I certainly appreciate the sentiment of my colleague. The underlying bill is important to get done. These perimeter rule revisions are important too. Our fear is, unless there is some action, it will not be resolved, as it hasn't been in the past. I don't think it has to be a lot of amendments or a huge amount of debate. I do think we need the opportunity to have a vote or two on a couple of these amendments. If they don't prevail, then so be it. But that is an issue we will have to deal with one way or the other. What I would like to do is change the subject a little bit and talk about the proposals made by Senators Sessions and Pryor in a different context. We just got the word from the Congressional Budget Office that the new cost of the legislation on health care is going to be over $940 billion. Each iteration of this bill has seen an increase in the cost. This is striking because, as we know, even though the Congressional Budget Office has had to take the legislative language as it has been given to them in providing the pricetag and, therefore, alleges that it will not put us in deficit, the truth is, it will. If you double count savings, if you assume savings that will not exist and so on, then you can project a budget-neutral bill. I think most objective observers have acknowledged that the bill will be far out of balance and that the $940 billion price tag will not be paid for by the various taxes and spending reductions ostensibly a part of the bill.…
Share & report
More from Jon Kyl
Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee for engaging in this brief colloquy and for specifically calling for a hearing a couple of weeks ago at which the two cochairmen of the National Defense Strategy…
Madam President, I just want to thank my colleague, the majority leader, for his comments about me. He asked if there were differences between the time that I served before and this most recent time, and I must say that the thing that I…
Yes, Mr. Chairman, Representative Jacobs, the whole point is if the adversary believes that our system no longer functions, then they don't need to try to wipe it out at the beginning of a conflict.
What it shows first of all, that it's kind of the microcosm for the macrocosm.





