"Reducing Unsustainable Debt Must Be A Priority"
Our nation's mounting debt is one of the biggest challenges facing our country and one that Congress must address as an urgent priority. Federal borrowing at current levels simply cannot be sustained and threatens our economic recovery by hampering growth and by crowding out private investment by businesses and individuals. Our debt will make it harder for our job creators to raise capital and hire workers. Our debt also exposes our nation to foreign creditors, such as China, that may not share our values and strategic interests.
While far from perfect, the budget control plan recently passed by Congress is a step in the right direction. It averts default, puts real controls on spending, begins to tackle our long-term debt, and provides more certainty to our job creators. For the first time in decades, it begins to address Washington's underlying spending problem.
It simply would have been unacceptable for the United States government to default on its debt for the first time in history. Defaulting on our obligations would have had dire consequences for our economy. It would have pushed up interest rates, making it more difficult for families to purchase homes, or take out a loan to buy a car or truck. It would have forced many employers to put on hold any plans to hire more employees.
At the same time, there is no question that reducing our $14.3 trillion debt is in the best interests of America. This unsustainable debt is a threat to a strong economy. We must reduce spending carefully and responsibly. Rather than raising tax rates on working families and small businesses, Congress should focus on eliminating wasteful tax loopholes and subsidies such as the ethanol subsidy that costs American taxpayers $6 billion each and every year. I have voted several times to eliminate this ethanol tax subsidy, and I have also voted to close loopholes that benefit the five major oil companies. Ending these subsidies will help bring our budget back into balance.
The budget agreement also requires a vote on a balanced budget Constitutional amendment by the end of the year. I am convinced that a balanced budget amendment to our Constitution is needed to permanently address our growing deficits. I have cosponsored such a balanced budget amendment. I wish it had passed when I first voted for it in 1997. I am encouraged that the Senate will soon consider this issue again.
While I supported the budget plan recently passed by Congress, I did so with serious reservations. A special committee will be created that will be charged with finding additional savings later this year. I don't think we needed to create yet another committee. More important, I am concerned that if this committee cannot agree on a plan for additional spending reductions and to reform our tax code to make it fairer for all Americans, an automatic trigger could result in ill-advised across-the-board cuts. Such cuts could hurt our seniors by reducing Medicare payments to doctors, hospitals, home care agencies, and nursing homes in rural areas.
In addition, while it is important that Congress continue to work to improve efficiency and reduce wasteful spending within the military, I am very concerned that deep and indiscriminate cuts could threaten our national and homeland security. Our senior military commanders are unanimous in their concerns that a severe reduction in defense funding could eventually sap the strength of our military and threaten the safety of our troops. General Dempsey, the new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has testified that implementing what could be nearly $850 billion in defense cuts would be extraordinarily difficult and pose a real threat to our security. There is no doubt we must control spending, but protecting our people is the first priority of government. Such severe cuts to our national security would not be in the best interest of America.
Given the magnitude of the challenges we face, I remain troubled by the President's handling of this crisis. In particular, it was unacceptable for him to frighten our nation's seniors by suggesting that their Social Security checks could be in jeopardy if Congress hadn't reached an agreement on the debt limit by the August 2 deadline. It would have been more useful if the President had produced his own plan to provide a path forward. It's unfortunate that the President didn't work harder to promote a bipartisan plan that could have avoided the last minute brinkmanship we witnessed-and brought people together around an agreement that would have moved America forward.
The work that lies ahead will be difficult, and Congress must make tough choices to put our nation back on a sound financial footing. Nevertheless, I'm encouraged that Washington is finally talking about how it can impose real spending controls, reduce burdensome regulations on small businesses, and implement policies that will help our country's job creators. While this may be just an initial step, I am hopeful we can continue to work in a bipartisan way to spur job growth and get our economy back on track.
While far from perfect, the budget control plan recently passed by Congress is a step in the right direction. It averts default, puts real controls on spending, begins to tackle our long-term debt, and provides more certainty to our job creators. For the first time in decades, it begins to address Washington's underlying spending problem.
It simply would have been unacceptable for the United States government to default on its debt for the first time in history. Defaulting on our obligations would have had dire consequences for our economy. It would have pushed up interest rates, making it more difficult for families to purchase homes, or take out a loan to buy a car or truck. It would have forced many employers to put on hold any plans to hire more employees.
At the same time, there is no question that reducing our $14.3 trillion debt is in the best interests of America. This unsustainable debt is a threat to a strong economy. We must reduce spending carefully and responsibly. Rather than raising tax rates on working families and small businesses, Congress should focus on eliminating wasteful tax loopholes and subsidies such as the ethanol subsidy that costs American taxpayers $6 billion each and every year. I have voted several times to eliminate this ethanol tax subsidy, and I have also voted to close loopholes that benefit the five major oil companies. Ending these subsidies will help bring our budget back into balance.
The budget agreement also requires a vote on a balanced budget Constitutional amendment by the end of the year. I am convinced that a balanced budget amendment to our Constitution is needed to permanently address our growing deficits. I have cosponsored such a balanced budget amendment. I wish it had passed when I first voted for it in 1997. I am encouraged that the Senate will soon consider this issue again.
While I supported the budget plan recently passed by Congress, I did so with serious reservations. A special committee will be created that will be charged with finding additional savings later this year. I don't think we needed to create yet another committee. More important, I am concerned that if this committee cannot agree on a plan for additional spending reductions and to reform our tax code to make it fairer for all Americans, an automatic trigger could result in ill-advised across-the-board cuts. Such cuts could hurt our seniors by reducing Medicare payments to doctors, hospitals, home care agencies, and nursing homes in rural areas.
In addition, while it is important that Congress continue to work to improve efficiency and reduce wasteful spending within the military, I am very concerned that deep and indiscriminate cuts could threaten our national and homeland security. Our senior military commanders are unanimous in their concerns that a severe reduction in defense funding could eventually sap the strength of our military and threaten the safety of our troops. General Dempsey, the new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has testified that implementing what could be nearly $850 billion in defense cuts would be extraordinarily difficult and pose a real threat to our security. There is no doubt we must control spending, but protecting our people is the first priority of government. Such severe cuts to our national security would not be in the best interest of America.
Given the magnitude of the challenges we face, I remain troubled by the President's handling of this crisis. In particular, it was unacceptable for him to frighten our nation's seniors by suggesting that their Social Security checks could be in jeopardy if Congress hadn't reached an agreement on the debt limit by the August 2 deadline. It would have been more useful if the President had produced his own plan to provide a path forward. It's unfortunate that the President didn't work harder to promote a bipartisan plan that could have avoided the last minute brinkmanship we witnessed-and brought people together around an agreement that would have moved America forward.
The work that lies ahead will be difficult, and Congress must make tough choices to put our nation back on a sound financial footing. Nevertheless, I'm encouraged that Washington is finally talking about how it can impose real spending controls, reduce burdensome regulations on small businesses, and implement policies that will help our country's job creators. While this may be just an initial step, I am hopeful we can continue to work in a bipartisan way to spur job growth and get our economy back on track.
