FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, each year the President presents a budget. It is the beginning of the formal conversation about what next year's budget will be, and each President presents their offering and their suggestion. Then, of course, the House and the Senate have to try to reach an agreement as to what the actual budget will be. The President suggests a bottom line in spending, and then the House and the Senate make appropriations decisions within that bottom line.

Today, President Obama kicked off this conversation by presenting his budget to America. He presented it at a time when he faces two very significant challenges: how to create more jobs and less debt. It is a tough balancing act because we know that to reduce the debt, we need to reduce spending. What the President reminds us is, let's not cut spending in areas that are critical for the growth of our economy and the creation of good-paying jobs in America.

The unemployment rate is about 9 percent. Mr. President, 13.9 million Americans are out of work. In Illinois, it is 9.3 percent, with 620,000 people actively looking for jobs. Too many people want to work so they can keep a roof over their heads but cannot find a job.

At the same time, though, we have a $14 trillion debt. I hope the Presiding Officer will forgive me for a little history because I think it is worth noting when we talk about the debt of America how we have reached the point we are at today.

The fact is, 10 years ago--10 years ago--when President William Jefferson Clinton left office, the debt of America was $5 trillion. The President said to his successor, President George W. Bush: The budget is in surplus as I leave office. We are collecting more money than we are spending in Washington, and we project a $120 billion surplus in the next fiscal year. Welcome to Washington, President Bush.

Now fast-forward 8 years later--the next transition, from President George W. Bush to President Obama. What was the state of play? The national debt was no longer $5 trillion; 8 years later, it was $12 trillion--$12 trillion. President George W. Bush said to President Obama: Welcome to Washington. I can't give you a surplus, but I can give you a deficit of $1.2 trillion for the next fiscal year.

In 8 years, what a massive turn of events. How did we go from a $5 trillion debt to a $12 trillion debt? How did we go from surplus to deep deficit in 8 years? Well, you do it by waging two wars you do not pay for, being the first President in history to call for tax cuts in the middle of a war, and by creating programs, such as the Medicare prescription drug program, that are not paid for. Put those policies together, and you end up with the sorry state of affairs President Obama inherited. Now that deficit has gone from $4 trillion to $14 trillion because of the recession he inherited, and we are still struggling to get out from this mountain of debt that was created during the 8 years of the President George W. Bush administration and continues to this day.

So President Obama is trying to strike the right balance: How do you responsibly go after a deficit that calls on us to borrow 40 cents for every $1 we spend and at the same time not kill the economic recovery? So he has tried to parse out those things that he thinks and I agree are critical for economic growth: education, innovation, and building America's infrastructure. He has done it with this budget and I think done it in a responsible way. He calls for freezing our spending for 5 years, which will save us $400 billion off of the anticipated deficit, and he also talks about in the same period of time reducing the amount of money for domestic discretionary spending to a level, as a percentage of GDP, where it was under President Eisenhower back in the 1950s. We understand there is more to do, but I think the President sets out on a course that is responsible. We will change it--we always do--but I think the goals he has given us are worthy goals.

We know we have to act on our fiscal situation. I was appointed by the majority leader to be a member of the President's deficit commission. With Erskine Bowles, a former chief counsel to the President, and Alan Simpson, our former colleague in the Senate, our bipartisan Commission studied it for 10 months and came up with a proposal that we should deal with this budget deficit in a sensible way.

One of the things they suggested and I agreed with is, let's not cut too soon. If you cut too soon in some areas, you are going to spoil the recovery, you are going to slow down the recovery. You have to make sure the investments are there that will help us build jobs.

Now, the House Republicans see things differently. They started calling for cuts in spending and then were trumped within their own membership to raise those cuts to a level of about $100 billion. Among the things the House Republicans want to cut are the following: $74 million from the Small Business Administration at a time when small businesses are turning to the SBA for loans so they can stay in business and hire more people; $1.4 billion from the clean water revolving loan fund that local communities use for basic infrastructure so they have good, clean drinking water for the families in their communities; $600 million in TIGER II grants. These were grants that went directly from Washington to local units of government--no middleman involved at any State capital--for economic development. We need them in my State in communities such as Peoria and Moline. They also want to cut $2.5 billion from high-speed rail. That is a national project of significance that hires thousands of private sector employees who would be out of work if the House Republicans have their way.

In education, the House Republicans would cut $1.1 billion from Head Start.

How many people have to remind us if we don't intervene in the lives of small children from families at risk, that those kids, sadly, may end up as poor students or worse. Head Start gives them a chance, and it is one of the first programs the Republicans called to cut.

They propose to cut $700 million from schools across America serving disadvantaged students. They are going to have to lay off 10,000 teachers because of this House Republican cut.

House Republicans also call for an $845-per-student cut in Pell grants for 8 million college students across America. There is a way for us to make sure Pell grants are well spent, but cutting the assistance for these students will discourage some from the training and education they need to find a job in the future.

House Republicans propose to cut $1.5 billion from grants to States for job training. Again, at a time when we need new skills, when many people have lost a job to which they can never return, cutting this money could be very tragic.

Then, when it comes to research and development, I think the House Republicans have lost their way. They want to cut $300 billion from the National Science Foundation, cutting grants to researchers, teachers, and students across America.

They want to cut $1 billion from the National Institutes of Health. What are they thinking, to cut $1 billion in medical research funds from the National Institutes of Health? If there is ever an area where we cannot lose our edge, not only for the good of humanity but for the good of our own people, it is in medical research. That is one of the first areas the Republicans turn to, to cut $1 billion; and money from the Office of Science at the Department of Energy, $1.1 billion. That is research for innovation in areas such as batteries for electric vehicles and other forms of clean energy, and that is clearly the future. What the Republicans want to cut, sadly, is too much in areas that promise a better future for America. We can do better.

Government can't directly create jobs at the pace we need to get this economy moving forward, but we can make the right investments. For example, infrastructure. In Illinois, we need to make sure we invest in high-speed rail. I am glad our State was chosen. It is going to mean more and more passenger service within our State, fewer cars on the highway, more construction. Ultimately, it is a benefit to the environment. So high-speed rail is an important infrastructure investment.

Modernizing O'Hare Airport, not just for the flight times so they will be more on time for arrivals and departures, but also for safety--the modernization of O'Hare needs to continue.

We need to have safer roads and bridges.

We need broadband across Illinois and across America so small towns have the same advantages as big cities.

We need to put money into Head Start for education.

We can do this. There is waste in this government to be cut. We can work on that together and find it, but let's not eliminate the jobs of teachers whom we need so badly or the money for elementary and secondary schools or grants for families and loans to help them put their kids through college, and worker training. These are things where the President has the right priorities and, sadly, the House Republicans do not. It is a sharp contrast. It is an important debate, and it is one we will hear on the floor of the Senate and the House in the weeks ahead.

We can reduce our debt. I think the President is right. His budget would reduce projected deficits by $1.1 trillion over the next 10 years. He wants to freeze nonsecurity discretionary spending for 5 years, and I think he has shown leadership in making that proposal. We need to work with him to come up with a bipartisan plan that reaches our goal of reducing debt in America while still creating jobs.

I went through that exercise with the deficit commission. I didn't agree completely with their product, but I thought it was a move in the right direction and I joined the bipartisan group of 11 who supported it. The fiscal commission report was called the moment of truth, and it was. With funding for the current fiscal year unresolved, with the next fiscal year looming, and with the debt ceiling within shouting distance, this is a seminal moment for the fiscal and economic future of America.

I commend the President for his approach in the fiscal year 2012 budget proposal. Just as America has faced down great challenges throughout our history, we can do this too. We can meet the dual challenges of more jobs and less debt. It takes leadership and constructive activism and realism. Bringing those together, Democrats and Republicans can work together to make equally painful but important political sacrifices. It will take a lot of work, but we can do it if we work together.

Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source