Well, if the President had signed the bill that you, Mr. Chairman, pushed through this Congress, frankly, we would be well on our way to a balanced budget by the year 2002. The fact he vetoes it makes me very, very frightened when I look at that chart that I have been showing around recently that shows that big red portion representing interest on the debt, which is so large that within a year or so it is going to exceed what we spend on the defense of this Nation. We will spend more money just paying off the interest on our borrowings of past years than we will spend on the defense of this Nation. That is a frightening thought. And if that trend continues, our children will either have to pay extraordinary taxes to have the benefits at all and still will probably have to pay high taxes.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of the President's veto on the budget and national defense spending.
Share
More from Edward Livingston
I certainly rise to support his bill. It is one of the most important bills in the appropriations process, at least from the standpoint of a Member who lives in New Orleans, in the center of the Mississippi River Valley watershed, because…
I first want to rise and congratulate the chairman, the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard), and the ranking member, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hefner), for once again doing the outstanding job that both of them are…
Not only are we in complete agreement with the need to ensure effective missile defenses for our troops abroad, but we agree that these actions should remain a funding priority for fiscal year 1998. Although the administration limited the…
I heard the gentleman's statement, and I would be happy to tell the gentleman that in fiscal year 1999 we are certainly going to address this. Matter of fact, I have made the commitment to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) that…





