Sen. Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.), top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor Thursday, in which he deconstructs the ongoing debate over the nation’s debt and deficit and discusses some of the myths, gimmicks and falsehoods that have been propagated by Democrats (and the media) throughout. (As prepared):
“One of the things that most frustrates the American people about Washington is how hard it can be to get reliable information and straightforward answers.
Politicians offer a budget proposal and say it cuts taxes even though taxes go up. They even come up with new names to disguise tax hikes—maybe they call them deficit cuts or revenue enhancements or reduced spending in the tax code. We hear people come to the floor and blame our massive deficit on anything and everything but our out-of-control spending—it’s the war in Iraq or it’s a tax cut passed a decade ago or it’s special preferences for private yachts and Learjets.
We can’t have an honest budget if we don’t have an honest dialogue.
So I’m here today to speak the plain truth, as best I can, and to provide some concrete facts for consideration by my colleagues, the media, and the public.
First, I would like to address the myth that the president has a $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan. The only plan the White House has ever put on paper is his February budget, which doubles our national debt.
The president has never put a single spending cut plan on paper and he has no proposal to slash the deficit. If he does, it’s a closely guarded secret. And if such a secret plan does exist it should be made public this very afternoon. I’d like to see it. I’m sure millions of Americans feel the same.
We also have no debt plan from Senate Democrats. In fact, they haven’t even passed a budget in 813 days.
As of now, there is only one debt limit plan on paper. Only one plan available for public scrutiny and review. That’s the plan we are debating today: cut, cap, and balance. It cuts spending immediately, it caps it so it doesn’t go up, and it requires the passage of a balanced budget amendment to ensure Washington ends the deficit spending once and for all. The American people do not trust Washington to pass some grand budget deal with tax hikes that never go away and spending cuts that never materialize.
They are wise to the gimmicks and accounting tricks. That’s why I’ve introduced legislation requiring 7 days to review any bill increasing the debt limit.
In fact, Washington Democrats are resisting cut, cap, and balance because they know there’s no gimmick or accounting trick to get around it.
If this becomes law, Washington will have to end the spending spree. There will be no other option. These are the responsible choices families, cities, and states make every year.
In Alabama, Governor Robert Bentley oversaw an across-the-board cut of 15 percent from the General Fund in the current year because of a constitutional prohibition on deficit spending. For next year, he has proposed cuts of up to 45 percent for some state agencies. Unlike the federal government, our state is legally obligated to live within its means.
Another myth I’d like to address is the idea that our current budget crisis is the result of two wars and a tax cut. Let’s consider that claim. The total cost of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, over the entire last decade, is $1.3 trillion. Again, that’s over the last decade. This year alone the deficit is expected to be $1.4 trillion dollars. War costs represent only 4 percent of total outlays over the last ten years. The total amount of money spent since the president took office is $8.5 trillion dollars. By the end of his first three years in office we will have added $5 trillion to our gross federal debt. We are borrowing almost half of what we’re spending every single day. In the last two years, non-defense discretionary spending has soared 24 percent. The stimulus package alone—enacted into law in a single day in 2009—cost more than the entire war in Iraq. Annual spending when President Bush took office was less than $2 trillion. Today, it’s almost $4 trillion. It will be almost $6 trillion by the end of the decade.
There is only one honest answer to the question over why our debt is rising so fast: out-of-control domestic spending.
Another myth that’s circulating which I’d like to address concerns the budget summary from the Gang of Six. The authors of the summary claim that their approach would reduce the deficit by $3.7 trillion. But my staff on the Budget Committee can only find $1.2 trillion in reduced spending, along with a tax increase of $1 trillion. Where does the other $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction come from? Chairman Conrad, one of the members of the Gang of Six, even says the outline has a $1.5 trillion tax cut. But this is compared against a baseline that assumes a $3.5 trillion tax increase. It’s just an accounting gimmick. The real cost of the tax changes could be an increase as large as $2 trillion.
This is why we need more than a handout—we need legislative text.
The last myth that I’d like to address is perhaps the most important of all. This is the myth that we only need about $2 trillion in spending cuts over the next ten years.
Democrats have said—although no plan has ever been made public—that they could get behind a budget deal that reduces the deficit $4 trillion over the next ten years, half of it comprised of spending cuts. I’m skeptical that even this minimal level of spending cuts would occur. But even if it did, it’s not even close to what is needed to ultimately balance our budget. We are projected to spend $46 trillion over the next ten years. A $2 trillion cut is only about a four percent reduction in spending that is set to increase almost sixty percent.
In just a little over 2 months our debt will equal 100 percent of our GDP—matching the size of our entire economy. It already costs us a million jobs or more a year.
The honest truth is that this president, and this Democrat-led Senate, will never agree to the level of spending cuts in a debt deal necessary to put our country on a sound path.
They are committed to a big-government vision and will do whatever they can to preserve it. This the great debate of our time. And it won’t be settled in two weeks.
But I am confident that the good sense and wisdom of the American people will prevail. I am confident that we will get our spending under control, we will restore American principles of limited government, and we will build a better, freer future for our children.”
Politicians and journalists like to portray "the American people" as wise and innocent, being let down, deceived, and misled by their elected politicians.
But the reality is that it is the entitlement-addicted American people who want to preserve the welfare state status quo, and unwilling to tolerate any short-term loss or pain, as long as somebody else ( the rich, the businesses, foreign bond investors, and the future generations ) pay for it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExactly right, Kommie.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCorrect. That is why I've started to call America the Wimpy* nation:
"I'll gladly have some future generation pay you for the entitlements that you give me today."
PS..And it is quite easy for Democrat demagogues to buy votes when so many of their constituents do not even pay income taxes! The quickest way to get spending under control? Have a broad-based income tax, ban automatic with-holding and require people to actually write their tax check every quarter, after they've already spent it! Then you will see people start paying attention to spending!
*Wimpy (of 'Popeye' fame):
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."
Way long ago, my first job was at a Wimpy's hamburger restaurant!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell said, commie. There's way to many lazy and irresponsible people wandering among us who want you and I to pay their way through life.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe straight talk is welcome. Too bad it was not started and continued from about 8 months ago.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBrilliant, Senator Sessions. To quote Stan Lee, "Nuff said."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThank you Senator Sessions.
Pay attention gutless republicans. Read this speech. Then read it again. And shove your "grand bargain".
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI love how "Washington" is just a euphemism for "Democrats" in Session's speech, the gist of which is "Democrats lie, Republicans tell the truth." This is pointless partisan drivel that gets us no closer to the "truth" than we were before he opened his mouth. Politicians (Democrats, Republicans, and Tea Partiers, and Bernie Sanders) all massage the truth to make it fit whatever set of skewed "facts" are polling well with whatever group they think they need to woo. Sessions is no different; he's simply either your guy or he's not. Any time a politician, of either major party, tells me he's going to be honest with me, I assume he is preparing to lie to me about something big.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseyour hypocrisy is amazing. Your last sentence is the essence of partisan drivel. Sessions' comments are filled with facts and figures - if you want to call him out on "lies" as you characterize them - you owe him the minimal courtesy of citing specifics and facts in opposition to those you are taking issue with.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHow is what I said in any way partisan? I'm assuming I never get the whole truth from any politician, and thus find it laughable when one claims to be offering it to me. In his own speech, Sessions says that facts and figures are fudged all the time! Why should we trust his facts and figures any more than any other politician's? I cringe just as much when Barney Frank and liberal truth-tellers open their mouths. The debt is a bipartisan problem, but like the honesty deficit in Washington.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd by "but," I meant "just" in that final clause.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhere is the Democrats budget? Where is there budget plan? Until you have one, the onus on you. Talk is cheap, and the lies are getting expensive.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThat is a fair complaint but Sessions seems more likely to actually have some "fact" in his facts. In fact - he is part of the reason the rest of Washington is uncomfortable - forcing people to take a position on his facts. I like to see politicians squirm.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt's just an old trick lefties play all the time. They say "both sides do it" intending to create an illusion of balance; but you will notice they only direct specific citicism at the Republicans and the right.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou might think it's a trick, but it's very true. Where was the GOP in 2006? That's right, castigating the Democrats because they dared vote against the debt ceiling increase. Now the roles are reversed.
So was the GOP right in 2006 and right in 2011? Explain how you would reconcile that twisted position.
The same question goes to Democrats (and yes, I've waded into that swamp, asked the question, and promptly was cussed at and insulted). Were they right in 2006? Then why isn't the GOP right in 2011?
There's not many on the GOP side that have credibility in my view. And none of the Democrats do. Too many times they decide their position on issues not based on what's right for the country, but by the party of the guy who's trying to it passed.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseit might be worth remembering that in 2006 the deficit was coming DOWN. in 2007, the last republican budget year, it was 160 billion. so were the democrats against raising the limit because they were appalled by spending? if so, then why have deficits expanded x10 since they took over congress?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't disagree, but Sessions isn't one of them. I would say we have about half of the GOP's attention. The dems realize they are in a box and have decided to just ride it out. They essentially just have their ears and eyes covered praying.
Its a sad thing to watch a political party have no answer except spend, spend, spend.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"intending to create an illusion of balance; but you will notice they only direct specific citicism at the Republicans and the right."
And that's what Sessions did here, only toward the Democrats and the left.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWrong. His criticism is directed mostly at the false promises of the "Gang of Six", which is "bipartisan".
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse