STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS -- (Senate - April 23, 2007)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
By Mr. FEINGOLD:
S. 1186. A bill to amend the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to provide for the expedited consideration of certain proposed rescissions of budget authority; to the Committee on the Budget.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I am delighted to join my colleague in the other body, Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, in introducing the Congressional Accountability and Line-Item Veto Act of 2007. Congressman Ryan and I belong to different political parties, and differ on many important issues. But we do share at least two things in common--our hometown of Janesville, WI, and an abiding respect for Wisconsin's tradition of fiscal responsibility.
The measure we are each introducing today would grant the President specific authority to rescind or cancel congressional earmarks, including earmarked spending, tax breaks, and tariff benefits. This new authority would sunset at the end of 2012, ensuring that Congress will have a chance to review its use under two different Administrations before considering whether or not to extend it. While not a true line-item veto bill, our measure provides for fast-track consideration of the President's proposed cancellation of earmarks. Thus, unlike current law, it ensures that for the specific category of congressional earmarks, the President will get an up or down vote on his proposed cancellations.
There have been a number of so-called line-item veto proposals offered in the past several years. But the measure Congressman Ryan and I propose today is unique in that it specifically targets the very items that every line-item veto proponent cites when promoting a particular measure, namely earmarks. When President Bush asked for this kind of authority, the examples he gave when citing wasteful spending he wanted to target were congressional earmarks. When Members of the House or Senate tout a new line-item veto authority to go after government waste, the examples they give are congressional earmarks. When editorial pages argue for a new line-item veto, they, too, cite congressional earmarks as the reason for granting the President this new authority.
That is exactly what our bill does. It provides the President with new expedited rescission authority--what has been commonly referred to as a line-item veto--to cancel congressional earmarks. The definitions of earmarks that we use are the very definitions upon which each house has agreed in passing legislation earlier this year.
Unauthorized congressional earmarks are a growing problem. By one estimate, in 2004 alone more than $50 billion in earmarks were passed. There is no excuse for a system that allows that kind of wasteful spending year after year, and while I have opposed granting the President line-item veto authority to effectively reshape programs like Medicare and Medicaid, for this specific category, I support giving the President this additional tool.
Under our proposal, wasteful spending doesn't have anywhere to hide. It's out in the open, so that both Congress and the President have a chance to get rid of wasteful projects before they would become law.
The taxpayers--who pay the price for these projects--deserve a process that shows some real fiscal discipline, and that's what we are trying to get at with this legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows
S. 118
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT