitutes of Health funding by 5 percent; have not picked up a thing from the credibility to the breaking point by reduce energy supply research and de- nightmare of the 1980’s. This so-called continuing to pretend that these obvi- velopment; reduce mass transit oper- Contract With America calls for mas- ously incompatible goals—massive tax ating subsidies; phase out Amtrak op- sive tax cuts, increases in defense breaks and reduced deficits—can ever erating subsidies; phase out funding of spending, and a balanced Federal budg- by reconciled in the real world. Legal Services Corporation, and so on et by the year 2002. Even if defense AMENDMENT NO. 350, AS MODIFIED TO and so on and so on. spending is not increased, the House AMENDMENT NO. 347 Reduce programs in vocational and Ways and Means Committee’s tax cuts adult education; cut contributions to Mr. President, on page 2, line 10, I will cost $630 billion over the 10 years. modify my amendment and I ask unan- international peacekeeping; reduce That cost will have to be paid for, funds for Goals 2000 and school-in-work imous consent to modify it by striking along with over $1 trillion in additional ‘‘1974’’ and inserting ‘‘1985.’’ programs; reduce funding for construc- spending cuts, in order to balance the tion of agriculture/interior facilities The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there Federal Budget by the year 2002. objection? and trails. Well, I made that mistake in 1981. Mr. President, we saw what happened But this is one Senator who is not pre- Without objection, it is so ordered. in 1981 under President Reagan’s poli- pared to make the same mistake again. The amendment (No. 350), as modi- cies. He blew into town preaching def- I do not intend to vote for any tax cuts fied, is as follows: icit reduction and promising to balance this year—not President Clinton’s and At the appropriate place insert the fol- the Federal budget while, at the same not the House Ways and Means Com- lowing: time, proposing to increase defense mittee’s proposal. SEC. . USE OF THE REDUCTIONS IN DISCRE- spending and to cut taxes. Congress We say we are for deficit reduction, TIONARY SPENDING CAPS. gave him what he asked for, and I gave and I am for deficit reduction. I am for (a) CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT.— him what he asked for. cutting spending where we can do so in (1) BUDGET RESOLUTIONS AND LEGISLA- The people of West Virginia said, ‘‘He a fair and equitable manner and at the TION.—Section 301 of the Congressional Budg- is a new boy on the block, help him, et Act of 1974 is amended by adding at the same time deal with our investment give him a chance.’’ So I did. I voted to end the following: deficit in this country. We have not give him what he asked for. We passed ‘‘(j) USE OF REDUCTIONS IN DISCRETIONARY only a trade deficit, not only a fiscal his massive tax cuts in 1981, and I have SPENDING CAPS.—It shall not be in order in deficit, but we also have an investment been kicking myself ever since. the Senate or House of Representatives to We passed his massive tax cuts in deficit, an infrastructure deficit. consider any concurrent resolution on the budget, bill, joint resolution, amendment, 1981, which cut revenues by $2.1 trillion I am opposed to enacting spending cuts to pay for tax giveaways. Any sav- motion, or conference report that decreases over the following 10 years. We pro- the discretionary spending limits unless the vided huge increases in defense spend- ings we can make should go toward reducing our deficit not lining some- concurrent resolution on the budget, bill, ing as well, and I went along with that. joint resolution, amendment, motion, or con- I voted for everything he asked for. I body’s pockets. ference report provides that such decrease My amendment provides that it shall wanted to give him a chance. That is may only be used for deficit reduction and what my constituents told me to do. not be in order in the Senate or House may not be used to offset all or part of an in- Supply-side economics, we were told, of Representatives to consider crease in direct spending or decrease in re- would kick in as a result of the tax Any concurrent resolution on the budget, ceipts under section 252 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act cuts, and we would actually see more bill, joint resolution, amendment, motion, or conference report that decreases the discre- of 1985.’’. revenues coming into the Treasury tionary spending limits unless the concur- (2) SIXTY VOTE POINT OF ORDER.—Sub- than would have come in without the rent resolution on the budget, bill, joint res- sections (c) and (d) of section 904 of the Con- tax cuts. We were going to ‘‘grow our olution, amendment, motion, or conference gressional Budget Act of 1974 are amended by way’’ out of our deficit problem. But, it report provides that such decrease may only inserting ‘‘301(j),’’ after ‘‘301(i)’’. did not happen. Instead, we saw a be used for deficit reduction and may not be (b) GRAMM-RUDMAN.—Section 252 of the string of budget deficits which were by used to offset all or part of an increase in di- Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit far the largest in the history or the Na- rect spending or decrease in tax receipts Control Act of 1985 is amended by adding at tion. Those deficits of President Rea- under section 252 of the Balanced Budget and the end the following: gan’s 8 years were only exceeded by Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1974. ‘‘(f) USE OF REDUCTIONS IN DISCRETIONARY President Bush’s deficits, which stand My amendment also creates a re- SPENDING CAPS.—A decrease in the discre- quirement that a waiver would require tionary spending limits may only be used for as the largest in history. It should be deficit reduction and may not be used to off- clear that supply-side economics is a an affirmative vote of three-fifths of Senators duly chosen and sworn, as set all or part of an increase in direct spend- failed theory, and David Stockman ing or decrease in receipts under this sec- knew it and said it in writing. It was would an appeal of the ruling of the tion.’’. bogus baloney. It was a flop and it was chair. I urge Senators to support the Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield the highly detrimental to this Nation. floor. It is why we are in this debate right amendment. If the rhetoric about bal- today. It is why we are in the pickle ancing the budget which has been flow- Mr. EXON addressed the Chair. that we are in right today, because out ing fast and thick in this Congress The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- of that colossal mistake that we made since we convened is to be believed, we ator from Nebraska. came the largest budget deficits, a need to take this important step. Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I have been quadrupling of the national debt and Any private citizen paying attention listening with keen interest to the ex- the pressure for a line-item veto and will know that these huge deficits will cellent remarks made by my great for constitutional amendments to bal- never be reduced if we are subsidizing friend and colleague from West Vir- ance the budget. That is why we are in wealthy tax payers with back-loaded ginia. I want to compliment him, once this pickle. They brought us to this. tax cuts at the same time we are try- again, for being able to seize the key We would not be debating a line-item ing to reduce the deficit. elements that tell the truth as it is. I veto here today if we had not gotten How ironic that we are voting before am rising now principally to support caught up in that trap, that quad- this day is over, voting to shift the the amendment that has been offered rupling the debt. control of the purse, vested in the by the senior Senator from West Vir- We are now being asked by the Re- hands of the people’s representatives in ginia and to address what he had to say publican leadership in the House to go Congress, voting to shift that power to about the history of the lack of fiscal down that same road again. an executive, in the name of reducing management. I think it points out just It is really quite unbelievable, but deficits, in the name of balancing the how important the amendment he is of- that is what the proponents of the huge budget on the one hand and, on the fering tonight and why it belongs on

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4456 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 the important piece of legislation be- tax cuts or entitlement expenses, is Mr. President, I do not think the fore us. like buying an unaffordable new house Senate should adopt the Byrd amend- This amendment would strengthen based on the expectation that a person ment because I think it is redundant, and reinforce the pay-as-you-go re- is going to get a substantial raise each and I do not think we need it. I would quirements in the current budget law. and every year that follows. It might like to explain why. And certainly, Mr. President, I think it work. But then again, Mr. President, it On the 28th day of February of this deserves our support. If only we had might not. Most times, it has not year, in response to an inquiry that I something like this during those other worked. We should not base our Na- as chairman of the Budget Committee times when we went down that rosy tion’s fiscal policy on such promises made to the Congressional Budget Of- scenario road that the Senator from and guesswork. fice, in the last correspondence signed Under the current law, rewards fol- West Virginia outlined. by Robert Reischauer as Director, in low responsibility. The law holds ap- I would like to take a few moments response to two questions, the second propriated spending responsible for to discuss the logic of supporting the of which was: Can legislation that re- breaches of the appropriation caps, and current law, which fits right in with duces the discretionary limits—that is, holds legislation under the jurisdiction the amendment offered by the Senator the caps—be counted on the pay-as- of authorizing committees responsible from West Virginia. you-go scoreboard? Mr. President, the current law refor entitlement and tax law changes quires the Government to account for that do not pay for themselves. Allow- Now, essentially, this question is an- annual appropriations spending sepa- ing committees of the Congress other swered in a rather lengthy paragraph rately from permanent changes in than the Appropriations Committee to which I will read shortly. Essentially, taxes and entitlements. It is unwise for get credit for reducing appropriation it says ‘‘No.’’ the Government to use savings prom- caps will encourage those committees Now, what has happened is in the 1990 ised by budget process changes to pay to look to the appropriated spending summit, followed by a reconciliation for tax cuts or entitlement expansions, rather than to themselves for deficit bill later on, the U.S. Congress distin- which, by their very nature, are perma- reduction. guished appropriated accounts from nent and require no additional congres- The law links deficit reduction bur- taxes and entitlements and mandatory sional action. They, theoretically, are dens and benefits, and we should keep spending in two very fundamental there forever. it that way. ways. A few days ago, the House Budget Under section 251 of the Balanced First, as to appropriated accounts, Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Committee reported out a piece of legislation that would have allowed future they were to be governed and con- Act, annual caps on budget authority trolled by a mechanism called caps. and outlays limit discretionary spend- reductions in appropriation caps to be counted to offset the tax cuts, those That means that literally, until 1998, ing. Pay-as-you-go procedures in sec- there is an actual dollar number al- tax cuts that Senator BYRD outlined tion 252 of the act control mandatory ready existing for all of the appro- spending and taxes. The law setting just a few moments ago. My concern is, what is to stop the priated accounts including defense. So forth these pay-as-you-go procedures House Budget Committee from includ- we add them all up, Senator EXON, and does not, in any way, mention changes ing such a provision in the budget reso- there is a literal dollar number. Later in the discretionary spending limits. lution that they may report next year? on, from time to time, we might The appropriations caps constrain The amendment by the Senator from change those caps. But they are, none- the total amount of money that the West Virginia would ensure—I repeat, theless, caps. Congress may appropriate. They do Mr. President—the amendment offered not, by themselves, spend money, nor What happens is that if we break by the Senator from West Virginia can anyone know that they will save those caps the budget is held harmless would ensure that they could not profit money until Congress has enacted and returned to that level by a seques- from such a provision that on its face every appropriations bill for the year ter, an automatic across-the-board cut is so phony. in question. The Congressional Budget of appropriated accounts. The amendment of the Senator from If we come in under those caps then Office scores only actual appropria- West Virginia would help to ensure that money does not go on any tions, because they provide the actual that any savings achieved from low- scorekeeping card nor is it counted as authority to spend. Changes in the ering the appropriation caps would go a reduction in the caps unless you do caps, on the other hand, do not yield to deficit reductions. We all know now that, and until the year’s end nothing immediate budgetary savings. If Con- and we all understand that that was happens to that money because it is gress reduces the caps, subsequent ap- the reason for the caps in the first in- still subject to appropriation under the propriations bills, later appropriations, stance, to try to bring sanity to the fis- caps. after-the-fact appropriations are the cal irresponsibility we have experi- ones that determine whether or not we enced for far too long. The appropria- Now, that is one way of treating the live up to the goals that we have out- tion caps under this bill would go to combination of defense spending and lined. deficit reduction. I suggest that that is appropriated domestic money. That is The amount saved would not be the way it should be. how it is treated. available. I emphasize that again, Mr. The amendment offered by the Sen- Now, the rest of Government—that President. The amount saved would not ator from West Virginia simply would is, entitlement and taxes—are treated be available to offset legislative make it more difficult to alter the ex- differently. They are treated under lan- changes in entitlements or taxes. isting law. He would preserve the pay- guage called pay-as-you-go. Let me The Congressional Budget Office thus as-you-go procedure that has served read what the Director of the OMB has believes that it cannot include cap re- Congress so well over the past few to say about pay-go accounts. ductions on the pay-as-you-go score- years, and make sure they are effective Here is where I think our good friend, card without a change in the law. in the future. Sound reasons for support of the struc- Senator BYRD, got the idea that we Mr. President, I urge Senators to needed to put a new law in place. Un- ture of the law—that is important. support the amendment offered by the That is sound reasoning. Congress ap- less it is to tweak the House, because Senator from West Virginia. they went through an exercise of say- propriates spending, year by year, one I yield the floor. year at a time. Mr. DOMENICI addressed the Chair. ing they were going to pay for taxes Entitlement spending and tax cuts, The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. BEN- with appropriated accounts. CBO says on the other hand, often go on and on NETT). The Senator from New Mexico. they cannot do that. and on forever unless Congress takes Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I have This is the CBO Director’s response an affirmative action to trim them just read the amendment from the dis- to that question. One, the Office of back. To rely on budget processes, tinguished Senator from West Virginia. Management and Budget contends that changes that promise to constrain ap- I regret, Senator EXON, that I did not current law allows a reduction in propriations in future years to pay for get to hear your entire argument. spending limits to offset increases in

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4457 spending or losses of receipts on the for the pay-as-you-go scoreboard, have committed it to the Budget Com- pay-as-you-go scoreboard. which is the only place it could have mittee. We will get onto some other The Congressional Budget Office dis- gone to make room for tax cuts. And it changes in the Budget Impoundment agrees. The current budget enforce- does not go there. It does not go there Act. There are a lot people want to do. ment process reflects a clear decision by law. Besides, I am not at all sure—I say to by the lawmakers that discretionary So there is not any need to now say my friends on the other side—how soon spending—a subject matter of Senator you cannot use savings by reducing the this line-item veto will get out of con- BYRD’s amendment—that discretionary caps to offset taxes because that is the ference. There are some very big dif- spending would be subject to different law. That is what the director of CBO ferences between this bill as it leaves budgetary control mechanisms than says. That is what our Parliamentarian the U.S. Senate and the bill that the would be applied to mandatory spend- is going to say. I do not think there is U.S. House of Representatives passed. ing and receipts or taxes. any doubt about it. A point of order There are very, very big differences. Under current law [law that is in effect to- will lie, and we do not need to create it As a matter of fact, I think we will night] discretionary spending is limited by in a new piece of legislation because it have a budget resolution on the floor, I annual caps on budget authority and out- already would lie if you attempted to say to my friend, Senator BYRD, before lays. If enacted, discretionary appropriations offset in some way the savings that that conference report will ever get for any year exceed either cap, an across-the- will come from reducing appropriations back. So this amendment, if it is on board sequestration of nonexempt appropriations would lower discretionary spending to to pay for tax cuts. there, is not going to help that situa- the level of the caps. Incidentally, if there really was rea- tion. But I am here to say I am going I stated that a little while ago. Now son to do this it would be because the to try to help because I do not have to it is being stated in the language of the President of the United States—and give a speech as to why, why we should CBO director, Dr. Robert Reischauer: that is stated in this letter, implicitly, not use appropriated accounts, the at least—made a mistake. He found Mandatory spending and revenues are con- Paygo accounts. We went through that. trolled by pay-as-you-go procedures. Under room in his budget to pay for his so- We spent weeks on end figuring this PAYGO, OMB and CBO track all mandatory called middle-class tax cuts by cutting out. There is no intention whatsoever spending and revenue legislation enacted appropriated accounts—lowering the to use discretionary programs of this since the BEA. If at the end of a session of caps. As a matter of fact he made two country to pay for tax cuts or entitle- Congress such legislation has, in total, in- mistakes. ment increases, and I do not think that creased the deficit for the current and budg- First is, he cannot do that. You need is the way it is going to be. et years, spending for nonexempt mandatory to get a waiver here. It should not be in And I do not think that is the way it programs is cut by the amount of the in- a budget without a clear statement is going to be. crease. Section 252 of the Balanced Budget that I need a 60-vote waiver in the Sen- Act, which governs enforcement of the Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, will the PAYGO procedures, does not refer in any ate because the law prohibits me from Senator yield? way to changes in the discretionary spending doing that. That is one mistake. Mr. DOMENICI. Yes. limits. The second mistake, he used phony Mr. BYRD. I have no doubt that the Which is what is worrying the distin- numbers. First he increased the caps distinguished Senator from New Mex- guished Senator from West Virginia: impropitiously, in a manner not pre- ico means exactly what he says. He has The limits on discretionary spending inscribed by law. And then he reduced no intention of doing that. That is not cluded in the BEA and OBRA–93 constrain the caps to count some savings. And what the House is saying. The House the overall amount of money that the Con- then he counted the savings to pay for wants to change the law. I do not want gress may appropriate in a given year. They the tax cuts. Every single step of that to see the law changed. I think we do not by themselves create new budget au- is either illegal or phony or a combina- ought to have this amendment. This thority or outlays, and CBO and OMB have tion thereof. would also apply to any reductions in not reflected the limits in their scorekeeping That is not going to happen in a the discretionary spending limits systems. CBO scores only actual appropria- budget resolution in the Senate be- which might occur pursuant to any tions, because they provide the authority to spend. Changes to the discretionary spending cause it will get caught right here on budget resolution in the future. limits thus do not yield immediate budg- the floor. If I try to do it when I put The Senator from New Mexico agrees etary savings. If the discretionary spending that budget resolution up there for de- that the summit agreement—we were limits were reduced, the savings would be bate, Senator BYRD will get it. He will both there—and resulting Budget En- achieved through subsequent appropriations stand right up and say, ‘‘You cannot do forcement Act do not allow domestic bills, but the amounts saved would not auto- that.’’ So let me suggest, he is not spending cuts to be used for pay-go. matically be available to offset legislative going to get a chance to do that be- This amendment will make it perfectly changes in mandatory spending or receipts. cause I am not going to do that. I will clear that any reductions in discre- That is the answer to the question not bring a budget resolution to the tionary spending limits will be used for and why we do not need the amend- floor of the U.S. Senate as chairman of one purpose only, deficit reduction. ment. Let me repeat: a committee that flies smack in the Does the Senator from New Mexico If the discretionary spending limits were face of this letter from the Congres- agree that that should be the case? reduced, the savings would be achieved sional Budget Office that says that is Mr. DOMENICI. Did I yield for a through subsequent appropriations bills, but not the law. question? I thought I still had the the amounts saved would not automatically be available to offset legislative changes in So, if anybody needed any assurance floor. mandatory spending or receipts. Therefore, that is not the way we are going to do Mr. BYRD. The Senator does. CBO believes that reductions in the discre- it here, you got it right now, because Mr. DOMENICI. The reason I say that tionary spending limits cannot be included we are not going to do it that way. is that I am supposed to be somewhere on the PAYGO scorecard without a change in Well, I should not say it. If 61 Sen- in a minute. I want to get the floor law. ators want to vote that we do it that back, and then I will yield very quick- I hope this information has been sat- way, we will do it that way, the 61 ly. isfactory, he says to me, writing this votes are prescribed in this amendment Let me just make this point. There letter. also as a way to waive it. You do not have been some discussions on the floor Mr. President, I have the greatest re- need that either. of the Senate about the amendment spect for the Senator from West Vir- So I regret coming down here. I think that is going to pass, the line-item veto ginia. And I have great, great empathy I made a case, however, and I do not that is going to pass. There has been and concurrence with the notion he is think I harmed Senator BYRD’s posi- some discussion about how different it trying to achieve. The budget resolution at all because I think he makes was in the original Domenici-Exon tion produced by the Senator from New the right point. But I do not think we line-item veto. Let me just say there is Mexico, coming out of our Senate com- need the amendment. Frankly, if there one aspect to this line-item veto that mittee, will follow this law. If we re- is anything else we have to do by way the American people ought to under- duce the discretionary caps the money of amending the Budget Act we are stand, and that Senators ought to un- allegedly saved will not be available going to have some more hearings. I derstand.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4458 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 First, I will premise it on the fol- that period, planning that year for the rector, Dr. Reischauer, who is no lowing. None of us really knows wheth- next election, the next year, I cannot longer there. We have a new CBO Di- er this will be a significant shift of boast myself of tomorrow because I do rector now. I agree, I think, almost power, whether Presidents now or in not know what a day may bring forth. word for word, paragraph by paragraph, the future will use line-item veto to But I hope I am here when that sun- point by point, with everything the gain some significant leverage that set provision runs out because I want chairman of the Budget Committee they should not have or a myriad of to do everything I can to see that this said. Then why are we arguing? We are other concerns that are on the side of monstrosity does not have a future life, arguing because the chairman seems to those who are reluctant to vote for as much as I do believe in a future life. feel that just because we have a policy this. While I am on any feet, I want to that has existed in the past, that that But I might suggest there has been compliment the distinguished Senator is going to continue to be the policy in one exchange made in the Budget Com- from Arizona. He has fought for this the future. mittee and carried over here, and even legislation over the years. I do not Senator BYRD, I think, has no quarrel made a little better. That is a sunset think this is the legislation he really with what the Senator from New Mex- provision. This bill, as it leaves here in wants. It is not the legislation that he ico is saying. We have no quarrel with a compromise between the distin- agrees that he has expressed support what Senator DOMENICI says he intends guished Senator from Arizona and the for over the years, but he is about to to do. Senator BYRD has a quarrel, and Senator from New Mexico, carries a 5- achieve a victory of sorts. I have a quarrel, and I think you, Sen- year sunset. That means that if we I compliment him on a job well done. ator DOMENICI, have a quarrel with look at this maybe in 3 years and it is I thank the distinguished Senator what is going on on the other side of not working too well, or in 4 years, from New Mexico. the Hill. clearly when that 5th year comes, it is Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I say What we are trying to do—since this gone. If Presidents in the meantime to the Senator, the ‘‘V.’’ in my name is measure that is going to pass is going choose to make it this big power shift, my mother’s maiden name. Her father to be the law of the land—is to put into you see that this sunset means that we was named Pete—like me—Vichi, V-i-c- place, in law, once again now, provi- do not have to send them anything. h-i. She wanted so much to have as sions to tell the House of Representa- But if we send them a new bill, there much of her father as she could. She tives that we are not going to allow will not be any law on the books. So gave me his first name, and she gave them to continue what they are doing, they will not have the veto pen out to me his initial, and then my father in- which is in violation of what Dr. make us do it their way. That is if we sisted that I, nonetheless, have his Reischauer previously said. I think we all agree. I think what we are going to pass another law to name. So that is where it came from. are simply saying to my friend, the change it or modify it. I think every- Mr. President, I want to make one chairman of the Budget Committee, is body should know that. That is a bit of other comment. The legislation is dif- if you agree with Dr. Reischauer, then protection for the uncertainties that ferent in another way. The sunset is you agree with Senator BYRD. The only come with legislation of this type. brief. It is 1 year shorter than pre- Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, will the viously reported out of the committee. disagreement you seem to have is that Senator yield? But there is another thing. I know this it is redundant and it is not necessary. I would simply say that I really Mr. DOMENICI. Yes. would never be enough to convince the think this amendment is obviously Mr. BYRD. I thank you for that. distinguished Senator from West Vir- necessary, given what is going on in That is the only good provision in this ginia. But this does make it such that the House of Representatives today in package that we are about to vote on individual vetoes can be voted on sepa- that Budget Committee. And we have a tonight; the only good provision. I rately in the U.S. Senate. They do not fully support that provision. new director over there of the Congres- have to be packaged, as in the original sional Budget Office. What is to stop But I call attention to the distin- McCain proposal or the original guished Senator’s statement in the the Budget Committee from telling the Domenici proposal. Congressional Budget Office to do dif- ‘‘Report on the Legislative Line-Item And, in a sense, for those who do not ferently in the budget resolution than Veto Act of 1995.’’ Senator DOMENICI, like the line-item veto, or are worried what Dr. Reischauer had indicated ear- according to this statement, ‘‘The Ad- about it or frightened of it, that is ditional Views of Senator Pete V. lier, as was extensively and accurately thought to be a little better protection quoted by the chairman of the Budget Domenici’’—I do not know what the than if you have to vote, like the mili- Committee. ‘‘V.’’ stands for; I want Pete to tell me tary BRAC Commission, take it or I would simply say that I believe we what that is: leave it. At least you can take one at are talking by each other as we do I do not support S. 4 because I believe it a time. That is one other aspect of this often times here in this body. As near will delegate too much authority to the that I thought we ought to put on President over the control of the budget . . . as I can tell, Senator DOMENICI, the record as being different and changing chairman of the Budget Committee, I do not believe he supported S. 4. I things a bit. Senator BYRD, myself, and many oth- think that S. 14, which represented his I yield the floor. ers all agree. And if the only reason views, is the bill that we ought to be Thank you, Mr. President. not to adopt the Byrd amendment is passing. And that is the bill with some Mr. EXON. Mr. President, before my because it is redundant, then this is important additions that the distin- good friend and colleague leaves the the time when redundancy is vitally guished minority leader introduced as floor—I know he has another matter— important because of what is going on a substitute. He included the additions I just wanted to make a few brief com- in the House of Representatives. The on taxes as well, which was an im- ments. First, that I have had a very House’s recent actions are anything provement. I am sorry that the Sen- close relationship with the chairman of but redundant with regard to what we ator objected to that. But I supported the Budget Committee for a long, long have done in the past. that measure when the distinguished time. Although we do not always agree, All Senator BYRD is trying to do with Senator’s committee reported it out. we have a good working relationship this amendment—and I am surprised I thank the Senator. I am glad that that is going to carry through in the that there is opposition on the other there is that sunset provision: future. I hope to try to solve the mam- side—is to say, let us keep doing busi- Boast not thyself of tomorrow, for thou moth problems that are going to be ness the same way we have done it in knowest not what a day may bring forth. pushed off on the Budget Committee, the past. Some people say you do not I do not know whether I will be here and to help where the decisions have to have to say that because it is redun- 5 years from now. None of us know. Not be made. dant. any man or woman in this Chamber I have listened to the statements he Well, just look at what is going on in can foresee whether he in truth will be made in opposition to the amendment the House of Representatives today. here when that 5 years rolls around. offered by the Senator from West Vir- They are making cuts in vital pro- But that is within my present term, ginia. I listened very carefully to the grams for infants and children and and although I intend to be running quotes he made by the former CBO Di- mothers and senior citizens, and all the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4459 underprivileged of the Nation, for the much of a shift down to the White will also determine, I suppose, what purpose of putting in a tax cut that House this may represent. There is cer- will happen with regard to the scope of benefits primarily the wealthiest citi- tainly a vagary with regard to the de- tax legislation, but we ought to be the zens of this Nation. They are only gree of practicality or of the prudence ones to determine for what the line- going to be able to do that over there in taking a simple bill and making it item veto is going to be used. And if we if they make some changes in the rules 1,500 or 2,000 pages. There is a lot of va- determine it, we have our opportunity and regulations that we have followed gary here. But how ironic it would be if with this amendment to say it is going in the past. in the interest of deficit reduction, to be used for deficit reduction and What Senator BYRD is simply saying, with all the other vagaries, we did not that is it. I say to my colleagues on both sides of even know this was going to reduce the So, Mr. President, there is nothing this aisle, is let us not fool ourselves deficit, we had no idea whether or not more to say than that. The purpose of again. Let us not go down that path ultimately we were going to accom- this amendment is very clear. Again, that we did in the 1980’s by charting plish what I thought brought us here in as so many amendments that we have new courses and going through rosy the first place, which is to reduce the offered have attempted to do, we are scenarios and inventing systems such deficit. That would be the ultimate trying to improve this legislation in a as what—I have always called the irony. way that allows us the confidence that, laughable curve. I think it was really All the distinguished Senator from indeed, we are doing what we say we the Laffer curve, but I called it the West Virginia is saying is let us be true want to do. laughable curve. The laughable curve to our goal. If we are going to do this, So I commend the distinguished Sen- in the 1980’s is back with us once again let us be absolutely certain there is no ator from West Virginia for the amend- under a different name. It is rosy sce- mistake about why we are doing it. Be- ment. I am very hopeful that in an nario. It is changing the rules. fore we vote on final passage, regard- overwhelming bipartisan consensus we All that Senator BYRD’s amendment less of what assurances we may be can adopt it before this bill is enacted tries to do, and I think the chairman of given by CBO, regardless of what budg- into law. And with that I yield the the Budget Committee agrees with it, etary guidelines normally we must fol- floor. if I heard him correctly—and he is a low—as the Senator from Nebraska has Mr. BUMPERS addressed the Chair. very honest and honorable man—is let so appropriately said, we do not know The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- us leave things the way they are. In what is coming over from the other ator from Arkansas. this very important new piece of legis- side. We do not know how many times Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I will lation that in some form is going to be- things may come over from the other be very brief in my remarks. come the law of the land let us say side that will dictate a situation that I first want to rise in support of the once again that we are not going to be could otherwise undermine the intent Byrd amendment. As everyone here carried off course, and that we are of this legislation. knows, the House Budget Committee going to be using the cuts that we So let us be clear. This is our last op- last week proposed a change in the make to reduce the deficit and not to portunity to say with an exclamation Budget Act that would permit reduc- irresponsibly, irrationaly, and unrea- point, ‘‘Here is why we are doing it. tions in discretionary spending to be sonably make tax cuts that even the This is why it is important.’’ If we are used to offset lost revenues resulting Senate committees run by Republicans going to line-item veto specific provi- from tax cuts, rather than to reduce on this side of the Capitol, indicate do sions in the bill, then it better be des- the deficit. This is one of the most irre- not make sense. ignated for one purpose and one pur- sponsible proposals I have seen since The Byrd amendment makes sense. It pose only. Regardless of the agenda in coming to the U.S. Senate. Everyone in is in keeping with what I think is the the Contract With America, regardless Congress speaks loudly and clearly feeling of my chairman, Senator of what intentions the House may about the need for spending cuts in DOMENICI of the Budget Committee. I have, we now know that it is going to order to reduce the deficit. However, cannot see why we are arguing about go to deficit reduction because of the one of the first things the new Repub- something that we seem to all agree Byrd amendment. lican majority in Congress has pro- with. If the only argument not to ac- So I think it is very appropriate that posed is to, rather than reducing the cept the Byrd amendment is that it is this is the last amendment because it deficit, cut spending on programs that redundant, then it is the type of redun- ought to clarify with no equivocation help some of the neediest people in the dancy, Mr. President, that we need. why we have spent the last week debat- country so that we can pay for tax cuts I yield the floor. ing line-item veto. for some of the wealthiest people in Mr. President, I understand that the We are not supporting a line-item America. Democratic leader would like to speak veto because we want to offer an agen- I heard the distinguished Chairman on this amendment. da for tax reform or tax cuts, for tax of the Budget Committee, Senator The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cuts that we may not want. That is not DOMENICI, argue that the Byrd amend- Democratic leader is recognized. why we are doing this. We do not want ment would replicate current law. Mr. DASCHLE. Thank you, Mr. to provide more opportunities to cut While that might be technically true, President. Let me commend the distin- taxes and create even greater imbal- given the House Budget Committee’s guished Senator from Nebraska for his ance between the wealthy and the mid- actions last week, the Senate needs to comments. I feel very strongly about dle class in this country. That ought to go on record in opposition to using this issue as well. And I commend the be a fight for another day. What we are spending cuts to pay for tax cuts. distinguished Senator from West Vir- here for is to reduce the deficit. What These cuts must, and should, be used to ginia for offering the amendment. we are here for is to be absolutely cer- reduce the deficit. I urge my colleagues It is appropriate that this is the last tain that if we have designated the to support the Byrd amendment. amendment. It is appropriate in part President with new powers, we under- I also would like to spend a few min- because the distinguished Senator from stand what those powers are for. It is utes discussing the Dole line-item veto West Virginia has made it clear all to reduce the deficit and nothing else. proposal that will be voted on tonight. along that there are some very funda- So I hope that colleagues on both I want to pay tribute to my esteemed mental concerns here, and one of the side of the aisle, regardless of whether colleague from West Virginia, Senator biggest concerns we have is the vagary they think we have said it loudly BYRD, who, in my opinion, is always on of the legislation to begin with. There enough or clearly enough, can appre- the side of the angels when it comes to is a vagary on what the scope of tax ciate the concern for vagary once more assaults on the Constitution, always on legislation is. There is a vagary on its in this legislation. the side of the angels in understanding constitutionality. There is a vagary, The courts are going to determine what James Madison and John Jay and frankly, on the balance of power, as the whether or not this is constitutional. Alexander Hamilton meant when they Senator from New Mexico just indi- Ultimately, we will probably be able to talked about the separation of powers. cated. We are not sure what this is determine what kind of a shift in the The first time I ever heard that ex- going to do. We are not sure just how balance of power results. The courts pression I was in the ninth grade. The

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4460 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 concept of separation of powers was re- thing they did not want FDR to have West Virginia. The yeas and nays have fined for me somewhat when I read the the authority to do. been ordered. The clerk will call the Federalist Papers for the first time But can you imagine the President of roll. when I was an undergraduate student the United States having a line-item The legislative clerk called the roll. at the University of Arkansas. Then I veto on the Supreme Court? The Con- Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Sen- went off to law school and studied a stitution would prohibit him from cut- ator from Texas [Mr. GRAMM] and the full course in constitutional law and ting their salaries, but he could sure Senator from North Carolina [Mr. almost a full course on the Federalist turn the lights out. He can cut the heat HELMS] are necessarily absent. Papers. It is a tragedy that every high off. James Madison would just be I also announce that the Senator school student in this country does not whirling in his grave if he knew this from Alaska [Mr. STEVENS] is absent on have at least one semester on that sa- debate was going on. official business. We, as Members of Congress are not cred document called the U.S. Con- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there perfect. There is plenty of pork to go stitution. any other Senators in the Chamber John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and around. Anybody who beats his chest who desire to vote? James Madison created the concept of on the floor of this body and says, ‘‘I’m the separation of powers as a method of above that’’ is not being entirely truth- The result was announced—yeas 49, protecting the public. They put it in ful. All you would have to do is ask nays 48, as follows: the Constitution because it was an im- that Senator how he or she voted on The result was announced—yeas 49, portant idea that should not get swept the space station. That is the biggest nays 48, as follows: away with a momentary trendy, pop- piece of pork in the history of the [Rollcall Vote No. 114 Leg.] ular idea. So here we are with a very world. How did they vote on the super YEAS—49 momentary, popular, trendy idea that collider, the second biggest piece of Abraham Faircloth Murkowski could very well be an unmitigated dis- pork in the history of world? How did Ashcroft Frist Nickles aster for the country—the Dole line they vote on that $400 million wind Bennett Gorton Packwood Bond Grams Pressler item veto proposal. tunnel the other day, the third biggest Brown Grassley I remember when I was Governor of Roth piece of pork? No, it is that little $1 Burns Gregg Santorum Arkansas 250 magnificent prints of a million lab down in some poor rural Campbell Hatch Shelby mockingbird showed up to be signed by state that is pork. Chafee Hutchison Simpson Coats Inhofe Smith the Governors of the five States that So, Mr. President, as I say, we are Cochran Kassebaum Snowe had the mockingbird as their State not perfect. Cohen Kempthorne Specter Coverdell Kyl bird. When these prints arrived I spent But we have been doing some things Thomas all night long signing my name 250 right. Over the last several years we Craig Lott D’Amato Lugar Thompson times on those prints. And of the 250, I have taken a number of concrete steps DeWine Mack Thurmond got 50, Preston Smith in Texas got 50, in an effort to deal with the deficit. If Dole McCain Warner the other three Governors got 50. They we are serious about the deficit, we Domenici McConnell all spent all night long signing their need to agree to work in a bipartisan NAYS—48 names, too. manner and say to the American peo- Akaka Feinstein Leahy We are going to see similar signing ple, ‘‘Yes, we are going to get the def- Baucus Ford Levin ceremonies if the Dole proposal ever icit under control and we are not going Biden Glenn Lieberman becomes law. Poor President Clinton. to squander the opportunity to get the Bingaman Graham Mikulski Boxer Harkin Moseley-Braun He does not sleep very much as it is. I deficit under control by putting out a Bradley Hatfield Moynihan have known him for years. He gets by politically inspired tax cut to people Breaux Heflin Murray on less sleep than anybody I have ever who do not want it.’’ Bryan Hollings Nunn Bumpers Inouye Pell known, but he cannot get by with the So we have a golden opportunity. Byrd Jeffords Pryor 2 hours a night that will be left if he is And instead we are squandering it with Conrad Johnston Reid forced to sign all those billettes sent another assault on the Constitution by Daschle Kennedy Robb up by Congress. shifting the power of the purse to the Dodd Kerrey Rockefeller Dorgan Kerry Sarbanes Mr. President, I would not be sur- executive branch. We want the Presi- Exon Kohl Simon prised if within 2 years from this mo- dent to be king. Feingold Lautenberg Wellstone ment, the Dole proposal will have been The one thing the Founding Fathers NOT VOTING—3 found to be such a disaster, so unwork- in 1787 said in Philadelphia, ‘‘We have able, there would be a clamor to repeal had enough kings. We don’t want any Gramm Helms Stevens it. more kings. We are going to have a So the motion to lay on the table the Mr. President, I went to Wake Forest President.’’ amendment (No. 350), as modified, was 3 or 4 weeks ago to speak at a convoca- And until this moment, they have agreed to. tion of their law school. The subject of succeeded magnificently. We have had Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I my speech was on the ‘‘Trivialization 42 Presidents and no kings. I wonder move to reconsider the vote. of the United States Constitution.’’ how much longer that is going to last. Mr. COATS. I move to lay that mo- While we are not dealing with a con- I yield the floor. tion on the table. stitutional amendment today, we are Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask for The motion to lay on the table was dealing with an assault on the Con- the yeas and nays on the amendment. agreed to. stitution. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a I voted for Senator HATCH’s amend- sufficient second? There appears to be AMENDMENT NO. 347 ment to try to retain some semblance a sufficient second. Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise in of the constitutional balance or power. The yeas and nays were ordered. opposition to the separate enrollment Can you imagine what FDR would have Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, on be- bill offered by Majority Leader DOLE done when he called the Supreme Court half the chairman of the Budget Com- because I do not believe that it rep- those nine old men who kept striking mittee, I make a motion to table the resents a true compromise. I cannot down the laws that he was trying to Byrd amendment, and I ask for the support legislation that requires a two- get passed to get this country moving yeas and nays. thirds vote of both Houses of Congress again—nine old men. He detested them. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a to disapprove a presidential item veto He wanted to pack the Court by put- sufficient second? There appears to be because I see it as an unwarranted tilt- ting six more members on the bench. a sufficient second. ing of the balance of power away from At first, everybody thought that was The yeas and nays were ordered. Congress—the branch of government pretty good idea. Just like at first ev- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The that is closest to the people. erybody thinks the Dole proposal is a question is on agreeing to the motion I believe that separate enrollment good idea. All of the sudden, the people of the Senator from Arizona to table legislation would be both unconstitu- of this country decided that was one the amendment of the Senator from tional and unduly burdensome. This

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4461 bill requires the enrolling clerk to en- fice states: ‘‘ * * * rescissions cannot be aggressive chief executive, this power roll each individual item in appropria- expected to serve as a significant def- could be wielded to subvert the most tions bills or legislation that includes icit reduction or spending limitation basic decisions and policies of the leg- new entitlement spending or a new tar- tool.’’ islature. geted tax benefit. The definition of a If one doubts the effect of rescissions The line-item veto can be taken to ri- targeted tax benefit is ambiguous, and on the Federal budget, we can look to diculous extremes by strong chief ex- the application of new entitlement the example of the States. Forty-three ecutives. In Wisconsin, Governor spending is unclear. States grant their governors line-item Tommy Thompson has exercised his What is clear is that this slice and veto authority. Studies have shown generous line-item authority on some dice approach could break up one bill that less than 1 percent of budgetary 1500 occasions. Governor Thompson has into more than 2,000 separate pieces of savings is typically achieved by these been unafraid to wield his veto pen, legislation. As Senator BYRD noted, if States through the item veto. The and he has been imaginative in doing separate enrollment requirements had State of Wisconsin—which has one of so. He has gone so far as to delete indi- been in place last year, it would have the most generous item vetoes in the vidual letters, words and lines from the required the President to review 9,625 Nation—is a good case study. An anal- budget to stand the legislature’s intent separate appropriations measures, in- ysis of 542 line-item vetoes in Wis- on its head. stead of just 13 appropriations bills. consin found that budget savings at- The Governor’s prolific and inventive Separate enrollment would surely be a tributable to the Governor’s use of use of the line-item veto attracted a boon to the Presidential pen manufac- item veto authority ranged from only great deal of attention in his State—so turers industry, but a logistical night- .006 percent to 2.5 percent. much so that Wisconsin citizens voted mare for everyone else. Former President Ronald Reagan was to amend the State constitution to bar I have always been very concerned one of the most vocal champions of a the Governor’s use of the so-called about line-item veto legislation. But, I line-item veto. In fact, in honor of his ‘‘Vanna White Veto.’’ It was so named could support a reasonable version this persistent support, the House passed because Governor Thompson used his year because of the environment in its line-item bill on his birthday. The veto to imitate the ‘‘Wheel of Fortune’’ which we now find ourselves. fact is, however, that when the former star who came to fame by flipping let- We recently completed a lengthy de- President was Governor of California, ters. bate on the balanced budget amend- he used his line-item authority to re- Here are just a few examples. In one ment. That proposal failed—fortu- scind an average of less than 2 percent instance, Governor Thompson was sent nately, in my view. But at least five of the State’s budget. a bill establishing a 48-hour maximum other Constitutional amendments—on While its impact on spending levels is detention for certain juvenile offend- tax limitation, term limits, unfunded likely to be small, the DOLE legislation ers. He creatively used his line-item mandates, school prayer and flag burn- raises important Constitutional sepa- veto authority to increase that limit to ing—are waiting in the wings. ration of powers questions. Granting 10 days. The new Congressional leadership has new rescission authority would shift In another instance, the Governor expressed an unprecedented desire to the delicate balance of powers our gutted a $650,000 clean energy rebate enact the Republican agenda not only founders established, and would inordi- program by eliminating all the words in statute, but into the permanent nately increase Presidential power over except ‘‘$50,000’’ and ‘‘program’’, there- Constitution of the Nation. spending priorities. by providing $50,000 for an unspecified This is the context in which I am The framers did not flip a coin to program—mystery pork, you might willing to support statutory changes divvy up powers among our three say. On two occasions, he used his line- that I might not otherwise have en- branches of government. They were fa- item authority to raise taxes. dorsed. In contrast to Constitutional miliar with tyranny and were con- On yet another occasion, Governor amendments, we can easily change cerned about vesting too much power Thompson redirected $83 million of a statutory language if we find that it in the hands of any one person. They $183 million property tax relief meas- has not met our expectations or has believed that the Nation’s priorities ure to the State’s general fund for had unintended consequences. should be determined by a large and other purposes. As one member of the I support the substitute offered by highly accountable body of representa- State assembly pointed out, such ac- Senator DASCHLE. I believe it is a rea- tives. They wanted Congress to make tions have resulted in the Governor lit- sonable line-item veto alternative. It public policy by deciding whether and erally vetoing budget items into exist- requires both Houses of Congress to how much money should be allocated. ence. vote on a President’s rescission list and So they specifically granted the power While Governor Thompson has been sets up a fast-track procedure to en- of the purse to Congress—not to the somewhat more inventive than his sure that a vote occurs in a prompt and President. predecessors in exercising item veto timely manner. In Federalist 58, James Madison authority, his intent has been the same My change of heart is not based on a wrote: as his fellow governors. A 12-year study belief that strengthened line-item au- This power over the purse may, in fact, be of the State’s item veto revealed that thority will be effective in curbing regarded as the most complete and effectual Wisconsin’s Governors were likely to spending. It is based on a willingness to weapon with which any constitution can arm use the authority to pursue their own give a reasonable measure a try. the immediate representatives of the people, policies or political goals—but not to Line-item veto legislation has always for obtaining a redress of every grievance, reduce spending. been trumpeted as a critical tool to re- and for carrying into effect every just and Wisconsin is not alone. The Congres- duce the deficit. Its supporters argue salutary measure. sional Budget Office recently con- that any Constitutional concerns are Strengthening the President’s power cluded that ‘‘although the item veto eclipsed by the need to rein in a free- over the purse could yield dangerous may affect State budgets, it is more spending Congress. They argue by and unintended consequences. Ex- likely to substitute the Governor’s pri- anecdote that strengthened rescission panded line-item authority could be orities for those of the legislature than authority is essential to impose fiscal used to arm-twist individual legislators it is to reduce spending.’’ discipline and eliminate egregious into adhering to the president’s polit- While much has been made about the pork-barrel spending. There is, how- ical priorities. Legislators could be co- need to increase the President’s rescis- ever, little evidence that line-item au- erced into supporting policy positions sion authority, all evidence suggests thority reduces spending in any signifi- out of fear for vital projects in their that current authority works quite cant way. State or district. well. Here is what the experts have to say. It is clear that granting greater line- In the 20-year history of the Congres- According to the Congressional Budget item authority increases an executive’s sional Budget and Impoundment Con- Office: ‘‘ * * * the potential for the say over not just how much money will trol Act of 1974, Congress has enacted item veto to decrease the deficit is un- be spent but also over what will be more than $92 billion in rescissions, certain.’’ The General Accounting Of- spent. In the hands of a creative and compared to $72 billion requested by

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4462 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 six Presidents. This point bears repeat- It has been suggested that ‘‘similarly cifically the Dole substitute amending: Congress has rescinded $20 billion situated taxpayers’’ may refer to tax- ment before us today. I would like to more in spending than requested by payers who are engaged in a particular thank the Majority Leader and my col- Presidents over the last two decades. activity. Democrats would not disagree leagues Senator MCCAIN, and Senator Earlier this month, one likely Presi- with this as one interpretation of the COATS for their leadership and hard dential candidate announced that he language. work in drafting a compromise bill would not seek his party’s nomination. As I did last night, I would like to that has gained wide support in the Explaining his decision, he declared take an example because I believe this Senate. I believe the Dole amendment that he wanted to focus on real eco- helps focus the discussion. Speaking in is good legislation. I hope that my col- nomic issues, but that his party was generalities can only get us so far, and, leagues on the other side of the aisle more interested in gimmicks and pro- as I said, it is important that we pro- will join me in supporting this impor- cedural issues. That candidate was vide some specific guidance for those tant piece of legislation granting line- none other than Jack Kemp. who will be implementing this lan- item veto authority for the President. I believe that the line-item veto is guage. In light of our Nation’s $4.8 trillion just one more procedural duck designed Suppose that a proposal is raised to public debt, which is $18,500 for every to serve as a substitute for the difficult provide a tax credit for research ex- American, I believe enacting line-item and painful budget choices needed to penses incurred by companies pro- veto legislation would be an important balance the budget. moting conservative causes. I don’t be- step to reduce Federal deficit spending. In less than 2 weeks, the Senate lieve anyone would argue that this pro- Obviously, line-item veto legislation Budget Committee is required by law posal should not be a subject to scru- by itself would not eliminate our year- to report a budget resolution. All evi- tiny under the line-item veto legisla- ly budget deficits, but it would create a dence suggests that our colleagues on tion. Everyone would agree that a tax critical link in our efforts to control the other side of the aisle have no in- benefit solely for companies that do re- and effectively reduce the enormous tention of meeting this statutory dead- search in an effort to promote a spe- public debt. I am committed to getting line. Apparently, when the Congres- cific cause is a special interest tax our Nation’s fiscal problems under con- sional Compliance Act was signed into break. And, as a special interest tax trol and I believe line-item veto legis- law earlier this year requiring Con- break, it ought to be subject to pos- lation would help accomplish this dif- gress to abide by all laws it imposes on sible line-item veto. ficult, yet attainable, goal. everyone else, the new majority put in But, what if someone were to say, a hidden rider exempting Congress ‘‘Compared to those taxpayers who pro- Whether the Senate approves en- from obeying its own internal laws. mote conservative causes, there is no hanced rescission, expedited rescission, The 104th Congress has now been in special treatment here.’’ In other or separate enrollment, any of these session for 12 weeks. At least two- words, what if we define ‘‘engaged in a approaches would strengthen the abil- thirds of the Senate’s time has been oc- particular activity’’ as the identical ity the President has to rescind Fed- cupied considering process changes activity for which the special tax break eral spending or targeted tax benefits. that would make none of the difficult is given. Clearly, this leads to a ludi- and painful decisions needed to put our The central message I hear every day fiscal house in order. crous result, and clearly that is not from Idahoans is to reduce Federal Members of Congress have had ample what is intended. spending, balance the budget and lower opportunity to bemoan the economic Again, common sense dictates that the national debt. But above all they illnesses our country faces and offer the particular activity to which the want Congress to eliminate pork-barrel seemingly painless magic potions to measure should be compared is busi- spending. American taxpayers are tired cure them. Most of these proposed ness research or some broader activity. of watching the Federal Government cures have been worse than the disease. When this is the comparison group, waste their hard earned tax dollars on And all have been lacking in the basic then we obtain the right result—that unnecessary projects which are not of a political leadership and courage that is is, that the provision is subject to po- national concern. necessary to solve our problems. tential line-item veto. Let me turn another point of clari- Mr. President, I would like to share At the end of the day—balanced with you a sample of some of the com- budget amendment, or no balanced fication, relating to the application of ments I received from Idahoans during budget amendment, line-item veto or the Dole substitute to direct spending the 104th Congress in support of enact- no line-item veto—we have to roll up measures. Again, it is important that ing line-item veto legislation: our sleeves and get to work. we make these clarifications for those I am willing to support a reasonable who will be charged with implementing Recently the house passed a measure to line-item veto proposal. I can support this legislation. allow the line-item veto for the President. one that guarantees the President a Nowhere in the language of the Dole This is something I feel we desperately need majority vote. But I cannot support substitute does it say that application in order to eliminate much of the ‘‘pork’’ any line-item proposal that hands the of the line-item veto will be restricted that is added to large bills as they proceed President plus a small minority in ei- to increases in direct spending. Both through the process. I realize that I may not decreases in spending and increases in understand all the implications this power ther House of Congress the power to might lend to the executive branch but I feel govern. spending, therefore, potentially will be at least it is better than the uncontrolled be- I am not willing to undermine the subject to the veto pen. havior that is now practiced by members of delicate balance of powers created by The result is that the Dole language the Congressional branch. If individual our Founding Fathers in our zeal to re- would treat direct spending differently States need such pork, let that State pay for spond to a contemporary economic from targeted tax benefits. A reduction it. I respectfully request that you pass this problem. in entitlement spending would be sub- measure—Joy C. Roberts, Eagle, Idaho Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, there ject to potential line-item veto, where- I believe this measure would discourage has been uncertainty expressed regard- as a tax increase clearly would not be the funding of unnecessary programs and re- ing some of the language contained in subject to line-item veto. duce government waste—Marc Banner, the Dole line-item veto substitute. It is There are the points of clarification I Boise, Idaho important to clarify the language in wished to make at this time for the Line item veto is mandatory to bring back order to give guidance to those who RECORD. It is my hope and intention responsible government—Richard Lewis, Po- will be responsible for implementing it. that these will provide adequate guid- catello, Idaho The major area of uncertainty has ance to those in both Chambers who surrounded the definition of targeted will face the important task of inter- This would help eliminate many partisan tax benefit under the Dole substitute preting and implementing the line- and/or irresponsible clauses passing through and, in particular, the meaning of on the shirt tails of otherwise responsible item veto legislation we enact. legislat[ion]—Bill Trammel, Boise, Idaho ‘‘similarly situated taxpayers.’’ I would Mr. KEMPTHORNE. Mr. President, I like to enter into the RECORD a few rise today to offer my strong support Under the Dole amendment, once an comments to further clarify this issue. for line-item veto legislation, and spe- appropriation bill, authorizing bill, or

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4463 any resolution providing direct spend- gress’ budgeting process or fail to come eting process and this regulation re- ing or targeted tax benefits passes the to grips with its effects on our spend- quires that we examine every proposal Senate then each item in the bill or ing habits. that affects the budget to make sure resolution will be enrolled as a sepa- During the early years of our Repub- that it is both worth the cost and nec- rate bill or joint resolution. The re- lic Congress’ appropriations comprised essary. spective committees will report the all of four or five pages. Back in the With a line-item veto in effect Con- bills with great detail so that each 1940’s and 1950’s, however, Congress de- gress no longer will reach compromises item may be separately enrolled. With veloped the habit of putting riders, in by giving everyone the spending pro- the President’s existing Constitution reality spending programs irrelevant to grams they want because a third party, authority to veto bills, he will be able the underlying legislation, on our bills. the President, will hold an effective to review each item in detail and veto It was the funding for these riders that veto power over each element of that any provision separately enrolled. Presidents impounded, and it was in compromise. Instead of being forced to Opponents of line-item veto legisla- 1974, after Congress took away the choose between accepting a good pro- tion believe Congress would unneces- President’s impoundment power, that gram that has been stuffed with pork sarily grant the President too much the legislature began earmarking all or vetoing the entire bill, the President power, therefore upsetting the legisla- funding. now will be able to slice away the pork, tive and executive branches’ balance of At that point Congress began to pass leaving the program itself intact. power. Moreover, opponents fear the appropriations bills, laws, and enabling In this way the President, once President will use this line-item veto legislation of hundreds of pages in again, can serve as a check on over- power to coerce Members of Congress. length. spending by Congress, without taking There is concern the President would The word ‘‘omnibus’’ no longer finds away our constitutional right and duty be inclined to target funding of par- its way into legislation, but many of to consider and enact legislation in the ticular interest to Members’ States as the so-called laws Congress passes ac- interest of the American people. pork-barrel spending and threaten to tually are bundles of laws and appro- I yield the floor. line-item veto it to gain support for an priations put together for reasons of Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, in Sep- administration objective. I believe political convenience. tember, the Congress will vote to in- line-item veto legislation will hold the During most of the 19th and part of crease the U.S. Government’s bor- President more accountable to Federal the 20th century, Congress passed rowing authority to over $5 trillion—a spending programs. The President and shorter, more precise, and concise laws regrettable but necessary step to keep Congress will be forced to work to- that only aimed to accomplish par- our Government afloat. The tragic gether on spending programs. ticular goals—setting or better yet truth is, uncontrolled Federal spending Enacting line-item veto authority for eliminating a particular tariff, paying has effectively saddled every man, the President is a top priority of the an individual for a particular service, woman and child in this country with Republican leadership in the 104th Con- and so on. We also put fewer burdens $18,000 worth of debt. And, deficits congress. Forty three States provide their on our people in the form of taxes and tinue to pile up at a rate of more than Governors with some type of line-item regulations. $200 billion per year with no end in veto legislation because it works. It is simply unrealistic to pretend sight. Idaho is one of these States. that the legislation that generally In short, Congress’ appetite for Last January, during President Clin- comes out of Congress today represents spending more than the Treasury takes ton’s State of the Union Address he unitary legislation. in, has created a deficit situation that urged Congress to send him line-item In some ways, perhaps, our society is snowballing out of control. Today, veto legislation for his approval. Var- requires more complex legislation—to, the interest charge alone on our na- ious line-item veto bills have been infor example, set forth a complete pro- tional debt consumes 15 percent of our troduced and voted on in previous Con- gram that has a number of distinct but annual Federal budget. In my view, the gresses, at times when we had a Presi- mutually dependent elements. But too deficit crisis is our most significant, dent who wanted line-item veto au- many of us have come to use complex and distressing national problem. Ab- thority, but a Congress not willing to legislation as a form of cover under sent swift action, our children will in- give him the power. Today, however, which we can hide pork for our con- herit a legacy of debt that will reduce we have a President who wants a line- stituents. This is wrong, and it should their standard of living, and eclipse the item veto authority, constituents who be stopped. American dream. demand it, and a Congress willing to The line-item veto essentially re- While the line item veto on its own give him the power. It is time for the turns to the President a power he al- will not substantially reduce these Senate to do the responsible thing and ready has—that of reviewing legisla- deficits, it is an important check on pass the line-item veto. tion and vetoing it if he finds it im- special interest spending that today Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise proper. Discrete programs and appro- finds its way into dozens of bills signed in support of the Dole substitute to the priations still would be sent to the into law each year. The substitute McCain-Coats Legislative Line-Item President as before, only now the amendment we are debating today, Veto Act of 1995. President would be able to approve or which has been sponsored by the distin- I do not feel it necessary to revisit, disapprove of each of them, even when guished Majority Leader, Senator here, the stores of dubious spending bundled together into a large, more DOLE, would give the President badly programs, whether on cranberries, disparate bill. needed authority to veto special inter- bees, helium, or whatever, that unfor- The line-item veto would provide us est spending provisions and tax expend- tunately find their way into legislation with an important tool in combating itures buried in important legislation, and our bloated Federal budget. hidden pork and yet maintain an ap- without having to veto the overall I will, however, repeat what we all propriate balance of power—with a leg- measure. know, or at least should know: that we islative process under which the Presi- In effect, rather than receiving a sin- desperately need to regain control over dent may review and even veto any gle bill, the President would receive a our spending so that we can stop add- piece of discrete congressional action, series of mini-bills contained within an ing to our country’s huge and explod- and under which we in Congress may, if overall bill. He could then surgically ing deficit. We must use every means two-thirds of us agree that we should, remove or veto narrow special interest at our disposal to eliminate unneces- override that veto. provisions, and sign the remainder into sary spending, including Presidential Far from taking away our proper leg- law. The Dole substitute would require vetoes of particular spending programs islative function, this line-item veto that all new direct spending provisions, that have been inserted into larger ensures that we will scrutinize every appropriations measures and targeted bills. piece of legislation, every program and tax expenditures contained within each Those who argue that this bill im- spending proposal, to see to it that it is bill be enrolled as separate items to properly hands excessive power to the in the interest of the American people. give the President this surgical, or President ignore the history of Con- We must restore discipline to our budg- line-item veto authority. The Congress

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4464 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 could override vetoes with which it dis- line-item veto bill this session of Con- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without agreed by a two-thirds vote of both gress, and this is a way to get that objection, it is so ordered. houses. done. Mr. EXON. Mr. President, under the The Dole amendment would give the The Dole proposal does contain a pro- unanimous-consent agreement, I un- President the authority to excise pork vision for the veto of certain tax provi- derstand the Senator from Nebraska barrel projects and tax breaks intended sions. I believe that is an improvement has been allotted 5 minutes. I would to benefit narrow constituencies. Im- over previous versions. like to take that 5 minutes at this Although the separate enrollment re- portantly, it would also enable the time. President to veto new direct spending quirements of the Dole bill may be The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- programs which programs operate cumbersome, I have supported that ap- ator is recognized. without the need for annual appropria- proach in my cosponsorship of the tions. Bradley bill in the last session of Con- Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I will vote During my tenure as Governor of gress. It is, if not the preferred ap- for final passage of the Dole line-item Rhode Island from 1962 to 1968, there proach, still a reasonable one. veto substitute. As my colleagues well were many occasions when I wished I’d I want to be clear that I don’t think know, I would have preferred another had a line-item veto. The situation I the line-item veto will have much af- version of the legislation, namely S. 14, faced then was identical to the problem fect on the size of the Federal deficit. which I cosponsored with the distin- But, in real ways, it will bring more the President confronts today at the guished Republican and Democratic discipline to congressional spending. national level. Narrow special interest leaders and the chairman of the Budget And for that reason I believe it is good provisions, which could not survive on Committee. public policy. their own merits, are inserted into The line-item veto is one part of a se- However, S. 14 was not meant to be. critical legislation, leaving the Presi- ries of reforms that I believe are nec- We had a vote earlier today to sub- dent with a Hobson’s choice: Veto ur- essary to change the spending habits in stitute S. 14 for the so-called Dole com- gently needed legislation, or swallow Congress. That is the reason I voted promise. Unfortunately, S. 14’s sup- the offending provisions to advance the yes on both the Daschle and the Dole porters, of which I am one, did not greater good. The line-item veto is the proposals for a line-item veto. carry the day. right prescription for this problem. AMENDMENT NO. 347, AS AMENDED All vote tallies aside, I still believe Many have expressed concern that The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under with all of my heart that S. 14 is a bet- giving the President this new author- previous order, amendment No. 347, as ter bill. As one of its architects, I can ity would undermine the ‘‘power of the amended, is agreed to. say that it is a cleaner bill. It is con- purse’’ delegated to the legislative The amendment (No. 347), as amend- structed on sound footing. It is a sim- branch under the Constitution. While ed, was agreed to. ple bill without the unwieldy contrap- this concern maybe overstated, there is The PRESIDING OFFICER. The tions that complicate and weigh down no question——this is a bitter pill for question is on the engrossment and the Dole substitute. It is a bill that can the Congress to swallow. But it’s a rec- third reading of the bill. weather a constitutional challenge. ognition that the legislative branch The bill was ordered to be engrossed cannot put its fiscal house in order, for a third reading, and was read the Yet, I tell my colleagues today that I and that additional checks are needed. third time. will vote for the Dole substitute. I will Wisely, the Dole amendment includes a Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, as I un- vote for it as our only chance to win a 4-year sunset provision, so that we are derstand the parliamentary situation, line-item veto. I will vote for it as a not committing ourselves to an irre- under the previous unanimous-consent last resort to cut pork-barrel spending. versible course of action. agreement, Mr. BYRD is going to speak Mr. President, I can support this bill In closing, I want to commend the for up to 2 hours. because it is much improved over its majority leader, Senator DOLE, as well The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under original version. In spite of the haste as Senators MCCAIN and DOMENICI for the previous order, there will now be and pressure to ram this legislation working together to develop the Dole up to 2 hours of debate under the con- through this body, the Senate worked substitute to S. 4. I strongly support trol of the senior Senator from West its will in a number of areas. Through this amendment and hope that the Sen- Virginia. the amendment process, we made this a ate will adopt this measure with a sub- Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, I have better bill. We made it a bill that Sen- stantial bipartisan vote. discussed the unanimous-consent ators from both sides of the aisle can Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I have agreement with Senator BYRD and he support—albeit reluctantly. long believed that giving the President has agreed to allow a new unanimous- consent agreement that would allow I am pleased to see that many of the the capability to exercise a line-item concepts that I proposed in S.14 have veto will be helpful in preventing some for 5 minutes for the Senator from Ari- zona, myself; followed by 5 minutes by found their way into the Dole sub- of the unsupportable spending projects the Senator from Indiana, Senator stitute. The bill now contains a sunset that are put in appropriations bills provision. It now addresses the critical COATS; and, of course, whatever leader without notice, public debate, or hear- time he wishes to consume. areas of targeted tax benefits and enti- ings. So I ask unanimous consent that, in tlements. I voted for the Daschle proposal for a addition to the 2 hours controlled by However, we are not yet in the win- line-item veto today, and I am also Senator BYRD, following the 2 hours ner’s circle. We will have enormous voting for the Dole proposal to give the controlled by Senator BYRD, there be 5 hurdles to clear in conference. I hope President the line-item veto authority. minutes for the Senator from Ne- they are not insurmountable. I hope The Daschle proposal contains two braska, 5 minutes for the Senator from that reason and bipartisanship can con- provisions that were, in my opinion, Arizona, and 5 minutes for the Senator spire to produce a conference report preferable to the Dole proposal. The from Indiana. that the Senate can support, and as a Daschle proposal had a broader provi- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Senate conferee one that I can support sion on the line-item veto for tax objection, it is so ordered. when we take the final action on this items. Also, the Daschle proposal Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, I thank proposition when the conference report called for a majority override on the the Chair. Pending the presence of Sen- is returned to the Senate. vetoed provision. The Dole proposal re- ator BYRD, I suggest the absence of a In conclusion, this is not an enthusi- quires a two-thirds vote to override the quorum. line-item veto. Both of the provisions The PRESIDING OFFICER. The astic vote I cast today. I have listened in the Daschle bill are preferable to clerk will call the roll. with great interest to my colleagues me. The bill clerk proceeded to call the who oppose this bill. I share many of However, the Daschle bill did not re- roll. their concerns. I share many of their ceive sufficient votes for passage. Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unan- suspicions. Therefore, I am voting for the Dole imous consent that the order for the I am still leery of the cumbersome proposal. I want the Senate to pass a quorum call be rescinded. separate enrollment process that was

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4465 tossed into the pot at the last minute. In a statement earlier this week I has been quoted on this floor. I was I wish we could have had a thorough went through a sample piece of legisla- somewhat surprised by his most recent hearing on it. Separate enrollment tion that the Senator from Indiana had statement about this. put together as a test run of how the could turn into the dreaded hydra of The Assistant Attorney General for which Senator BYRD warns. There are bill would work, and the results speak interpreting the Constitution under also serious constitutional consider- for themselves. The bits and pieces the Bush administration concluded— ations which I believe could haunt us that result would be standing alone, as his name was Timothy Flannigan—con- for years to come. Fortunately, we now they are left to do, would be incompre- cluded that you cannot have separate have a sunset provision that will allow hensible and would bear no relation- enrollment. This was the Bush Assist- Congress to revisit this legislation in 5 ship to the bill that was passed by the years. Congress. ant Attorney General. In his view, the But, Mr. President, I will vote for Finally, Mr. President, the bill does Constitution ‘‘requires that the bill be this bill because it’s our only hope for not achieve its intended purpose of en- presented to the President as passed by a line-item veto. There is a certain abling the President to cut spending by the Congress.’’ irony not lost on this Senator. Just as vetoing earmarks. I do not think most Separate enrollment is unconstitu- the President often has to accept the of our colleagues even realize that. But tional. bad with the good in a critical spending under the Dole substitute, unlike the I believe Mr. Dellinger, President bill, so must I accept the bad with the original S. 4 or S. 14, if the President good in this bill. vetoes an earmark, he will not save the Clinton’s Assistant Attorney General, Mr. President, I wish we did not need taxpayers a dime. He still has the ap- in his statement in his most recent let- a line-item veto at all. I wish Congress propriations to spend. He will just ter says that the best reading of the had the raw courage to make the sound spend it for something other than the Constitution is that separate enroll- fiscal decisions that would make this purpose specified by Congress. ment does not work. But what is inter- bill unnecessary. But a rising deficit The Constitution establishes the esting was Laurence Tribe’s earlier and a nearly $5 trillion debt under- method by which laws are enacted and opinion which I want to just briefly scores the necessity of this legislation. repealed. It specifies how a bill be- read, because, while Laurence Tribe is, No, this bill will not balance the comes law. It says that when a bill is indeed, a constitutional expert, a few budget. No, this bill will not eradicate passed by both Houses of Congress, it years before his current opinion, he the national debt. No, this bill will not must go to the President. It does not wrote a book. In that book called solve all of our problems with a wave of have an exception. The bill before us ‘‘American Constitutional Law,’’ this the hand. No, this legislation is not would attempt to carve out an excep- is what Professor Tribe wrote. perfect, but it is one important step to tion. The House bill, which is passed by blot out the red ink. It is one impor- both Houses, would not under this sub- The core issue is whether Congress may tant step to put an end to out-of-constitute go to the President. Instead, it statutorily expand the meaning of the term gets carved up into bits and pieces, and ‘‘Bill’’—which denotes a singular piece of trol spending that is bleeding future legislation in the form in which it was ap- generations dry. It is one important the bits and pieces go to the President. proved by Congress—by defining as a sepa- step to change the Nation’s wasteful We cannot amend the bits and pieces. rate ‘‘Bill’’ each and every item, paragraph, spending habits. And that is how we We cannot refer the bits and pieces or section contained within a single bill that will solve our Nation’s fiscal ills—one back to committee. The bits and pieces has passed both Houses as an entirety. The step at a time. I ask my colleagues to go to the President as if they were bills method would be to direct the enrolling join with me today and take this first passed by the Congress, although the clerk of the House where the bill originates crucial step. Congress never legislated on those bits to disassemble a bill and enrol each num- Mr. President, I yield the floor. and pieces the way we legislate on any bered section and unnumbered paragraph as The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under bill by having it introduced, having it a separate bill or joint resolution for presen- the previous order, the Senator from go through a committee process, a tation to the President in compliance with West Virginia now controls 2 hours. hearing process, an amendment proc- clauses 2 and 3 of section 7 of article I. But Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I will be ess, a motion process, a conference it is far from certain whether the myriad happy to yield some time, if Senators bills thus presented to the President could be process. The bill which we passed does said to have been considered, voted on, and wish. I ask the distinguished Senator not go to the President. The bills passed by the two Houses in accord with the from Michigan [Mr. LEVIN] how much which he is given to sign have never Constitution’s ‘‘single, finely wrought and he needs? been passed by us. That violates the exhaustively considered procedure.’’ The I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished Constitution. We cannot do that. choice of whether to adopt and submit one Senator. What is ironic here also is if the appropriations bill or a hundred, and the de- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- President wants to sign a bill in its en- cision as to the form the bill or bills should ator from Michigan. tirety, an appropriations bill, he can- take, might well be deemed the ‘‘kind of Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Chair. I not do so. He does not have a bill to decision[s] that can be implemented only in thank the Senator from West Virginia. sign. The bill disappeared. It was splin- accordance with the procedures set out in ar- Mr. President, I think it is appro- tered into shards. Under this process, if ticle I.’’ And delegation to an enrolling clerk priate for the President to be able to the President wants to sign the bill, an in either house of the power to make decisions which would otherwise be part and par- single out spending items that he be- appropriations bill which has been lieves to be wasteful, and to require a cel of the political, deliberative, and legisla- splintered into 500 parts, he cannot tive process is constitutionally suspect. separate congressional vote on those sign the bill. He has to sign 500 pieces items. For that reason, I was sup- of the bill even if he wants to sign the Mr. President, I think it is appro- portive of a bill similar to that origi- whole appropriations. If he wants to priate for the President to be able to nally introduced by Senators DOMENICI veto the entire appropriations bill, he single out spending items that he be- and EXON. That is why I also voted for cannot veto the entire appropriations lieves to be wasteful, and to require a the bill that was introduced by the bill. The President has vetoed appro- separate congressional vote on those Democratic leader. However, I cannot priations bills in their entirety. Presi- items. For that reason, I was prepared vote for the bill before us for three rea- dents under this approach cannot, but to vote in favor of a bill similar to that sons. would have to veto each of the shards, originally introduced by Senators First, I believe the bill is unconstitu- each of the bits and pieces that were DOMENICI and EXON. That is also why I tional. The Constitution specifies the submitted to the President. voted for the substitute proposed by mechanism by which laws are made. I wonder if my time is up? I wonder the Democratic leader. This bill establishes a different mecha- if the Senator from West Virginia However, I cannot vote for the bill nism. We cannot do that. We cannot would yield me 1 additional minute? before us for three reasons. amend the Constitution by legislation. Mr. BYRD. I yield 2 additional min- Second, the bill would cut up legisla- utes. First, the bill is unconstitutional. tion into pieces which standing alone Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, Laurence The Constitution specifies the mecha- are bits and pieces. Tribe, who is a constitutional expert, nism by which laws are made; this bill

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4466 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 purports to establish a different mech- achieve the same result, he would have whether a provision is an allocation of anism. We can not do that. We can not to veto hundreds of different bills. funds creating a positive obligation to amend the Constitution by legislation. But suppose the President went expend funds, or simply a limitation on Second, the bill would cut up legisla- ahead and vetoed each of the hundreds funds. tion and cut it in pieces which standing of little bills. The Constitution says These are all legislative tasks, but alone are gibberish. In a statement ear- that he shall return each bill, with his they would be performed by an enroll- lier this week, I went through a sample objections, to the House in which it ing clerk, not by the Congress as the piece of legislation that the Senator originated, which ‘‘shall proceed to re- Constitution provides. We are supposed from Indiana had put together as a test consideration.’’ The Constitution then to make these legislative decisions, not run of how this bill would work. I provides that we must have a recorded the enrolling clerks. think the results speak for themselves. override vote on each such bill. The When the clerks have done their The hundreds of bits and pieces of a bill Constitution states: work, these shreds of the bill we passed that result would be incomprehensible [I]n all such Cases, the Votes of both would then be brought back to the and would bear no relationship to the Houses shall be determined by Yeas and House or Senate for what is called a one bill Congress actually passed. Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting vote en bloc. This vote is a charade. A Finally, the bill does not achieve its for and against the Bill shall be entered on Member who objected to one or more of intended purpose of enabling the Presi- the Journal of each House respectively. the new bills would not have an oppor- dent to cut spending by vetoing ear- So we cannot have a voice vote on tunity to vote against them. No Mem- marks. I do not think most of my col- veto overrides, and we cannot do it en ber would have any opportunity to leagues realize that. Under the Dole bloc. The Constitution says that we offer a motion to recommit. No Mem- substitute—unlike the original S. 4 or shall act on each bill vetoed by the ber would have any opportunity to S. 14—if the President vetoes an ear- President, and we shall do it by re- offer an amendment. No Member would mark, he will not save the taxpayers a corded vote. So if the President vetoes have any opportunity to offer an objec- dime. He will still spend the money; he 500 little bills, we have to have 500 re- tion. No Member would even have the will just spend it for something other corded votes. opportunity to correct an error in the than the purpose specified by Congress. Simply put, Mr. President, the proce- shredding process. So while I support the version of a dure that this bill would put us The only recourse that we would line item that comports with the re- through is a charade. It is a fiction, de- have, if we had a problem with any of quirements of the Constitution and the signed to pretend that we have passed the bills, for any reason, would be to system of checks and balances estab- bills that we did not write, did not in- vote against the entire package of lished by our Founding Fathers, the troduce, did not report out of com- disaggregated bills. And what would bill before us fails that fundamental mittee, did not debate on the floor, happen if we were to reject this prod- test. could not amend, and did not have any uct of the enrolling clerks? We would The Constitution establishes the legitimate opportunity to vote on. not have any opportunity to vote on a method by which laws are enacted and Here is how the procedure would corrected product. We would have to repealed. It specifies that a bill be- work. We would go through the entire start the entire legislative process comes law when it is passed by both legislative process of introducing legis- over. Houses of Congress and signed by the lation, reporting it out of committee, The absence of any opportunity at all President, or, if the bill is vetoed by amending it, voting it through both for Members to correct errors made in the President, when that veto is over- Houses, going through a conference, the process of disaggregation gives the ridden by a two-thirds vote in each approving a final product—a single ap- Secretary and the Clerk extraordinary House. This bill purports to create a propriation bill. powers and raises the potential for real third way by which laws can be made, Further, this bill passed both Houses mischief by appointed officials. by giving the Clerk of the House of in identical form. Under the Constitu- This is not the legislative process es- Representatives and the Secretary of tion, it is supposed to be sent to the tablished in the Constitution. It is a the Senate the power to take a bill President. But that is not what we are charade, designed to create the appear- passsed by both Houses of Congress and going to do. ance that we have complied with the disaggregate it. Instead, we will give the bill to the constitutional requirements. That is Despite the efforts of the sponsors, Clerk of the House or the Secretary of not good enough. The Constitution that is simply not consistent with what the Senate, and tell them to says that a bill passed by both Houses the Constitution requires. Article I, disaggregate it into hundreds of dif- of Congress shall be sent to the Presi- section 7 of the Constitution states ferent bills. The Clerk and the Sec- dent for signature. There are no excep- that ‘‘Every bill which shall have retary, who are not elected at all, but tions for momentarily convenient ends. passed the House of Representatives are appointed officials of the majority This bill does not comply with that re- and the Senate’’ shall be presented to party in each House, would be directed quirement. the President for signature. It does not to take the careful work of the Con- The Supreme Court said in the say that some bills shall be presented gress—a bill which, under the Constitu- Chadha that we cannot amend the Con- to the President for signature. tion is supposed to be sent to the Presi- stitution by legislation. The Court ex- So here we have an appropriations dent—and tear it up into shreds. plained: bill that has passed both Houses of This process of splintering a bill The explicit prescription for legislation ac- Congress. Under the substitute before would involve a substantial exercise of tion contained in Article I cannot be amend- us, it does not go to the President. It discretion. The enrolling clerks would ed by legislation. . . . The legislative steps goes to the Clerk of the House and the have to determine which provisions are outlined in Article I are not empty formali- Secretary of the Senate instead, to tax expenditures. They would have to ties; they were designed to assure that both tear it up into different bills. That is decide if these provisions affect a lim- Houses of Congress and the President par- not the procedures established in the ited group of taxpayers differently ticipate in the exercise of lawmaking au- Constitution. The Constitution says from other, similarly situated people? thority. that every bill passed by Congress shall What, exactly is a ‘‘limited group’’ of The Court explained its decision as be sent to the President for signature taxpayers? Who is ‘‘similarly situ- follows: or veto. It does not give us leeway to ated’’? How do we expect the enrolling The bicameral requirement, the Present- pass a bill and then hide it and try to clerks to know? ment Clauses, the President’s veto, and Con- pass something else. The enrolling clerks would have to gress’ power to override a veto were intended The President, if he wanted to sign determine which pieces of a paragraph, to erect enduring checks on each Branch and that appropriations bill in its entirety, or a single sentence, contain alloca- to protect the people from the improvident exercise of power by mandating certain pre- could not do so. To achieve the same tions or suballocations of appropria- scribed steps. To preserve those checks, and result, he would have to sign hundreds tions. They would have to decide where maintain the separation of powers, the care- of different bills. If we wanted to veto in a sentence to stop one bill, and start fully defined limits on the power of each it in its entirety, he could not do so. To another. They would have to decide Branch must not be eroded. . . . With all the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4467 obvious flaws of delay, untidiness, and poten- on an appropriation, without vetoing We start with an appropriation. For tial for abuse, we have not yet found a better the appropriations itself. In other example, the following: ‘‘The following way to preserve freedom than by making the words, he could veto the limitations, funds are appropriated: For the purpose exercise of power subject to the carefully and spend all of the money anyway. of program X, $600 million.’’ crafted restraints spelled out in the Con- stitution. The President could have rejected pro- We then want to specify more pre- visions in appropriations bills that at- cisely how that money will be spent, so Mr. President, I intend to vote tempt to reduce Government waste. He we have an allocation. For example: against the measure before us because could have vetoed limitations on ‘‘of which $20 million shall be available it is unconstitutional. spending for consultants, for entertain- for purpose A; $12 million shall be Second, I oppose the bill, because it ment of Government officials, for Gov- available for purpose B; $15 million would turn carefully considered pieces ernment travel. That means he could shall be available for purpose C; etc.’’ of legislation into gibberish. Earlier have spent more money for these pur- That is an allocation of an appropria- this week, I showed my colleague a poses. tion. If one of these allocations is fur- document prepared for the Senate en- Fortunately, we have corrected part ther divided into pieces, that would be rolling clerk, at the request of the Sen- of the problem. Under the Levin-Mur- a suballocation. ator from Indiana, as a test run of how kowski-Exon amendment, items of the Now, let us look at the difference be- this bill would work in practice. type I have just described would not be tween the two bills reported out of What the enrolling clerk put to- separately enrolled. The President Committee and the Dole substitute. gether was one appropriations bill, cut would no longer be able to veto rescis- The two reported bills both took the up into separate pieces as required by sions or cancellations of funds. He rescission approach. They authorized the measure before us. He produced a would no longer be able to veto restric- the President, subject to certain limi- stack of paper 3 inches thick, con- tions on appropriations and still spend tations, to rescind any amount of budg- taining 582 separate bills, each of which the money. He could no longer spend et authority provided in an appropria- would be separately enrolled, signed by money for purposes inconsistent with tion. That means that the President the Speaker of the House and the the specific intent of the Congress. could veto all or part of an appropria- President of the Senate, and sent to That was an important amendment, tion. the President for signature. but my colleagues should be under no In the case of the example I just As I pointed out at that time, many illusion that we have eliminated the gave, if the President decides that the of these so-called bills are, standing by problems with this bill. We have done $20 million for project A was a wasteful themselves, simply gibberish. For ex- the best that we could with a flawed earmark, he could rescind the budget ample, I read one, which states, in its approach, but the approach remains se- authority for that project. Under ei- entirety: riously flawed. ther of the two rescission bills, the of which $200,000 shall be available pursu- Despite the adoption of the Levin- President would, in effect, put a blue ant to subtitle B of title I of said Act, and Murkowski-Exon amendment, the sub- pencil through that $20 million. At the That is it. That’s the entire text of stitute before us gives the President same time, and this is the important the bill, which we are going to send to broad powers to substitute his personal part, the President would also reduce the President for signature. Who is au- priorities for the budgetary priorities the overall $600 million appropriated thorized to spend this money? What are voted by the Congress. If, for example, for purpose X by the same $20 million. they authorized to spend it for? What we were to require the President to The appropriation would be reduced account does it come from? $200,000 out spend a specified amount appropriated to $580 million, and we would have a of what appropriation? ‘‘Subititle B of funds for the Strategic Defense Initia- real cut in spending. In fact, both bills title I’’ of what act? It makes no sense. tive, or a particular approach to SDI, contain a so-called lock-box amend- And there are hundreds more bills that the President could veto that requirement, under which the money re- are equally incomprehensible. This is ment and spend the money based on his scinded by the President could not be not the enrolling clerk’s fault—he just own personal priorities. spent for any other purpose. That did what the bill directed him to do. Moreover, the substitute before us means we would really reduce Govern- This is not supposed to be a jigsaw would cede this power to the President ment spending. puzzle, Mr. President. It is legislation. without giving him the authority to But now let us look at what the Dole Each of these sentences I read the save the taxpayers money by elimi- substitute does. Under this substitute, other day is an independent, free- nating an earmark. Despite the ex- the $600 million appropriation and each standing bill, to be sent to the Presi- traordinary powers given to the Presi- of the allocations of that appropriation dent for signature. After they are dent by this bill, when it comes to cut- are enrolled as separate bills. If the pulled out of a bill and separately en- ting spending, it is weaker than either President decides that the $20 million rolled, not one of them means a thing. of the two bills reported out of the for project A is wasteful, he can veto The measure before us would result in Budget and Governmental Affairs Com- the bill containing that allocation. a product that simply makes no sense. mittees. But what happens to the $600 million Finally, Mr. President, I oppose this How can that be? How can a bill that appropriation if he vetoes the alloca- bill, because it would give the Presi- gives so much power to the President tion? That appropriation is in a sepa- dent extraordinary powers, without give him so little power to reduce rate bill. He can not reduce it by $20 achieving its stated purpose of allow- spending? million as he could under the bills re- ing the President to cut spending by First, this substitute gives the Presi- ported from Committee; he must either vetoing earmarks. dent the power only to veto, not to re- sign it or veto the whole thing. If he I do note that the proposal before us duce, an appropriation. So while the vetoes it, he is rejecting not only the has been improved by the amendment President is given great power to veto wasteful earmark, but the entire pro- that I offered with the Senator from an earmark within an appropriation, gram to which it is attached. If he Alaska [Mr. MURKOWSKI] and the Sen- he would not thereby reduce the appro- signs it, however, he will not have ator from Nebraska [Mr. EXON]. Under priation itself, unless he were prepared saved a dime by vetoing the earmark. the substitute originally introduced by to veto the entire appropriation. So under substitute amendment be- the majority leader, the President Here is where we need to understand fore us, the President can veto an ear- could have used his line item veto what an earmark is. An earmark is not mark, but it will not do the taxpayers power to increase spending or to veto an appropriation. It does not give the any good, because that will not reduce restrictions on spending. President any additional power to the appropriation. We will still have Under the substitute, as originally spend money; it simply says that of the the same amount of spending that we proposed, the President could have money already appropriated, a certain would have had without the veto. used his line-item veto power to reject amount must be spent for a specified There is no money to put into a rescissions and cancellations of spend- purpose. This is what we call an alloca- lockbox, because spending has not been ing. He could have used this power to tion or suballocation of an appropria- reduced by a dime. The only difference veto limitations and conditions placed tion. Here’s how it works. is that the President will spend the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4468 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 money on his own pet project, instead determined that the anti-car theft pro- Constitution which Henry Clay put up of the project specified by Congress. gram was a relatively minor priority, when he was here. Let us look at a classic earmark. We compared to the assistance provided to Mr. BYRD. I thank the distinguished could have an appropriation for post of- state and local law enforcement pro- Senator from Michigan for his most fice construction, with allocations for grams. That is what we do in appro- generous and charitable words. I deeply specific post offices to be built in spe- priations bills. We establish priorities. appreciate them. I am flattered by cific locations. That is what we are Under the bills reported out of com- them. after in this bill, and I do not have a mittee, the President could rescind the The Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. great problem with giving the Presi- $200,000 allocation and save that money PELL], did he wish time? dent the power to veto those earmarks. for the taxpayers. But he can’t do that Mr. PELL. Three minutes. But I will say, Mr. President, that I under the Dole substitute. would prefer a rescission bill, which Under the bills reported out of com- Mr. BYRD. I yield 3 minutes to Mr. gives the money back to the taxpayers, mittee, the President could rescind the PELL. over this bill, which leaves the appro- $200,000 allocation and save that money The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- priation intact for the President to for the taxpayers. But he can’t do that ator from Rhode Island. spend on post offices of his own choos- under the Dole substitute. Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I find my- ing. Under the substitute, the President self in opposition to the line item-veto Mr. President, some Senators appear could veto the $50 million allocation, legislation before us, both on philo- to be under the misapprehension that the $200,000 allocation, or both, but sophical as well as practical grounds. the substitute before us would enable that would have no effect on the over- Philosophically, I simply believe that to President to cut spending by vetoing all appropriation of $62 million. The Congress should be extremely chary in an earmark. In fact, it does not. The President would still be required to yielding its power of the purse to the original version of S. 4 would have en- spend that money; he could simply sub- executive branch. I hold this view on abled the President to do that. The stitute his own priorities for those es- the basis of my Senate service under Domenici bill would enable the Presi- tablished by Congress. Perhaps he eight Presidents of both parties during dent to do that. The Daschle substitute thinks the car theft program is more my 34 years in the Senate, and not- would enable the President to do that. important than local law enforcement; withstanding the cordial relationships But the Dole substitute does not. he could reverse the allocations. But he I have had with all of them. Under the Dole substitute, if the Presi- would not save any money without The fact is that the executive branch, dent vetos an earmark—or an alloca- vetoing the full appropriation. under our Constitution, quite properly tion, as it is called in the bill—he can These priorities are no small matter. is a separate power center with its own still spend the money, unless he vetoes In the last Congress for example, we agenda and its own priorities. Inevi- the entire appropriation, which may spent weeks fighting over the relative tably, it will seek and use any addi- cover many worthwhile projects in ad- priority to be given in the crime bill to tional power to achieve its objectives. dition to the earmark. hiring additional cops, building addi- And the pending grant of veto power Some will say that, even so, we tional prisons, and establishing crime over specific items, I fear, will surely would be better off without the ear- prevention programs. We will undoubt- give even the most benign and well mo- mark. edly refight some of those battles in tivated Chief Executive a new means But not all allocations and suballoca- this Congress. But unless we are very, for exercising undue influence and co- tions are ‘‘earmarks’’. Many are basic very careful about the way we write ercion over individual members of the statements of congressional priorities, our appropriations bills, the President legislative branch. and many place important conditions, could use the veto power provided in So my preference would be to simply limitations, and restrictions on presi- this legislation to reverse our prior- retain the present system of Presi- dential spending. ities. Moreover, he could do it without dential recommendation of rescissions. Let us look at some real world appro- saving the taxpayers a dime. priations, with their allocations and In short, Mr. President, the sub- I fully recognize that under that sys- suballocations. I gave a few examples stitute before us is likely to do little tem our appropriations bills do some- yesterday, all from last year’s appro- good, and a lot of harm. In particular, times cater to narrow special interests. priations bill for Commerce, Justice the power given to the President to It was for that reason that I favored and State. Let me go through them veto allocations and suballocations the substitute offered by the minority again, to explain what the President will enable him to substitute his own leader to require congressional action, can do, and what happens to the personal priorities for those estab- by majority vote, on proposed rescis- money. lished in bills passed by Congress, but sions. It is unfortunate that the major- One example I gave was the so-called will not save the taxpayers a dime, be- ity saw fit to withdraw its support for bill which would state: ‘‘of which cause unless the underlying appropria- the earlier version of this approach, as $200,000 shall be available pursuant to tion is vetoed, the money will still be originally proposed by Senator DOMEN- subtitle B Title I of such Act’’. Let us spent. ICI. set aside the fact that, standing by This provision is well-intended. The It is even more regrettable that the itself, this is gibberish, and assume sponsors of the substitute undoubtedly only viable compromise that could be that the appropriating committees will think that they are striking out at ear- devised involves the dismemberment of figure out a way to write this so that it marks. But they have missed the mark. all appropriations bills into hundreds makes sense. What does it do? Mr. President, I will vote against this of separate bills. Quite apart from the Here is the answer. Last year’s bill bill, because it is unconstitutional. I constitutional questions which have appropriated $62 million for State and will vote against it, because it would been raised with respect to the form of Local Narcotics Control and Justice turn bills carefully considered and presentation of bills, the compromise Assistance under the Omnibus Crime passed by the Congress into gibberish. is mind boggling in its complexity. Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. And I will vote it because for all this Separate enrollment, it seems to me, The largest allocation out of that ap- trouble, we would not even succeed in is so cumbersome and unwieldy as to propriation was $50 million for state giving the President the power in- invite ridicule on this body for even and local law enforcement programs. tended, to cut spending by eliminating considering it. More to the point, it in- The $200,000 was an allocation for en- earmarked funds. I urge my colleagues vites bureaucratic confusion or at forcement of anti-car theft provisions to join me in opposing this bill. worst tampering with the legislative for preventing motor vehicle theft. I thank the Senator from West Vir- process. It is the kind of jerry-built so- The $50 million allocated for State ginia, not just for yielding time but for lution which seems almost certain to and local law enforcement programs his stalwart defense of the Constitu- spawn more problems than it was de- and the $200,000 for enforcement of tion. The spirit of Henry Clay is on this signed to fix. We should reject it, or anti-car theft provisions was a state- floor. I thank the Senator from West failing that, hope that the conferees in ment of congressional priorities. We Virginia for the kind of defense of the their wisdom will set it aside.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4469 Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield to the point of view of guarding their role but yet the Executive would be able to the distinguished Senator from Mary- under the Constitution as representa- use his veto to negate that item, not land [Mr. SARBANES], 5 minutes. tives of the people. The Founding Fa- on the merits of the item itself, but be- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- thers devised a constitutional system cause the executive branch would re- ator from Maryland. which has been the marvel of the late it to a totally separate item in Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I world. They established a National which they are being opposed by the thank the very distinguished and able Government with independent Member in the legislature. Senator from West Virginia for yield- branches that check and balance one Think very carefully about that. I being me time. another; to have not only the executive lieve it will happen. In the hands of a I wish to join my colleague from with power and authority but also to vindictive President, it could be abso- Michigan in the comments he made a have a legislative branch with power lutely brutal. few moments ago in expressing my and authority. But I think the temptation for its deepest appreciation to the Senator The thing we must be careful about use in this manner will be tempting to from West Virginia for the very strong as we consider these various line-item any Chief Executive who is concerned fight he has been making in the Cham- veto proposals is not to erode the bal- about moving some other matter ber on this issue and on other issues ance, the basic balance and constitu- through the legislative body and finds which touch the Constitution of the tional arrangement that has served the himself being thwarted or frustrated. United States. He has been a true Republic well for over two centuries. Finally, let me go back to the point champion of our Constitution and the The Congress passed the Budget Im- with which I opened. My deepest con- Nation is in his debt. poundment and Control Act in the mid cern is the manner in which we are I am deeply troubled that this body 1970’s, to address this balance between trivializing very important issues. The appears to be into the symbolism but the executive and the legislative Senator from West Virginia has ren- not the reality of addressing important branches which provided a rescission dered an extraordinary service to the national problems. There is a dedicated process. It is possible to do further re- people of the country by highlighting craftsmanship in dealing with problems finements with respect to the rescis- that. He has stood here on the floor and of public policy which members of a sion arrangements that currently exist underscored that we are dealing with legislative body are supposed to bring in the law and it is down that path I serious matters. This is serious busi- to the task. Anyone can stand up and believe we should be proceeding. ness. Decisions are being made in the thump their chest and holler there is a The current approach has been criti- rush of the moment that may well problem and we need to have a re- cized. It is said the President makes re- alter in a fundamental way our basic sponse. scissions, sends them to the Congress, constitutional arrangements. We ought The real question is will the response the Congress simply ignores them. to be very careful about doing that, be a sensible one? Will it in fact, in A proposal was offered by the minor- Mr. President. I regard the measure be- real practical terms, improve the situ- ity leader which would have addressed fore us as a giant step down that path ation? Too few want to face those ques- this problem by requiring the Congress and, therefore, I very strongly oppose tions and deal with them in a tough- to act upon rescissions sent to it by the it. minded way. Witness the proposal be- President. The Congress would not sim- Mr. President, I yield the floor. fore us. The Congress is going to send ply be able to ignore it. The President Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank thousands of little ‘‘billettes’’ down to would be able to focus the spotlight on the very able and distinguished senior the President to sign or veto. As the the issue and require the Congress to Senator from Maryland for his vision, able Senator from Michigan pointed act on it. The expedited rescission pro- his dedication to this Constitution of out, there are manifestly serious con- posal provided that if a majority in ours, his love for the Senate, and his stitutional questions about this ap- both Houses did not agree that the patriotism which has stood the test proach. item should be rescinded then it would many times on this floor in recent days There was a path the Senate could not be rescinded. That seemed to me to and in months and years past. It has al- have followed, pursuant to the concept be a sensible way of trying to address ways been with great pride that I have of expedited rescission, which I think some of the problems that have been listened to him and been thankful for would have commanded very broad sup- raised without fundamentally altering someone of Paul SARBANES’ stature and port in this body. An approach which our constitutional arrangements. courage. would have gotten at some of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time I know of others in this institution spending problems people have criti- of the Senator has expired. who treasure their membership in this cized without bringing about a radical Mr. SARBANES. Could the Senator body and who cherish the Constitution. and fundamental shift in the allocation yield me just 2 more minutes? I perhaps should not mention names of powers between the executive and Mr. BYRD. Yes. I yield the Senator 2 because, inevitably, I would not think the legislative branches. additional minutes. of all the names that should be men- I said earlier on in the debate that it Mr. SARBANES. I thank the Sen- tioned at a time like this. is no great trick to have a strong exec- ator. But I shall mention the name of the utive. If you go through history, many I just want to touch finally on a Senator from Michigan, Mr. LEVIN. He countries have had strong executives. point made immediately preceding me is a master craftsman when it comes to In fact, when it is carried to extreme, by the distinguished Senator from legislation. He is meticulous and care- we call them dictatorships. The hall- Rhode Island. Namely, that the pro- ful and exact. mark of a free society is to be able to posal before us places enormous power I have often thought that in that have a legislative branch and a judicial in the hands of the Executive to bring Convention which met from May 25 to branch in addition to an executive pressure on the legislative branch. September 17, 1787, he would have been branch and for those two branches to What the executive branch can do an appropriate man to appoint to the have independence of judgment and under this proposal is link items in an Committee of Detail. He is so method- real decisionmaking power, with the appropriations bill with totally unre- ical, so very, very thoughtful in prob- ability to check and balance executive lated issues on which a Member of the ing the depths of every word. He would authority. legislative branch may be challenging have been well placed in that great I can understand executives wanting the Executive. gathering, because there are very few to maximize their authority, but I have For example, the Executive may have words in that Constitution that are difficulty understanding legislators a nomination it is trying to move without great purpose. Not many words who in a blind way, are giving up a sig- through the Senate. A Senator opposes were wasted. nificant part of their role in the oper- that nomination. The Executive can I suppose that if I could flatter my- ation of the political system. pick out of an appropriations bill an self by thinking that I might find a few I do not say that from the point of item of critical importance to the Sen- words in that Constitution that per- view that they should guard their own ator’s home State, an item which ev- haps ought not to have been there—and personal power and authority but from eryone would concede is meritorious, I cannot say this with certitude, of

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4470 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 course—it would be those words in that would like to ask the Senator from The Framers gave to the President a veto clause, in the second part thereof, West Virginia a question about it. qualified veto. They did not give to the which refers to ‘‘every order, resolu- That is, currently if the President de- President an absolute negative. He has tion, or vote,’’ in saying that they cides to veto an appropriations bill, he to take it all or leave it all. But there should be presented to the President can just simply veto the bill. But under are so many questions that are raised for his consideration. this proposal, after the bill is divided by this substitute. I wish we could have Of course, we do not send votes to the into these bits and pieces, or gone on with this debate for a few more President. We do not enact orders of a ‘‘billettes,’’ as the Senator from West days. Several flaws have already been nature to be approved or disapproved Virginia calls them, in order to veto an brought to light during the limited de- by a President. We do enact simple res- appropriations bill, the entire bill, the bate that we have had on this measure, olutions, concurrent resolutions, and President would have to veto each of and only God knows what additional joint resolutions, neither of the first the bits and pieces of that bill. ones might have come to light upon two of which goes to the President. Let us say that the appropriations further examination. The Senator But as to the words ‘‘order’’ and bill is divided by an enrollment clerk, raises a very important question. ‘‘vote,’’ I have never been able to un- assuming this politically appointed en- Each of the little ‘‘billettes’’ would derstand why the Framers put those rollment clerk can figure out what rep- have to be signed or vetoed by the words in the Constitution. But they, resents a tax and a general tax and a President or, if he did not sign them, too, were afraid that something would tax which is limited to a group, and he and if Congress were in session, they be sent to the President and called a can properly put the limitations to the would become law without his signa- bill which was, in reality, not a bill. right appropriation and do all these ture. But if the President vetoes one or Bills have to be presented to the Presi- other things which are really legisla- several or all, there is no provision in dent for his approval or rejection. And tive—these are not ministerial func- this measure whereby a House, in so the Framers took every precaution tions, these are critical policy deci- which the bill first originated, has any to make sure that anything that went sions—but assuming you have an en- authority to collect those vetoed bills to the President for his signature or for rollment clerk who does all that and and vote to override them en bloc. I his veto would, indeed, be a bill or a sends these 500 bits and pieces to the raised that question in this Chamber joint resolution. President and the President says, ‘‘I yesterday. Mr. LEVIN. Will the Senator yield want to veto this entire appropriations In most cases, the House, being by for a question? bill,’’ it is my understanding that custom the originator of appropria- Mr. BYRD. Yes. under the pending substitute, he would tions bills, would be the first to decide Mr. LEVIN. First of all, for a thank have to veto each of the 500 bits and and, in many cases, the only House to you and to say how grateful I am for pieces in order to get to the entire bill. decide, because if the House chose not your comments, but also for a ques- If that happened, if he wants to veto to attempt to override, the Senate tion. the entire bill, he would then return all would never have a voice and, to that First, on that clause that the Sen- the bits and pieces—all of them would extent, the Senate is being subordi- ator just made reference to, ‘‘Order, come back to the Congress—and then, nated to the other body by this legisla- Resolution, or Vote,’’ I have not won- as I read article I, section 7, it says tion. dered as long or as hard as the Senator that in all cases of a veto, each bill ve- Many of the ‘‘billettes’’ would, by from West Virginia has about that, but toed—now we have 500 of them—‘‘. . . virtue of their having been offered to I wondered a bit about it. the Votes of both Houses’’ on the over- the bill as amendments in the Senate, I am wondering whether or not that ride ‘‘shall be determined by yeas and thereby have originated in the Senate might have been intended precisely to Nays, and the Names of the Persons and, under the Constitution, the meas- avoid the Congress from failing to send voting for and against the Bill shall be ure which is vetoed is to be returned to to the President something to which entered on the Journal of each House, the House in which it originated. Even the concurrence of both Houses was re- respectively.’’ though an amendment in the form of quired but which they would put a dif- So that as I read the Constitution, if an enrolled bill may have been offered ferent label on in order to avoid it the President decides to veto the entire in the Senate by the Senator from going to the President; that they bill, therefore he has to do all the bits Michigan, the Senator from Michigan might call it an order or a vote instead and pieces. Each of the vetoed bills may never see that measure again. The of a resolution to avoid the clear intent would have to come separately before House will determine, because the of the Constitution that something to the Congress for an override vote, and overall bill originated in the House, which the concurrence of both Houses they could not be voice voted and they whether or not there will be an at- may be necessary go to the President. could not be voted en bloc. I wondered whether that might be Is that the Senator’s reading of that tempt to override a veto. the reason for those words so that the language of the Constitution? It seems In short, there is no provision for es- Congress could not put the label, some clear to me, but the Senator is the con- caping the strictures of that constitu- label other than resolution on some- stitutional expert, I believe, around tional provision that the Senator has thing, and avoid a document which re- here, in my judgment, at least, and I mentioned. The bill goes back to the quired concurrence of both Houses am wondering whether he might indi- originating body and that House then from going to the President. cate whether that is the way he also votes to pass it over the President’s But my question of the Senator from reads that provision. veto, or it fails to do so. It cannot put West Virginia is this: The Senator has Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the Sen- two of those ‘‘billettes’’ together and focused a great deal of attention—need- ator flatters me, but aside from that, vote en bloc to override the presi- ed attention—on section 7 of article I, he has posed a very significant ques- dential vetoes. It cannot put a dozen or which requires that ‘‘Every Bill which tion. 50 or 100 of them in a package, and if shall have passed the House of Rep- I think what it amounts to is, we are the President chose to veto all of them, resentatives and the Senate, shall, be- doing indirectly what we cannot do di- there is no provision to override en fore it become a Law, be presented to rectly. And that is, that we are con- bloc. the President . . .’’ It does not say veying a share of power over the purse Oh, I know, we have decided by way ‘‘some bills,’’ it says ‘‘Every Bill.’’ to the Executive. We are purporting to of the Abraham amendment that, after The Senator has pointed out elo- send him a line-item veto, when, under the House and Senate have voted on quently and persuasively that what is the Constitution, the Senate and the the conference report and the enrolling attempted here legislatively is that a House, in my judgment, cannot give clerk of the originating body has en- bill which passes both Houses not go to away that power, cannot give to the rolled all of these little billettes, pack- the President and we cannot amend the President of the United States a line- aged them into one big bill again and it Constitution by legislation. item veto. Only the people can do that is put on the calendar, all of the little There is another part of that section through an amendment to the Con- billettes are to be voted on en bloc. 7 which has had less attention, and I stitution. Mr. LEVIN. Without amendment.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4471 Mr. BYRD. Without amendment, continuing resolutions, plus certain au- It has never been discovered up until with very limited debate, no motion to thorization bills, it boggles the mind to this time. It has never been used up recommit, no motion to reconsider. It think of the waste of time in trying to until this time. And the reason it has mystifies me. override such vetoes. Even the thought not been used is because it is not there. I have to say that I have heard Jef- itself is intimidating. Mr. SARBANES. Will the Senator Mr. President, I want to thank all ferson’s name invoked so many times yield on that point? during the debate on the ‘‘unbalanced’’ Senators. I think this has been a fairly budget amendment euphemistically good debate. It is highly regrettable, Mr. BYRD. Yes, I will yield. called the balanced budget amendment. Mr. President —and I do not say this Mr. SARBANES. It is my under- Jefferson’s name was invoked so many with any rancor—highly regrettable standing there have been Presidents, times, so often in that debate, to the that this bill on which the Senate is Chief Executives, who have urged their total disregard, almost, of what Madi- about to vote was brought to the Sen- lawyers within the executive branch to son thought about the Constitution, or ate on Monday of this week and offered do exactly that: Look in the Constitu- what Hamilton had to say. Jefferson’s as a complete substitute to S. 4. The tion to find an existing line-item veto name was invoked. He was not even at minority had no opportunity, as far as authority. And as much as the Presi- the Convention. He was in Paris at the I know, to participate in the writing of dents have wanted that authority, it is time. it. There has been no committee hear- my understanding his lawyers have al- We will see what Jefferson says in his ing on it. There has been no committee ways come back to him and said, ‘‘We manual, The Parliamentary Practice markup of the DOLE substitute. There cannot find that authority in the Con- for the use of the Senate of the United was no committee report, no minority stitution that enables us, in good con- States, printed 1801. On page 73, there- views, no supplemental views, no addi- science, exercising our professional of, one sentence: ‘‘After the bill is tional views by committee members. judgment, to say that authority is passed there can be no further alter- Yet, the Senate was immediately faced there to be found.’’ ation of it in any point.’’ Why it would with the prospect of a cloture motion have been anathema to Jefferson to offered on that substitute. Mr. BYRD. I think that is true. In have even mentioned letting the en- Now, what was done was within the the instance of Mr. Bush, for example, rolling clerk break that bill up into rules of the Senate. I do not question I think he was so advised. I know several parts, and thus, through a fic- that at all. Some may say, well, the George Washington maintained that he tion, created a multiplicity of bills. former majority leader often offered a had to sign or veto the whole bill. The Reading further what Jefferson says cloture motion the very moment that a first President of the United States about that: ‘‘When the bill is enrolled, motion to proceed was made. That is maintained that he had to sign the bill it is not to be written in paragraphs, true. I never thought of those instances or veto it in its entirety. He could not but solidly’’—solidly, solidly—‘‘and all as filibusters and have said so. I never take part and reject part. of a piece, that the blanks between the considered it to be a filibuster simply So, Mr. President, here a cloture mo- paragraphs may not give room for for- because the former majority leader tion was offered immediately on a gery.’’ That is Thomas Jefferson, in his could not get unanimous consent to measure which the minority only saw parliamentary manual. take up a measure. He made the mo- for the first time, a far-reaching meas- So, the Senator asked a question tion to proceed and offered a cloture ure, a measure which we, even after which, if this measure ever becomes motion immediately. I have never these 4 days of debate, cannot really law, which God avert, somebody will thought of that as a filibuster. comprehend. We really do not know have to answer. And at some point, But he was offering a motion to in- what this bill does. And I regret that even though the courts may try to voke cloture on a motion to proceed. I the Senate was faced with that fait avoid a political thicket, they may, in- do not recall any instances—there may accompli: Here it is. Here is a new bill. deed, have to make a decision there. have been instances—I do not recall We do not have a committee report on That is a problem with this measure. It any instances, however, in which the it. We have never had any committee is not just a thicket, it is a political previous majority leader—while he hearings on it. But here it is, and here thicket. often offered a motion to invoke clo- is a cloture motion along with it— That is what is behind this whole ex- ture on a motion to proceed—I do not which means that come the following ercise here, this whole effort—politics. remember any instances in which he day but one, the Senate will vote on We have to act on the line-item veto immediately upon the Senate’s pro- cloture. and, under the so-called Contract With ceeding to take up a measure or mat- America, send the President a line- ter, I do not remember any instances in It would seem to me that a minority item veto. which he immediately thereupon of- should find that pretty hard to swal- Mr. President, I thank the distin- fered a cloture motion on the matter low, the application of a gag rule im- guished Senator for his question. It is a itself. There may have been some such mediately upon a bill which had not penetrating one, one which we will instances. I do not recall such. seen the light of day until the moment have time to ponder. I see great dif- But even if he did so, it was certainly that it was introduced. ficulty, great difficulty. Never again not a matter of this gravity, a matter As I say, I do not speak with rancor. will a bill, which originally passed the of this nature. We are talking now I speak only with sadness that we have House and the Senate, through a proc- about a matter here which goes to the come to this in the U.S. Senate. When ess of debate, amendment, recom- heart of the Constitution. It is not a I came to the Senate, the minority mittal, and reconsideration of votes, constitutional amendment, but it seeks would not have stood for that, that ap- resume its original form. Instead it to amend the Constitution without approach. The minority at that time was will be sent to the President in the pearing to amend the Constitution. on the Republican side of the aisle. Nor form of 100, 500, 1,000, 2,000 little It seeks to do indirectly that which would the majority have sought to billettes. Never again will that bill be it cannot do directly. Congress cannot take advantage of the minority in that the same original bill that passed both give to the President of the United way. Senators in that day would have Houses. Never. States line-item veto authority. That rebelled at the thought. Never again will there be a public law would require a constitutional amend- But that day is gone now. And I will that refers to that bill in the manner ment. I know there are some who in which appropriations bills are now maintain that the line-item veto au- say this. If a minority does not seek to cited as public laws. When it comes to thority is in the Constitution already. protect its rights, then it cannot blame overriding a veto, just think of the I do not believe that for a moment. the majority for riding and running time that will be consumed in any ef- If it were in there, surely some Presi- over it, trampling it under foot. fort to override the vetoes of 15 or 20 of dent, along the line somewhere, would This substitute is an absurdity, an those little billettes that have been en- have been advised by his chief counsel absolute absurdity. Here we are, grown rolled by a clerk in the other body. that there, in that Constitution, is men and women. We have taken the When we annually consider 13 bills, something that you can use, and it is oath to support and defend the Con- plus supplemental bills, plus possibly the line-item veto. stitution of the United States. We have

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4472 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 been favored and blessed with the high of further examination and study by er cannot lead, if there are those who title of ‘‘Senator.’’ And we are judged the very fact that a cloture motion was will not follow. You have to let the fol- to be craftsmen of the art in legis- entered on the very day that this sub- lowers lead. lating. We are thought to be men and stitute was introduced. We were de- Can you depict a leader who has to women who should take great pride in prived of the opportunity to thor- follow? That is what a leader is reduced our work here, but alas, we fall far oughly probe it, uncover it, and look at to, if his troops will not stand behind short. it minutely. I do not think that is the him. The very idea that for the first time proper way to legislate. I have been a leader. I was elected by in all history, as far as I am con- I am sorry that the minority took it my party to be leader six times, three cerned—I know of no precedent for this lying down. I will bet that when the terms in the majority and three terms approach. I know of no precedent for Republican side was in the minority, it in the minority. I know. If you look be- the handling of a bill such as is out- would not have taken that lying down. hind you and your troops are not there, lined in this substitute. There is no I praise our minority leader, Mr. you may carry the title of leader but in precedent in British history, the his- DASCHLE. He has done everything that name only. Of all times when Senators tory of Parliament; in the history of he could do. But the minority leader should have stood, immovable, it is in the Colonial legislatures; in the history with 39 others cannot block cloture. It an instance when the very structure of of the State legislatures; in the history takes the minority leader plus 40 oth- our constitutional system is being en- of our republic under this Constitu- ers to block cloture. dangered. tion—absolutely no precedent for han- I chose to agree with the minority Mr. President, I want to read from a dling a bill in this manner. And not leader. There was no point in making book that has just been published. This only does tradition and custom refute the effort when we knew the votes were book is titled ‘‘Constitutional Equi- this approach, but the great parliamen- not there. It would only be an embar- librium: Mainstay of the Republic.’’ tarians of the past refute it. rassment. So let us do the best we can, And I begin by reading from page 183, I have just read from Jefferson’s fight the good fight, and be on to the under the subtitle ‘‘Decline and Fall of manual, and he, in turn, refers to the next battle. great authority on the British Par- Mr. President, this is indeed a sad the Roman Republic.’’ liament and its parliamentary proce- moment for the Senate. I remember The theory of a mixed constitution— dures, William Hakewill, in whose trea- what Brutus said in a letter to Cicero. That is what ours is, a mixed con- tise on parliamentary procedures, Cicero, in order to gain favor with An- stitution, with checks and balances, dated 1671, are noted the various au- thony and Octavian, came to agree and separation of powers— with them on certain things, and Bru- thorities referred to in so many in- The theory of a mixed constitution had its stances by Jefferson in his book on par- tus criticized Cicero for doing so, ac- great measure of success in the Roman re- liamentary procedure. There is nothing cording to Plutarch, in a letter: ‘‘Our public. It is not surprising, therefore, that like it. I have never seen anything like forefathers would have scorned to bear the Founding Fathers of the United States it. I could never have thought that even a gentle master.’’ should have been familiar with the works of here in the Senate we would be voting Mr. President, our forefathers, too, Polybius, or that Montesquieu should have on such a deformity as is this piece of would have scorned to bear even a been influenced by the checks and balances legislation. gentle master. and separation of powers in the Roman con- If we can do what we are doing with As I look around this Chamber to- stitutional system, a clear and central element of which was the control over the this bill, we can do almost anything. night, I think of Everett Dirksen. I purse, vested solely in the Senate in the hey- Do not be surprised at anything when a think of Norris Cotton, George Aiken, day of the republic. legislative body allows itself to be Bob Kerr, Richard Russell, Lister Hill, hoodwinked, blinded, cajoled, or what- Allen Ellender, Spessard Holland, and And what happened to Rome? Rome ever, into stamping its imprimatur on others whose voices have long been had its legendary founding in 753 B.C. such a piece of legislation, if it can be stilled, how they would have been Under the old republic and the middle called that. It will go to conference. I ashamed, ashamed, to see the Senate republic, the Senate was supreme. The hope it never sees the light of day after accept without a fight, and a long Senate had control, complete control it gets to conference. But for us to put fight, a piece of junk like this. This is over the finances. our imprimatur on it? a piece of junk out of keeping with any In short, Rome’s fate was sealed by the I have to stand before God when I precedent in any legislative body that I one-by-one donations of power and preroga- leave this life and give an accounting know of. In the words of Brutus, ‘‘Our tive that the Roman Senate plucked from its of my stewardship here. There is no forefathers would have scorned to bear own quiver and voluntarily delivered into the hands, first, of Julius Caesar and then way out of it. It is unavoidable. And I even a gentle master.’’ Octavian, and subsequently into the trust of have to give an accounting to my chil- Yet, there are some in the minority the succession of Caligulas, Neros, dren and my grandchildren. There is no who cannot stand and vote against clo- Commoduses, and Elagabaluses who fol- way out of that. I have to give an ac- ture once. Do not mention twice, or lowed, until at last, the ancient and noble counting to myself when I look in the three times. ideal of the Roman republic had been dis- mirror. I have to say, ‘‘Old boy, you did When the Republicans were in the solved into the stinking brew of imperial de- not do very well today. You have minority, and I was the majority lead- bauchery, tyranny, megalomania, and rubble seared your conscience. You voted to er, I offered cloture eight times on the into which the Roman empire eventually sank. do indirectly what you could not do di- campaign financing bill, and eight times that cloture motion was re- At the height of the republic, the Roman rectly.’’ I would have to look at it in Senate had been the one agency— that way. How others may wish to look jected. No majority leader has ever of- at it, is up to them. But I cannot in fered cloture on the same measure And the same can be true of this Re- good conscience ever look back upon eight times. I offered a cloture motion public. This Senate was the most bril- this hour and think that the Senate did eight times. Never were we able to get liant spark of ingenuity that came out the right thing. more than three votes for cloture from of that Constitutional Convention in This thing is going to pass. I wish the Republicans. They stood like a 1787. The Senate was part of the Great that this bill had been before the Sen- stone wall. You have to respect that Compromise. And every Member who ate for at least another week. Several kind of unity. has ever stood at that desk up there flaws have been detected and made I am sad. I am sad that we have a and taken the oath ought to take great visible by the distinguished Senior more powerful minority than the Re- pride in being a Member of this body, a Senator from Georgia [Mr. NUNN] and publicans had, as far as numbers go. continuing body. There has never been others. There have been attempts to We have a good leader. He has dem- a new Senate since the original Senate correct the flaws that came to light. onstrated leadership, statesmanship, sat, began its sittings on April 6, 1789. So for the time that this measure has heroism, and patriotism and great The same as can be said about the been on the Senate floor, the time has courage on the balanced budget amend- Roman Senate could be said about this been well spent. But we were deprived ment, and on this measure. But a lead- Senate.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4473 At the height of the republic, the Roman North Carolina: William Blount, Hugh side and voted with Curio. Whereupon, Senate had been the one agency with the au- Williamson, Richard Dobbs Spaight; South Claudius Marcellus closed the doors of thority, the perspective, and the popular Carolina: J. Rutledge, Charles Pinckney, the Senate and exclaimed to his fellow aura to debate, investigate, commission, and Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Pierce Butler; Senators, ‘‘Enjoy your victory. Have correct the problems that confronted the Georgia: William Few, Abraham Baldwin; Roman state and its citizens. But the Sen- and President and deputy from Virginia, Caesar for your master.’’ ate’s loss of will, and its eagerness to hand George Washington. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. its responsibilities over to a one-man Gov- Mr. President, what would they FRIST). The Senator from West Vir- ernment . . . a dictator, and later an em- think of us? ginia has 28 minutes remaining. Does peror, doomed Rome and predestined Rome’s Nathan Hale was a young school- he wish to yield that time? decline and ultimate fall. Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield 5 Mr. President, let us learn from the pages teacher who answered the call of his of Rome’s history. The basic lesson that we commanding chief, General George minutes to the distinguished Senator should remember for our purposes here is, Washington to go behind the British from Arizona. that when the Roman Senate gave away its lines and bring back drawings and Mr. MCCAIN. I thank the Senator control of the purse strings, it gave away its notes concerning the fortifications of from West Virginia. As always, I am power to check the executive. From that the British. Hale was 21 years old. He extremely impressed by the power of point on, the Senate declined and, as we have was a schoolteacher. his thoughts and his speech. seen, it was only a matter of time. Once the He went behind the British lines, dis- Mr. President, I will be brief. The mainstay was weakened, the structure crum- guised as a Dutch schoolmaster. He bled and the Roman republic fell. Senate has debated this legislation for completed his work. He made drawings a full week. The concept of a line-item This lesson is as true today as it was of the batteries and the British for- veto has been debated on this floor for two thousand years ago. tifications. many years. For eight years, I have And it pains me to see Members come On the night before he was to return sought the Senate’s consideration of a into this body who seem to have abso- to the American side, he was appre- legislative line-item veto. I believe lutely no conception of what this body hended and arrested as a spy. The next that in a few minutes the issue will be is all about, no conception of the con- morning, he was brought before the decided. And I am hopeful that the stitutional system, no conception of gallows with his hands tied behind him. issue will be decided in favor of the the system of separation of powers and His last request was for a Bible, and proponents of this measure. checks and balances, no conception of the request was denied. As I am not known for my great pa- the wisdom of the Founders in placing The British commander, whose name tience, it would be hard to overstate into the legislative branch the power was Cunningham, asked Nathan Hale if how gratified I am to have finally ar- over the purse, little conception, ap- he had anything he wished to say. Na- rived at this moment. It has been a parently little respect for or regard for than Hale, looking at the stark wooden long, difficult but worthwhile contest. the lessons of history. coffin in which his lifeless body would And one in which I feel honored to have Does anyone really imagine that the splen- soon be placed, said, ‘‘I only regret participated—honored to have partici- dors of our capital city stand or fall with that I have but one life to lose for my mansions, monuments, buildings, and piles pated irrespective of the outcome. country.’’ Much of that honor derives from the of masonry? These are but bricks and mor- Nathan Hale was willing to give his tar, lifeless things, and their collapse or res- quality of the opposition to this legis- one life. It is sad to say that there are toration means little or nothing when meas- lation. I know that some of the best ured on the great clock-tower of time. Members of this body who are not will- minds and ablest legislators in the Sen- But the survival of the American constitu- ing to give one vote for the Constitu- ate have argued in opposition to the tional system, the foundation upon which tion which was written by this illus- line-item veto. Their eloquence and the superstructure of the Republic rests, trious list of Framers whose names I their skill at debate surely exceed my finds its firmest support in the continued have just read. Not one vote to save own powers of persuasion. I had to rely preservation of the delicate mechanism of their country, to save the constitu- checks and balances, separation of powers, heavily on the skills of the majority tional system. leader, the persuasiveness of my fellow and control of the purse, solemnly instituted On a monument in Atlanta Georgia, by the Founding Fathers. For over two hun- proponents, and the merits of the cause these words are inscribed to the mem- dred years, from the beginning of the Repub- to advance this legislation. ory of the great Senator and orator lic to this very hour, it has survived in un- The senior Senator from West Vir- broken continuity. We received it from our Benjamin Hill: ginia, the estimable Senator BYRD, dis- fathers. Let us as surely hand it on to our Who saves his country, saves all things, sons and daughters. saves himself, and all things saved do bless tinguished this debate—as he has dis- him. Who lets his country die, lets all things tinguished so many of our previous de- Now, Mr. President, I have said about bates—with his passion, his eloquence, all that I wish to say. It would not die, dies himself ignobly and all things die curse him. his wisdom, and his deep and abiding matter if I spoke for days. The die is patriotism. Although my colleagues cast. This bill will go to conference. Mr. President, I wish that it could be said that we Republicans and Demo- might believe that I have eagerly What comes therefrom nobody knows. sought opportunities to contend with It may be this bill; it may be H.R. 2; it crats alike tonight had conspired to save our country and to preserve the Senator BYRD, that was—to use a may be a blend of the two; it may be sports colloquialism—only my game nothing. Nobody knows. But the record liberties of the American people. Be- cause in saving the Constitution, we face. I assure you, I have approached will have been written here, and it is a each encounter with trepidation. Sen- record of which I cannot be proud. And preserve the liberties of our people. Claudius Marcellus was a Roman con- ator BYRD is a very formidable man. the roll of Senators will soon be called. sul. His colleague was Paulus. They Senator BYRD has solemnly adjured Let me read the roll of the great men both were enemies of Caesar. Curio was the Senate to refrain from unwittingly who wrote this Constitution. Here it is: a tribune, also an enemy of Caesar. But violating the Constitution. His respect, New Hampshire: John Langdon, Nicholas Caesar with 1,500 talents had bought off his love for our Constitution is pro- Gilman; Massachusetts: Nathaniel Gorham, Rufus King; Connecticut: William Samuel Paulus and with an even greater sum found, and worthy of a devoted public Johnson, Roger Sherman; New York: Alex- had secured the services of Curio. The servant. But my love for our Constitu- ander Hamilton; New Jersey: William Liv- vote was put. Claudius Marcellus could tion is no less than his, even if I cannot ingston, David Brearley, William Patterson, not be bought. Marcellus was of the equal the Senator’s ability to express Jonathan Dayton; Pennsylvania: Benjamin opinion that Caesar should lay down that love. Franklin, Robert Morris, Thomas his arms. Curio, in the pay of Caesar, Like Senator BYRD, my regard for Fitzsimons, James Wilson, Thomas Mifflin, opposed the motion by Claudius the Constitution encompasses more George Clymer, Jared Ingersoll, Gouverneur Marcellus, and moved instead that than my appreciation for the genius of Morris; Delaware: George Read, John Dickin- son, Jacob Broom, Gunning Bedford, Jr., both Pompey and Caesar lay down that document, for the wisdom and Richard Bassett; Maryland: James McHenry, their arms. Most of the Senators who skill of its authors. It is for the ideas it Daniel Carrol, Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer; had theretofore been of the same opin- protects, for the nation born of those Virginia: John Blair, James Madison, Jr; ion as Marcellus went over to the other ideas that I would ransom my life to

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4474 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 the defense of the Constitution of the geted tax break, or a new entitlement, branches of Government, the ability United States. Members should prove more able to refor them to be separate, the ability for No ethnicity, no tribal identity, no sist the attractions of unnecessary them to have the respect of the people, accidents of geography or birth define spending—and, thus, begin the overdue we should ask ourselves as we continue this Nation. We are defined by ideas; reform of our spending practices. It is to try to destroy any one of those ideas whose antecedents are found in not an indictment of Congress nor of branches of Government, what do we antiquity, as Senator BYRD has so any of its Members to note that this do to our democracy? often and so eloquently recalled for us, very human institution can stand a lit- If we give up the power of the purse but whose application has been so well tle reform now and then. to the executive, that is chipping away. refined in our Nation’s history that we Mr. President, I urge my colleagues We find Members who want to deni- are now without peers in this world. to support the legislative line-item grate the very bodies in which they It is to help preserve the notion that veto, and show the people of this coun- serve—both this and the other body— government derived from the consent try that for their sake we are prepared and that chips away at our democracy. of the governed is as sound as it is to relinquish a little of our own power. We find those who want to destroy the moral that I have advocated this small I thank the chair, and thank all my Presidency no matter who holds it. shift in authority from one branch of colleagues for their patience during That chips away at our democracy. our Government to another. I do not this very long debate. Mr. President, each one of us should think the change to be as precipitous The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under take a little bit of time out, read some as its opponents fear. Even with line- the previous order, the Senator from history, consider what maintains this item veto authority, the President can Indiana has 5 minutes. great and powerful democracy and ask ill afford to disregard the will of Con- Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, I believe ourselves: Are we supporting it or are gress. Should he abuse his authority, the Senator from West Virginia had we whittling away at it? Congress could and would compel a re- not expended all of his time. If he seeks I yield the floor and thank the distin- dress of that abuse. to be recognized, I think it is in order. guished Senator from West Virginia. I contend that granting the President Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, this authority is necessary given the such time as he may desire to the Sen- though the legislation is seriously gravity of our fiscal problems and the ator from Indiana [Mr. COATS]. Will he flawed, I am willing to support an ex- inadequacy of Congress’ past efforts to tell me how much time he would like? perimental line-item veto authority remedy those problems. I do not be- Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I believe and to see it tested over the next sev- lieve that the line item veto will em- under the previous order, the Senator eral years. The so-called sunset clause power the President to cure govern- from Indiana was reserved 5 minutes of of the legislation, which terminates ment’s insolvency on his own. Indeed, his own time. I inquire of the Senator the expanded veto authority unless it is and will always remain mostly from West Virginia, if he wishes to use Congress takes action, was the key to Congress’ burden to restore our govern- or delegate any of the remainder of his my support for the bill. ment’s fidelity to the principle of time? If the Congress decides that we have spending no more than it receives. The Mr. BYRD. I think the Senator from gone too far in delegating authority to amounts of money that may be spared Vermont wants time. If the Senator the President, the sunset clause will through the application of the line- wishes to use his own time, if he needs make it much easier to act. The burden item veto are significant, but—as the a few more minutes, I will be happy to will be on those who want to retain the opponents contend—certainly not suffi- yield. authority. cient to remedy our deficit. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Without a sunset clause, Congress But granting the President this au- ator from West Virginia has 23 min- would have to pass a bill to overturn thority is, I believe, a necessary first utes. the line-item veto authority, and it is step toward improving certain of our Mr. LEAHY addressed the Chair. likely that any President would veto own practices—improvements that The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- such a bill, thus retaining this extraor- must be part of any serious redress of ator from Vermont. dinary new power. our fiscal problems. The Senator from Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I will West Virginia reveres—as do I—the take but a minute. The continuing Federal budget defi- customs of this honorable institution. Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield to cits justify granting this temporary But I am sure he would agree that all the distinguished Senator from authorty to the President, but I have a human institutions, just as all human Vermont such time as he may require. number of grave concerns with the pro- beings, must fall short of perfection. Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, earlier posal as it passed the Senate. For some years now, Congress has today I made a statement, I put an ad- First, and foremost among those con- failed to exercise its power of the purse ditional statement in the RECORD, of cerns is the threshold of a two-thirds with as much care as we should have. my opposition to the amendment, so I vote in each House to overcome this Blame should not be unfairly appor- will not expand on that, other than to new expended veto authority. tioned to one side of the aisle or the say I wish all Senators, no matter how That kind of threshold is provided in other. All have shared in our failures. they vote, will either listen to or read the Constitution for entire bills, but Nor have Congress’ imperfections what was said by the distinguished sen- extending that authority for individual proved us to be inferior to the other ior Senator from West Virginia. sections of a bill may be going to far. branches of Government. That is not I have served with him here for 20 There are many uncertainties in this what the proponents contend. years. Throughout that time, we have new authority that we are providing What we contend is that the Presi- had times of agreeing and times of dis- the President, and no one can antici- dent is less encumbered by the polit- agreeing. One thing I always agreed on pate all the potential abuses that ical pressures affecting the spending is his sense of history, his allegiance to might flow from this new authority. decisions of Members of Congress the Constitution. I know of no Member In Wisconsin, we have seen the abuse whose constituencies are more nar- of this body now serving or previous of a line-item veto authority by a num- rowly defined than his. Thus, the Presi- serving who stood stronger for the Con- ber of Governors, and it is safe to say dent will take a sterner view of public stitution or stood stronger for history that no one anticipated the extent of expenditures—be they in the form of as Senator BYRD. those abuses when the line-item veto appropriations or tax concessions— Mr. President, we should ask our- authority was first contemplated. Gov- which serve the interests of only a few selves, in a Nation as powerful as ours, ernor Thompson has used the veto au- or which cannot be reasonably argued in a Nation, really the most powerful thority not only to rewrite entire laws, as worth the expense given our current democracy known to mankind, the but to increase spending and increase financial difficulties. most powerful economy, the most pow- taxes. In anticipation of a veto and the at- erful military worldwide reach, but a The two-thirds threshold will com- tendant public attention to the vetoed democracy and the most powerful de- pound the uncertainty about possible line-item appropriation, narrowly tar- mocracy, one based on three separate abuses by making it that much

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4475 more difficult for Congress to respond ture and I will continue to fight for its that form. However, both Houses would to that possible abuse. passage. But in the meantime, there have passed the same legislative lan- I am also concerned about the poten- are other steps we can take to signifi- guage. tial unconstitutionality of the meas- cantly reform the way the Federal Even without the Abraham amend- ure. A number of serious questions on Government spends the American peo- ment, S. 4 is constitutional. Congress this very issue were raised during the ple’s money. today, we can take a giant has the power under article I, section 5 debate, and I am glad that the proposal step in the direction of fiscal sanity by to establish its rules. We can enact a also includes expedited judicial review passing the line-item veto. rule that deems an item of a bill to be to help resolve this matter. The biggest threat to America’s long- a bill. More importantly, the Supreme The provisions relating to tax ex- term prosperity is out-or-control def- Court has held that it is a political penditures may not be adequate. I am icit spending. The result of 26 straight question whether both Houses have ac- troubled that the language in this pro- years of deficit spending is a mountain tually passed the same language if the posal may be too protective of tax of debt. In fact, our national debt now bill that is presented to the President loopholes for the wealthy. Tax expendi- totals nearly $5 trillion. Every day is authenticated by both the Speaker tures contribute greatly to pressure on that we fail to impose fiscal discipline of the House and the President of the the deficit, and if any area should be on ourselves we are mortgaging our Senate. In other words, courts afford subjected to the scrutiny of line-item children’s future. conclusive effect to a congressional de- veto authority, it is this one. Giving the president the line-item termination that both Houses have The basic structure of this particular veto will not solve the larger problem— passed identical bills. But there can be line-item veto authority also raise massive deficits as far as the eye can no doubt that the Abraham amend- problems. If it becomes law, the meas- see. But it will begin to restore fiscal ment removes any question under the ure could mean sending the President sanity to a broken budget process. It presentment clause. And I commend hundreds, even thousands, of tiny bills. will allow presidents to strike out spe- my fellow freshman for his significant That could be a procedural nightmare, cific wasteful and unnecessary pro- contribution. and I would much prefer to have seen a grams that get stuck into huge and There is little doubt that when this different approach. complex appropriations bills. Now, if a bill becomes law, a constitutional chal- On the positive side, unlike the re- President wants to cut out a specific lenge will be raised. And that challenge cently debated balanced budget amend- item, no matter how big or small, he will go all the way to the Supreme ment, this line-item veto authority is must veto the entire funding bill. The Court. And the result will be an impor- established by statute, not as part of line-item veto, a power some 43 gov- tant Supreme Court decision on separa- the Constitution. By providing this ernors already have, would allow the tion of powers. When courts consider a new authority by law instead of President to eliminate those programs constitutional challenge to a statute, a through the Constitution, the measure without having to send the entire bill level of deference is paid to congres- does not raise the serious concerns back to Congress. It’s a common-sense sional resolution of the constitutional that making a permanent change to reform that is long overdue. issue. This Senator’s remarks are not our basic law would raise. The line-item veto is only one of legislative history in the sense that Also unlike the balanced budget what I hope will be a number of re- they illuminate statutory language. amendment, this proposal is no gim- forms in the budget process. There are But they do demonstrate that Congress mick. Though it is not a substitute for other reforms that would force Con- had expressly considered and resolved making real spending cuts, it can help gress to finally get its spending under constitutional issues raised by the bill. the cause of deficit reduction because control. For example, I am proposing a Courts will therefore provide the level it does convey real authority to the Spending Reduction Commission which of respect due to a coordinate branch’s President. would serve as a fail-safe mechanism to considered constitutional conclusion. Indeed, the danger is that it conveys help ensure we achieve the spending So I will take this opportunity to ad- authority that is too broad, and be- cuts necessary to get to a balanced dress some of the constitutional argu- cause of that, I will watch how the budget. There are other proposals to ments that have been raised apart from President uses this new authority, and change the current process that I be- the presentation clause. will lead the charge to oppose any ex- lieve we should seriously consider as The charge is made that this bill tension of this particular line-item well. would transfer power, in particular the veto authority if problems arise. But the issue before us today is the power of the purse, unconstitutionally The proposal now goes to a con- line-item veto. The American people from the legislative branch to the ference committee to settle the dif- are demanding that we act, and act President. But this is not the case. It ferences between the two Houses, and I now, to control Government spending. cannot truly be said that Congress will revisit my support for this bill Passing the line-item veto is an impor- alone has the power of the purse. Like when it comes back to the Senate. I tant step in that direction. I urge all so many powers in the Federal Govern- would certainly oppose the measure if my colleagues on both sides of the aisle ment, the power of the purse is not the sunset clause it removed, and may to support this bill. vested solely in one branch of govern- well oppose the measure if other Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. President, I sat ment. Powers are shared as well as sep- changes are made, but for now, I sup- in your chair on Tuesday, when the dis- arated in our constitutional system. port this temporary new authority. tinguished senior Senator from West The branches do not operate as hermits Mr. MACK. Mr. President, a few Virginia made an eloquent argument in splendid isolation. They need each weeks ago, the Senate failed to take against this bill. I agree with him that other. They were designed to function what would have been a courageous Senators should take great care to con- with each other, and occasionally even and historic step toward fiscal respon- sider the Constitution. And his argu- against each other. The authority that sibility when it defeated the balanced ments were very helpful to me, as I am each branch legitimately exercises budget amendment. It was one of the sure they were to all our colleagues. I sometimes overlaps with the legiti- most disappointing and discouraging believe that the Abraham amendment mate authority of another branch. It is votes I have been a part of. addresses the constitutional arguments this mutual dependence that makes That’s because we failed the Amer- that Senator BYRD raised concerning checks and balances possible. And it is ican people, who sent us a very clear orphan bills. The original Dole sub- this system of checks and balances message last November. They said they stitute prompted questions concerning that reduces the likelihood that the wanted an end to business as usual. the constitutional requirement of arti- Government will trample over the lib- Their message was emphatic: they cle I, section 7, that a bill that has erties of the people. want less spending, less Government passed the House and Senate must be The power of the purse is a classic ex- and more freedom. But we turned a presented to the President for his ap- ample of a shared power. It is true that deaf ear. proval or disapproval. Under the origi- if Congress will not appropriate money I hope the Senate has another chance nal Dole substitute, neither House for an expenditure, money from the to pass the balanced budget in the fu- would have passed the orphan bills in Federal Treasury cannot be spent for

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4476 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 that purpose. But it is also the case fenseless. The other body may choose bill proceeds to conference, it will be that an appropriation is not made to override vetoes of items of its the intent of the manager of the bill to merely because Congress votes to cre- choice. But if the Senate does not con- specify that both Members of Congress ate it. The President shares the power cur, the House’s override vote will be and persons adversely affected by the of the purse. If he signs the appropria- meaningless. In practice, both bodies act may utilize the review procedures. tions bill, the money is appropriated— will cooperate to override vetoes of Mr. MCCAIN. Yes, I do. not because the Congress voted for it, each other’s truly important items be- Mr. SIMON. To eliminate any mis- but because the President also ap- cause each House has the power of mu- apprehension, let me specify that sub- proved of the expenditure. One person’s tually assured destruction of the oth- section (a)(1) of the expedited review opinion in the executive branch counts er’s vetoed items. procedure should read as follows: as much as the vote of the Congress. The language of the Constitution And if the President vetoes the expend- rarely answers the difficult questions. (a) EXPEDITED REVIEW.— itures, then the President’s power of It is necessary to examine the court de- (1) Any Member of Congress or any person the purse counts more than up to two- cisions. And no Supreme Court decision adversely affected by the Act may bring an thirds of both Houses. If the appropria- has ever struck down a statute based action, in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, for declaratory tion fails, that does not mean that upon a generalized contention that it violates the separation of powers. judgment and injunctive relief on the ground Congress has transferred any power to that a provision of this Act violates the Con- the President. Many specific constitutional provisions stitution. S. 4 is fully consistent with the con- together create the doctrine of the sep- stitutional arrangement that the aration of powers. Only if the statute Does the Senator from Arizona con- Founders created. Indeed, the better violates one or more of those specific cur with my modification? argument is not that the bill would provisions is the Constitution violated. Mr. MCCAIN. Yes, I do, and I very transfer power to the President that No one has made an effective argument much appreciate the Senator’s efforts the President never had, but that it re- that S. 4 violates any specific constitu- to clarify this issue. stores to the President the power that tional provision. Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I rise to Congress wrested away from him. In Therefore, S. 4 complies in every re- express my support for the separate en- the early years of the Republic, appro- spect with the Constitution. In fact, it rollment version of a line-item veto. In priations bills were essentially line restores the constitutional balance be- the 103d Congress, I cosponsored S. 92, items. Congress simply did not pass ap- tween the President and Congress that the Legislative Line-Item Veto Sepa- propriations bills that contained hun- was originally contemplated. And it rate Enrollment Authority Act, which dreds or thousands of items and that does not change the balance of power was sponsored by my good friend and directed the spending of billions of dol- between the two Houses. Its enactment colleague Senator HOLLINGS. I am lars. Rather, Congress acted on each today will be a historic step in making pleased that the separate enrollment item on its merits. And the President Congress more accountable for its approach is now emerging as the com- signed or vetoed the item on its merits. spending decisions, one which will pre- promise version of the line-item veto Over the years, the level playing field serve, not harm, the liberties of the that will hopefully pass Congress and the Framers anticipated has been tilt- American people. be signed into law by the President. EXPEDITED JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE LINE-ITEM ed sharply in favor of the Congress. In my judgment, the line-item veto, Late in the session, Congress passes VETO Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, at this if enacted into law, would provide the enormous bills with a large number of President with an effective weapon provisions of varying merit. Not only is time I ask the distinguished Senator from Arizona to enter into a colloquy with which to fight wasteful Govern- the bill presented to the President, but ment spending. Over the past few so is a Hobson’s choice: Sign the bill with me. Two days ago, the distinguished Sen- years, a consensus has developed, even and let it become law regardless of the ator joined me in passing an amend- among most Members of Congress, merits of some of its line items, or veto ment to ensure expedited review of any that, as the 1989 report of the National the bill and shut down a department of remaining constitutional questions Economic Commission stated: ‘‘The Government upon which every Amer- raised by the line-item veto proposal. balance of power on budget issues has ican depends. Unlike Congress, Presi- The intent of that amendment was to swung too far from the Executive to- dents have historically been respon- provide a speedy way of removing any ward the Legislative Branch.’’ This im- sible, and have prevented the Govern- cloud regarding the separate enroll- balance has most likely contributed to ment from shutting down by accepting ment provision I would like to thank the deficit spending of recent years. Congress’ terms. By passing individual the distinguished Senator for his sup- It is believed by many that the Presi- items, Congress will give the President port in this matter. dent, exclusively representing the gen- only the power that the Framers al- Upon review of the amendment, I be- eral, national interest of the country ways intended for him to exercise. lieve the amendment warrants addi- as a whole, is more inclined to oppose Even apart from the supposed loss of tional clarification. As written, the Government spending which only power that Congress will suffer, it is amendment permits ‘‘any Member of serves parochial interests, yet in- also contended that under this measure Congress’’ to bring an action under the creases the national debt. Increasing the Senate will lose power at the ex- expedited review procedures. However, the budgetary power of the President pense of the other body. Because the it has come to my attention that the relative to the Congress would there- other body is normally the one where Federal courts have raised some ques- fore lessen the current bias toward appropriation bills originate, the deci- tion about whether a Member of Con- more pork barrel spending and sion whether to override the veto of an gress has standing to pursue such a strengthen the bias which favors na- item that originated in the Senate is suit under article III of the Constitu- tional priorities. solely up to the other body. If they do tion. If the Federal courts ruled that a The largest obstacle that we face as a not override vetoes of such items, the Member of Congress lacked standing in nation to sustainable, long-term eco- Senate cannot work its will. such a case, the expedited review pro- nomic growth is our huge national Of course, that can happen now as cedures would become null and void. well. If an appropriations bill is vetoed, To take account of this contingency, debt. Although we have made substan- and the President successfully per- I believe that it is important also to tial progress in reducing our annual suades the American people that the allow any person adversely affected by budget deficits over the past 2 years, bill should have been vetoed because of the act to bring an appropriate test cutting them in half in real terms, the items that the Senate insisted upon, challenge under the act’s expedited re- national debt is still standing at an un- the other body may choose not to over- view procedure. Does the distinguished acceptably high level. ride the bill. The Senate cannot then Senator from Arizona agree? The national debt as a percentage of succeed in overriding the veto. Under Mr. MCCAIN. Yes, I do. the economy, as measured by gross do- the new system, that may occur as Mr. SIMON. Does the Senator from mestic product, or GDP, now stands at well, but the Senate will not be de- Arizona further agree that, when the 52 percent. In other words, the size of

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4477 our national debt is just over half the Carter, Reagan, and Clinton, were sur- reason, I support giving the President size of the output of our economy for 1 veyed with regard to the line-item greater authority to strike spending as year. veto. Nearly 70 percent of those who re- well as tax expenditures, subject to a To put today’s figure in historical sponded said that, as Governors, they congressional override. And if the line- perspective, the national debt as a per- had found the line-item veto useful. item veto does not work, I support get- centage of the economy reached a peak Ninety-two percent of the past and ting rid of it—for that reason I am of 114 percent in 1946 because of the present Governors surveyed support a pleased that there is general agreement debt incurred to finance our efforts in line-item veto on the Federal level in among both sides that any line-item World War II. After 1946, the size of the order to restrain Federal spending. veto provision ought to have a sunset national debt relative to the economy Also in 1992, the General Accounting provision. declined steadily over the years even Office evaluated the potential effec- Certainly the current system has its during the Vietnam war and Great So- tiveness of the line-item veto on the flaws. Let me give you just one exam- ciety years, to a low of 26 percent by Federal level. The GAO report stated, ple, a $16 million urban tree-planting fiscal year 1981. This is because our and I quote at length: program at the Small Business Admin- economy grew much faster than the If the President had line-item veto author- istration. I do not believe in governing national debt during this period. ity from fiscal years 1984 through 1989 and by anecdote, but the repeated and un- This downward trend in the size of used that authority to reduce or eliminate successful attempts to kill this pro- the national debt, which is common in each item to which an objection was raised gram are illustrative. The administra- times of peace, reversed itself in 1981 in the Statements of Administration Policy, tion has tried to get rid of this pro- and rose over the next 12 years. The na- we estimate that the savings would have gram at least twice. The SBA does not tional debt doubled in real terms, from ranged from $7 billion to $17 billion per year, want the money—tree planting is not for a cumulative 6-year total of about $70 bil- a low of 26 percent in fiscal year 1981 to lion.... This would have reduced Federal their specialty. The House has tried on a high of 52 percent in 1993 due to the deficits and borrowing by 6.7 percent, from numerous occasions to get rid of this huge deficits we ran in the 1980’s. In the $1,059 billion that actually occurred dur- program because it simply makes no other words, our national debt grew ing that period to $989 billion.... In addi- sense for the SBA to be in the business twice as fast as the economy, the first tion, the reduced federal borrowing associ- of planting trees. The Kerrey-Brown time in American history this has hap- ated with the program savings explicitly group, of which I was a participant, pened in peacetime. shown would have resulted in interest cost tried to get rid of this program. But it The debt runup of the 1980’s is unique savings. has proved to be the Freddy Krueger of in American history, and it is worth re- The line-item veto has bipartisan Federal programs—no matter what you peating that it is the only time in our support in both Houses of Congress. In do to kill it, this program survives. history that the national debt has addition, Presidents Reagan, Bush, and I am hoping the line-item veto pro- grown substantially in peacetime. We Clinton are advocates of the line-item posals before us will make it possible have had only three similar runups in veto at the Federal level. In addition, to finally get at programs like this the national debt during the 219 years according to Gallup surveys, large ma- tree-planting program. I happen to be a of the existence of the United States: jorities of Americans spanning more big fan of trees and I spend a lot of my during the Civil War, during World War than four decades have consistently fa- time working to keep our air and water I, and during World War II. vored the line-item veto. clean enough to keep those trees alive. During the peacetime periods after There has been some talk of the sepa- I just do not think we can afford to each of the three major wars just men- rate enrollment line-item veto creating have the SBA running a program like tioned, during which it was necessary a bureaucratic ‘‘cut and paste’’ night- this, and I suspect most of my col- to increase the national debt, we re- mare in the enrolling clerk’s office. leagues agree with me. I am also con- turned to prewar levels of national But these nightmare scenarios are un- vinced that the reason we have had a debt. Now it is time to return to pre- founded. Due to the modern computer tough time getting at this program is 1980’s levels of debt. We have made a technology we enjoy in Congress, sepa- because it has been wrapped into larger good start by cutting the deficit in rate enrollment would not pose a pro- bills. When I was in the State Senate in half, and thereby halting the growth of hibitive burden on the clerk’s staff. In Connecticut, it was common wisdom the national debt. It ha been stabilized fact, such technology makes the proc- that the way to pass the tough items at 52 percent of GDP for the last 2 ess quite simple. was to bury them in the big bills and years, as the economy and the debt I urge my colleagues to support the keep your fingers crossed that they have grown at about the same pace. line-item veto. This is a clear oppor- would slip through unnoticed. Given Our next task is to start reducing our tunity to seriously address our biggest our deficit, I just do not think we can level of debt by balancing the budget, national problem—excessive deficit afford this approach anymore. thereby allowing the economy to grow spending—with a realistic, proven solu- In addition, I am firmly convinced much faster than the debt, because the tion. The voters have spoken; it is time that tax expenditures should also be debt will not be growing at all. In my to end wasteful Government spending. subject to any line-item veto passed by judgment, it will be necessary to re- Let us give the President the line-item this Chamber. Put simply, new taxes form the current budget process in veto through the separate enrollment should be put to the test in the same order to achieve the desired end of mechanism. way as new spending. As a proponent of budget balance. That is why I have Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I a capital gains cut as a way to increase fought so hard for a balanced budget rise in support of a broad-based line- needed investment and saving in this amendment to the Constitution and for item veto which would allow the Presi- country, I am well aware that adding a Presidential line-item veto. dent to strike spending as well as tax new tax expenditures to the line-item Constitutions in 43 States provide for provisions. veto bill could put some tax invest- a line-item veto whereby the Governors I am a relative newcomer to this in- ment incentives at risk. However, that have the ability to eliminate indi- stitution. But in my time here I have is a risk I am willing to take if the end vidual provisions or reduce amounts of observed that the system of rules we result will be more discipline, and spending in legislation presented for live under makes it far easier to spend fewer loopholes, in our Tax Code. their signature. The line-item veto has money than to save money. Maybe that We have heard a lot about possible a proven track record on the State is just a fact of life. Most Americans abuses of the line-item veto by the ex- level at discouraging and preventing would probably agree that spending is ecutive branch. I come from one of the unnecessary and wasteful spending. Be- easier than saving. We have the same 43 States with a line-item veto in our cause it has been a proven, effective problem here in Congress. State Constitution. It is a pretty tough tool against excessive spending on the The line-item veto may not fix all of provision—allowing the Governor to State level, it would make an effective our budgetary problems; in fact, I am ‘‘disapprove any item or items of any tool on the national level as well. reasonably sure it will not do so. But I bill making appropriations of money.’’ In 1992, 188 Governors and former do believe it is worth a try to make a And the provision has worked just Governors, including Presidents dent in those problems, and for that fine—the legislative branch has not

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4478 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 been overthrown, and no revolutions sponsibility for controlling Federal supported required the separate enroll- have occurred. By most accounts, the spending at the margins. It would put ment of numbered items or unnum- provision has been a success. additional responsibility on Congress bered paragraphs. Despite all of this, I do harbor some to remove those items that would be To use one example, one of those concerns that an Executive might use easy targets for a presidential veto. items or paragraphs might include the this provision for political ends. Surely No one can look upon the deplorable budget for veterans’ construction we are not above politics. I have state of our Federal finances and tell projects. Under the versions I have con- watched with some dismay as the other me that a little more fiscal responsi- sistently supported, the President body has targeted, or appeared to tar- bility, at both ends of Pennsylvania could veto that element of the Vet- get, programs which are priorities of Avenue, is not in order. erans’ Affairs, Housing and Urban De- this administration—programs like na- Of course, if the question were that velopment, independent agencies ap- tional service and the various tech- simple, we would not be at the impasse propriations bill, rather than the whole nology programs like TRP and ATP. we have reached today. bill. For this reason, I am pleased that There is honest, deeply held disagree- there is general agreement that pas- ment on whether we should go forward Now, some of my colleagues have ex- sage of a line-item veto should be with any experiment in a line-item pressed concern that the new require- something of an experiment—that it veto. ment, added in S. 4, that Congress has should sunset after a few years so that Everyone of us in the Senate, and to include additional detail, detail that we can debate its effectiveness and, if every citizen of this country, should be could, to continue my example, include specific construction projects at spe- it has been successful, pass it again. A grateful for Senator BYRD’S tireless ef- sunset provision should help keep the forts to remind us of the historical sig- cific veterans’ hospitals in specific executive branch away from abuses. nificance and constitutional implica- States. Mr. President, I support a line-item tions of the step we are contemplating The temptation for a President to veto which covers a broad range of here. use the line-item veto to extort conces- spending and tax cuts, and I hope my But I would like to make two points sions, or to punish transgressions, may colleagues will do so as well. in defense of separate enrollment line- be greater under this new formulation Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I have item veto legislation. than under the legislation I have sup- long held that separate enrollment is First, our Constitution was intended ported in the past. the solution to the tough question of to be flexible enough to adjust to a va- Mr. President, we still retain the au- how to provide the President with line- riety of new circumstances. Within the thority to determine the level of detail item veto power. limits I believe are rightly imposed in that we include in our committee re- Since 1984, when I joined Senator this case—a statutory change, with a ports, and thus the level of detail that Mattingly and others in introducing a built-in sunset provision, in the year will be required under S. 4. separate enrollment line-item veto bill, 2000—we should be willing to make in- until this year, as cosponsor of Senator And again, Mr. President, the new cremental adjustments in our proce- process we will adopt here today is not BRADLEY’s bill, I have supported both dures that have some prospect of pro- the principle of a line-item veto and a constitutional change, but a statu- moting our shared goal of deficit re- the specific approach of separate en- tory one, and a statutory change with duction and more responsible budg- rollment. a date certain—5 years from now— Today, I want to explain my position eting. when its authority automatically ends. Second, Mr. President, it could be ar- on this important issue, a position that gued that by enrolling each element in Now, I supported a quicker sunset of has, until just last week, had little sup- our spending bills separately, we are line-item veto power in the versions port on either side of the aisle. I am restoring a historical relation between that I cosponsored, this year and in the gratified by the recent embrace of this past. But I am satisfied that we have approach as the compromise position the President and Congress, a relationship that took a new course when we built in sufficient safeguard to give that could finally permit a controlled this experiment a chance to succeed— experiment with a line-item veto to go began to write appropriations bills that lumped hundreds, even thousands, of or to fail. forward. Because of the sunset provision, we Mr. President, a controlled experi- items of spending together. have reserved the right to reverse this ment is just what this proposal calls I am pleased that some of my col- decision if the anticipated benefits of for. leagues have cited arguments I made Mr. President, I share the concerns of several years ago in the Judiciary this bill do not outweigh its potential many of my colleagues that a line-item Committee in defense of the constitu- costs. veto could threaten the balance of tionality of the separate enrollment Its benefits, I believe, will come not power established in the Constitution approach. only in the form of reduced spending; between the Congress and the Presi- It is my considered opinion that this in these times, any money saved is im- dent. approach can survive any court chal- portant, but we should not expect this That is why I argued unequivocally lenge on constitutional grounds. I am to affect deficits in any fundamental against any constitutional version of persuaded that the Congress may way. line-item veto just 2 months ago in the choose—as it will, if we accept this leg- Its benefits are likely to be more sub- Judiciary Subcommittee on the Con- islation—its own procedure for enroll- tle, in the reduction of spending pro- stitution. ing and presenting legislation to the grams that can’t pass the ‘‘laugh Because this is a statutory line-item President. There is nothing inappro- test’’—that would be laughed at if they veto, Mr. President, and one, I must priate about choosing to present our were exposed to public ridicule. bills to the President in a way that will emphasize, with a built-in sunset it re- That is the real promise of this line- expose them to the same veto power mains the prerogative of Congress to item veto bill, that it will improve, at that he has always possessed. decide if this is, in the end, what we the margin, the quality, as well as the I must stress, Mr. President, that I want to do and how we want to do it. quantity, of our spending decisions. And that is, indeed, the intended ef- do have some concern about the dif- fect of the legislation before us today. ference between S. 4, the proposal be- Mr. President, a major improvement It grants new power to the President— fore us today, and S. 137, the version I of this proposal over earlier line-item to veto separate items in appropria- cosponsored this year and—with one veto proposals is that it includes those tions bills, not the whole bill as would exception—identical to the bill I intro- programs that spend money through be required today. This change permits duced a decade ago with Senator Mat- the Tax Code—what we call tax expend- the President to target specific spend- tingly. itures, and what everyone else knows ing programs, not whole categories of That difference is in the level of de- as loopholes. Government activity. tail that is required of the bills that we This is an approach I supported when But this change would not only pro- will send separately to the President. I cosponsored Senator BRADLEY’s sepa- vide the executive with additional re- The version that I have consistently rate enrollment bill this year.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4479 This is a substantial and far-reaching I recognize that the Daschle amend- In this case, it is possible to pass the line-item veto proposal that we will ment—which we tabled earlier today— better of 2 proposals, and a 2⁄3 override vote on this afternoon. And we must is essentially the same as S. 14, which is better than a majority override. It is recognize that it will grant power to was cosponsored by several Senators on that simple. the President that he does not have this side, including myself. In all other important respects, the today. I was an original cosponsor of both S. Dole amendment and other amend- Again, I prefer the language of S. 137, 4 and S. 14 as introduced, because I ments that we are accepting incor- Senator BRADLEY’s separate enroll- wanted to increase the chances of the porate the other positive aspects of S. ment bill, defining just what a tax ex- Senate passing a legislative line item 14 and the Daschle substitute into the penditure is. And I supported Senator veto, passing the strongest one we can, bill we are going to pass. BRADLEY’s attempt to clarify the tax passing one that was carefully crafted, expenditure definition in S. 4, that and passing one that is bipartisan. The bottom line is this: The principal could be open to ‘‘back-loaded’’ tax I voted to table the Daschle amend- difference between separate enrollment cuts that lose revenue more than 5 ment—as did some of the other cospon- and enhanced rescission in how the pa- years in the future. sors of S. 14; pers are bundled. That is all. But the debate here on the Senate This is because we now have a chance As improved here on the floor, that floor has convinced me that the lan- to pass a bill that is stronger than S. difference in bundling will not be a guage of S. 4 covers real tax loopholes, 14, and like S. 14, is carefully crafted to problem. both the narrowest gimmicks and the do the variety of things that the large Separate enrollment under the Dole broadest, that are such a drain on the majority Senators want to do. Federal Treasury. That is what we now have in the Dole amendment would wind up accom- Mr. President, at the heart of S. 4 is amendment. As in the original McCain- plishing essentially the same ends a the McCain-Coats type of enhanced re- the traditional veto power that the Coats S. 4, we have a 2⁄3 vote required President has always possessed. The to override an item veto. scission process in S. 4, with improve- change that this bill will bring about is As in both S. 4 and the original S. 14, ments from S. 14 added. a change in the way we choose to send we now have a process that prevents I also wanted to address some of the our bills to the President. circumventing the veto by passing a concerns about separate enrollment I have no doubt that this will shift one-line appropriation bill and putting raised by Senator NUNN and others. some influence over spending priorities hundreds of detailed directions in a to the Executive; this is, of course, one Some Senators are concerned that committee report; and we will avoid moving the details of committee re- purpose of the line-item veto—to extending the item veto to policy exchance executive budget authority, ports into separately enrolled bills items that are non-dollar items. would present the President with 10,000 and to put the Congress on notice that As in S. 14, and somewhat similarly our spending proposals will be exposed appropriations bills to sign or veto in- to the Bradley proposal, we apply the stead 13 or so. to an additional level of scrutiny. line item veto to targeted tax breaks. This may well add to the President’s As in S. 14, we apply the item veto to If writer’s cramp truly becomes a influence on the legislative agenda, new direct spending, and will include a concern, the Constitution allow the and, at the extreme, could provide a deficit-reduction lockbox. President simply to let the least con- President with the temptation to use As in bills introduced by Senators troversial or least notable of the these the line-item veto to threaten or to re- HOLLINGS and BRADLEY, in a bipartisan bills become law without signature or taliate against Members of Congress. spirit, we use the process of separate veto. If some future President chooses to enrollment. Article I, section 7 says, in part: make such use of this new budget tool I said before that I preferred a we offer him, then we will take it strengthened rescission process to sep- If any Bill shall not be returned by the away. President within ten Days (Sundays ex- arate enrollment; I still do; but taking In the end, should we not examine cepted) after it shall have been presented to each proposal as a whole, taking all the each of our spending decisions individ- him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Man- ually? Should we not subject our provisions in each, the Dole amend- ner as if he had signed it, . . . ment is the best package to come be- spending plans to the closest possible This simple answer is more than this scrutiny, down to presenting them sep- fore this body. Of all the versions discussed, the concern deserves. arately to the President? Some Senators are concerned that, In the face of the deficit problem we Dole amendment is the least likely to conversely, to thwart the President now confront, and in the face of corro- be subject to constitutional problems sive public cynicism about our ability and court review. and the line item veto, bills may be re- It is clear that, under Article I of the to get our houses in order, Mr. Presi- duced to one-line appropriations, with Constitution, the Congress determines dent, do we want to send the message the details, earmarks, requirements, that business as usual is good enough the form of bills it sends to the Presi- directions, and requests that now ap- for us? dent. pear in committee reports being moved In passing S. 4, we will take more This approach does not involve any instead into floor colloquies and let- care with our spending decisions, and of the issues raised in the past that ters. in a small but important way, end busi- might question the constitutionality of Senators who raise this kind of con- ness as usual. legislative vetoes or impoundment cern are assuming that business as Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I rise in powers that might cross the barriers usual will not change, but will just get support of S. 4, the Legislative Line separating the legislative and execu- more difficult under the new rules. Item Veto Act, as modified by the Dole tive powers. Some Senators supported the Daschle They are missing the point: This bill compromise amendment. will change how we conduct business This landmark legislation promises substitute as being the ‘‘middle around here. to bring some long overdue progress in ground’’ version. But now, by extend- fiscal responsibility and in our war on ing the veto to targeted tax breaks and The new rules mean it is a whole new government waste. new direct spending, the Dole amend- ball game. When it finally becomes law in the ment also is in the middle ground and Senator NUNN correctly points out coming weeks: covers a range of Senators’ concerns. that, as a matter of accommodation, It will help reduce the deficit; The only material difference remain- currently, report language is treated as It will subject a lot of questionable ing between the Dole and Daschle ‘‘sort of binding’’ on agencies as they pork provisions to the withering bright versions is whether you want a line spend appropriations. sunlight of Presidential and public item veto to be overridden by a major- The point is, this part of the process scrutiny; and ity vote or a 2⁄3 vote. It will also subject the President to I agree with President Clinton on should change. increased scrutiny—we’ll see if his veto this one: I want the stronger line item Now, so-called ‘‘earmarks’’ will have pen matches his promises. veto. to appear right out there in the open—

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4480 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 not hidden from view by an obscure important to go through the status event, the provision on which we vote comment in a conference report that quo’s ‘‘informal’’ process. tonight will disappear automatically— the lack of mention of contradiction in LINE-ITEM VETO it will sunset—in the year 2000 unless the Senate committee report means Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, several we act to extend it. that the Congress expects an agency to weeks ago I voted ‘‘no’’ when this body Mr. President, this is worth a try. It honor a direction given in the House voted on the proposal to send to the could have—and I hope and trust it will report as implicitly modified by a floor States for ratification an amendment have—a sobering effect on those who colloquy. to the Constitution to require a bal- seek to lard appropriations bills with How many of my colleagues even un- anced budget. I enumerated the reasons special-purpose pork. It can provide— derstand that this is the way we do for my opposition. Principal among and I hope and trust it will provide—a business now? them was that the constitutional tool to the President to achieve signifi- I can guarantee that most Americans amendment proposal was a fraud; its cant economies in the federal budget do not know that—and would be in- proponents claimed that it was essen- by eliminating programs that are not credulous if they did. tial to achieving a balanced Federal in the national interest, or have out- The current process leads to ambi- budget—a goal to which I fervently lined their usefulness but not their po- guity at best, evasion of responsibility subscribe—when, in reality, the amend- litical patronage. at worst. ment would not cut so much as a thin We must take real steps to achieve a Here is an actual example of how the dime from the deficit. In addition, the balanced budget. This will not be suffi- current system breaks down—it hap- amendment, had it been approved by cient by itself to achieve that bal- pened to this Senator: Congress and ratified by the requisite ance—we have much and very difficult In 1994, the House report on one ap- number of States, would have created a work ahead of us to cut the deficit the propriation bill took position on a mat- dangerous situation and a disturbing old fashioned way by cutting programs ter of agency discretion; several Sen- precedent of sinking not only into and expenditures and bringing revenues ators entered into a Senate floor col- standard procedure but into the U.S. in line with spending. But this truly is loquy directly contradicting the House Constitution requirements that several a real step, and I support it. position; the conference committee key types of Congressional fiscal policy Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, should have resolved that disagreement decisions would have to be made by the Senate is debating a truly funda- but did not. As a result, the agency had supermajorities. I was persuaded than mental change to our system of gov- no idea what, if any, guidance it had and remain persuaded now that the ernment. We have before us legislation from Congress or how binding it was. Founding Fathers—rightly—would be which proposes to reconsider some of Well, under this bill, if we put it in spinning in their graves in anxiety for the most basic principles of our democ- law, we know it is binding. If it is in a our Union if they knew what was then racy. For over 200 years, the Federal floor colloquy, we know it is advisory, being proposed and debated. government has maintained a careful interpretative, clarifying. But I promised at that time, Mr. balance between the powers of the leg- That is well-known and well settled. President, that I would vote for pro- islative, executive, and judicial There is no doubt—no doubt—that no posals that would make—or make like- branches. That balance has stood the court ever would find a floor colloquy ly—real savings in the Federal budget, test of time, and has helped sustain our to have the binding effect of law. and that did not sink fraudulent or un- nation’s cherished liberties for genera- So, what this line item veto means is tested methods into the Constitution tions. that a lot of unimportant earmarks or trample on the basic tenets of that Mr. President, given that remarkable and so-called ‘‘directions’’ simply will Constitution. record, we need to be very cautious be- disappear from the formal parts of the And tonight, Mr. President, the Sen- fore altering this historic balance of process. The important ones will be- ate is considering the kind of proposal powers. It’s not something we should come law or be vetoed. I promised to support, a proposal that do lightly. It’s not something we That is the way it should be. is very different than the Balanced should rush through. What a novel idea—that we should Budget Amendment. The proposal on We do, however, have to be prepared put into law the instructions that we which we are about to vote—to which to respond to changing conditions, and expect agencies to carry out. some refer loosely as a ‘‘line-item to make needed changes in the way we Some Senators are concerned that veto’’ although it has features quite do business. Despite all that’s good reprogrammings would have to be ac- different than proposals that carried about our democratic system, we also complished through an act of Congress that moniker for many years—is not a face some real problems. And one of instead of over the telephone among fraud. It is real. It provides the ability the most important is government committee chairman and ranking to the President of the United States waste, and the deep public anger that members. to achieve real economies in the fed- it provokes. The possible problems pointed out eral budget much more easily than with reprogramming, once again, are such economies can be achieved today. Mr. President, as much as any time only problems if you keep trying to do Is this a cure-all? No, of course not, in our history, it is critical to reduce business as usual under the new proce- Mr. President. The passage of the line- waste in government. We are con- dure. item veto will not instantaneously and tinuing to load debt on our children Now, under this bill, we will have to surely erase our nearing-$200-billion and grandchildren. The tax burden is decide when micromanagement of an deficits. But it is one tool—a new tool heavy. Americans are losing faith in item is so important that it should be with teeth—that any President can use government as they are repeatedly in law, and when we are just going to to remove less essential spending from bombarded with examples of unneces- let the agency have some discretion in the budget. And it gives strength to sary spending—from fraud in govern- how it does its job. such a Presidential decision by requir- ment programs to the Lawrence Welk We will need fewer reprogrammings, ing a two-thirds vote of both houses to Center—and taxpayers are infuriated. because this new process creates a dis- overturn the President’s decision and They have a right to be. incentive for Congress to micromanage reinstate the spending he vetoed. They also have a right to demand agencies through the appropriations I believe this tool can and will make that we do something about it. And process. a beneficial difference. It applies to tax there is broad public support for trying When we do handle that reduced expenditures as well as to direct spend- some form of line item veto. number of reprogrammings, they ought ing. Yet, Mr. President, we should not ex- to become routine legislation, basi- But if it proves not to work as adver- aggerate what a line item veto can ac- cally technical corrections. tised—as those of us who vote for it be- complish. It won’t eliminate all gov- And, after all, if an item of re- lieve it work—we can return to this ernment waste. Nor will it balance the programming is so controversial that floor and, by engaging in the Constitu- budget. It may result in eliminating it would be subject to contention on tional process of enacting a law, we can unnecessary pork barrel projects and the floor of the Senate, then it is too repeal it or modify it. And, in any special-interest tax loopholes.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4481 This is not to say, Mr. President, against executive branch abuses. It Or take police officers off the streets. that all narrowly—targeted spending also puts power in the hands of a small Or force young children to go hungry. or tax provisions are wasteful. But minority, undermining majority rule. Or increase the number of the home- many are. And the most egregious ex- It lets one-third of Congress rule with less on our streets. amples get the most publicity, and the President, controlling Federal pol- Or deny veterans the benefits they’ve erode public confidence in the Congress icy on virtually all new spending and earned by serving our country. and our government. Surely that’s one entitlement programs. Or deny senior citizens needed bene- reason why the public is so angry with The legislation also could uninten- fits under Medicare. Washington. tionally hurt smaller States, with Mr. President, these expenditures We need to look for ways to address smaller congressional delegations, like and these benefits are not pork. But this problem. And the line item veto my State of New Jersey. The proposal they all would be vulnerable to the might help, by giving the President ad- would load the deck in favor of bigger line-item veto under this amendment. ditional power to eliminate items that States which have a leg up on building And a President bent on eliminating are truly indefensible. the necessary two-thirds vote to over- them could wield this new tool as a Under current law, when the Con- ride a Presidential line-item veto. In meat ax against ordinary Americans. gress sends the President a broad my view, that’s unwise. There need to be some real protections spending or tax bill, the President’s op- Mr. President, the case for a line against that if we are to have a line- tions are pretty limited. He can sign item veto rests largely on the need to item veto. the whole bill into law. Or he can veto eliminate narrowly targeted pork-bar- Mr. President, I also am concerned the entire package. rel spending. But the majority leader’s that a line-item veto could open the Once an appropriations bill is en- amendment goes much further than door to what some have called ‘‘polit- acted, the President can proposed to that. It would allow a President to uni- ical extortion’’. I use that term to con- rescind specific items of spending, and laterally eliminate funding for entire vey how a President would be able, in send Congress a rescission. But this re- programs. This would give a single in- effect, to hold a gun to the head of scission power is extremely limited. dividual the power to kill major initia- Members of Congress. First, it does not apply to tax breaks. tives in education, law enforcement, This is what could happen. A Presi- And, in the case of proposed rescissions health care, veterans, mass transit, im- dent could go to a Member of Congress to appropriations, Congress can simply migration enforcement, housing, you and say this: ignore them. name it. All would be at risk. ‘‘I need your support for my favorite It seems to me, Mr. President, that It would also put Medicare, veterans new initiative. If you don’t agree to it’s worth trying to give the President benefits, and other entitlement pro- support it, I’m going to rescind that additional powers to eliminate waste. grams under the control of a small mi- bridge, or highway, that’s so important But, as we move into these uncharted nority of Congress aligned with a to your district.’’ waters—fundamentally changing our President. Mr. President, that kind of political form of government—we should build Mr. President, I’m not suggesting pressure occurs in some States that in certain protections against abuse of that President Clinton or any future have a line-item veto. And it can lead executive power. Restraint of executive President would abuse this new power. to more wasteful spending, not less. power has been a hallmark of our Con- But we really don’t know. Mr. President, to limit the possi- stitution and guided our Founding Fa- That’s not a Democratic concern or a bility that a line-item veto will be thers in its creation. Republican concern. It’s a nonpartisan abused, it’s important to keep the Ex- We can strengthen the President’s re- concern. ecutive on a short leash. One way is to scission power by making sure the Con- That’s not a liberal concern or a con- require Congress to reauthorize the gress considers all Presidential rescis- servative concern. It’s a democratic— line-item veto on a routine basis. An- sion proposals, and does so on an expe- with a small ‘d’—concern. other is to allow a majority in Con- dited basis. That would be a significant It has nothing to do with party or gress to overrule the President. These step forward in the fight against waste. ideology. It has everything to do with protections would preserve the con- Currently, if the President sends re- the potential for abuse of power and stitutional principle of balance of scissions to us to eliminate wasteful rule by a congressional minority. power and avoid shifting power ex- spending, we can just ignore them. And Let’s take one example, Mr. Presi- traordinary power to the executive we usually do. Forcing review of waste- dent, of a President of my own party, branch, or to larger States at the ex- ful expenditures, in the glare of public Lyndon Baines Johnson. President pense of medium sized or smaller debate, would be a healthy antidote to Johnson was a strong leader who ex- States. our current way of doing business. celled at cajoling and pressing Mem- They would make it less likely that a We can also build in protections bers of Congress into voting with him. future occupant of the White House against abuse of this expanded execu- I never experienced it myself, but the would ride roughshod over the people tive power by retaining the democratic ‘‘Johnson treatment’’ was something and Congress. practice of majority rule. The pending that is legendary. Unfortunately, Mr. President, the legislation would permit the President Lyndon Johnson used every tool in pending proposal doesn’t include ade- to kill any increases in spending or his arsenal to win. quate protections. It’s a serious flaw in changes to entitlement programs if he Looking to the future, a President the legislation. can convince just one-third of one with strong leadership skills and I’m also concerned about the provi- house of Congress to support him. strong convictions would gain enor- sions in the pending amendment re- That’s an enormous expansion of exec- mously in power. With just one-third of lated to tax expenditures. Those provi- utive power. It would permit the Presi- one House of Congress, he could wipe sions, though drafted ambiguously, ap- dent to nullify what a majority of the out essential benefits for ordinary parently are intended to provide a people’s representatives have already Americans and a majority in Congress ‘‘loophole for loopholes’’ that will pro- approved. could do nothing to stop him. tect many special interest tax breaks Finally, we can guard against abuse Mr. President, I’d urge against giving from rescission. of power by the Executive by requiring the President that virtually unbridled Mr. President, we all know the many the Congress to review the line item power. special tax breaks that have been in- veto after a prescribed trial period. Ini- I’m not willing to risk that a future cluded in tax bills over the years. tially, I think the shorter this trial the President would be able to overrule a There are special rules for the timber better. If the line item veto works as majority in Congress and eliminate all industry. For the oil and gas industry. its authors intend, it will have a salu- school lunches. For cruise liners. In fact, a few years tary effect on our government and Or deny middle-class students the op- ago we even tried to enact a special there will be no problem extending it. portunity to go to college. loophole for the tuxedo industry. Unfortunately, Mr. President, the Or deny working families assistance Once enacted, Mr. President, most proposal before us fails to protect with child care. tax breaks enjoy a special status that

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4482 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 even the most popular spending pro- that veto, and send it back to the legis- to do this for the President. You would grams would envy. They never have to lature within 10 days. They either sus- have 49 pens you were looking at, and be appropriated. They never have to be tained or overrode your veto. one in your hand, and you would sign reauthorized. They never have to com- Second, I had the opportunity to re- on the bottom. So you would write pete for scarce budgetary resources. In- duce a number from $1 million to Wendell H. FORD and all those pens go stead, they simply nestle quietly and $500,000 and give the reason for the re- up and down with you, and you would unobtrusively into the nooks and cran- duction. I had 10 days to send it to the sign 50 sheets, as they would slide nies of the Tax Code, never to be seen legislature. I also had the authority to across. Then you got 50 more you have or heard from again. But, they lose veto a phrase in the language of the ap- to sign, they slide across. That is what substantial revenue, and their costs are propriations bill. you are doing. made up by ordinary taxpayers. That is all it was. Simple is better, in Maybe we could have a patent on the Mr. President, unwarranted tax loop- my opinion here. Either give the Presi- pens that are going to be used by the holes go to the heart of what bothers so dent the authority to line item, initial President, so when he signs hundreds many Americans today. Loopholes gen- it, send it back up here, and say ‘‘These and hundreds of billettes that he will erally are provided only to special in- are the reasons I had to line-item veto just be able to use one pen, and one pen terests and wealthy individuals who ei- this particular position in an appro- will work on all those billettes. ther have special connections, or priation bill.’’ It will be an interesting day and an enough money to hire a lobbyist with I am beginning to worry that we have interesting night. The future is not yet access to Members of Congress. gotten to a point where our distin- here. We will have to wait and see how Meanwhile, ordinary Americans don’t guished friend from West Virginia is it comes. I hope this bill leaves here have these connections. They don’t calling them billettes. I have heard of and comes back with something we can have personal relationships with pow- ‘‘sermonettes.’’ They are probably bet- all join together on. erful Senators. And they don’t have ter than billettes. But we hear all Gov- I yield the floor, and I thank the Sen- lobbyists working for them. ernors have had this authority. Gov- ator from West Virginia. So when ordinary Americans see the ernors use it. So do many States. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- clients of lobbyists getting special Well, we are not modeling after what ator from West Virginia has 14 min- treatment in the Tax Code, they resent the Governors have at all. Maybe this utes. it. And they resent it very, very deep- is a little bit different, but still we deal Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair. ly. with the legislative body, we deal with Mr. President, how much time does Mr. President, the pending amend- appropriations bills, and third, we have the distinguished Senator from Cali- ment includes some ambiguous lan- a responsibility to give the reason, and fornia need? guage on targeted tax benefits. But, ac- the legislative body then has the op- Mrs. BOXER. Two minutes. cording to statements made on this portunity. Mr. BYRD. I yield 4 minutes. floor, that language is intended to be I am hoping that when this bill goes Mrs. BOXER. I thank my friend from very narrow. Apparently, if a tax break to conference and comes back—and it West Virginia. benefits a particular company, it may is going to conference—that it will be a Mr. President, I will be brief. The be subject to a rescission. But if the somewhat better bill. There has been a hour is late and there has been an ex- loophole benefits two companies, or an lot of Members that have had enthu- cellent debate on this. I really had not entire industry, it will get special pro- siasm for the Domenici-Exon bill legis- planned to speak. I have written some- tection. lation and it was voted out. Some thing that is going to go in the RECORD Mr. President, that’s a loophole for could not get together on it, and as we to explain why I am voting ‘‘no’’ on loopholes, and I cannot support it. have heard about Henry Clay, Henry this bill. In conclusion, Mr. President, let me Clay was the great compromiser. Come But I was really moved to come over again emphasize that we’re talking to Lexington, KY, sometime, and see to the floor and to shake the hand of about the basic structure of Govern- his library. You would be quite im- my friend from West Virginia. I am so ment that was established over 200 pressed with that. Henry Clay said, proud to serve in this body with so years ago, and we should proceed with ‘‘Compromise was negotiated here.’’ many extraordinary people, but I have caution. To help eliminate waste in Well, we have seen no negotiation to say that I really do not think there Government, it’s worth trying a line- here except on one side, 49–48 a while is anyone in this Chamber—this is my item veto. But, we should not support ago. When we said all this money that opinion—who understands the Con- proposals that are vulnerable to abuse, is going to be saved ought to reduce stitution so well—but more than that, that fail to adequately protect the pub- the deficit, there was a lot of blus- feels it inside. lic interest and our constituents, or tering going on around here, and they It is a combination that is just ex- that provide a loophole for special in- said, ‘‘No, we don’t want it to go to the traordinary. His ability to put it into terest tax loopholes. deficit, we want to use it for something the history of the world, it is such a I yield the floor. else.’’ We will see how that comes out. gift. I wanted to thank the Senator for Mr. FORD. Mr. President, would the Mr. President, I hope when this bill sharing his wisdom, his thoughts, here. distinguished Senator from West Vir- leaves the Chamber tonight and it goes I have to say when I was over in the ginia give me about 3 minutes? to conference that the conference will other body for 10 years and someone Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield as have the wisdom to send back some- said, ‘‘Well, what do you think of Sen- much time as is under my control, as thing we can all join in, and have an ator BYRD,’’ I would not have said all the Senator from Kentucky requires. opportunity to give the President line- these glowing things because I did not Mr. FORD. I thank the Senator, and item veto. And if this line-item veto we understand what I understand now. I thank the Chair. are passing tonight is the one that Having been exposed to him in this Not many people in this Chamber— comes back from conference, and it is debate and other debates, we are so several, probably—have operated under finally passed and the President does privileged here. I hope that everyone the line-item veto. As Governor of Ken- sign it, I am not sure how long it will understands when we cast our vote on tucky, I was given the opportunity for last because I was amazed at the state- this, how it will be viewed in the long use of the line-item veto. I had three ment by my friend from Arkansas, Sen- term. things I could do. I checked with the ator BUMPERS. He thought he would Things may lack real power on the legislative research commission to be have a sense of the Senate that they surface, but I guess I have to ask this sure that there have been no changes, would save so many acres of timber in question on this bill: Why do we want or whether they have broadened some. order to be sure we had enough paper to be here if we are going to give away I had three things I could do when an to be used to all of these 2,000, 3,000, our ability to fight for the people we appropriations bill comes to you. You 4,000, billettes that are going to come represent? Why do we want to be here? can veto the whole bill. But you can back. We do not have to be here. run a line through the item, initial it, I remember when I was Governor, we Why not just give up the power to the then you have to give your reason for had to go get bond issues. We may have executive branch—and I do not care

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4483 who is there. I happen to like this ciary, where it died. Since then, nearly As Governor and as a candidate for President. I think this President is 200 attempts at line-item veto have President, President Clinton joined compassionate and smart. He is a good been introduced, each time buried in with 10 former Presidents and a great deficit cutter. I trust him. But that is committee, filibustered to death, or many Governors in calling for a line- not what we are legislating about. procedurally blocked from direct con- item veto. We intend to give him that I see my colleagues on the other side sideration. authority. are smiling and are happy tonight be- Last November the long-building Many in this body deserve our thanks cause they are going to win something anger against this Congress for such for bringing us this far along. Former in the contract. Well, I will put that abuses of the power of the purse erupt- Senator Mack Mattingly of Georgia contract up against the Constitution ed, and with their votes the American first suggested the idea of separate en- any day of the week, and I am picking people decisively demonstrated their rollment in 1985. The distinguished the Constitution. I am proud that I am deep frustration with business as usual, Senator from new Jersey, Mr. BRAD- here and I thank the people of Cali- with the status quo, with the practice LEY, had a similar interest. fornia, 31 million people, the people of the Congress in exercising the power The distinguished Senator from Indi- who sent me here to stand up for the of the purse. ana, Senator COATS, The distinguished Constitution tonight. Recently the U.S. Senate fueled that Senator from Arizona, Senator Mr. President, I yield the floor. anger by failing to pass a balanced MCCAIN, and my distinguished friend The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- budget amendment and in doing so from New Mexico, Senator DOMENICI, ator from West Virginia has 11 min- clearly demonstrated that we as an in- have worked tirelessly in support of utes. stitution are more concerned with pre- legislation to give the President this Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I will be serving our power than protecting our additional authority. Each time the glad to yield time to any Senator on ei- Nation’s posterity. Let us, by our vote Senate has voted on the line-item veto, ther side if any Senator wishes it. If tonight, show the American people we have been able to garner a few more not, I am ready to yield back my time that we heard their message in Novem- votes. Tonight we will hopefully have if the other side is ready to do the ber; show them that we are serious more than we need to ensure final pas- same. about fundamental changes in the way sage. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- the Congress works and does its busi- We are familiar with the issue. We ator from Indiana. ness. Let us show them that we intend have debated it and discussed it before Mr. COATS. Mr. President, earlier to present tax and appropriations bills and again at length this week. the Senator from West Virginia read without subsequent embarrassment. Our substitute was not perfect. The the names of the distinguished Ameri- Let us send the message to taxpayers amendments offered by Senators cans who signed the Constitution, that under our guidance, their dollars SIMON, LEVIN, MURKOWSKI, and ABRA- which is a document that we all revere. will no longer be wasted on pork-barrel HAM, have all served to improve the He asked the question: What would spending or tax benefits that favor the bill. I am sure there will be other they think if they observed what we few at the expense of the many. Let us issues to address in the conference but were doing this evening? act boldly to eliminate the dual defi- we are almost there. And I ask the question: What would cits of public funds and the public The status quo just wasn’t working. they think if they were able to observe trust. Let us tonight show the Amer- We have all at some point in time had the spending habits of this Congress, ican people that business, as the Sen- some special project or concern that we the abuse of the power of the purse ate has practiced, it is over. felt had to be included in a bill. All that has resulted in a $4.8 trillion debt, Mr. President, it has been 120 years these small things added up and here the practice of taking every penny of since that Congressman from West Vir- we are today—out of control. appropriations and putting it into one ginia offered line-item veto. The time Can we still add our special continuing resolution, placing it on the has come for this Congress to finally projects—yes, but it will truly be gov- desk of the President at 11:59 of the pass that measure. ernment in the sunshine. Those items last day of the fiscal year and saying, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- will be front and center. We have the ‘‘Mr. President, take it all or close ator from West Virginia still has 10 opportunity to propose—and the Presi- down the entire Government of the minutes. dent has the opportunity to oppose. United States.’’ Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I do not It may not be perfect—but it is the What would the Founding Fathers choose to use the 10 minutes. I will be best chance we have got. Let us give it think of that practice? What would the glad to yield it to others. a try. If it does not work, we can Founding Fathers think of the practice Mr. DOLE. I will only take 1 minute change it. of taking appropriations bills and ti- of my leader’s time. But first—let us try. tling them ‘‘Emergency Supplemental Mr. BYRD. I yield back my time. I would just say, as the Senator from Appropriations’’ or ‘‘Dire Emergency Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the long Indiana just indicated, it has been a Supplemental Appropriations,’’ to pro- awaited moment has finally arrived. It long time coming. We are now going to vide relief for hurricane victims in has been a long time in coming, but it have the vote. This measure may not South Carolina or Florida, or earth- is welcome nonetheless. be perfect, but I think it is an indica- quake victims in California, or flood As with the balanced budget amend- tion that we are serious about it and, victims in the Midwest—and attaching ment, the line-item veto has the over- again, I thank many of my colleagues, to that spending that is totally irrele- whelming support of the American peo- especially my colleague from Arizona, vant to the question, totally unneces- ple, and I hope it will receive the over- Senator MCCAIN, and my colleague sary, at a time when we are running whelming support of the Senate. from Indiana, Senator COATS, for their deficits of several hundred billion dol- Those of us on the Republican side untiring, ceaseless efforts over the past lars and increasing a debt which our have supported giving the President several years. children and grandchildren and our the line-item veto for years. During the I agree with the distinguished Sen- posterity will find extraordinarily dif- 1980’s, opponents of the line-item veto ator from Indiana we have stubbed our ficult to pay? Mr. President, $20,000 used to say that Republicans supported toe on the balanced budget amend- now for every new child born in Amer- it only because the President happened ment. We sent the wrong message to ica, of debt that child assumes. What to be a Republican at that time. With the American people. They do not want would they think of that? passage of the measure we hope to dis- business as usual. We had business as We are not new to this issue. Line- pel that myth once and for all. We be- usual on the balanced budget amend- item veto was first introduced nearly lieve that any President of the United ment but that took 67 votes. I hope we 120 years ago by a gentleman from States, as Chief Executive, should be will have many more than a majority West Virginia, Congressman Charles given more power to reduce Federal on this important measure. Faulkner. He was the first to introduce spending. So I suggest, as I have said—I know line-item veto in 1876. It was referred If we cannot control ourselves— my colleagues would like to leave. This to committee, the Committee of Judi- maybe the Chief Executive can help. will be the last vote tonight.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4484 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 I remember back when Senator Mat- Dorgan Hollings Nickles spending or targeted tax benefit as a sepa- tingly from Georgia was here and we Exon Hutchison Packwood rate item and the statement of managers ac- Faircloth Inhofe Pressler companying that report clearly identifies debated this and offered the amend- Feingold Kassebaum Robb each such item. ment and we talked about separate en- Feinstein Kempthorne Roth (3) If a conference report is presented to rollments at that time. The distin- Ford Kennedy Santorum Frist Kerry Shelby the House or Senate that fails to comply guished Senator from New Jersey, Mr. Gorton Kohl Simpson with either paragraph (1) or (2), it shall not BRADLEY, had a similar interest. Graham Kyl Smith be in order in that House to consider such In any event, I think we have had Grams Lieberman Snowe conference report. If a point of order under Grassley Lott Specter this paragraph is sustained in the House to some amendments adopted that have Gregg Lugar Thomas improved the bill. We will go to con- Harkin Mack Thompson first consider the conference report, the ference with the House. They have a Hatch McCain Thurmond measure shall be deemed recommitted to the somewhat different version in some re- Heflin McConnell Warner committee of conference. Helms Murkowski Wellstone spects, as far as separate enrollment is SEC. 3. WAIVERS AND APPEALS. concerned. I think perhaps we can NAYS—29 Any provision of section 2 may be waived work this out. We are prepared, as we Akaka Hatfield Moynihan or suspended in the House or Senate only by said, to give a Democratic President— Baucus Inouye Murray an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Bingaman Jeffords Nunn I remember the days when we had Re- Members of that House duly chosen and Boxer Johnston Pell sworn. An affirmative vote of three-fifths of publican Presidents, we were always Bryan Kerrey Pryor the Members duly chosen and sworn shall be accused, on the other side: Oh, well, Bumpers Lautenberg Reid Byrd Leahy required to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Republicans want this for a Repub- Rockefeller the Chair on a point of order raised under Conrad Levin Sarbanes Dodd Mikulski that section. lican President. Simon Glenn Moseley-Braun Now we are in the majority and we SEC. 4. SEPARATE ENROLLMENT. are prepared, nearly all of us on this NOT VOTING—2 (a)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision side, to give this authority to a Demo- Gramm Stevens of law, when any appropriation or authoriza- cratic President, President Clinton, So, the bill (S. 4), as amended, was tion measure first passes both Houses of Con- who sent me a letter today saying he passed. gress in the same form, the Secretary of the supported this measure and asked that Senate (in the case of a measure originating S. 4 we move it as quickly as we can. in the Senate) or the Clerk of the House of Be it enacted by the Senate and House of I would also like to thank my col- Representatives (in the case of a measure Representatives of the United States of America originating in the House of Representatives) leagues on the other side of the aisle— in Congress assembled, shall disaggregate the items as referenced in I think we have handled this matter SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. section 5(4) and assign each item a new bill expeditiously. It has not dragged on. This Act may be cited as the ‘‘The Sepa- number. Henceforth each item shall be treat- We have not had a lot of extraneous rate Enrollment and Line Item Veto Act of ed as a separate bill to be considered under amendments. I thank also the Demo- 1995’’. the following subsections. The remainder of cratic leader. SEC. 2. STRUCTURE OF LEGISLATION. the bill not so disaggregated shall constitute Finally, I also thank my friend from (a) APPROPRIATIONS LEGISLATION.— a separate bill and shall be considered with the other disaggregated bills pursuant to New Mexico, Senator DOMENICI, who (1) The Committee on Appropriations of either the House or the Senate shall not report subsection (b). worked with Senator STEVENS and Sen- an appropriation measure that fails to con- (2) A bill that is required to be ator COATS and Senator MCCAIN in sort tain such level of detail on the allocation of disaggregated into separate bills pursuant to of molding this compromise package, an item of appropriation proposed by that subsection (a)— and also members of my staff and the House as is set forth in the committee report (A) shall be disaggregated without sub- various Senators’ staffs who have accompanying such bill. stantive revision, and worked so hard over the past 3 or 4 (2) If an appropriation measure is reported (B) shall bear the designation of the meas- weeks. to the House or Senate that fails to contain ure of which it was an item prior to such I yield the floor. the level of detail on the allocation of an disaggregation, together with such other item of appropriation as required in para- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- designation as may be necessary to distin- graph (1), it shall not be in order in that guish such measure from other measures ator from Arizona. House to consider such measure. If a point of disaggregated pursuant to paragraph (1) with Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, I ask for order under this paragraph is sustained, the respect to the same measure. the yeas and nays. measure shall be recommitted to the Com- (b) The new bills resulting from the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a mittee on Appropriations of that House. disaggregation described in paragraph (1) of sufficient second? (b) AUTHORIZATION LEGISLATION.— subsection (a) shall be immediately placed There is a sufficient second. (1) A committee of either the House or the on the appropriate calendar in the House of Senate shall not report an authorization origination, and upon passage, placed on the The yeas and nays were ordered. measure that contains new direct spending The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under appropriate calendar in the other House. or new targeted tax benefits unless such They shall be the next order of business in the previous order, the question now measure presents each new direct spending each House and they shall be considered and occurs on S. 4, as amended. or new targeted tax benefit as a separate voted on en bloc and shall not be subject to The clerk will call the roll. item and the accompanying committee re- amendment. A motion to proceed to the bills The legislative clerk called the roll. port for that measure shall contain such shall be nondebatable. Debate in the House level of detail as is necessary to clearly iden- Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Sen- of Representatives or the Senate on the bills tify the allocation of new direct spending or shall be limited to not more than 1 hour, ator from Texas [Mr. GRAMM] is nec- new targeted tax benefits. essarily absent. which shall be divided equally between the (2) If an authorization measure is reported majority leader and the minority leader. A I also announce that the Senator to the House or Senate that fails to comply motion further to limit debate is not debat- from Alaska [Mr. STEVENS], is absent with paragraph (1), it shall not be in order in able. A motion to recommit the bills is not on official business. that House to consider such measure. If a in order, and it is not in order to move to re- The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. point of order under this paragraph is sus- consider the vote by which the bills are tained, the measure shall be recommitted to FRIST) Are there any other Senators in agreed to or disagreed to. the committee of jurisdiction of that House. the Chamber who desire to vote? (c) CONFERENCE REPORTS.— SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS. The result was announced—yeas 69, (1) A committee of conference to which is For purposes of this Act: nays 29, as follows: committed an appropriations measure shall (1) The term ‘‘appropriation measure’’ [Rollcall Vote No. 115 Leg.] not file a conference report in either House means any general or special appropriation that fails to contain the level of detail on bill or any bill or joint resolution making YEAS—69 the allocation of an item of appropriation as supplemental, deficiency, or continuing ap- Abraham Brown Coverdell is set forth in the statement of managers ac- propriations. Ashcroft Burns Craig companying that report. (2) The term ‘‘authorization measure’’ Bennett Campbell D’Amato Biden Chafee Daschle (2) A committee of conference to which is means any measure other than an appropria- Bond Coats DeWine committed an authorization measure shall tions measure that contains a provision pro- Bradley Cochran Dole not file a conference report in either House viding direct spending or targeted tax bene- Breaux Cohen Domenici unless such measure presents each direct fits.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS March 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4485 (3) The term ‘‘direct spending’’ shall have risdictional statement shall be filed within (2) with respect to a repeal of direct spend- the same meaning given to such term in sec- 30 days after such order is entered. No stay ing, or a targeted tax benefit, reduce the bal- tion 250(c)(8) of the Balanced Budget and of an order issued pursuant to an action ances for the budget year and each outyear Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. brought under paragraph (1) of subsection (a) under section 252(b) of the Balanced Budget (4) The term ‘‘item’’ means— shall be issued by a single Justice of the Su- and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 by (A) with respect to an appropriations preme Court. the amount by which the measure would measure— (c) EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION.—It shall be have increased the deficit in each respective (i) any numbered section, the duty of the District Court for the Dis- year. (ii) any unnumbered paragraph, or trict of Columbia and the Supreme Court of (b) EXCEPTIONS.— (iii) any allocation or suballocation of an the United States to advance on the docket (1) This section shall not apply if the ve- appropriation, made in compliance with sec- and to expedite to the greatest possible ex- toed appropriations measure or authorization 2(a), contained in a numbered section or tent the disposition of any matter brought tion measure becomes law, over the objec- an unnumbered paragraph but shall not in- under subsection (a). tions of the President, before the President clude a provision which does not appropriate (d) SEVERABILITY.—If any provision of this orders the reduction required by subsections funds, direct the President to expend funds Act, or the application of such provision to (a)(1) or (a)(2). for any specific project, or create an express any person or circumstance is held unconsti- (2) If the vetoed appropriations measure or or implied obligation to expend funds and— tutional, the remainder of this Act and the authorization measure becomes law, over the (i) rescinds or cancels existing budget au- application of the provisions of such Act to objections of the President, after the Presi- thority; any person or circumstance shall not be af- dent has ordered the reductions required by (ii) only limits, conditions, or otherwise re- fected thereby. subsections (a)(1) or (a)(2), then the Presi- stricts the President’s authority to spend SEC. 7. TREATMENT OF EMERGENCY SPENDING. dent shall restore the discretionary spending otherwise appropriated funds; or (a) EMERGENCY APPROPRIATIONS.—Section limits under section 601 of the Congressional (iii) conditions on an item of appropriation 251(b)(2)(D)(i) of the Balanced Budget and Budget Act of 1974 or the balances under sec- not involving a positive allocation of funds Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is tion 252(b) of the Balanced Budget and Emer- by explicitly prohibiting the use of any amended by adding at the end the following gency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to reflect funds; and new sentence: ‘‘However, OMB shall not ad- the positions existing before the reduction (B) with respect to an authorization meas- just any discretionary spending limit under ordered by the President in compliance with ure— this clause for any statute that designates subsection (a). (i) any numbered section, or appropriations as emergency requirements if SEC. 9. EVALUATION AND SUNSET OF TAX EX- (ii) any unnumbered paragraph, that statute contains an appropriation for PENDITURES that contains new direct spending or a new any other matter, event, or occurrence, but (a) LEGISLATION FOR SUNSETTING TAX EX- targeted tax benefit presented and identified that statute may contain rescissions of PENDITURES.—The President shall submit in conformance with section 2(b). budget authority.’’. legislation for the periodic review, reauthor- (5) The term ‘‘targeted tax benefit’’ means (b) EMERGENCY LEGISLATION.—Section ization, and sunset of tax expenditures with any provision: 252(e) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency his fiscal year 1997 budget. (A) estimated by the Joint Committee on Deficit Control Act of 1985 is amended by (b) BUDGET CONTENTS AND SUBMISSION TO Taxation as losing revenue for any one of the adding at the end the following new sen- CONGRESS.—Section 1105(a) of title 31, United three following periods— tence: ‘‘However, OMB shall not designate States Code, is amended by adding at the end (1) the first fiscal year covered by the most any such amounts of new budget authority, the following paragraph: recently adopted concurrent resolution on outlays, or receipts as emergency require- ‘‘(30) beginning with fiscal year 1999, a Fed- the budget; ments in the report required under sub- eral Government performance plan for meas- (2) the period of the 5 fiscal years covered section (d) if that statute contains any other uring the overall effectiveness of tax expend- by the most recently adopted concurrent res- provisions that are not so designated, but itures, including a schedule for periodically olution on the budget; or that statute may contain provisions that re- assessing the effects of specific tax expendi- (3) the period of the 5 fiscal years following duce direct spending.’’. tures in achieving performance goals.’’. the first 5 years covered by the most re- (c) NEW POINT OF ORDER.—Title IV of the (c) PILOT PROJECTS.—Section 1118(c) of cently adopted concurrent resolution on the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is amended title 31, United States Code, is amended by— budget; and by adding at the end the following new sec- (1) striking ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon in (B) having the practical effect of providing tion: paragraph (2); more favorable tax treatment to a particular (2) redesignating paragraph (3) as para- ‘‘POINT OF ORDER REGARDING EMERGENCIES taxpayer or limited group of taxpayers when graph (4); and compared with other similarly situated tax- ‘‘SEC. 408. It shall not be in order in the (3) adding after paragraph (2) the following: payers. House of Representatives or the Senate to ‘‘(3) describe the framework to be utilized consider any bill or joint resolution, or SEC. 6. JUDICIAL REVIEW. by the Director of the Office of Management amendment thereto or conference report and Budget, after consultation with the Sec- (a) EXPEDITED REVIEW.— thereon, containing an emergency designa- (1) Any Member of Congress may bring an retary of the Treasury, the Comptroller Gen- tion for purposes of section 251(b)(2)(D) or eral of the United States, and the Joint Com- action, in the United States District Court 252(e) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency for the District of Columbia, for declaratory mittee on Taxation, for undertaking periodic Deficit Control Act of 1985 if it also provides analyses of the effects of tax expenditures in judgment and injunctive relief on the ground an appropriation or direct spending for any that a provision of this Act violates the Con- achieving performance goals and the rela- other item or contains any other matter, but tionship between tax expenditures and stitution. that bill or joint resolution, amendment, or (2) A copy of any complaint in an action spending programs; and’’. conference report may contain rescissions of (d) CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT.—Title IV brought under paragraph (1) shall be prompt- budget authority or reductions of direct ly delivered to the Secretary of the Senate of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is spending, or that amendment may reduce amended by adding at the end thereof the and the Clerk of the House of Representa- amounts for that emergency.’’. tives, and each House of Congress shall have following: (d) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of ‘‘TAX EXPENDITURES the right to intervene in such action. contents set forth in section 1(b) of the Con- (3) Any action brought under paragraph (1) gressional Budget and Impoundment Control ‘‘SEC. 409. It shall not be in order in the shall be heard and determined by a three- Act of 1974 is amended by inserting after the House of Representatives or the Senate to judge court in accordance with section 2284 item relating to section 407 the following consider any bill, joint resolution, amend- of title 28, United States Code. new item: ment, motion, or conference report that con- Nothing in this section or in any other law tains a tax expenditure unless the bill, joint ‘‘Sec. 408. Point of order regarding emer- shall infringe upon the right of the House of resolution, amendment, motion, or con- gencies.’’. Representatives or the Senate to intervene ference report provides that the tax expendi- in an action brought under paragraph (1) SEC. 8. SAVINGS FROM RESCISSION BILLS USED ture will terminate not later than 10 years without the necessity of adopting a resolu- FOR DEFICIT REDUCTION. after the date of enactment of the tax ex- tion to authorize such intervention. (a) Not later than 45 days of continuous penditure.’’. (b) APPEAL TO SUPREME COURT.—Notwith- session after the President vetoes an appro- SEC. 10. EFFECTIVE DATE. standing any other provisions of law, any priations measure or an authorization meas- The provisions of this Act shall apply to order of the United States District Court for ure, the President shall— measures passed by the Congress beginning the District of Columbia which is issued pur- (1) with respect to appropriations meas- with the date of the enactment of this Act suant to an action brought under paragraph ures, reduce the discretionary spending lim- and ending on September 30, 2000. (1) of subsection (a) shall be reviewable by its under section 601 of the Congressional appeal directly to the Supreme Court of the Budget Act of 1974 for the budget year and Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I move to United States. Any such appeal shall be each outyear by the amount by which the reconsider the vote. taken by a notice of appeal filed within 10 measure would have increased the deficit in Mr. COATS. I move to lay that mo- days after such order is entered; and the ju- each respective year; tion on the table.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S4486 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 23, 1995 The motion to lay on the table was the Reagan defense heavyweights in That is true. agreed to. battle. But Congress refused to close the Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I voted Cap Weinberger was the Secretary of massive gap between the Pentagon against this bill because I believe the Defense at the time. FYDP’s and the Reagan budgets. Dole proposal creates a dangerous shift When the day was over, Mr. Chuck The gap was just too big. of power from the Legislative to the Spinney had skewered them with their Yet that is exactly what some of my Executive branch. own spear. Republican colleagues want to do The power of the purse, Madison said Mr. Spinney had used Secretary today. in Federalist No. 58, represents the Weinberger’s own FYDP data to expose Cap Weinberger was Secretary of De- ‘‘most complete and effectual weapon the flaws in his massive plan to ramp fense when we argued this out 10 years with which any constitution can arm up the defense budget. ago. the immediate representatives of the This was the crux of Mr. Spinney’s He kept asking for more and more people for obtaining a redress of every Plans/Reality Mismatch briefing: money. grievance and for carrying into effect The final bill for Weinberger’s fiscal But Mr. Spinney’s analysis of DOD’s every just and salutary measure.’’ year 1983–87 FYDP would be $500 billion own data showed that the military was Through this power, Congress—as the more than promised. directly elected representatives of the Mr. Spinney’s outstanding perform- getting less and less capability. people—can serve as a check on the Ex- ance won him a place on the cover of The topline kept rising. ecutive branch. Time magazine on March 7, 1983. But so did the gap. An alternative proposal by Minority That was 12 years ago. The money sacks were piled high on Leader TOM DASCHLE was far more bal- Again, all of this stuff happened be- the Pentagon steps, but there was anced and far less cumbersome and I fore 54 of my colleagues ever set foot in never enough. was pleased to vote for it. I did not this chamber. By the mid-1980’s, Secretary Wein- come to the Senate to fight for a shift Well, the brawl over the build-up led berger’s 5-year funding roadmap topped of power to the President—any Presi- to a slew of reform initiatives: The out at $2 trillion. That was the fiscal dent. I came here to fight for the peo- Carlucci Initiatives; the Grace Com- year 1986 FYDP. ple of California in an equal partner- mission; Nunn-McCurdy legislation; Congress just did not buy it. ship with the Executive. two Packard Commissions; Goldwater- Congress put the brakes on and This measure tips the scale unfairly Nichols legislation; and the Defense slapped a lid on defense spending. away from the carefully crafted bal- Management Review. With the help of my Democratic and ance of powers so wisely designed by We were told that these initiatives Republican allies, I was able to put a the founders of our Nation. would cure the disease, but they didn’t. freeze on defense spending in 1985. Mr. GRASSLEY addressed the Chair. The same old problem persists. Noth- We were convinced that all the extra The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- ing has changed. Nothing has been money was just making matters worse. ator from Iowa. fixed. It was generating waste and abuse Mr. GRASSLEY. I ask unanimous And things may be getting worse—as consent to speak for 10 minutes as if in rather than more military strength. the budget vise is tightened down. The spare parts horror stories kept morning business. The money gap between the Pen- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without pouring out and finally and completely tagon programs and the budget per- discredited the defense budget buildup. objection, it is so ordered. sists. f Congress literally carved up Sec- Today, the GAO figures that the retary Weinberger’s ambitious 5-year DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE FU- FYDP is overprogrammed by at least plans. $150 billion. TURE YEARS DEFENSE PRO- Take, for example, the fiscal year That’s a conservative estimate, too. GRAM AND THE PRESIDENT’S 1983–87 FYDP. BUDGET The CBO has come up with a somewhat lower estimate but a gap none- It’s price tag was a staggering $1.6 Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I theless. trillion plus. would like to continue my discussion There is a consensus on the problem Congress balked and cut the plan on the integrity of the Department of but not on the solution. back to $1.1 trillion. Defense budget. Should we pump up the defense budg- The final amounts appropriated were Yesterday, I examined accounting $600 billion below Weinberger’s request. disconnects in four key areas of the de- et to close the gap—as some of my Re- publican colleagues suggest? We never got close to the $400 to $500 fense budget. billion a year defense budgets that Sec- Now, I would like to turn to the My Republican friends seem bound retary Weinberger wanted. budget/future years defense program and determined to start up that slip- Mr. Weinberer’s plans were unreal- disconnect or the plans reality mis- pery slope toward higher defense budg- istic. They were not affordable, and match, as it is sometimes called. ets. This is about the disconnect between They want to repeat the mistakes of they were totally out of line with what the Future Years Defense Program or the 1980’s. was really needed. FYDP and the President’s budget. They want to rip open the national That is exactly where we are today. I first became aware of this problem money sack at both ends and get out Mr. President, that concludes my in the early 1980’s, after hearing about the big scoop shovel. statement for today. the work of Mr. Chuck Spinney—an an- But why and for what? Tomorrow, I hope to complete my alyst in the Pentagon’s Office of Pro- The Soviet military threat is gone. discussion of the Program/Budget mis- gram Analysis and Evaluation. The cold war is over. match. Mr. Spinney treated the Senate We need to begin balancing the budg- I yield the floor. Armed Services and Budget Commit- et. tees to a stack of his famous spaghetti And DOD’s finance and accounting f diagrams at a special hearing held in operation is flat busted. the Caucus Room in late February 1983. And if it is really busted like I think it is, then DOD does not know how APPOINTMENT BY THE MINORITY This was an unprecedented event. LEADER It was the only joint Armed Services/ much money it needs right now. Budget Committee hearing ever held. Nor does anybody else. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Moreover, it took place despite a con- Leadership and better management Chair, on behalf of the minority leader, certed effort by certain DOD officials are the only solution—not more pursuant to Senate Resolution 105, to suppress Mr. Spinney’s work and money. adopted April 13, 1989, as amended by block the hearing. Well, in the 1980’s—at the height of Senate Resolution 280, adopted October In a room filled with TV cameras and the cold war, Congress did approve 8, 1994, announces the appointment of bright lights, Chuck Spinney engaged major increases in the defense budget. the Senator from Nebraska [Mr.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 04:34 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S23MR5.REC S23MR5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS