The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“THE 2-PERCENT SOLUTION” mentioning the Department of Interior was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H2314-H2315 on Feb. 28, 1995.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
{time} 1010
THE 2-PERCENT SOLUTION
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Dickey). Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 4, 1995, the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Allard] is recognized during morning business for 5 minutes.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, the House of Representatives passed the balanced budget amendment last month. Today, the Senate will decide the fate of this critical reform. Whether the vote is yes or no, Congress will still need a statutory mechanism to ensure that spending is put on a glide-path to balance by the year 2002. I propose the 2-percent solution.
Shortly, I will introduce legislation to establish caps that will limit overall spending growth to 2 percent a year. If this level is exceeded in any year, an across-the-board sequester will kick in and force the necessary cuts, excluding Social Security and certain other contractual obligations.
With 2 percent growth the Federal Government can balance the budget of 2002 and still spend $1 trillion more over the next 7 years than it would under a 7 year freeze. Two percent growth will allow us to enact the tax cuts of the Contract With America and achieve the first balanced budget in 33 years.
Two weeks ago, I attended a Budget Committee field hearing outside of the beltway to hear the views of our constituents. Over 1,000 people showed up and the message was clear--cut spending. Just do it, balance the budget. [[Page H2315]] That is what the Republican majority plans to do.
During the debate on the balanced budget amendment, the rhetoric was thick with charges that the Congress does not need a constitutional amendment to balance the budget, all we need to do is offer a balanced budget. Well, the need for the balanced budget amendment is shown clearly by the President's just released budget.
The President's budget is a lost opportunity to do what he called for in his State of the Union speech, a balanced budget without the need for a constitutional amendment. In the President's budget, there is no entitlement reform, no welfare reform, and spending in most major departments goes up. Department of the Interior spending is up; HUD and the Labor Department get an increase in spending; the EPA gets an increase in spending; the Energy Department gets a spending increase even through the administration once talked about abolishing the Department; and even the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities get increases.
The bottom line is not a balanced budget, it is $200 billion deficits as far as the eye can see.
This is not what the average American is looking for. America wants a balanced budget. Unfortunately, the President has left the heavy lifting to the Republican Congress. Our goal is not $200 billion deficits, but a balanced budget with zero deficits. We must lead and meet the challenge and produce a budget that makes the tough cuts.
During the balanced budget debate, some questioned whether we can ever balanced the budget. Opponents like to point to the fact that over
$1.2 trillion in spending must be reduced. This huge number is used to show how painful it would be to actually enforce a balanced budget amendment by 2002.
This argument could only occur inside the beltway. Though Republicans abolished baseline budgeting on opening day, much more must be done before the terms of the debate are changed.
Baseline budgeting is the process of assuming automatic spending increases every year. If Congress appropriates anything less than the baseline spending growth, there has been a cut. I suspect most Americans believe a cut is when you spend less than you did the year before, not less than you thought you would spend.
The current debate about a balanced budget amendment demonstrates why this issue of baseline budgeting is so important. Every nickel of the
$1.2 trillion that must be cut is projected baseline growth.
As the chart next to me shows, the CBO projects that spending growth will average 5.3 percent a year through 2002. Under this scenario Federal spending will grow from $1.5 trillion this year to $2.2 trillion in 2002, and the deficit in 2002 will be well in excess of
$300 billion.
Of course, this assumes Congress does nothing to alter current spending patterns. If Congress instead manages to hold overall spending growth to 2 percent per year, the payoff for this discipline will be the first balanced budget in 33 years. And as I noted earlier, $1 trillion more will still be spent over those 7 years than if spending had been frozen.
So let me answer the doubters, there is no doubt about it, we can balance the budget by 2002. It can be done in a reasoned and responsible manner--by holding overall spending growth to 2 percent a year.
It is not my intention to suggest that this will be easy. It will be difficult, particularly for those programs that are growing rapidly. But this is Congress' job, it is what the America people want.
Over the last three decades Congress has dropped the ball on the budget. This is why we need the balanced budget amendment and the 2-
percent solution. With them we can build a secure future for our grandchildren.
____________________
