American Recovery And Reinvestment Act Of 2009
Floor Speech
American Recovery And Reinvestment Act Of 2009
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I would like to respond to the Senator from Arizona, in particular on his amendment, but I also would like to respond in a most general way.
Let's have the right starting point. Barack Obama has been President of the United States for 2 weeks and 2 days. He did not create this economic crisis; he inherited this economic crisis. This economic crisis we face in this country has brought down growth of our gross domestic product, which is the measurement of the value of all goods and services in the United States, to the lowest point of growth in 25 years.
Did Barack Obama create that? No, he inherited that. We know we have lost jobs, dramatic losses of jobs--500,000 in December, 600,000 in January. I do not know where this will end. Did Barack Obama create that situation? No, he inherited that situation.
What led us to this point? Well, there are a litany of things to which you can point. Some of it goes back to the failed policies of the previous administration. When we identified the weakness in the American economy last year, President George W. Bush came to the Democratic Congress and said: I know the solution. It has been the solution all along. It will work again. We need tax cuts. If we can send $300 to every American citizen, the economy will recover. The Democratic Congress accepted George W. Bush's solution for the problem, enacted a program of tax cuts, $150 billion worth of tax cuts, sent the money to families across America, who I am sure appreciated it.
How much did they spend? About 15 percent. They used the remainder of the money to put into savings and to pay off their credit cards. Well, for each family that was a blessing. It was helpful. From the viewpoint of the economy, it did not work. We continued to go downhill.
This notion from the other side of the aisle that tax cuts solve everything has failed. It is part of the failed policies of the previous administration that have brought us to this moment in history.
When President Bush was elected to office, he inherited a surplus in the Federal budget from the Clinton administration, a surplus. And he inherited the accumulated debt of the United States of America from George Washington until George W. of $5 trillion.
What happened to the national debt under the Bush administration's 8 years? It more than doubled. It more than doubled because the President insisted then in sending tax cuts to the wealthiest people in America and in waging a war without paying for it. We dragged ourselves deeply into debt with not only the complicity but the cooperation and with the enthusiastic approval of the other side of the aisle. That is where we are today, with a debt over $10 trillion, with an economy flat on its back, with the failed policies of the last 8 years creating the economic crisis we face today. President Barack Obama, in office for 2 weeks and 2 days, did not create this crisis. But the people of America said last November 4: Do something about the way you are running the Government. Bring real change to this town. Find solutions to our problems and, for goodness' sake, work together. We are tired of all the squabbling on Capitol Hill between Democrats and Republicans. Finally, accept this challenge of setting the economy straight and work together.
President Obama in 2 weeks and 2 days in office went to the Republicans in the House of Representatives asking for their cooperation and their assistance. When this measure of stimulus recovery was called in the House, not one single Republican Representative would join in that effort.
Now it comes to the Senate, where we need 60 votes. We will need several Republicans to step up and hear the lesson from the last election and help us move forward. This is the measure before us. It is voluminous. It costs about $900 billion, a substantial sum of money. But it has been calculated to try to get the economy moving forward, to try to save and create 3 to 4 million jobs in America. It is about the jobs.
Now we have a proposal from Senator McCain to spend less than half. What will that cost us--1.5 to 2 million American jobs. They are prepared on the other side of the aisle to accept what I consider a halfway response to a major American problem.
Then they have their bill of particulars, their objections to this measure, President Obama's recovery plan. I have listened carefully and measured and added up their arguments against these measures. It turns out, if I could do this in a symbolic way, that their measures account for one page of this bill. Listen to the things they list that they find so objectionable. They account in dollar terms to about one page of this bill. Listen to what they have to say. Let's go into some of the particulars we have heard repeatedly. Smoking cessation, $75 million. I happen to believe passionately in this issue, passionately because I lost my father to lung cancer when I was a little boy, passionately because I have fought the tobacco companies as long as I have been in public life, passionately because I know tobacco-related disease is the No. 1 killer in America. I believe in this. I have given my public career to it. But we decided, because of the objection to one page, to remove it.
My message to the Republican side of the aisle is: Read the bill. Smoking cessation programs are no longer in the bill. That is a fact.
Let me also note, Senator McCain said something which is not accurate. I want to call his attention to it, as he is in the Chamber. Senator McCain said there is not one penny for defense in this bill.
Mr. McCAIN. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. DURBIN. I yield for a question.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I was incorrect in that statement. I was only speaking about the reset. We need a lot more. I would like to acknowledge that I was incorrect in that statement.
Mr. DURBIN. I thank the Senator.
Senator McCain suggests $4 billion in defense spending in his amendment. The bill contains $4.5 billion in defense spending already. I acknowledge that we all make mistakes, but we have done well by defense. We can do better, but we have not ignored our national security nor the men and women in uniform in this important stimulus package.
Let me also say, there have been arguments made that we need more oversight in this bill. I don't want to waste a single taxpayer dollar. I want to make sure that money is well spent. I call the attention of Senator McCain and the Republican side of the aisle to page 9 of the bill. On page 9--and those that follow--there is item after item where we are providing additional funds to inspectors general in each of the departments to keep an eye on the spending in this bill.
Let me read what it says:
In addition to the funds otherwise made available, hereby appropriated are the following sums to the specified offices of inspectors general to remain available until September 30, 2013, for oversight and audit of programs, grants, and projects funded up under this act.
Oversight is important, but oversight is included in this bill.
I heard Senator McConnell. I have heard Senator McCain. They object to the idea of making Government buildings more energy efficient. How shortsighted can they be? If you own a home, is it worth insulating the home, if it costs a little bit of money this year, knowing that it will save you money in heating costs for years to come? Would you put in thermal windows? Would you insulate your home? It is a practical decision made by families every day. When we suggest including money in this bill so that the Government buildings we pay for and the heat and air-conditioning in these buildings we pay for is done in an energy-efficient way, it is ridiculed--in the words of Senator McConnell, ``money to spruce up buildings.'' We are not talking about planting flowers, we are talking about energy efficiency. The notion that that is wasteful? Is it wasteful for your family if you get rid of the incandescent bulbs and buy fluorescents? No. It is smart. We need that kind of approach when it comes to energy.
Then Senator McConnell criticized $70 million, using the money for research in climate change. There is at least one Republican Senator who calls climate change a hoax, but I think only one. Most of us understand something is happening in this world. The climate is changing and not for the better. Global warming is happening, and it changes weather patterns--hurricanes in months of the year when we have never seen them, storms we have never seen before. Should we just ignore this and say: Maybe God will take care of it or do we have an obligation to do something about it? Will it affect our economic future? Of course it will. They ridicule the $70 million in this bill for global warming and climate change. I don't understand that.
Let me also say, Senator McCain has suggested in his bill that there will be $276 billion in tax cuts. I say to him, in the bill we have before us from President Obama, there is $370 billion in tax cuts already. Senator McCain is reducing tax cuts for American families. Does that make it a stronger bill, a better bill for revitalizing the economy? I don't think so.
The bottom line is this: President Obama inherited the worst economic crisis in 75 years. It is the product of many factors, but it also clearly is the product of failed policies of the past. Returning to those policies over and over is the definition of insanity, to do the same thing over and over when it fails. That is what this amendment does. It returns to the same worn, unfortunately, unsuccessful concepts from the past.
What President Obama brings us today is an opportunity to step forward, to work together and do something about this economic crisis. This bill not only provides a helping hand to the unemployed, giving them additional money each week, it provides an opportunity for many of them to have health insurance which they have lost when they lost their jobs. It provides a helping hand for the poorest among us who are struggling to get by in areas such as food stamps. It provides a safety net for the most unfortunate circumstances facing Americans. But it invests in good-paying jobs, too, building roads and bridges and highways, the infrastructure that builds the economy of the 21st century, making certain we invest billions of dollars into health care technology so we can computerize medical records so that we have better outcomes in medical care and so that it is a safer experience for
most Americans. There is more money as well in education. If we don't put money into education, how can we ever believe we are going to have the leaders we need tomorrow? There is more money for 21st-century libraries and laboratories and classrooms. Isn't that what we want for our children and grandchildren? There is money for energy research and energy efficiency so we can lessen our dependence on foreign oil and build this economy with homegrown energy. These are the things included in the Obama plan.
This plan will fail without the help of Republican Senators. At some point, I am hoping that at least a handful of Republican Senators will say: We are willing to step forward and help.
They have 1 page of grievances out of a bill of more than 900 pages. They should remember what one of the patriarchs and saints of the Republican Party, Ronald Reagan, used to say. Ronald Reagan used to say: If I can go into a negotiation and end up with 80 percent of what I wanted, it is a successful negotiation. Now we have Republicans, who say kind words about the Gipper, the former President, saying that 80 percent isn't enough; 99 percent isn't enough. It has to be 100 percent. If we can find one page of grievances in this bill, it is good enough for us to walk away from it.
We cannot walk away from this crisis. We cannot walk away from this challenge. If there was ever a time for us to come together with a solution--not just a debate, bold action instead of tentative action which will accomplish half the job when we need to do the whole job, to bring about real change and reform--this is the day to do it.
I encourage colleagues on the other side of the aisle, please don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Let's work together as the American people asked us to on November 4 and do something about this crisis. Let's not leave this effort on the floor of the Senate at the end of the day undone. Too many Americans are counting on us.
I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DURBIN. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. GRAHAM. Yes.
Mr. DURBIN. I wish to call to the Senator's attention two amendments that have been adopted, both of them initiated by Republican Senators and both of them now in the bill, the first by Senator Grassley and Senator Menendez in committee that added about $70 billion in cost to the bill--the alternative minimum tax relief. It is something we both support, but it clearly was an effort to engage Republican Senators in changing the bill in a positive way. The second amendment adopted yesterday was by Senator Isakson of Georgia relative to a tax credit for home purchases, and I believe the cost of that is $19 billion. Those two amendments account for $89 billion out of the $900 billion in the bill. So about 10 percent of the bill comes from Republican amendments.
To suggest that we are not open to amendments from the Republican side, I would say to my colleague, I think we are trying. We could do more and we want to do more, but we don't want to lose what we hope President Obama is asking for here--something that will have a substantial and dramatic impact on the economy.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DURBIN. I thank my colleague from New York. I would like to engage him. I listened carefully to Senator Coburn, my friend, a conservative Republican. I think that perhaps some elements of history have been forgotten. We don't want to dwell on the past, but those who don't learn the past are usually destined to repeat the mistakes of the past. When President Clinton left office, he left President Bush a surplus and he left him with a national debt, accumulated since the time of George Washington, of $5 trillion. Eight years later, when President Bush left office, he left President Obama--who has been President for 2 weeks and 2 days--with the biggest deficit in recent memory, $1 trillion, and a national debt that had doubled under the Bush administration.
I ask the Senator from New York if he is familiar with the fact that the debt incurred under the Bush administration comes down to $17,000 for every man, woman, and child in America, for the 8-year period of that administration? Is the Senator familiar with that fact?
Mr. SCHUMER. I thank my colleague for the question. I am indeed familiar with that. I have to tell my colleague it sort of astounds me how there is sort of a role reversal. In the past, the Republican Party has been known as the fiscal-and-austere party, and we have been labeled--or accused of being--the tax-and-spend party. When President Clinton left office, there was a significant surplus, I believe close to $300 billion a year. When George Bush took office, he ruined that rather quickly. We now have the deep deficit he left President Obama. President Obama has agreed to deal with that deficit once we get through the economic crisis.
Mr. DURBIN. The second question is this: There are complaints about this recovery reinvestment bill, which is currently at about $900 billion over a several-year period of time. Isn't the Senator aware, and haven't we recently been briefed that we expect in the next 2 calendar years $1 trillion less in spending by the American economy, and the amount we are talking about to try to put back into that accounts for less than half of what we know is lying ahead?
If we are going to invigorate the economy, create jobs, and give businesses a chance and give struggling families a chance, $900 billion, though it seems huge on its face, in comparison to the economic crisis we face, is at least proportional to the challenge.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the provision in the bill states that Federal funds cannot be used to support facilities in which a substantial portion of the functions of the building are involved in a religious mission.
I say to the Senator from South Carolina, this language has been in the law for 40 years. It is the result of three Supreme Court decisions.
Mr. DeMINT. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. DURBIN. No, I won't. It was signed into law in the Higher Education Reauthorization Act signed by President Ronald Reagan, President George Herbert Walker Bush, and President George W. Bush.
The DeMint amendment is opposed by the Jesuit universities. We have struck a balance here helping religious schools on buildings that are not primarily for religious functions. We will continue doing that and continue honoring our Constitution's establishment clause.
I hope everyone will support me in opposing the DeMint amendment and stand by the language that has been time tested and approved by the Supreme Court in three separate decisions.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source