Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 2 minutes and for Senator Leahy to be recognized following my remarks for 10 minutes.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I wouldn't mind the chart from my friend from Nevada staying up because it makes my point.

In a few hours, the Senate will hold an up-or-down vote on H.R. 1, the House Republicans' scorched earth spending proposal that counts among its casualties such critical priorities as border security, cancer research, and food safety inspectors. The House GOP proposal is a Trojan horse, and we will not be fooled by it. It speaks in the name of deficit reduction, but the dirty little secret about the Republican spending plan is that once the dust is settled, it would only decrease the deficit by $5 billion in fiscal year 2011. When we look at the CBO score of the continuing resolution we are operating under and compare that to the House spending bill, the difference by CBO in budget outlays only amounts to $5 billion in fiscal year 2011. We are talking about a difference of $1.36 trillion in budget outlays under the current CR versus $1.355 trillion in budget outlays under the Republican proposal, much as the chart of my colleague from Nevada has shown. In other words, all of the cuts the Republicans are currently proposing will shave a grand total of .3 percent from the deficit.

Some might say it is a start, but in relation to the damage these cuts will do, it is a meaningless start. Their cuts to domestic discretionary spending will do nothing to create jobs or spur short-term economic growth.

In fact, the reverse is true. As numerous independent economists point out, we will see a reduction in economic growth almost immediately if H.R. 1 is enacted, and these cuts will harm our ability to prepare for the future because they gut the very priorities we need to invest in to help our economy grow: education, energy investment, technology, and infrastructure.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCHUMER. So if all these cuts will not improve the economy in the near term and will not help economic growth in the longer term and will not cut the deficit, then exactly what will they do? They will satisfy a very small but vocal segment of the Republican Party. That is all.

So it is time for a reset. This morning I called for a reset of this budget debate. I think it is important that after today's votes both sides in the debate take a deep collective breath. We should all take stock of how the discussion up to now has become distorted and seek to reset the terms of the debate. It may not happen tomorrow, but in the coming weeks, as the negotiations led by the White House reconvene, we should approach the talks with fresh eyes and a new mindset.

Rather than continuing the fixation on domestic discretionary cuts, which at the same time do huge damage and cut the deficit very little just because of the way they are spent, the next offer and counteroffer should include mandatory cuts and revenue raisers such as oil royalties into the mix.

We will only put a dent in the deficit through shared sacrifice. Focusing simply on domestic discretionary and even leaving out the military will not achieve our goal of deficit reduction. Including mandatory cuts and revenue raisers such as oil royalties will.

The bottom line is this: The blame for the current breakdown in budget negotiations rests with our failure to think big. A bipartisan compromise simply will not be found in discretionary spending cuts alone. We must broaden the playing field. The solution will only come from putting other kinds of cuts, as well as revenue enhancements, on the table. Doing this will also set the table for the larger budget discussions still to come.

I see my colleague from Vermont, so I am ready to yield the floor to him.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source