(UNTITLED)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75B00380R000500190007-4
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 18, 2001
• Sequence Number: 7
• Publication Date: June 27, 1973
• Content Type: OPEN

June 27, 19 7,,A-pproved For 8 E531RA1: RI:C;UKll 75%KJ%000500190007-4
one hand, remove these 13,000 to 14,000
from eligibility for medicaid because
their income is somewhat above the pay-
ment levels and the State is constitution-
ally prohibited from supplementing up
to the new levels, or could keep them on
the medicaid rolls and it would then
have to forfeit all of the Federal money
it receives for all medicaid recipients in
the State.
I should add that- the State legislature
has attempted to remedy this situation.
The State legislature attempted to ap-
propriate State funds to take care of
some of the needs of people made eligible
by the SSI program; however, they were
told by the Attorney General's office that
such a move would not be constitutional,
since no ]?'ederal funds would be match-
ing State appropriations.
I should also add that there was an
attempt to repeal this entire section of
the State constitution, but it failed in
an election in May 1971. In addition,
there will be a constitutional convention
next year, and the State director.pf pub-
lic welfare is convinced that this provi-
sion then will be removed from State
law.
My amendment is very narrowly
drawn and says that the mandatory sup-
plementation provisions of this bill will
not apply to a State, but only on two
very limited conditions: first, the State
constitutional prohibition against .sup-
plem.entation must have been in exist-
ence prior to July 1, 1973, and second,
the State Attorney General or other ap-
propriate State officials must have made
a finding prior to July 1, 1973 that State
supplemental payments would not be
possible because of the constitutional
limitations.
I believe there are sufficient safe-
guards in this amendment to insure that
there will be no abuses. My State has
made efforts to overcome this constitu-
tional difficulty, and I know that in the
next year serious efforts will be made to
correct it.
I am hopeful that the manager of the
bill can accept this amendment.
Mr. BENNETT, Mr. President, I was
part of the discussion of this problem in
committee. I recognize it is an unusual
and unique problem affecting only the
State of Texas and it is caused by the
constitution of the State of Texas. I am
delighted that the Senator from Texas
found a solution for the problem.
However, for the record I have to say
that I think this is not the bill on which
the amendment should be offered. I real-
ize that it will be agreed to, but to keep
my amateur status I will have to indi-
cate my opposition to the amendment on
this bill, although I do support the pro-
posal
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, in view of
the statement of the Senator from Texas,
I do not think there will be more than a
relatively small number of cases of in-
dividuals in Texas who would have diffi-
culty complying with the committee
amendirlent. Unfortunately, Texas has
an unusual constitutional problem that
does not exist in other parts of the coun-
try. As much as the legislature and the
Governor of the State might wish to take
though it may be beyond the capacity of
the State legislature and the Governor to
provide the cooperation this bill would
require in complying with the mandate
the Senate has adopted. Unless we can
work out a better answer, I think we
should agree to the amendment, which
will solve the problem.
Mr. President, I yield back the re-
mainder of my time.
Mr. BENTSEN. I thank the Senator. I
yield back the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques-
tion is on agreeing to the amendment of
the Senator from Texas.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, I have
it be stated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated.
The amendment was read as follows:
At the end of the bill, add the following
new title:
TITLE V-LIMITATION OF USE ON
APPROPRIATED FUNDS
PROHIBITION AGAINST USE OF APPROPRIATED
FUNDS FOR COMBAT ACTIVITIES IN CAMBODIA
SEC. 501. No funds heretofore or hereafter
appropriated under any Act of Congress may
be obligated or expended to support directly
or indirectly combat activities in, over, or
from off the shores of Cambodia or in or over
Laos by United States forces.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, I ask
for the yeas and nays on the amend-
ment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
a sufficient second? There is a sufficient
second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, this
amendment is similar to and almost
identical to an amendment passed by the
Senate 3 weeks ago.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, will the Sen-
ator yield?
Mr. EAGLETON. I yield.
Mr. LONG. I hope the Senator will
not take an extended period of time to
debate the amendment. I am confident
the Senate will vote the same as they did
when the Senator offered the amend-
ment on the other bill that was vetoed.
Mr. EAGLETON. I will be brief but I
think we should have the Record com-
plete.
Mr. LONG. I agree with the Senator.
Mr. EAGLETON. I thank the Senator.
I will be brief and to the point.
Mr. President, this amendment is simi-
lar to and almost identical to an
amendment which the Senate passed on
May 31 by a vote of 63 to 19, which would
prohibit the use of any Federal funds to
conduct or continue combat activities in
Cambodia and Laos. This amendment
was subsequently agreed to and accepted
by the House and became part of the
Supplemental Appropriation bill. The
Supplemental Appropriation bill was ve-
toed this morning by the President, and
the override on the veto failed by 241 to
override and 173 to sustain.
Mr. President, I think it is necessary
that we persist in this endeavor to bring
this unconstitutional and unauthorized
war to a termination. There is no au-
thority whatsoever for what is being done
S 12171
in Cambodia today, and being done with
a vengeance.
Since May 31, the date on which the
original Eagleton amendment was adopt-
ed by the Senate, the following has oc-
curred in Cambodia with respect to
American casualties:
June 5, OV-10 - downed, one
action.
June 15, HH-53 helicopter
three killed, two rescued.
June 16, F-4 downed, two missing in
action.
Totals killed in Cambodia and Laos to
date: six-killed in action, four missing in
action in Cambodia. Eight killed in action
in Laos.
Mr. President, more tonnage has been
dropped on Cambodia since the cease-
fire was signed on January 27 than was
dropped over North Vietnam in the last
3 years. Think of that, in less than half
a year we have dropped more bombs on
Cambodia and inflicted more devasta-
tion, than we had in the entire 3 prior
years with respect to North Vietnam.
I think President Nixon's veto of the
supplemental appropriation bill hinged
mainly on the inclusion of the anti-
bombing amendment. He clearly wishes
to continue a bombing policy which is
improvident, unwise, and goes directly
to the heart of the constitutional proc-
ess. It is our authority-Congress' au-
thority-to determine how, when, and
where we go to war; and in the supple-
mental appropriation bill there was a
clear determination by the Congress,
both Houses concurring therein, that we
not go to war in Cambodia and that we
not continue the bombing any longer.
If the President wishes to persist in
his methodology, we must persist in ours.
Because if we give in on this issue, we
will then, by indirection, in my judg-
ment, be sanctioning a war in Cambodia.
If we succumb and delete the anti-
bombing amendment from any appro-
priate vehicle by which it may reach the
President's desk, if we recede from that
amendment, we are tacitly and affirma-
tively going along with this war-a war
which has no basis in logic or in law.
As far as I am concerned, this amend-
ment'has the same legitimacy, the same
compelling need, the same efficacy to-
day in June as it had on May 31 when
it was originally adopted.
Unless there is something further, I
am prepared to yield back my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who
yields time?
Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I yield
myself 2 minutes.
Earlier in the debate I pointed out that
there was grave doubt about the ability
of the House to tack this kind of amend-
ment on a bill which, under the Con-
stitution, has to originate in the House.
I think there will be a point of order
automatically made against this kind of
amendment on this bill, regardless of its
merits. I expect to vote against it for
that reason, but I want the record to
show that this is a revenue bill, subject
to the constitutional point which re-
quires revenue measures to originate in
the House. Moreover, t'iir amendment is
completely outside the jurisdiction of the
Ways and Means Committee, with which
we must go to conference, and I think
Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000500190007-4
 S 12172
Approved For Re ease 200 75B 00500190007-
0 NGRESS t t, t SE - ~uae 27, 1973
they have no choice but to reject it on
that ground.
Now I would like to yield to the Sena-
tor from New Mexico.
The PRESIDING.OFFICER. Does the
Senator yield on the bill itself?
Mr. BENNETT. This is on the amend-
ment.
Will the Senator from Louisiana yield
the Senator some time?
Mn LONG. How much time does the
Senator from New Mexico want? Is 5
minutes s?lfficient?
Mr. DOMENICI. Five minutes will do.
Mr. LONG. I yield 5 minutes to the
Senator from New Mexico.
Mr. DOMENICI.:'Ir. President, letme
say to the distinguished Senator from
]Missouri that a few days ago, when the
so-called Eagleton amendment came be-
fore the Senate, I supported it, and I
want the Senator from Missouri to know,
and I want all Senators to know, that I
support the concept of prohiibting air ac-
tion in Cambodia. However, I will not
support the amendment today because I
think it is ? inappropriate that it be at-
tached to this measure. In fact, I doubt
that I will support any measure other
than those that the Finance Committee
;itself con: idered as part of this bill.
They have brought before us amend-
ments that are truly relevant. Because
we have no budgetary procedures in Con-
;gress, they saw fit to remind us of defi-
ciencies to social security, supplemental
income, and the like, and I support them
'because they are either from trust funds
or, they are relevant to the subject mat-
ter. But the pending amendmen;, it
seems to me, is not relevant. I do hope
that other Senators will be heard today
and that we will not, on this issue, con-
front the President on this matter and
then blame him when the social pro-
grams that are part of the bill are not
carried out.
So I want the distinguished Senator
to know I have not changed my mind
with reference to my support as a U.S.
Senator, but I have changed my mind
with reference to where that amendment
should ftad itself in the procedure's of
the Senate.
As a freshman, if came here thinking
we could really vote on priorities iii the
Senate, and I fir..d myself voting on
many, many billions of dollars added on
to a debt limitation bill.
I have just one last thought. Unless
and until we devise a method for budget-
ing, we are not going to have priorities
that are meaningful. They will be noth-
ing more than opportunities for those of
us who d.sagree to say if we had a prior-
ity system we would vote differently; we
would not agree with the President; we
would not agree with the Senator crom
Louisiane.. But I doubt that we really
want a budgetary system which permits
us to vote fair and square, up and down,
on priorities. That is the second point
that concerns me about today's delibera-
tions.
However, so the Senator from Mis,youri
will undEo'stand, I have not changed my
mind on this issue, but I will not support
his amendment today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who
yields tirae?
`Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I do not
think there is anything to be gained by
further debate. I do think we would do
well to move ahead with the business
before the Senate. I hope other Senators
will not ask for any more time on this
question. I suggest we get to a vote. I
am prepared to yield back my time.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, I just
have a few brief remarks, and then I am
prepared to yield back my time, as well.
The Senator from New Mexico raised
the question of the propriety of offering
this amendment to this particular bill
which raises the debt ceiling. So far as I
am concerned, I can think of nothing
more appropriate to attach to this bill
than an amendment which would pro-
hibit the unauthorized, illegal, and ex-
pensive bombing of Cambodia-and in
this context I stress the word "expensive."
Last year almost $10 billion was spent
for combat activities and support in
Scutheast Asia. Had that expenditure
not occurred, perhaps we would not he
here today attempting to raise the debt
ceiling. Annual expenditures as a result
of the bombing in Cambodia are esti-
mated at over it billion dollars. That ex-
pense will add greatly to the debt ceiling
of our Government. So I think it is rele-
vant to be debating at the present time
ar, amendment to prohibit such bomb-
ing--when we are discussing priorities
and how niuch further we should go into
debt-when we are going further into
debt as a result of a bloody war in which
we should never have been involved and
from which we should immediately ex-
tricate ourselves.
So far as I am concerned, I can think
of no more appropriate bill to attach an
amendment to discontinue the bombing
in Cambodia.
I am prepared to yield back my time.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I was en-
gaged in other matters at the time the
majority leader made his statement. I
asked that his remarks be available to
me, So I could read them.
He said
If the veto is uphold, it would be our
intention--I repeat--to attach similar Cam-
bodian riders to every other possible piece
of legislatSon, and we will do it, because
under the Constitution only the Congress
has been given the war-making power, not
the President, and Congress has spoken.
I assume that represents the views of
We leadership on this side of the aisle.
It is not my view, but it is the view of
the majority leadership and a majority
of the Senate. If that is what the Sen-
ate wants to do, they have the votes to
do it.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, before
the Senator yields back his time, I am
informed that the Senator from South
Dakota (Mr. MCGOVrRN) wishes me to
yield. some time to him to speak on the
measure. I yield 5 minutes to the Sena-
tor from South Dakota.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. President, I sim-
p_.y want to take a moment to commend
the Senator from Missouri for again of-
fering what I think is an eminently sen-
sible proposal at a time when we are
talking about the fiscal integrity of the
Government. We should make one more
effort in the Senate to put an end to this
senseless bombing of Cambodia and Laos.
I remember years ago ;when former
Senator Wayne Morse of Oregon, used to
speak in this Chamber against the war
that he frequently referred to the war as
the Johnson war or the McNamara war.
It used to bother me that anyone's name
was attached to the war at a time when
we could not get a majority in Congress to
announce its opposition to it. However,
all of that is finished now. The Senate
has previously voted by a majority of 63
to 19 in favor of terminating any further
military operations on or over Cambodia
and Laos-more than ?L 3-to-1 margin
on the part of the Senate to bring this
bombing to an end.
Now, to whatever extent the Senate
has any constitutional responsibility or
right to advise and consent on matters of
foreign policy, the Senate has made it
very clear on a bipartisan basis that it
does not support the continued aerial
bombardment of these little countries of
Cambodia and Laos. We have made that
overwhelmingly clear.
The Eagleton amendment, when of-
fered in committee, was passed by a vote
of 24 to 0. There was not one single dis-
senting vote against the amendment. Not
one Democrat and not one Republican
voted against the amendment.
People who at an earlier time had sup-
ported the war now make it unequivo-
cally clear that they oppose it. We want
to have all of the war operations termi-
nated.
The amendment previously passed on
the floor of the Senate by a vote of 63 to
19. In the House of Representatives it
passed by a strong majority. The rec-
ord is clear. An overwhelming majority
of both the House and Senate voted to
have the war terminated and to have the
bombing over Cambodia and Laos ended.
As far as I am concerned, from here
on out, this is Nixon's war. This is it
Presidential war being conducted in clear
defiance of the overwhelming expression
of opinion of the Members of the Con-
gress of the United States.
I think that the President and the
American people ought, to understand
from here on out where the responsibility
lies.
I thank the Senator for yielding me
time.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, I
thank the Senator from South Dakota.
Mr. President, I am prepared to yield
back the remainder of lny time.
Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Louisiana yield me time on
the bill?
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I yield to
the Senator from Texas.
Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I know
how the vote is going to come out. And
I know that no amount of debate is going
to change the result. However, I will not
sit here and hear this referred to as
Nixon's war. He had nothing to do with
getting the war started. He has extri-
cated us from Southeast Asia with honor.
He is trying to assure now that we will
have peace and that we do have it posi-
tion from which to negotiate serious ob-
servations in compliance with the terms
of the Paris accords.
I therefore think that the Eagleton
amendment Is something that Is calcu-
Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000500190007-4
 Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000500190007-4
June 27, 1973 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE S 12173
lated to perpetuate the war in South-
east Asia. Let us call it what it is, and
that is Congress' war.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I yield 3
minutes to the distinguished Senator
from South Carolina.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from South Carolina is recognized
for 3 minutes.
Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, the
war in Vietnam has gone on for 10 years.
President Nixon finally brought the war
to an end. Why should we crowd him
now? Why should we not give him a
little elbow room in which to negotiate?
The President just threw one bill back
here, the second supplemental appropri-
ations bill, on the ground that it con-
tained the Cambodia amendment.
If we wish to play politics with the bill,
this is the way to do it. If we want to
be patient, that is one thing. However,
if we want to play around and try to. put
the President on the spot, that is another
thing. If we want to take the position
that we are determined to do anything
to make our point, this is the right ap-
proach.
I hope the Senate will vote down the
amendment. It has no place in the bill.
It can do nothing but extend the war
10 years after 50,000 men have been
killed and 300,000 men have been
wounded.
We should reject the amendment and
let them negotiate and enforce the
cease-fire which President Nixon has
brought about. We would then be doing
the country a great service. Any other
course, in my judgment, can result only
in great detriment to the welfare of the
Nation.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, just
briefly, I wish to point out that this is
most certainly, Nixon's war in Cambodia.
It is a war that is being waged by the
President without the authority of Con-
gress. It is heating up. It is not toning
down. This is not something that is going
to go away in the twilight hours.
I read to the Senate earlier the cas-
ualties that have occurred in Cambodia.
As we prolong the consideration of this
measure, the casualties will surely in-
crease.
Yesterday, for the first time, Russian
surface-to-air, heat-seeking missiles were
reported as being used against our planes
over Cambodia. With the risks that we
are taking every day, there is a higher
risk of death and a risk, that we will add
to the list of missing in action, and pos-
sibly even incur a new prisoner of war.
It is a risk that Congress can refuse to
take. If the President does not see fit to
do it, it is our responsibility to determine
how and when we should get out of this
war.
We exercise that responsibility in a
reasonable manner in cutting off funds
for Cambodia. We must continue to do
everything in our power so that our voices
and pleas will be heeded.
Mr. President, 1: yield back the re-
mainder of my time.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, let me say
that I recognize that this amendment, if
agreed to, means a very serious confron-
tation between the legislative and the
executive branches, assuming that the
House sees fit to agree to the amendment,
as it did on a previous occasion.
If it is a confrontation that the spon-
sors of the amendment are seeking, this
is the right bill to which to attach it. I
will not vote for the amendment. If it is
agreed to, I will do my duty and will sup-
port it in conference and will see to it
that the House has an opportunity to
vote on it.
Mr. President, I heard what the ma-
jority leader has said. I thought I heard
him correctly, and I respect the right of
those who feel that there should be a
confrontation on a bill that the Presi-
dent either has to sign or dire conse-
quences will otherwise flow therefrom.
If that is what they want to do, this is
the bill.
I recognize that any Senator has a
right to offer an amendment. He is cer-
tainly privileged to offer it to this bill.
Mr. President, I yield back the re-
mainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time
has been yielded back. The question is on
agreeing to the amendment of the Sen-
ator from Missouri. On this question the
yeas and nays have been ordered, and the
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce
that the Senator from Delaware (Mr.
BIDEN) and the Senator from Iowa (Mr.
CLARK) are absent on official business.
I also announce that the Senator from
Mississippi (Mr. STENNIS) is absent be-
cause of illness.
I further announce that, if present
and voting, the Senator from Iowa (Mr.
CLARK) would vote "yea."
Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the
Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BROCK) is
necessarily absent.
The result was announced-yeas 67,
nays 29, as follows:
[No. 242 Leg.]
YEAS-67
Abourezk
Gurney
Moss
Aiken
Hart
Muskie
Bayh
Hartke
Nelson
Bentsen
Haskell
Nunn
Bible
Hatfield
Packwood
Brooke
Hathaway
Pastore
Burdick
Hollings
Pearson
Byrd,
Huddleston
Pell
Harry F., Jr.
Hughes
Percy
Byrd, Robert C. Humphrey
Proxmire
Cannon
Inouye
Randolph
Case
Javits
Ribicoff
Chiles
Johnston
Schweiker
Church
Kennedy
Stafford
Cook
Magnuson
Stevens
Cotton
Mansfield
Stevenson
Cranston
Mathias
Symington
Dominick
McClure
Talmadge
Eagleton
McGovern
Tunney
Ervin
McIntyre
Weicker
Fong
Metcalf
Williams
Fulbright
Mondale
Young
Gravel
Montoya
NAYS-29
Allen
Eastland
McGee
Baker
Fannin
Roth
Bartlett
Goldwater
Saxbe
Beall
Griffin
Scott, Pa.
Bellmon
Hansen
Scott, Va.
Bennett
Helms
Sparkman
Buckley
Hruska
Taft
Curtis
Jackson
Thurmond
Dole
Long
Tower
Domenici
McClellan
-
?
NOT VOTING-4
Biden
Clark
Stennis
Brock
So Mr. EAGLETON'S amendment was
agreed to.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, I move
that the vote by which the amendment
was agreed to be reconsidered.
Mr. CASE. Mr. President, I move to
lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I have an
amendment at the desk, and I ask that
it be stated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated.
The assistant legislative clerk read as
follows :
At the end of the bill add a new title VI as
SEC. 1. The non-trust fund expenditures
of the government of the United States dur-
ing each fiscal year shall not exceed its reve-
nues from all non-trust sources for such
year.
SEC. 2. (a) The President shall submit a
budget pursuant to the Budget and Account-
ing Act of 1921, as amended, in which non-
trust fund expenditures do not exceed non-
trust fund revenues for each fiscal year.
(b) The provisions of this section may be
adjusted to reflect any additional revenues
of the government received during a fiscal
year resulting from tax legislation enacted
after the submission of the budget for such
fiscal year.
Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, my
amendment is vitally important if Con-
gress and the administration are ever
going to come to grips with inflation and
the certainty of a larger and more omi-
nous national debt in the future if we do
not act.
Simply put, my amendment would pro-
vide that the Federal Government shall
not spend Federal funds for nontrust
fund items in excess of the revenues col-
lected by the Federal Government from
nontrust fund sources during any given
fiscal year.
My amendment also requires that the
President submit a budget in which non-
trust fund receipts and expenditures are
strictly balanced.
If we are serious about controlling in-
flation and eliminating the prospect of
an increasing national debt in the future,
then the Senate must face up to the facts
regarding deficit spending in the last 4
fiscal years.
From the beginning of fiscal year 1970
through the end of the current fiscal year
1973, the Federal funds area of the uni-
fied budget has run a deficit during just
these 4 fiscal years, of approximately
$100 billion. Senators know that-the uni-
fied budget procedure tends to obsecure
the real impact of deficit Federal spend-
ing by offsetting trust fund surpluses
against nontrust fund deficits. This $100
billion deficit in the last 4 fiscal years
has meant that the Federal Government
was spending $100 billion more for the
operation of ? Government than it was
receiving in Federal taxes. Truly, no Sen-
ator can ignore the impact that this $100
billion in deficit Federal spending has
had upon our economy in these past 4
years. It has been the primary stimulus
for the inflation which has seriously
eroded the purchasing power of the-dol-
lar both at home and abroad.
We have heard a good deal of rhetoric
Approved For Release m2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000500190007-4
 S 12174
Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000500190007-4
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE June 27, 1973
over the need to do something about in-
flation. We have hoard the same rhetoric
over the need to control and limit the na-
tional debt. Well, Mr. President, here is
an opportunity to take some action, to
face up to the danger that reckless Fed-
eral spending has presented to our Na-
tion's economic security, and to protect
against future increases in the national
debt.
Controls on wages and prices and
every other element in our economy will
never stop inflation because these con-
trols are not directed at the cause of
inflation, There is no question that it; will
be difficult for some Senators to commit
themselves to a balanced Federal budget,
because such a budget will necessitate
cutting down substantially on Federal
expenditures. But ]: am firmly convinced
that an overwhelming majority of the
American people would rather see the
Government spend less, thereby stopping
this inflation, than to see larger and
larger Federal deficits being spent with
money that inflation has made prrcti-
cally worthless.
I urge .tenators to consider this amend-
ment seriously and to adopt it. I am
convinced that it is the first step clown
the road toward eliminating Inflation
and establishing a firm foundation for a
stable economy in this country.
Mr. President, I ask for the yeas
and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. LONG. Mr. ;President, if I tin der-
stand the- amendment correctly--and I
have been studying it with a capable
staff-it would require a $19 billion cut
in the Federal funds deficit that exists in
the present budget. In other words the
Senator from North Carolina is seeking
to eliminate the deficit on a Federal
funds bails. That means a $19 billion cut
in spending, which would be more ;Pan
balancin? the budget; it would be more
than resisting inflation.
While the Senator, of course, has very
practical objectives, a sudden shift of
Federal activities o:r the size of a $19 bil-
lion cut in Federal funds outlays, would,
I think, cause such a drastic shock ore the
economy that it really could no'; be
sustained.
When we have a $16 billion surplus
in our trust fund, if the Federal Govern-
ment is running a $16 billion deficit in
Federal funds, it still is not the Federal
Government that is creating inflation,
because the Federal Government pulls as
much money out cf circulation as it is
putting back into circulaition.
This matter was studied by President
Johnson's administration, which mn-
cluded a .at we ought to have a unified
budget. It was studied by the administra-
tion of Richard Nixon, and that admin-
istration concluded that the unified
budget was the best way to handle these
accounts.
If we look at the budget action that
would have to be considered, we would
realize that what the Senator has in
mind would be absolutely devastating,
when one realizes that there are many
things that cannot 1)e cut. We cannot cut
the interest on the national debt. We
cannot cut social security payments. In
the controllable items, such as public
works, a great many national defense
items, education programs, programs
that are most meaningful to the Ameri-
can people, and to their communities, it
would mean a cut of some $20 billion.
Controllable programs cannot be cut that
much and continue to be effective.
Mr. President, the Senator has a very
noble purpose in mind. I think, however,
that, if anyone had the experience of
living with this, he would have a great
deal of explaining to do to his constit-
uents-when they saw what was recom-
mended by the President, passed by the
Bouse, and what the Senate then pro-
p:)sed to do, if the Senate could prevail
oa it.
I hope the amendment will not be
agreed to. I think the consequences
would be a shock, with an adverse reac-
tion to the country when the people felt
the impact of it. A sharp recession or
depression sponsored by the Federal
Government would be such that the Sen-
ai;e would regret the day it adopted the
amendment, if indeed we were able to
P.-evail upon the House and the adminis-
tration to implement it.
At this point, Mr. BARTLETT assumed
the chair.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield 2 misautes?
Mr. LONG. I control the time in op-
position.
Mr. DOMENICI. I a.m on the Senator's
side.
Mr. LONG. Then I yield the Senator
2 minutes.
Mr. DOMENICI. Let me say to the dis-
tinguished Senator from North Carolina
that I am not going to do this before
every vote, but it seems to me that in
fairness, since I rose to object to the
Cambodian proposal as being irrelevant
and putting the Senate on the spot-
having to vote on something that really
w 36s not germane to what the Commit-
tee on Finance had considered-I raise
the same issue with respect to the Sena-
ter's amendment.
I must tell the distinguished Senator,
a,. I said to the Sena:.or from Missouri,
that, although I agree in concept with
the premise-as I did with the Senator
from Missouri's proposal about Cambo-
dia-I will not vote for it, in spite of the
fact that I am beginning to think there
is no other way to control the budget, no
orderly way. There really is no priority
way to vote, because we do not want such
a system here.
I still cannot vote fcT a $19 billion cut,
a:= explained by the distinguished Sena-
tor from Louisiana. I do not think it is
relevant to the issue. I compliment the
Senator on the thesis and the theory,
but I want him to know why I will not
vote for his amendment on this occasion.
Mr. HELMS. I thane: the distinguished
Senator, my seatmate and my friend.
Mr. FANNIh'. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Louisiana yield? I am go-
ing to vote with the Senator from Loui-
siana, although I am in agreement with
the Senator from North Carolina,
Mr. LONG. I yield.
Mr." FANNIN. Mr. President, I com-
mend the distinguished Senator from
North Carolina for offering this amend-
ment. I agree wholeheartedly that it is
needed to bring fiscal responsibility to
the Federal Government.
Moreover, I am the author of a pro-
posed constitutional amendment which
would require a balanced budget over a
2-year fiscal period. Flowever, I believe
that such an amendment would not be
proper on this bill.
While I fully agree with the substance
of the amendment, I cannot support it
at this time. I regret that I cannot do so.
I hope that at a future time, if it is not
agreed to now, I can join the Senator on
such an amendment.
I thank the distinguished Senator from
Louisiana for yielding.
Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield me 2 minutes?
Mr. LONG. I yield.
Mr. BENNETT. Mr President, I think
that all of us in the Senate should re-
member that a process has begun
through which Congress can take back
the responsibility for budget priorities.
The Joint Study Committee was set up.
It studied the problem. It recommended
a program. We are waiting for Senator
METCALF'S subcommittee and for the
House to act on the recommended pro-
cedure. ]: think that when a procedure is
approved and Congress begins to accept
the responsibility for responsible budget-
ary action, many of these rather harsh
proposals will become unnecessary.
I am in the agreement with the ob-
jective of the Senator, that we must get
control of the budgetary process and that
we must begin to move toward a balanced
budget. But, in the spirit of this particu-
lar bill, I think an attempt to approach
it from the point of view suggested by
the Senator is not the right way to do it.
So, while I am in support of his objective,
I must oppose the amendment, both in
view of the procedure that is already on
its way through Congress and the limi-
tations of this particular bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
1)oMENICI). Who yields time?
Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator from North Caro-
lina yield?
Mr. HELMS. I yield to the distin-
guished Senator from Virginia such time
as he desires.
Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. I favor the
concept of the amendment offered by the
distinguished Senator from North Caro-
lina. It seems to me that sooner or later--
the sooner the better-we must get to a
balanced budget concept We cannot con-
tinue these huge deficits. The people of
this country are suffering by this. The
huge deficits are the major cause for the
tremendous Inflation that is eating so
heavily into the paycheck of the work-
ingman and the grocery dollar of every
housewife.
The amendment offered by the able
Senator from North Carolina is directed
toward helping solve the question of
rampaging :inflation.
The Senator from Louisiana made a
very important point, I think, and one
that must be considered. I wonder
whether the Senator from North Caro-
lina would consider modifying his pro-
posal to make it effective with the fiscal
year 1975-that is, with the new budget
which will be submitted by the admin-
Approved For Release 2001/08/28 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000500190007-4