00:00:31.240 - 00:01:16.820

um Mhm. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Mhm. Mhm two. Yeah. You. Yeah. Hi. I'm Senator Lawton Child's. The big news in Congress so far this year as it is almost every year, is the federal budget. The president is required by law to send his budget his priorities of spending proposals to Congress this year.

00:01:16.820 - 00:01:41.360

It took six volumes just to explain his budget. The books alone cost $58 and they weigh over £12. Congress has two committees to deal with the budget, one in the House of Representatives and the other one here at the Senate Budget Committee. It's our job to go through the budget with a fine tooth comb, every program, each dollar to find out exactly what the president has in mind.

00:01:42.240 - 00:01:59.350

That's why we have members of the president's Cabinet come to the committee and answer questions. James Miller is the head of the Office of Management and Budget and the man responsible for putting together the president's plan. Mr. Miller is the first witness and explains the broad outlines of the budget.

00:01:59.840 - 00:02:28.250

Now the president's budget proposes outlays for 87 of 904 $94 billion and receipts of 850.4 billion we hold to the Gramm Rudman Hollings targets on a current service basis. Outlays are estimated to be a trillion 25.9 billion and receipts at 844. 1 billion, thus resulting in a deficit of 180 approximately 100 $82 billion.

00:02:28.250 - 00:02:50.560

And I would. The committee also heard from the secretary of defense, Caspar Weinberger, who faced some tough questioning by senators disturbed over procurement practices at the Pentagon. Fact. What's happened with the procurement problem is the product again of the fact that we had the highest number, largest number of auditors and the largest and most intensive number of contract audits in the history of the department.

00:02:50.640 - 00:03:18.630

And we found a great many things wrong, and we corrected them. Uh, the only problem was that as we found them, each one was attributed to us, even though that was not the case, and each one was taken as an example of something that was going very wrong and was blowing up and was used by a lot of opportunistic demagogues to try to hurt the defense effort of the country and what we really have to do with that, I think, is to put it in proper perspective.

00:03:18.640 - 00:03:30.920

Of course, those prices were outrageous. That's why we didn't pay them. Of course they were outrageous, and that's why if one or two had slipped through, we got refunds for them. And that, I think, is a vital thing to bear in mind when you talk about procurement scandals.

00:03:30.920 - 00:03:52.670

I prefer to talk about procurement reforms based on problems that we found and we correct it. Weinberger's defense budget requests total $320 billion or 30% of the total federal budget. Secretary of State George Shultz covered the whole range of international affairs from trade and foreign aid to security for American embassies.

00:03:52.680 - 00:04:14.660

Overseas, civilized nations and civilized peoples have been inadequately prepared for it that can and must change. We must do everything we can to thwart those who seek to advance their ends through terror and to ensure the safety of our citizens abroad. Even in this period of budgetary stringency, this task must be a priority.

00:04:15.640 - 00:04:34.360

We have designed a program which in our view is prudent and efficient in its commitment of resources, yet responsive to the inescapable necessities we now face. With this goal in mind and knowing of the great concern in the Congress, I formed the advisory panel and overseas security chaired by Admiral Inman.

00:04:35.190 - 00:05:01.330

The panel exhaustively researched all aspects of our security and counterterrorism programs. Its recommendations have vision. Equally important, they are practical. They are recommendations which, with your support, we can act on. And I might say, as we've had hearings before various committees, I believe, including this one at times of terrorist crisis when our embassies are under attack.

00:05:01.330 - 00:05:28.250

I have been told by member after member that we must spend whatever is necessary to provide adequate protection and that we should design a program that, of course, watches the pennies but nevertheless does not compromise security. So we've done it. We are requesting 44 billion spread over five years of this total.

00:05:28.260 - 00:05:46.330

The atmosphere in the committee is not hostile, but it is serious and very thorough. Every member of the committee, just like every other senator, will eventually have to vote on the budget, and we need the facts. When the hearings are over. The Budget committee moves on to the next stage of the process.

00:05:46.740 - 00:06:04.960

Well, we've just finished our first day of a budget markup. And let me just explain the budget mark up, gets its name really from taking the president's budget and listening to what the request are on all of the different agencies and then sort of debating that around this table in the committee.

00:06:05.440 - 00:06:26.780

And then you literally sort of mark up the budget. So you put together, the budget will come out with I'm the ranking Democrat on the Budget Committee, were made up of 12 Republicans and 10 Democrats. Senator Pete Domenici is the chairman. Ah, we sort of represent, we think, a microcosm of the Senate.

00:06:26.790 - 00:06:47.850

Across the spectrum. We have liberals and conservatives and go across the board. I guess that way, Pete, this is the fourth markup that we've participated in. While you've been the chairman and I've been the loyal opposition, what do you notice? You notice anything different about today's mark up the meeting that we had today?

00:06:47.860 - 00:07:17.190

Oh, indeed I do. I think we've reached the point where because we have Gramm, Rudman Hollings in place and the target is mandated, there's a much, much more of a willingness to get on with doing our work and getting it done quickly. Secondly, it appears that it is finally dawned on everyone that the budget is, uh, not a Republican problem or a conservative problem or a Democrat problem or liberal problem.

00:07:17.190 - 00:07:41.060

It's everybody's problem. American people are going to be hurt. We can't fix it. And there appears to be a growing willingness to work together to get this huge deficit down. There appears to be a willingness to compromise. And most of all, there is a growing knowledge that a deficit of this size continuing indefinitely will hurt everyone.

00:07:41.640 - 00:08:07.180

Well, we've talked about someone said on the committee that we don't have as much running room. Uh, Gramm, Rudman, Hollings, what happens, basically, if if we don't, uh, do the job and come out with a budget here that Congress can pass, uh, you know what? Well, in the past, there was a lot of goals set that were nothing more than the words and commitment rhetoric.

00:08:07.190 - 00:08:24.660

If you want to call it that from those, uh, in positions of leadership, the president would have his, uh, speaker of the house would have his We would do ours. But if we didn't get there, nothing happened. Uh, we just added to the public debt. Somebody be expected to pay it some time.

00:08:25.240 - 00:08:41.910

Perhaps our Children would be penalized. They'd have to pay for it, and maybe we'd have a recession long before we should. All of which are bad things, things we don't want to do. But in the past, there was no real consequence of failure to act so we could have gridlock.

00:08:41.920 - 00:08:57.460

We could everybody taking their position and claiming victory out there among the people. But instead of a victory, it was a loss every time because the deficit went up. The one great thing, in my opinion, that Gramm Rudman Hollings does is it says August of this coming year.

00:08:57.840 - 00:09:14.700

If you haven't got the deficit down to $144 billion you don't have the plan in place. Then it will be done for us with an across the board cut arbitrary. Everything is, except Social Security, and a few programs that are exempt would get cut across the board, including defense.

00:09:15.240 - 00:09:27.570

We don't think that's the way to run our country. That would be disastrous. Well, that's that's what I said, I said, That's unthinkable. Congress could allow that to happen. I think you called it a guillotine. I call it a train wreck that we planned. An island team comes.

00:09:27.580 - 00:09:47.140

We don't want either. And of course, you have programs in your state that you can always use. But what I talk about in Florida, for example, I say that, you know, we're fighting the war on drugs coming in and immigration all the time and trying to keep, uh, people from a illegal immigrants from aliens from coming to our shores.

00:09:47.140 - 00:10:07.180

And if we cut the Coast Guard and Customs, the Drug Enforcement Agency, uh, the Justice Department, our crime programs would just be gone. They with the kind of thick cut. So no, you're talking about If grant rotten is automatically is automatically set priorities, Well, the NASA program would be, uh, there'd be no way for it to grow in an orderly manner.

00:10:07.180 - 00:10:26.230

Even a plan when you're waiting around at the end of each year for an automatic 10 or 11 12% cut, same with defense, and I don't want to leave that out. People running around here talking like and save all this money in defense. Surely you can plan for it, But you can't just say Let's cut 10 more 12% across the board that it has to go across all of the program.

00:10:26.230 - 00:10:47.170

Absolutely. You wouldn't be setting any priorities in the defense programs. And again, I think that would be something that no thinking person should want to do. I thought we had a spirit here. I agree with you that trying to do something, Uh and I think it was that, you know, basically the the best politics is to do what's best for the country.

00:10:47.170 - 00:11:06.890

And I thought that was good to hear that coming from both sides of the aisle. Of course, this is maybe the easiest meeting we could have because we haven't put any numbers down on paper, and you and I sort of looked at some of those numbers and we know it's still going to be very tough to to make the kind of cuts that we have to do.

00:11:06.920 - 00:11:25.490

But you've talked about a glue that will be necessary to kind of hold us together. Yeah, What I've been talking about is, if you look at the defense needs of the country and decide. Uh, yes. You've got to reduce the president's request. He can't get everything he wants.

00:11:26.040 - 00:11:47.010

Got to reduce some domestic programs. Reform some cut, some freeze some. Obviously, we've already decided Social Security's out, so it isn't gonna be touched. Well, if you look at that and say, how much can you do from both of those? Is that going to be enough to get you to the deficit required by law?

00:11:47.060 - 00:12:04.620

I say no. I say you've got to glue those two together with some new revenues. Another way to put it is if you put some revenue increase in the pot, that mixes easier to come by. I mean, it kind of will attract the others. After all, this is a political consensus institution.

00:12:05.030 - 00:12:31.960

I mean, we can have politicians saying what they want, but what we have to do is end up getting enough enlightened, conscientious men and women, the art of the possible and making sure we have enough votes in both houses to exactly this plan. Let me say, Senator Childs, I'm hopeful we're going to be able to work this out where you and I and some from your side and some from mine are all voting for this.

00:12:33.040 - 00:12:50.490

Some say, Why should Chairman Diminish? She'd be saying, uh, we need revenues when the president says we don't Isn't that bad politics to say we need to increase in some way that tax base. I'm not talking about an awful lot. That's why I chose to call it glue.

00:12:50.500 - 00:13:15.990

I don't think you're talking about raising anybody's individual, right? Sorry. I want to make it clear I'm not, indeed not. I mean, we're looking at things like tax amnesty like, ah, some reforms in the tax code using some closing some loopholes. Actually, Senator, I just found out the number today in the tax with so called tax reform $164 billion uh, of taxes.

00:13:16.380 - 00:13:36.750

We're putting a new tax on somebody that wasn't tax by closing loopholes and closing exceptions. That business had a portion of that instead of holding it around for reform could be used for this. So we get the deficit behind. You know, I have always felt like, sort of a revenue neutral tax reform bill when you were facing a $221 billion deficit.

00:13:36.750 - 00:14:02.160

That's what it was last year 181 billion. We think this year that again just doesn't make sense to me that you would. You would collect that much more new money 140 something billion dollars and not use some of that to put on your deficit. Maybe I could put it another way if your constituents were asked, Do you want to move towards a balanced budget?

00:14:02.840 - 00:14:23.690

My guest senator, is that about 75? 80% would say yes. They know we can't keep on spending 100 and $8200 billion a year more than we take in. I mean, it's just common sense, and most people are have an awful lot of good common sense. Then if you proceed and asked us this simple, freestanding question, do you want to pay some more taxes?

00:14:24.130 - 00:14:58.560

Well, the compelling, uh, say no, no, no, of course. Well, I don't want to. I want to make them pay more taxes. But let me ask the question. In other words, if you turn around and say this deficit is is $180 billion we want to move it down towards zero and five installments Now, if we're going to have 12 to $15 billion.18 billion in taxes, almost twice that much, uh, in other savings and and restraint and you're going to put them together are you for cutting things, reducing defense spending and some taxes to get rid of that deficit?

00:14:58.770 - 00:15:11.600

The answer is different. A compelling number of people say, if you really do it and if you're going to apply it to the deficit, the answer is yes. Well, and I think again, if you're asking them, do you think everybody ought to be paying their fair share of the taxes?

00:15:11.650 - 00:15:42.760

And I think I know you've talked about a minimum corporate tax at times. Uh, I certainly have. I have a hard time trying to say to people in Florida how I can explain now. While some of these major corporations can have revenues of a billion dollars and be getting money back from the federal government and some of the provisions for rebates course, there are many people around here and in other parts of the government, saying When you fix those loopholes, you have to use it all for tax reform.

00:15:42.940 - 00:15:58.450

Yeah, that sounds great. We're all for simplifying the tax code, but which should come first. And we think that the thing that should come first is the deficit. Well, you're a mayor in your city, I know. And, uh, and I started off in the state Legislature for 12 years.

00:15:58.840 - 00:16:14.090

And the nice thing about there, you couldn't leave when you voted your budget. Until you raise the money to pay for that budget, you just couldn't. You couldn't leave the capital so to speak. And our process has been differently different up here because I've been thinking of late.

00:16:14.090 - 00:16:30.380

That's so tough to cut any program at what we've done for the last 4.5 ideas is let the American people grow accustomed to a $200 billion deficit. So they assume that that's what government ought to pay to everyone. All the programs ought to be there. Everybody ought to get increases.

00:16:30.390 - 00:16:49.010

Truth of matter is, we're doing it all with deficit spending. Uh, I believe that they're willing to to help us, the people in your state and otherwise that I think there are two. And I think one of the things we will be discussing here is we're setting this budget plan is a, you know, recognizing that we are setting priorities.

00:16:49.020 - 00:17:09.560

And while we're saying every area must have its share of the cuts, we've got to recognize that this is sort of the blueprint for spending for the government. And there's certain things that makes sense if we're going to promote our trade. Uh, if we're going to promote growth and investment in this country, there's some areas from job training and some of those places that have to go up rather than down.

00:17:09.570 - 00:17:34.050

And that that just makes sense. Uh, you know, even in a time when we're cutting, we've got to be thinking about five and 10 years from now is, uh, because that's the blueprint that we're putting out. Well, let me say this markup today I was indicates to me that we can indeed address this problem bipartisan Republicans and Democrats, and we can reach some political consensus that we're going to do that.

00:17:34.540 - 00:17:47.950

Obviously, the people know that we can't do that and leave everything exactly as it is. I mean, if you want to cut the federal government's budget, you've got to change some programs, right? People want to cut the budget, but they want to leave everything the same.

00:17:48.070 - 00:18:05.940

Defense has to take part of it. We can't cut the budget, let it continue to grow immensely. We are probably going to have to raise a little revenues to mix together. But if that comes out meeting a real goal of 144 billion, moving us down toward balance the positives for our people and your people are tremendous.

00:18:06.100 - 00:18:22.890

I think you get a better growth. You get lower interest rates. Things are beginning to shoot, will begin to study up for a lot of our business people and employment. Well, and what I say to some of the people whose programs are going to be cut, then unless we get the deficit under control, were never able to set priorities.

00:18:22.900 - 00:18:42.050

We can't determine whether you know education should be getting more money or or social programs should be getting more money doing. We're always under the gun. So we've got to bring this thing under control. Then we can sort of sit some of the priorities. Well, I I thank you very much for appearing with us today, and I hope you're going to be a profit.

00:18:42.540 - 00:19:00.260

Uh, we are, uh we all know that the first days or the nicest days we'll see in the next five or six. This was the easiest. That's the easiest one. Thank you very much for having me. The bipartisan spirit that Senator Domenici and I hope for finally prevailed, and the wee morning hours have made a second.

00:19:00.270 - 00:19:19.780

The Senate adopted the Domenici child's budget by a vote of 72 25. We'll take that same spirit to a conference with the House of Representatives as we try to complete action on the budget before July the fourth. We had to work together this year to tackle the deficit, one of the country's biggest problems here in Florida.

00:19:19.780 - 00:19:35.360

We needed that same kind of teamwork to solve a problem of our own. And it started last summer when I discovered some costly confusion on the Miami River. The truth is, the river was in a jam. Miami is a world class city on a great river.

00:19:35.840 - 00:19:53.550

It's a river of history, a commercial lifeline. But during the last few years, the river became a floating junk yard littered with the wreckage of the war on drugs. Old boats seized by the government help stop the drug flow or blocking the traffic flow on the river.

00:19:54.240 - 00:20:19.770

The boats have been costing us money three quarters of a million dollars every year and storage fees alone. As you see on shore, there are also storage vessels and dry storage. Mhm. Real in depth. That's a U. S. Marshal seizure. Several 100 freighters in here. There's a tender on the left side is about 85 ft.

00:20:19.780 - 00:20:55.770

It's also a seizure and LST on the left side of seizure. That's on the right. The lady doll. It's about, um, 75 ft tub, ocean tug and the left side of that episode of this will. Now that's about 50 ft tug season, right? You know, none of the vessels in here been here less than a year, except for probably the humble tea, and the vessels were in terrible shape.

00:20:56.240 - 00:21:20.960

The longer they stayed, the less likely that taxpayers would ever get rid of them in a reasonable price. Last October, I toured the Miami River, then held an outdoor hearing at Jose Marti Park. I wanted to find out why boats were just rusting away. It just didn't make any sense that taxpayers should be paying more in storage money than the boats were worth.

00:21:22.540 - 00:21:45.760

Could you describe for me the record keeping system maintained by Customs here in Miami to keep track on both the number and the disposition of the votes? Was chairman when we first got here, wasn't it like we asked for a list of those boats that were on the Miami River so that we could go and take a look at initially there was no list first got here.

00:21:45.760 - 00:22:00.720

They had to take this list from individual files that they had after a week took got their list. It was 137 votes that they had provided us with. We took a ride on the river, and we try to identify some of those that were on the river.

00:22:00.720 - 00:22:18.210

As you can see today, there are some people onto customs in some dome. It was a little confusing as good point exactly launches custom on this. The one that interested me most was the Monica. The Monica has been around since 1982 and we asked, why was it still there?

00:22:18.370 - 00:22:46.270

The information that we were provided with that evidently had fallen through the cracks it could have been disposed of several years ago was seized on 10 4, 81. According to customer service, it was forfeited on June 7th. As you have up on that chart 1982 before it was forfeited on that date before the Customs Service can get it out of its inventory, so to speak, it has to go to the ECE and ask for disposition.

00:22:46.280 - 00:22:59.360

There they are trying to find out whether there is any other federal agency that could use that vote, that there was some indications in the foul that they had gone to G s A. To get this position. But they had never got any return answer for the ECE.

00:22:59.840 - 00:23:14.460

There was no system that they had customs here in Miami to follow up and keep track of which both they could have gotten rid of which they couldn't have. What I'm saying, the bottom line to this. Yes, sir, they could have gotten rid of that boat earlier.

00:23:15.740 - 00:23:38.800

So were you. We paid the storage costs $9 just while they were sitting there. No one's no way of following up. What was broken. It's been stories. A lot of people were upset. And just looking at the dots on this map shows why every one of these dots represents a derelict boat on the river.

00:23:38.800 - 00:23:58.110

Last October, part of the problem was that at least nine different agencies were involved. Not only was the river congested, we had a logjam over who was supposed to do what? The hearing ended with a clear message. We set a timetable six months to clear out the wrecks.

00:23:59.040 - 00:24:14.870

When I came back this April for another hearing to check on the progress, I spoke with Cleve Jones, the president of the Jones Boatyard. Here's what he told me while we rode the river at the end of the deadline. Well, you were telling me you've been on the river over 60 years.

00:24:14.880 - 00:24:29.730

That's correct. Yeah, well, I'm sure you've seen an awful lot of the changes in the river. You know, I was here six months ago, and as you can see, I've got a grin on my face because I think it looks better. What do you think That you know, you've seen a lot more than I have it.

00:24:29.740 - 00:24:48.300

Well, I think it has improved in the last six months. And I think if we continue on like we have been the let's be clean enough for us all swimming again, right? You think Customs has actually made an effort and gotten a lot of the boats out?

00:24:48.310 - 00:25:08.890

That yes, they have done the derelicts that they have done a lot to get rid of the derelict that were there. Yeah, well, I hope our hearings will do some good, and we got some good. I'm sure they will. Yeah. Yeah. What do you think? Now that we need to step, go forward with one of the things that we need to go forward?

00:25:08.900 - 00:25:31.860

Well, I think one of the things that we probably need to do is see about dredging the river out and getting rid of the rid of the Mm. We're still We're going to ask the court today how they're coming with our study. I understand that Senator Pepper, Congress and Pepper has introduced a bill and, uh, Congress.

00:25:32.840 - 00:25:53.450

They have passed it in the house so far. Uh, probably be coming over to your area to try to move on. That too, right. The map you saw earlier from October changed to this in April. And here's how the river itself looks now open for business and pleasure craft.

00:25:53.460 - 00:26:13.770

A lot of agencies govern traffic on the Miami River, but they got bottled up install the same way the river was clogged. These hearings showed us that sometimes it takes a little push to get things moving. It's not much different than the words of the sensible man who said Rivers or roads that move.

00:26:14.220 - 00:26:32.660

And now that we've got things moving, we've got to keep it that way. I first heard about the Miami River problem from another sensible person, someone right here in Florida who wrote me a letter about the situation. As a matter of fact, the mail is one of the best ways for me to find out what Floridians are thinking.

00:26:33.240 - 00:26:50.160

You let me know in thousands of letters every month. Just what's on your mind. Last month alone, I received more than 17,000 letters. I've got a few letters right here now to show you what I mean. Here's a letter from a retired officer in Panama City.

00:26:50.840 - 00:27:09.360

Dear Senator Child, I hope you'll back Senator Goldwater when he tries to reorganize the Pentagon to give us the toughest fighting men possible. Senator Goldwater has devoted much of his life as an Air Force general and as a senator in trying to provide for the best possible defense, please back him sincerely.

00:27:09.940 - 00:27:37.370

Well, that one turned out to be rather simple. The committee had worked on this reorganization proposal for over four years. The bill came out of the committee unanimously, and after a short debate on the floor for a very complex bill because the Senate was convinced that this needed to be done, the Senate unanimously voted for this major reorganization act of the Pentagon to really help this country deliver a better fighting force.

00:27:38.740 - 00:27:54.160

Another letter I received from Jacksonville. They say, Dear Senator Charles, I'm writing you because I'm worried about my granddaughter. She's supposed to have a baby towards the end of the year, But her doctor says he may quit before then because he can't afford insurance rates that have gotten so high.

00:27:54.720 - 00:28:11.270

I've heard about this problem before, but I didn't know it was close to home. Sincerely. Well, I'll have to tell you that letter gets my attention. I just had my fifth grandchild, and I've heard about this problem as well. Uh, it's one of the toughest that we're working on now.

00:28:11.740 - 00:28:30.050

25% of the O B G Y n are retiring in Florida from the delivering of babies. Now those are the older doctors, but still, it's a terribly serious problem. How do we deal with it? We're talking about changing the whole liability law of the government that we've operated under for a long time.

00:28:30.540 - 00:28:47.770

Well, our committees are working on it up here, and state legislatures are working on it as well. And I don't know that we need the We know the answer right now, but it's one that I think we have to come to grips with. And I look forward to seeing what our committee has come up with because this is a terrible, terrible problem.

00:28:48.640 - 00:29:11.050

Here's another letter that I received from a man in Fort Myers who writes Dear Center to Child's. I see on television that we're no longer going to be able to deduct our sales tax payments off of our income tax. Is that true? It seems to me that it's only fair that will be able to deduct our sales tax since people in other states can deduct their income tax payments.

00:29:11.740 - 00:29:33.950

Well, I have to say I agree with that fellow and my instincts are exactly the same. Under the new tax bill, we're going to allow states to deduct a state income tax and the state property tax. But if you happen to be one of the 11 states like Florida is that raises your principal source of revenue from the sales tax, you can't deduct that.

00:29:34.320 - 00:29:59.950

That just strikes me as being very unfair to our state. I think we've done a good job in operating our state so we can get by without a state income tax. I don't think we should be penalized because of that. And when the tax bill comes to the floor, I'm going to try to get with some other senators from states that have similar problems and see if there's some way that we can get some equity into this into this situation.

00:30:01.340 - 00:30:16.060

Well, that's a brief sample of what Floridians have on their minds and the months ahead. We'll be exploring a good many more issues you've asked about in your letters. Until then, this is Senator Lawton Child's Yeah, yeah,