[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 126 (Friday, September 13, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10536-S10537]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     AMERICANS HAVE TO MAKE CHOICES

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, as you know, for some time now, we have 
attempted to have the freshmen of the Senate come on to the floor, from 
time to time, to talk about issues we think are important. We call this 
``Freshman Focus.'' We appreciate this time to do that. I will be 
joined by at least one of my associates, very soon. Many of the others 
have departed for home.
  Mr. President, we wanted to talk a little today about choices--
choices that we have in a Government like ours, the one that President 
Lincoln said was a Government ``of the people, by the people, and for 
the people,'' which we all, of course, want to maintain. In order to do 
that, then each of us, as citizens, as the people who will run this 
Government, need to make choices, need to make decisions, and need, of 
course, to be as informed as we can be with respect to those choices.
  In order to be informed voters, and in order to participate in those 
decisions that will guide the country, not only in the short term but 
in the long term, I think we have to decide what those fundamental 
choices are and then, of course, decide for ourselves how we approach 
them. And there are fundamental choices, choices that have impact over 
time, choices that affect this country and the way it is organized, in 
its purpose, and its goals--not just the short-term issues that sort of 
are instant gratification for each of us. Of course there are those, 
and we always like that. But the fact is that there are basic issues 
that really will affect the way we operate over the years, not only for 
those of us who are now voting, but for our kids and our grandchildren. 
Those are the ones that, it is my belief, we should really focus on and 
seek to bring out in our own minds, at least how important they are.

[[Page S10537]]

  I am concerned, because it seems to me that we are increasingly 
moving away from basing our views on those fundamental decisions and we 
get engrossed in all the short-term kinds of things that we talk about. 
This administration, frankly, has done more to seek to blur issues than 
any administration that I have ever seen. It is fairly easy to do that. 
It is fairly easy to say, ``Yes, I am for that, too.'' I think the best 
example that I have seen over the last number of years--and 
particularly in this session--is where we have spent a great deal of 
time talking about balancing the budget and a balanced budget amendment 
to ensure that that in fact happens. I don't think there has been a 
soul that has risen and said: ``I am not for balancing the budget.'' 
They have said, ``I am for balancing the budget, but. . .'' So we 
establish that initially, at least in rhetoric, and don't do that. We 
haven't balanced the budget in 25 years.
  So it is very easy to blur the issues, very easy to make it difficult 
to ascertain where people are on these issues. And issues is what 
elections are about. Those are the choices that you and I have to make 
as November comes. I think it is more and more difficult to really 
identify where people are, where parties are, where candidates are, for 
a number of reasons. It is almost an irony that--just imagine, 50 years 
ago, 100 years ago, how little information we all had about what went 
on in our Nation's Capital or around the world. Now, because of 
technology, we know instantly. If we fire a rocket at Iraq, we know 
about it right away, and we actually see it. Despite that technological 
opportunity to know more, it seems as if it is more difficult for us to 
clarify the choices that we have. One of the reasons, of course, is the 
media. We get much of our information--most of our information and, 
indeed, almost all of your information--through public media. I don't 
think it is any secret that the media most often tries to pick out 
those things that are controversial and emotional, and those things 
that create debate rather than the ones that clarify the issues. I 
understand that. That's the way it is. But it makes it difficult.
  More and more of our decisions and our choices and our information 
come from advertising, political advertising, which is generally 
designed to skew issues in one way or another. It is not the exclusive 
province of either party, but it is something that is done, almost 
entirely, in almost all the ads we see. So that does not help to 
clarify issues.
  We see right here in this Chamber all kinds of amendments. Yesterday 
was a great example of amendments designed simply for some kind of 
political statement, which really had nothing to do with the bill we 
talked about. Frankly, it had very little to do with the prospect of it 
passing. But it was something thrown out there to create an image. It 
makes it difficult to decide on choices. We even find, Mr. President--
like yesterday--a delay tactic going on here. Instead of moving 
forward, because we have a couple more weeks to finish a lot of work, 
we spent 25 hours on one bill, with 100 amendments. Why? I think simply 
to delay. I think simply to increase the potential--frankly, the 
possibility of a shutdown of the Government and Congress would be 
blamed for that. So, when you're dealing with things like that, it is 
very difficult to really come down on the bona fide choices and 
directions that will guide this country into the future.
  There are differences. There are choices. There are legitimate 
choices and, frankly, they are fairly clear. It is a legitimate choice, 
but there are those who want more Government, who think there ought to 
be more taxes, who think that money collected in taxes and spent by the 
Government is better spent. I don't happen to agree with that, but I 
agree that it is a legitimate choice.
  Indeed, if we can make it a little more clear between those kinds of 
things, then people could choose. The other choice, of course, is less 
Government, moving Government closer to people through the State and 
local governments, and actually having tax relief so people spend more 
of their own money rather than collecting it and spending it out 
through the Federal Government. Those are choices. Those are quite 
different, and that is what elections are about--to decide which of 
those directions we want to take.

  Imagine, for a minute, that you have a ballot. You go into the 
polling booth and the ballot has on it a number of issues. You check 
those issues that you agree with. What is your choice on the issue of a 
balanced budget amendment? Do you want that? You go down a series of 
questions of that kind, and then, rather than selecting a candidate, 
because of what you have selected with the issues, the candidate is 
automatic. The ones who represent what you most nearly represent is 
your choice. That would be an interesting exercise, wouldn't it?
  I suppose you could talk about the size of Government--smaller, 
larger? Federal Government--smaller, larger?
  Cost? Do you think the cost is too much? Do you think the Federal 
Government costs too much as it increases, or should it be less? It is 
possible to be less.
  Tax relief? If we pay nearly 40 percent of our income on average in 
taxes, should we have tax relief, or have the system continue like it 
is? Yes or no?
  Welfare reform? We have talked about that for the last 2 years. The 
President had it in his campaign in 1992. Finally, after the third 
time, it was passed and signed. Now, of course, the same people who 
said they were for welfare reform are now saying, ``Well, as soon as we 
get back in Congress, we will change it. We will take out some of that 
stuff. We really do not want this welfare reform.'' So welfare reform 
ought to be one of the questions for voters.
  Do you want welfare reform? Regulatory relief? We talked a lot about 
that. We tried to do that this year. Lots of people are not for 
regulatory relief. Many of us on this side of the aisle are. They are 
legitimate issues, and legitimate choices.
  So, Mr. President, I simply want to say that I hope as we move on in 
this election that each of us has a responsibility to vote, each of us 
who has the responsibility in this kind of Government to participate in 
the decision as to where we go in the future, take a look at the issues 
and choose, because there will be fairly clear choices, but it may be 
hard to determine that.
  I guess that is the essence of what I am talking about this morning--
that we need to have choices. I believe that we have two pretty 
different philosophies--one for more Government, more taxes, more 
regulations; one to reduce the size of Government, have tax relief, 
reduce the regulations so that we have more jobs and more economic 
growth. Those are the clear choices.
  Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by the Senator from 
Minnesota, who also wants to comment on some of the choices that are 
available to us as part of today's Freshman Focus.
  I yield to my friend.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. GRAMS. Thank you, Mr. President. I thank, very much, my colleague 
from Wyoming.

                          ____________________