Budget Negotiations

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I have been listening to the remarks of my friend from Wyoming. I noticed that he repeatedly indicated that what we needed to do in this building was to keep the military funded, to deal with the deficit, and to cut spending. It is my firm belief that if we were sent a bill that kept the military funded, that dealt with the deficit, and that cut spending, it would pass in the Senate very readily. Indeed, we have already agreed to $73 billion in spending cuts. As Senator McCaskill said earlier, the problem is that the Republicans won't take yes for an answer.

The issue dividing us at this point is not the need to keep the military funded. We completely agree on that. It is not the need to deal with the deficit. We agree on that. Indeed, the last time we successfully dealt with the deficit, it was under the Democrats. Clearly, we have gone way more than halfway by agreeing to cut $73 billion in spending. So as to those three points, the answers are yes, yes, and yes. So what is the problem?

The problem is two riders that are being insisted on in the negotiations, one of which would eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood and the second of which would gut the Clean Air Act--Planned Parenthood and the Clean Air Act. I thought this was about the deficit. I thought this was about solving our fiscal situation. The facts are a little different.

Here we are, mere hours away from the first government shutdown since Newt Gingrich forced one during President Clinton's first term. We are facing some 800,000 Federal workers being furloughed; millions more, including men and women in uniform, who will begin working without pay. Projects will grind to a halt. People working under government contracts will stop. There will be a real danger to our fragile economic recovery that is just starting to gain steam. Why take that risk?

In front of cameras all week, Republicans have been saying that despite these dangers, they will threaten a government shutdown because we need to tackle the deficit. The story behind the scenes is quite different. Even though the tea party has focused 100 percent of its cost-cutting fury on only 12 percent of Federal spending--only the nonsecurity, so-called discretionary spending--we agreed to the level of cuts Republicans wanted.

Nothing on the revenue side, everything on the spending side, and only from 12 percent of the budget, and yet we were still able to come far more than halfway to where the Republicans are, virtually within single-digit billions of dollars of agreement. Yet we still find ourselves without funding for the government beyond tomorrow night.

We have heard today that it has to do with the fact that we did not pass a budget last year. Well, we did not pass a budget last year, but we tried. As Senator McCaskill pointed out, she and I were on the floor when the omnibus spending bill came to the floor. It had been negotiated in a bipartisan fashion. It had come through all the different appropriating committees. It would have funded the government through September 30. We thought we had an agreement, and at the last minute all of the Republicans who had agreed to it changed their minds, literally while we were on the floor. The bill went down. One Republican Senator even took to the floor to gloat about the end of that bill.

So it is a little bit of crocodile tears to blame the Democrats for not having an appropriations and budget bill at this point from the side of the Chamber that took that bill down, that pulled their individuals who had participated in that bipartisan bill out of the deal, that filibustered it, and that shut it down. That is why we are here today. The minority party used its filibuster power, walked away from a deal it had already signed off on, and took down the spending bill. So here we are. It is important to stay somewhat close to the facts.

So now the Republicans are using the deficit concerns, which I think Senator Barrasso said very clearly: Keep the military funded, deal with the deficit, and cut spending. That is what we are prepared to agree to do. But the bill we are being asked to agree to now is a Trojan horse. It is a Trojan horse that looks like a deficit bill, but inside it is filled with tea party ideology. It is filled with an extremist rightwing political agenda to do things like eliminate Planned Parenthood and give America's polluters free reign in violation of the Clean Air Act as it has been determined by the U.S. Supreme Court to apply. This is no longer about the deficit; this is about trying to force a very radical agenda down America's throats in a Trojan horse that looks like it is about the deficit.

What is it really about? Well, you do not have to go very far from this building. Just a few days ago, outside, you had the tea party ralliers, and what were they chanting outside of the Capitol? They were chanting, ``Shut it down. Shut it down. Shut it down.'' That is what the tea party wants. That is why we are here. And, sure enough, when the Speaker went to his caucus on the Republican side and announced to them--to the people who are actually here making decisions in this Congress--that he was notifying the administrative staff on the House side to prepare for a shutdown, what was the reaction? It was a standing ovation supporting the Speaker in that.

So on the outside of the building, you have the tea partiers chanting, ``Shut it down. Shut it down. Shut it down.'' You have the extreme Members of the House Republican caucus out there with the tea partiers, egging them on, ``Shut it down. Shut it down. Shut it down.'' They come back into the building. The Speaker says: We have to get ready to shut it down. They give him a standing ovation. They could not be happier about this. They load the bill up with things that have nothing to do with funding the military, nothing to do with cutting the deficit, nothing to do with bringing down spending, but instead accomplish ideological missions that the Republican Party has been on for years.

Mr. SCHUMER. Will my colleague yield for a question?

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Absolutely. I yield for a question.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.

Mr. SCHUMER. First, I thank him for his outstanding remarks. My question is this: Isn't it true we have had many, many Republicans in the House, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, some Presidential candidates, erstwhile potential Presidential candidates, as well as even some of our colleagues here, Republicans, saying they want to shut down the government?

My question to the Senator is, I cannot recall a single Democratic elected official saying they want to shut the government down. My second question is, Doesn't that show something about who is itching for a shutdown or at least thinks they can use the shutdown to accomplish an agenda?

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I agree with the Senator from New York. I cannot recall a single Senator expressing any desire for a shutdown. I have been present in our caucus meetings. Not one person has once said there is anything good about a shutdown.

We are all gravely concerned about what a shutdown would do to our fragile economic recovery. This is still about jobs, ultimately. We still have to grow an economy in this country. And when we shut down every government contract and put those people out of work, when we shut down every government project and put those people out of work, when we take paychecks away from government workers and when we furlough government workers, what does that do to the economy? Any economist will tell you it strikes a terrible blow. We recognize that, and that is why no elected Democratic official has said one good word about a shutdown.

That is very different from what we are seeing from the other side, where standing ovations, where chanting mobs, egged on by sitting Members of Congress, where public statements by candidates for President and by Members of Congress have all said that the shutdown----

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.

Mr. SCHUMER. I thank my colleague.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. My time has expired. I thank the Senator from New York for his question.

I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and would share a few things.

If my Democratic colleagues would prefer not to shut the government down, then do not do it. The House, the Republican House, has passed a bill to fund the government, to fund the Defense Department, and the Senate, the Democratic Senate, has passed nothing. Indeed, the Democratic leadership proposed a bill that they said was worthwhile that would have reduced spending by $4.6 billion. Ten Democratic Senators defected from the leadership position--a pretty gutsy thing to do on an issue as important as this.

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

Mr. SESSIONS. I will be glad to yield for a question, although my time is limited.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I thank the Senator for his courtesy in yielding for a question.

Mr. SESSIONS. All right. Go ahead.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. If, in fact, this is really about the deficit and if, in fact, this is really about reducing spending and if, in fact, this is really about ensuring the military remains funded, why is it necessary to have it be a nonnegotiable condition of the bill that Planned Parenthood be zeroed out and that the EPA be prevented from enforcing the Clean Air Act? I do not see that there is any connection between those two requirements and the deficit, and I think, if the party were willing to give up those two demands, we could solve this very quickly. It is those two demands that are fouling things up and forcing a shutdown.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source