Judd Gregg: “The point is, we see a bill which has been brought to us which is dramatically over--dramatically over--the number which…”

“The point is, we see a bill which has been brought to us which is dramatically over--dramatically over--the number which was proposed by the President, and then the number that was passed by this House as a budget number, and now, when there is an attempt to bring some fiscal discipline to the bill, we see the committee come forward and say, well, we don't know how much we are over or we are not going to tell you how much we are over, but we want to waive the budget. At what point does fiscal discipline enter any of the discussion around this Senate? It appears to have become a fantasy land for the purposes of spending, and it is unfortunate because who is going to be paying this bill? Well, it is going to come out of the general fund, which means it will be added to the debt, which means that our children are going to pay for it. Now, there are ways to fund a highway bill that are appropriate, and it is called going to the highway fund and using the money in the highway fund. This proposal, as it came out of the Budget Committee, as it was presented by the President, represented a 19-percent increase in funding, using dedicated funds. It was a very reasonable approach. But the bill, as it is on the Senate floor today, represents something in the vicinity of a 40-percent increase in cost, and it is not paid for with highway funds. It is paid for by borrowing from the general fund, which means running up the debt, and that is inappropriate.”