Jim Wright on Budget
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House of Representatives chamber; U.S. House Rep. Del Latta (R-OH) speaking: "Let me say that I think that is grossly unfair. I think the American people think it's unfair. It's unfair to the President of the United States, who has a commitment from all the people, all the people of this country, to turn the economy of this country around and to get us on the upward track once again." Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) states Rep. Latta's time has expired and turns to Rep. Leo Zeferetti (D-NY) who recognizes the Chairman of the Budget Committee, Rep. James Jones (D-OK) comes to the House floor; adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated at House rostrum in BG, Speaker O'Neill seated at Speaker's platform. Rep. Jones states that he rises to change his previous position, to seek support from undecided colleagues, and to explain what made him change his mind; starting with a history of his involvement in the reconciliation process.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative James Jones (D-OK) continues to explain why his position changed to support the rule; First, budget reconciliation is a complicated process and is not the job of the committee to decide what to cut, but only how much to cut. Second, he does not wish to undermine the process of budget reconciliation. And third, he believes in having a controlled timeline for this process, which has been mutually agreed upon by both parties. Jones: "After Gramm-Latta passed and the committees intensely worked for thirty days to make the specific cuts and they reported back beginning on June 12 to the Budget Committee, we looked at what they did. We asked the Congressional Budget Office to verify what they did and we found that in addition to the $35.1 billion they were asked to cut next year, they not only met that target, but the House committees cut $37.6 billion in fiscal year 1982 outlays; $2.6 billion more than they were asked to cut." Rep. Jones then questions Rep. Del Latta's (R-OH) assertion of shortfalls given the CBO disagrees, verifying the work of the House and Senate. The Office of Management and Budget may agree, but they have been wrong in other recent predictions.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative James Jones (D-OK) continuing to explain his position to support the rule. Rep. Jones: "...After the committees met their targets and exceeded those targets, last Thursday night Office of Management and Budget Director Dave Stockman asked to meet with Mr. Panetta and myself to discuss this. He presented us a list of about twelve items in which he said cuts were not deep enough. He never mentioned anything about restorations. He never mentioned anything about the committees not having met their responsibility. He said that we need to cut more. We need to cut more out of social security. We need to cut more out of Medicaid. We need to cut more out of Medicare. We need to cut more out of guaranteed student loans. Every one of the cuts Mr. Stockman asked us to make in order are made in order in this rule. If you want to protect the legislative process, the independence and the integrity of Congress and the legislative process, if you want to protect the budget process, then I suggest you support the rule." Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) states Rep. Jones time has expired; adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks in BG.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Del Latta (R-OH) gives two minutes time to U.S. House Rep. Jimmy Quillen (R-TN). Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) acknowledges Rep. Quillen. Quillen speaks out against the rule, calling it nothing more than a "gag order". He thinks the rule is unfair and partisan, primarily using historic dueling anecdotes to make his point; having a duel between two parties, but only one has live ammunition, while the other can only use blanks. Rep. Quillen closes his remarks by stating: "I appeal to you to have the courage to rise above partisan politics and do whatever is necessary to turn this country back into the right economic life that the Democrats over a period of more than twenty-six years have stumbled us into. Yes, we must have the courage. I urge you again to vote down the previous question. I yield back the balance of my time." Rep. Tip O'Neill seated at the Speaker's platform; adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated at House rostrum.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Leo Zeferetti (D-NY) recognizes U.S. House Rep. Leon Panetta (D-CA), Chairman of the Budget Committee Task Force on Reconciliation. Rep. Panetta (D-CA) comes to the House floor; adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated at the House rostrum in BG, Speaker Tip O'Neill seated at Speaker's platform. Rep. Panetta defends the work of the committee and the Congressional Budget Office that verified it in the House and Senate. Neither body achieved 100% of what the President wanted, yet there is no protest in the Senate. The House Committees were given targets and they were achieved, even exceeded in a very tight time frame. Panetta rails against the Reagan administration, particularly the director of Office and Budget Management, David Stockman for coming in at the 11th hour to demand more.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Leon Panetta (D-CA), Chairman of the Budget Committee Task Force on Reconciliation continues to defend the committee's work, noting the committee's job was to cut the budget, not specify where it was to be cut. Rep. Panetta: "I ask you from a reconciliation point of view, from a process point of view, but most importantly, from an institutional point of view, that we not surrender the only power we have here, the power to check and balance the Executive. That line is going to have to be drawn sometime, and I urge you to draw it now by supporting the rule." Rep. Panetta leaves the House floor as Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) recognizes Rep. Del Latta (R-OH); adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated around House rostrum. Rep. Latta yields one minute of time to Rep. Gene Taylor (R-MO).
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representatives Gene Taylor (R-MO) argues against one particular point in the committee bill that is rectified in the Gramm-Latta bill. Rep. Taylor brings up the issue of dual pay to Federal employees who are in the National Guard and our Reserve components when they are on temporary active duty. Rep. Taylor goes on to state that the current bill penalizes these soldiers for the time they spend in camp, because their compensation as a reservist, while on duty, will be deducted from their pay. As long as the private sector is being asked to give this support, it's wrong that the same support is denied for federal employees serving in the military. They would be protected in the Gramm-Latta substitute, and therefore, Rep. Taylor sides with defeating the current bill. Rep. Taylor leaves the floor as Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) recognizes Rep. Del Latta (R-OH); adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated at the House rostrum. Rep. Latta yields two minutes of time to Rep. Barber Conable (R-NY).
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Barber Conable, Jr. (R-NY) opposes Rep. Leon Panetta's (D-CA) remarks. Conable: "It is not restraint for the majority to deny the minority the right to offer its alternative on as critical an issue as budget reconciliation. It is not restraint for them to dictate to the minority what amendments they can offer. It is not restraint if the majority specifies what will be in the motion to recommit, the last recourse of the minority. In short, it is not restraint to control procedures so that the major alternatives cannot emerge. Voting against the previous question will permit this body to function as it was supposed to. Go thou and vote accordingly." Rep. Conable leaves the House floor, Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) recognizes Rep. Del Latta (R-OH); adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated at House rostrum. Rep. Latta asks how much time Rep. Conable yielded back; Speaker O'Neil states the remaining time left. Rep. Latta yields two minutes of time to Rep. John Jacob Rhodes (R-AZ).
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
Speaker of the House Tip O'Neil (D-MA) gives U.S. House Representative John Jacob Rhodes (R-AZ) two minutes. Rep. Rhodes enters House floor; Speaker O'Neill seated at Speaker's platform, adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated around the House rostrum. Rep. Rhodes gives remarks providing support for the Gramm-Latta bill, particularly because the bill would be more beneficial to social security recipients. Rep. Rhodes: "Institutionally, this rule does a terrible thing to the sense of comity which we have had in this House for all of these years. In the first place, the motion to re-commit. Now, I understand that people are saying they don't worry about having a vote on the package, you can vote on the motion to recommit. That's not true. The motion to recommit proscribes what the minority will put in the motion. I have never seen this happen before. I have known for 28 years that the motion to recommit is probably the best weapon, maybe the only weapon, that the minority has. We should be allowed the authority to put what we want to it, in a motion to recommit with instructions."
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative John Jacob Rhodes (R-AZ) leaves the House floor. Rep. Richard Walker Bolling (D-MO) yields three minutes to Rep. Wyche Fowler Jr. (D-GA). Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) recognizes Rep. Fowler Jr. for three minutes; adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated around House rostrum. Rep. Fowler states that he has listened to several debate points, but has noticed the missing theme of accountability. Rep. Fowler states that Congress did, in fact, cut more government spending than the President of the United States originally asked for. Fowler: "The only question now remaining is whether or not we will stare the American people in the eye, stare at each one of these people, not camouflaged by talk of programs, not camouflaged by talk of packages, but look the American people in the eye and say to them, "It is you, the parent, that we will deny a student loan; it is you, the worker, that we will deny a first home."
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Wyche Fowler Jr. (D-GA) continues his remarks for Congressional accountability by providing a parable to support his argument on Congressional accountability to constituents stating: "Today is the day of reckoning. Today is the day of accountability. Today is the day that a rule has finally been made that allows us the basic requirement of the American legislative system: Accountability to the people that we ask to bear the largest burdens of these cuts. I thank you, gentlemen." Rep. Fowler Jr. leaves House floor; Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) seated atop the House rostrum, adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated below.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) seated on Speakers platform, adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated below him at House rostrum; Rep. O'Neill calls on U.S. House Representative Del Latta (R-OH). Rep. Latta yields time to Rep. Virginia Smith (R-NE). Rep. Smith rises in opposition to the rule, saying when she and others go home next week, constituents will want to know why the President's proposal was not given a chance.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Del Latta (R-OH) yields two minutes to Rep. Ralph Regula (R-OH). Rep. Regula walks onto House floor; Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) seated on Speakers platform, adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated below him. Rep. Regula notes that the House will soon recess for a time to mark American Independence Day; a sacred time that spawned a government that derives its power from the consent of the governed. Should the government become destructive to these ends, the people have a right to abolish or alter it. Rep. Regula recalls that the recent election altered the government, and gave the current administration a mandate by consent of the people. Regula goes on to detail the amount of savings being provided to the people and advocates the mandate of the people be followed. Rep. Regula leaves the House floor and Speaker O'Neill recognizes Rep. Del Latta (R-OH).
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Del Latta (R-OH) yields three minutes of time to Rep. Phil Gramm (D-TX). Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) recognizes Rep. Gramm, adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated around House rostrum. Rep. Gramm begins his remarks: "Mr. Speaker, we've had numerous people come to the well and speak as if we're talking about, a question of whether to allow the President to have his program, supported by two hundred members of this body in a firm, hard commitment, voted on up or down, or whether we are going to break it into six packages and make it more difficult to pass. I'd like to make it very clear that that's not the issue and that's not what the Rules Committee did."
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. Representative Phil Gramm (D-TX) continues his remarks on the rule question where, in his view, the Committee took the President's proposed package, threw two-thirds of it away, kept a third, but has altered that third in several ways from its original form and purpose. Gramm: "Don't be deceived. The issue here today is not the whole package versus a fragmented vote. The issue here is circumvention of the democratic process. And don't think we're going to be able to go back home and say we wanted to vote in its parts, because that's not the way the rule does it. What this rule does is destroy our opportunity to work the people's will. I ask you to vote against the previous question and against the rule, and for Gramm-Latta when it's introduced not because the President's for it, not because the American people support it, not because fair play and the democratic process dictate that two hundred members of this body get an opportunity to have their package voted on, but because it's right..." Rep. Gramm leaves the House floor; Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) seated at Speakers platform, adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated below him.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) seated on Speaker platform, adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated below. O'Neill: "the gentleman from Missouri has fourteen minutes remaining. Gentleman from Ohio has..." Rep. Richard Walker Bolling (D-MO) interrupts to yield two minutes to Rep. Peter Peyser (D-NY). Rep. Peyser comes to the House floor to compliment the factual remarks by Rep. Leon Panetta (D-CA) and Rep James Jones (D-OK), contrasted to the metaphors made by others using Fourth of July and Andrew Jackson anecdotes. Rep. Peyser supports of the rule and proceeds to specifically discuss the proposed amendment's effect on guaranteed student loans relative to a family's adjusted gross income. Rep. Peyser is not against having these amendments put to a vote, if only to have Congressmen on the record with their position. Rep. Peyser yields back the remainder of his time. Speaker O'Neill calls on Rep. Del Latta (R-OH); adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated at the House rostrum.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Del Latta (R-OH) yields two and half minutes to Rep. Jack Kemp (R-NY). Rep. Kemp references the previous speaker and his comments on guaranteed student loans in correlation with family income levels. Rep. Kemp sees the issue as much greater, namely that with interest rates and inflation, the average American family makes less today than in 1969. This marks an economy going backwards, making it difficult to make any substantial purchases, such as a house or car, let alone college education. Kemp implores Congress to work with a willing President to reign in federal spending, lower interest rates, and inflation. He does not see this as a question of procedure, but one of policy, and urges members to vote for fiscal restraints as they been presented in Gramm-Latta I and now in Gramm-Latta II. Rep. Kemp leaves the floor; Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) speaking with an adult Caucasian male; adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated around the House rostrum.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Richard Walker Bolling (D-MO) first yields two minutes to "the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Nelson", but there is confusion. Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) recognizes the "gentleman from Florida, for two minutes", then waits for a correction; adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated around the House rostrum. Rep. Bolling comes back to yield five minutes, instead, to Rep. Jim Wright (D-TX), the Speaker acknowledges.
Jim Wright on Budget Reconciliation Act
U.S. House Representative Jim Wright (D-TX): "Mr. Speaker, I want to say a few words about what we owe to ourselves by way a choice, a few words about what we owe to the President of the United States, and a few words about what we owe to the legislative process and to the Congress as an institution. It seems to me that we owe to ourselves the right to make choices and to go on record, clearly, as to the component parts of those choices. What we have today is a question of whether we shall vote on one issue only that is a compendium of proposals that were dictated by David Stockman in the Office of Management and Budget, or whether we shall have the opportunity to vote on each of six component parts. There may well be members, and I may be one of them, who would like to vote for one of these amendments and against others..." Rep. Wright goes on to highlight Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid proposed cuts, and his desire to have specific proposals to be voted on separately, judged on their own merits.
Jim Wright on Budget Reconciliation Act
U.S. House Representative Jim Wright (D-TX) continuing his remarks on the rule in question: "Why is it that you don't want to face these specific issues? There is one proposal that would make child nutrition, summer feeding, and school lunch lose about $2 billion in three years. There's another proposal that would reduce guaranteed student loans by about $2 and half billion or $3 billion. None of this was demanded by the Gramm-Latta proposal that we passed in the first place. It required the committees of the House to reduce some $35 billion to $36 billion from current year's expenses, and they've have done that. They've complied. Here is their bill. A complex piece of work. And now we are being asked, sight unseen, without ever having seen a copy of the so-called Gramm-Latta substitute, to make in order and to support the ideas of one or two people who met clandestinely and arrogated to themselves the assumption that they could do a better job than the committees of the House could do. So it seems to me that we should adopt this rule."
Jim Wright on Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Jim Wright (D-TX) continues his remarks, turning to the President's demands of Congress. Wright: "I think we owe to the President of the United States cooperation and an opportunity. We do not owe to him obeisance, obedience, and submissiveness. Yet, that's what's being demanded of us. That's what being asked that we subject ourselves to. I have never known a situation in which a Congress extended itself farther in an effort to accommodate any President that has been the case this year. It is unprecedented, as was described by my distinguished friend, the minority leader, for a Congress to give to any Chief Executive a specific timetable and to stick with that timetable to make sure that every element of his proposals would get fair and free and sympathetic opportunities to be heard and to be acted upon. Yet, we have done that and we have stuck with that timetable. What else do we owe? After having followed that mandate faithfully and in good hope and good heart, the best that the committees of the House could produce coming forward in this document, we're being told that isn't good enough."
Jim Wright on Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Jim Wright (D-TX) continues his remarks on Congress' subservience to the President's requests; Wright: "Yesterday, the President of the United States says in San Antonio, that unless he can have it all, that his program may not work. No President, no President in the history of the United States, not Franklin Roosevelt, not Lyndon Johnson, not George Washington, or Thomas Jefferson ever demanded of Congress that we lie down, submissively, and give him every last scintilla. No President has ever demanded that we allow the Office of Management and Budget to write our legislation." Rep. Wright goes on to excoriate Congress for being dictated to by an appointed official, OMB Director David Stockman, giving up the "historic prerogatives of Congress". Rep. Wright urges members to vote yes on the rule, so that everyone can go on the record and the public knows exactly what is being done. Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) applauding along with other members of Congress; adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated around House rostrum. U.S. Rep. Trent Lott (R-MS) walks onto House floor.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) calls on the "gentleman from Ohio"; adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated around the House rostrum. U.S. House Representative Del Latta (R-OH) yields three minutes to Rep. Trent Lott (R-MS) already on the House floor. Speaker O'Neill asks adult male off clerk how much time is left, before stating that the "gentleman has ten minutes left and he yields three minutes."
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Trent Lott (R-MS) counters the remarks made by Rep. Jim Wright (D-TX): "Mr. Speaker, yes, the gentleman from Texas wants to vote on the parts of the bipartisan substitute, but not on the parts of the Jones substitute. Never before have so few done so much to violate the rights of so many. The reconciliation rule proposed by the Democrat leadership in the Rules Committee effectively denies at least half the Members of this House and the 110 million Americans they represent a clear cut vote on the President's package of budget cuts which total $20 billion more than the Democratic package of cuts. It is parliamentary obstructionism." Rep. Lott states that an individual vote on these proposals is a guise to prevent necessary budget cuts from happening. He does not believe this is a matter of procedure, but of substance. These budget cuts need to happen and the spending of the federal government needs to be brought under control. Rep. Lott yields back the balance of his time; Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) seated on Speakers platform, adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated below him.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Del Latta (R-OH) asks how much time has been yielded back. Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) seated on Speakers platform, states a half minute has been yielded back. Rep. Latta yields two minutes to Rep. Charles Stenholm (D-TX). Speaker O'Neill recognizes Rep. Stenholm for two minutes. Rep. Stenhom approaches walks onto the House floor; adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated around House rostrum. Rep. Stenholm states that since he first arrived to Congress, leadership told him that they would never force him to vote against his conscience or convictions. He believes that every member Congress has done what they think is right and in the best interest of the country, even if there are disagreements among one another. Rep. O'Neill taps the gavel as his time expires until Rep. Latta extends his time by thirty seconds. While Rep. Stenholm thinks this vote is the most important one this year, he holds no animosity to anyone that disagrees with him, and appreciates the same courtesy being extended to him.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) calls on the "gentleman from Ohio" and states that he has five minutes remaining; adult Caucasian male and female clerks seated around House rostrum. U.S. House Representative Del Latta (R-OH) yields to Reps. William Wampler Sr. (R-VA), Jack Fields Jr. (R-TX), and Dick Cheney (R-WY); each member rises to voice opposition to the rule and "revise and extend my remarks"; Speaker O"Neill says "without objection" to all three. Rep. Latta yields five minutes to Minority Leader, Rep. Robert Michel (R-IL). Speaker O'Neill recognizes Rep. Michel for five minutes.
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Robert Michel (R-IL) accuses the Democrats of a divide and conquer strategy employed only because of Republican unity and strength. Michel further accuses the Democrats of being greedy, continually cutting into pieces the whole proposal, far beyond what Republicans could stomach. Michel: "I cannot believe that you expect us to take it here today. It is unconscionable and, moreover, you have the audacity to still refer to the specific amendments made in order under the rule as Republican initiatives. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Wright, my friend Mr. Bolling, these are no longer our amendments that are made in order. They are bastards of the worst order, for which we disclaim any parental responsibility. What have you done to us? You have denied what I believe is a majority of this House philosophically, if not numerically, a clean vote up or down on our package."
Budget Reconciliation Act 1981 Debate
U.S. House Representative Robert Michel (R-IL) continues his remarks against the proposed budget rule: "...I might say further, we might as well find out today whether there is or is not a formal philosophical coalition. Is it there or is it not? The country cries out for it. Give us a chance to implement what we voted for, they say. We ask our friends on the Democratic side of the aisle to again join us in this effort. I need not tell the members what the long-range implications are of this very critical vote today. Those members with a good sense of fair play should be just as incensed as I am over this turn of events. We are witnessing, in effect, foul play today and I urge my colleagues to let it be known in no uncertain terms by voting down the previous question and give us an opportunity to substitute a rule to make in order our package of amendments that we are so concerned about..." Rep. Michel leaves the House floor to applause; Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (D-MA) seated at the Speaker's platform; adult Caucasian and African American male and female clerks seated around House rostrum.