{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://www.paul.senate.gov/news-floor-speech-sen-rand-paul-speaks-out-against-budget-agreement/", "FLOOR SPEECH: Sen. Rand Paul Speaks Out Against Budget Agreement", "2015-10-29", "2015", "2015-10", "Republican", "Senate", "KY", "Rand Paul", "P000603", "www.paul.senate.gov", "paul", "https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/", "scraper", "WASHINGTON, D.C. \u2013 U.S. Senator Rand Paul delivered the following remarks on the U.S. Senate floor today regarding his opposition to the two-year federal budget agreement.\n\nFor a point of clarification: after Sen. Paul announced his filibuster of the debt bill earlier this week, Senate Leadership moved to end the filibuster by filing cloture. Cloture is the mechanism in the rules to end debate, and thus end a filibuster. If 41 Senators vote with Sen. Paul, the filibuster will continue.\n\nBelow is video and transcript of Sen. Paul\u2019s remarks.\n\nCLICK HERE TO WATCH SEN. PAUL\u2019S REMARKS ON THE SENATE FLOOR\n\nTRANSCRIPT\n\nSen. Rand Paul: I rise today in opposition to raising the debt ceiling. I rise in particular in opposition to raising the debt ceiling without getting any sort of spending reform or budgetary reform in return. In fact, it will be completely the opposite. We will be raising the debt ceiling in an unlimited fashion. We will be giving President Obama a free pass to borrow as much money as he can borrow in the last year of his office. No limit, no dollar limit. Here you go, President Obama. Spend what you want.\n\nWe do this while also exceeding what are called budget caps. We have been trying to have spending restraint in Washington. It hasn\u2019t worked very well, but at least there are some numbers that government is not supposed to exceed. These include spending caps for military spending as well as domestic spending. When I first arrived, I was part of a movement called the tea party movement. We came into prominence and I was elected primarily because I was concerned about the debt, worried about the debt that we were leaving to our kids and our grandkids, worrying that we were destroying the very fabric of the country with debt.\n\nWe came here in 2010 and we negotiated and negotiated, and the president said, President Obama said I won\u2019t negotiate with you. He says I won\u2019t negotiate with a gun to my head. The media all said you just always have to raise the debt ceiling. It\u2019s irresponsible to use that as leverage to get reform. But you know what? We did get reform. The conservatives put forward something called Cut, Cap, and Balance. It was passed overwhelmingly in the House, blocked in the Senate, but ultimately there was something passed called sequestration, which put caps on both military and domestic spending. And it did slow down the rate of growth of government for a little while.\n\nThis is the problem with Congress. Congress will occasionally do something in the right direction, and then they take one step forward and two steps back. In 2013, we gave up on this sequestration when we added back in about $60 billion worth of money. Now we\u2019re doing the same thing again. We\u2019re going to add back in this time $80 billion, $50 billion in 2016, another $30 billion in 2017. We\u2019re doing the opposite of what we should be doing.\n\nWe should be using the leverage of the debt ceiling, saying we\u2019re not raising it again until you reform your ways, until you begin spending only money you have. Instead, we\u2019re doing the opposite. We\u2019re saying here, Mr. President, you can raise the debt as much as you want. You can spend as much as you want while you\u2019re in office, and we\u2019re going to do nothing. In fact, we\u2019re going to help you. We\u2019re going to exceed the caps so everybody gets what they want. So everyone in Washington\u2019s is going to get something.\n\nThe right\u2019s going to get more military money, the left\u2019s going to get more welfare money. The secret handshake goes on, and the American public gets stuck with the bill. Now, I think one of the most important things we do is defend the country. If you ask me to prioritize it\u2019s spending, I would say we have to defend the country above and beyond and before all else. But that doesn\u2019t mean we\u2019re stronger or safer if we\u2019re doing this from bankruptcy court. I any the number-one threat to our country, the number-one threat to our security is debts, piling on of debt.\n\nThe debt threatens our national security, and yet we just want to pile it on, pill it on. This deal will do nothing but explode the debt. In fact, it doesn\u2019t even limit how much the debt can go up. We\u2019re giving the president a blank check.\n\nWe\u2019re in the middle of a filibuster. This filibuster will go on to about 1:00 in the morning and then we will find out who the true conservatives in this town are. If you are conservative, you will say there is no way I\u2019m going to vote to give an unlimited power to the president to borrow money. If you are a conservative, you\u2019re going to say we shouldn\u2019t be exceeding the budget caps. If anything, we should be passing more stringent budget caps. It disappoints me greater than I can possibly express that the party that I belong to that should be the conservative party doesn\u2019t appear to be conservative. This is a big problem.\n\nI\u2019m traveling the country and I ask Republicans everywhere. I have yet to meet a single Republican who supports this deal. In the house, they voted on this yesterday. Do you know what the vote was? Two to one among Republicans to say this is a God-awful deal and we shouldn\u2019t touch it with a ten-foot pole. It\u2019s a terrible deal. House Republicans understood this. We should be doing the opposite. We should be taking the leverage of saying we\u2019re not going to raise the debt ceiling unless we get reform. Instead, we went to the president and said here, raise the debt ceiling as much as you can possibly spend over the next year, and we\u2019ll let you exceed the budget caps. It\u2019s irresponsible, it shows a lack of concern for our country, for the debt, and it should go down in defeat.\n\nWhen I ran for office in 2010, the debt was an enormous issue and the debt was $10 trillion. Some of us in the tea party were concerned because it had doubled in the last eight years. It doubled from five to ten under a Republican administration. And many of us were adamant that Republicans needed to do a better job. We had added new entitlement programs, we had added new spending, and the deficit got worse under Republicans. Now we\u2019re under a Democrat president, and it\u2019s set to double again.\n\nThis president will add more to the debt than all of the previous presidents combined. So we\u2019re going to go from $10 trillion now to nearly $20 trillion. We may get close to $20 trillion. Now that we have increased the debt ceiling in an unspecified amount, we may well get to $20 trillion by the time this president leaves. Is it a problem? Some people say it\u2019s just a big number.\n\nI don\u2019t know what a trillion dollars is. Well, if you want to imagine a trillion dollars, take $1,000 bills and put them in your hand. $1,000 bills four inches high is a million dollars. But if you want to have a trillion dollars in $1,000 bills, it would be 63 miles high. We\u2019re talking about an amount of money that is hard to fathom, and you say what does that mean? How does that hurt me or my family?\n\nEconomists say that we are losing a million jobs a year to the burden of debt. The economists also say when your debt becomes as large as your economy, that you are in a worrisome place, that when the debt is as large as the economy, there\u2019s a possibility that you may enter into a period when you might suffer a panic or a collapse or a burden so great that your economy can\u2019t withstand it. 2008, we were very close to a panic. I think we get closer with each day.\n\nThe number-one priority up here shouldn\u2019t be trying to scrounge around and find new money to spend. It should be trying to conserve. It should be doing something that some say is radical but I say is the absolute essence of common sense, and that is we should spend what comes in.\n\nSo often up here things become partisan and people just want to point fingers and say it\u2019s that party that did it, they\u2019re the ones responsible for the debt, but I want to let you in on a secret. This is a secret that goes on and on and on up here. It is something I call the unholy alliance. It is the unholy alliance between right and left. They both have sacred cows they want to spend money on.\n\nSo instead of saying you know what, the debt is a real problem and we both have to conserve in both areas, they both get together and raise the money for the secret cows. On the right we are busting the limits because the right wants more military spending, the left wants more for welfare, the unholy alliance a secret handshake, and what gets worse? The debt. We\u2019re borrowing $1 million every minute, and it\u2019s not going to end in a pretty way.\n\nWhat do other conservatives have to say about this deal? Steve Moore at the Heritage Foundation writes \u201cit\u2019s the worst budget deal to be negotiated by the G.O.P. since George H.W. Bush violated his no new taxes pledge in 1990.\u201d\n\nRush Limbaugh says, \u201cthe Republican party cannot campaign by running around blaming the Democrats for destroying the budget for overspending, for threatening the very fabric of the country. They can\u2019t do it because they\u2019re now complicit.\u201d\n\nHere\u2019s the thing. We can\u2019t point fingers and say oh, the Democrats are the big spenders. We now by this deal become complicit. We become equally guilty of supporting new debt. Now, some say well, gosh, you\u2019ve got to raise the debt ceiling, right? If you don\u2019t raise the debt ceiling, there will be default. Hogwash.\n\nDo you know how much money comes into this place every month? Through taxes, about $250 billion comes in in taxes. Do you know what our interest payment is? About $30 billion. It might be as high as $60 billion, $70 billion, $80 billion. There is never not enough revenue to pay for interest. People say well, we couldn\u2019t pay for everything.\n\nI say well, maybe we shouldn\u2019t spend it on everything. We have plenty of money that comes in every month to spend on interest, to spend on Medicare, to commend on Social Security and to spend on sailors and soldiers salaries and veterans\u2019 affairs. Maybe the federal government shouldn\u2019t be doing much else. These are the questions we have to ask. What would happen if the debt ceiling didn\u2019t go up? You would have a balanced budget. How bad would that be? If your debt ceiling didn\u2019t go up, you would spend what comes in. That\u2019s what every American family does, you spend what comes in. I think this is absolutely what we need to do.\n\nBut even myself, I\u2019m willing to compromise, so I\u2019ve put forward a compromise. I\u2019ve put forward a compromise that we tried in 2011. It\u2019s called Cut, Cap, and Balance. My compromise would cut the deficit in half in one year, a dramatic lessening of the burden of debt. That\u2019s the cut. The cap is that my bill would actually cap spending at 18% of G.D.P. What does that mean? 18% of the total amount of money spent in the economy. Why do we pick 18? Because that leads to a balanced budget.\n\nThe last part of my bill, the Cut, Cap, and Balance, is that we would pass a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. And I have kind of jokingly said but probably seriously, if we pass a balanced budget amendment to the constitution, we pass term limits, I will go back to being a doctor, which is my first love anyway, but we\u2019ve got to fix the country. We\u2019re destroying the country with debt. We\u2019re drowning in a sea of debt, and neither party seems to be concerned with it anymore. So what I would do is I would say yes, I\u2019ll compromise. I\u2019ll raise the debt ceiling under those three conditions \u2013 cut the deficit in half, cap the spending and pass a balanced budget amendment to the constitution, and people say well, there aren\u2019t the votes for that.\n\nWhy don\u2019t we have a vote? Why don\u2019t we allow a vote on Cut, Cap, and Balance, the conservative alternative to this deal that we\u2019ve got on the floor? Why don\u2019t we vote on an alternative, because there won\u2019t be any amendments allowed? This will be pushed through without amendments. And I really object to that. This is supposed to be the body of deliberation.\n\nWe\u2019re supposed to be able to deliberate over whether or not how we\u2019re going to fix the problems of the country. And I think this is the number-one threat to us. We\u2019re accumulating debt at a million dollars every minute. Someone\u2019s got to stand up and do something about it. Taxpayers for common sense say about this we\u2019re not a fan of this new agreement.\n\nCato writes the gipper, Ronald Reagan\u2019s ghost, is probably to go down from heaven at the new budget deal between Congressional leaders and the Obama administration and saying there they go again. So let\u2019s rephrase the question. What do advocates of fiscal restraint get in exchange for raising these spending caps? Well, if you peruse this agreement, it\u2019s apparent they don\u2019t get anything. So what we have traded is not just an increase, an unspecified increase in the debt ceiling.\n\nWe have said to President Obama, you can spend as much money as you want throughout the rest of your presidency, no limits. The National Taxpayers Union writes, \u201cIf the question on the budget and debt ceiling package is deal or no deal, taxpayers should clearly opt for the latter.\u201d While the agreement contains a few meritorious provisions, it fails other savings and reforms necessary to address our nation\u2019s $18.1 trillion debt problem. The debt is, without question, the number-one problem in the country. We will have a vote this evening and that vote will be, do you care?\n\nAre you willing to do something to slow it down? Do you think we ought to use the leverage of the debt ceiling to slow down spending, or are you a profligate spender who will vote to bust the caps and who will vote to give President Obama unlimited borrowing authority? I think it is a clear-cut question. I will vote \u201cNo,\u201d and I will continue this filibuster as long as there are enough votes here to allow it to continue.\n\nAt this point, I\u2019d like to ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of my bill, Cut, Cap, and Balance, which is calendar number 274, S. 2182. I further ask that there be an hour of debate equally divided in the usual form, that following the use or yielding back of time, the bill be read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table.\n\nI agree with the senator from Oregon that bipartisan agreement is necessary in this body, but I think we have in this agreement, bipartisan agreement in the wrong direction. The bipartisan agreement we need is to conserve across the board, for both sides to say that our sacred cow, whether it is military on the right or domestic spend on the left that they all will have to be conserved. We won\u2019t be able to spend money that we don\u2019t have.\n\nAnd I think we\u2019re becoming weaker and a nation the more we borrow. If we pass this bill, it isn\u2019t a difference or a choice between calamity and continuing to add to the debt, which this bill will do. I fully believe that we can continue to make our payments. We have $250 billion a month that comes in, interest payment $30 billion. There\u2019s absolutely no reason why we would ever default.\n\nI have a bill called default protection act, which would ensure that Social Security, and Medicare and our soldiers\u2019 salaries and the interest on the debt were paid for. So I think what we should be doing is doing the opposite kind of compromise.\n\nRight and left should come together and say, you know what? I really want spending on this. And the right says I really want spending on the military. And they should come together and say, we don\u2019t have any money. We\u2019re borrowing $1 million a minute. So I think this bipartisan compromise goes in the wrong direction. What I would ask for is a bipartisan compromise to actually save money and borrow less. Thank you, Mr. President.", 1, "2026-03-30T01:40:41Z", "2026-04-08T20:28:00Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://www.paul.senate.gov/news-floor-speech-sen-rand-paul-speaks-out-against-budget-agreement/"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 1.2301751412451267, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}