Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2014

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SHELBY. I will try to be careful and quick. I wish to thank the distinguished Senator from Washington for yielding the time.

I rise today to once again express my concerns about the fiscal problems facing our Nation. Thus far this year I have held public meetings in 61 of my State's 67 counties. Without exception, my State's top concern is our Nation's unsustainable debt and its effect on job creation and economic growth.

Alabamians know the Federal debt currently stands at nearly $17 trillion. Yet they see that the Democratic budget before us does not balance--not in 10 years, perhaps not ever. They know the Federal debt has increased by $6 trillion under President Obama. Yet they see that the Democratic budget proposes to pile on $7 trillion more.

My constituents know that excessive taxes are choking job creation in this country. Yet they see that the Democratic budget costs $1.2 trillion of new job-killing taxes. They know the stimulus package was an abject failure.

My constituents understand that the more we borrow, the more we must pay back in interest. Yet they see that under the Democratic budget, we will pay more in interest on the debt--$791 billion--than we will spend on national defense. They know that fiscal reform without entitlement reform is meaningless. Yet they hear no mention of entitlements in the Democratic budget.

It has been 1,423 days since the Senate passed a budget. My constituents waited that long for this. There is little wonder that trepidation over our Nation's future is so prevalent. No dominant power in world history has remained strong with a weak economy--not the Persians, not the Greeks, not the Romans, not the British, not anyone. Under the Democratic budget, our Nation would learn that lesson the hard way.

Thank you, Madam President. I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, this amendment would create a deficit-neutral reserve fund for legislation that requires financial regulators to perform rigorous cost-benefit analysis of their proposals. If this analysis determines that a proposed rule's cost exceeds its benefits, the rule should not be implemented. Given the far-reaching scope many new financial rules will have on our markets, I believe it is imperative that regulators conduct thorough cost-benefit analysis to fully understand how these rules will affect our economy.

Independent final regulators operate under a patchwork of Federal laws that require varying degrees of economic analysis and provide too much discretion to regulators. As a result, American job creators are under siege from capricious rulemaking activities. Regulations should be based on solid evidence and supported by robust economic analysis, not the arbitrary preferences of bureaucrats.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source