August 1, 1975
Page 26686
THE MILITARY PROCUREMENT AND SCHOOL LUNCH CONFERENCE REPORTS
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the Senate has pending two important conference reports which have major implications for the new congressional budget.
I am compelled, as a Member of the Senate and as chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, to vote against both.
I will vote against the military procurement conference report because it authorizes military expenditures which translate into appropriations which exceed our congressional budget targets.
I will vote against the school lunch conference report because it is automatic spending legislation which, as it comes back from the conference, would result in 1976 spending almost $430 million in excess of our budget target. I hope other Senators will vote likewise.
It is no discredit to our Senate conferees on these bills that we vote to reject these reports. Each bill, as it passed the House, exceeded the budget totals to an even greater degree than do these conference reports, The Senate conferees were able to reduce that excess spending but, regrettably, not to eliminate it.
But a vote to approve these conference reports is a vote to exceed the budget targets we set for ourselves in May. It is a vote for a larger deficit.
It is perfectly clear that Congress made a very conscious judgment in adopting the budget resolution to hold the budget deficit under $70 billion. The budget Congress adopted was based on 17 spending targets for items such as national defense, health, income security, and so on. It. is true that none of the individual spending priority targets is written in stone. But it is a pernicious fallacy to assert that we can be true to the budget process if we exceed a budget target in one area without deciding at the same time where we are going to cut the budget in another area.
Members may say that Congress is free to exceed the defense spending target or the income security spending target. Those Members must tell us where congress is going to cut the budget to compensate for these increases. Those Members must take responsibility for exceeding the $70 billion deficit we have agreed upon.
Congress can change its mind about budget targets after they are adopted. But I have not recently heard anyone suggest that we should spend more than the $367 billion targeted in our congressional budget as the total Federal spending. And I have not recently heard anyone advocate that we should exceed the $69.6 billion deficit ceiling it contains. So let us avoid exceeding any budget target unless we simultaneously decide where Congress will make appropriate reductions in other spending targets.
I call every Member's attention to the Senate budget scorekeeping report which clearly shows that there is very little slack in any spending category in which cuts can be made. As I have said over and over again, both at the time we adopted the Congressional Budget Resolution and after, this is a tight budget.
As chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, I must say that I do not see where spending will be cut in any spending target we have adopted. And I believe that, if Congress decides to breach a spending target, it is actually making a judgment to increase the deficit. That belief compels me to vote against both of these conference reports.
But there is another factor which compels votes. The Budget Reform Act has two purposes — to control Federal spending and cut waste, and to reorder our national priorities within an overall spending ceiling. These two conference reports provide both guns and butter — more in each case than Congress has targeted. Both should be rejected.
What if we reject only one report and not the other? Are we prepared to say to America's families and their children that we will break the budget to buy bullets, but we are going to cut back on the budget at the school lunch counter?
It can be argued that the defense bill we are considering is only an authorization for spending — that it must have a subsequent appropriation bill to translate it into actual Federal outlays. Some may feel free to vote for this bill even though, when it is appropriated for, it will exceed the budget. I think we must reject that argument. When the Senate approves an authorization for major military programs in July, the public has a right to expect we believe them necessary for our national defense — that we want those programs funded in September.
These bills test whether we are serious about the budget reform process. They test whether we intend to hold the line on Federal spending this year. They test whether we are going to deal even-handedly in holding the line, both for defense and domestic spending.
I believe both reports should be returned to conference for further changes, to make them more consistent with the Budget resolution. And I will so vote.
Mr. President, I shall try to make my comments on the Military Procurement Conference Report as brief as possible. We are on restricted time.