On the recordFebruary 9, 1994
I rise in opposition to this amendment. I believe that an additional $94 billion in spending cuts, on top of the spending cuts required to comply with last year's deficit reduction package, would jeopardize our recovery. As every resident of my State knows, the economic recovery has yet to filter down to our State and our region. This package would undermine the economic progress that other States have recently experienced, and that Connecticut dearly hopes to see soon. Two weeks ago, Congressional Budget Office Director Robert Reischauer testified that there has been a cumulative improvement in the deficit of $670 billion for the 6-year period from 1993-98. The deficit reduction package enacted last year is the largest single reason for the dramatically improved deficit picture. An improving economy is another. The fiscal 1995 budget submitted by President Clinton on Monday reduces discretionary spending by $7 billion below the level of outlays enacted last year. That's the first time in a quarter of a century that discretionary spending has declined below the previous year's level. When I questioned Dr. Reischauer about the impact of additional spending cut proposals, he stated that if too ambitious a package of deficit reduction were undertaken too soon, we might very well jeopardize the kind of economic growth we are currently experiencing.
Source
govinfo.gov




