I want to make clear that I have not heard one substantive reason against this, not one. Rather, the argument against this is the House is gone. We all know the House has gone because they do not want to vote on this issue. They planned to have the Senate bring the debt limit up at this time. The House planned to leave before the debt limit came up. They planned that so they do not have to vote on the issue. The other side plans to vote down all amendments so they do not have to go back to the House. It is a gimmick. It is a game. There is not one word of substance as to why we should not have a smaller debt ceiling rather than a full year. I think it is time to call it as it is and explain what has happened here. What I explained is what is happening.
Max Baucus: “I want to make clear that I have not heard one substantive reason against this, not one. Rather, the argument against…”
On the recordMay 23, 2003
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the debt limit and criticizing the House's avoidance of a vote on the issue.
Share
More from Max Baucus
Mar 28, 2017
Senator Baucus, the judge at the sentencing said you fell in love with this woman, you lost control. I am only giving you 7 years because you did not really harm the United States.
Aug 7, 2017
During my several years of experience as representative of United States -- to China -- one, the Chinese are very respective of strength. And they probably respect -- when President Trump vacillates and issues contradictory statements and…
Mar 28, 2017
So from my perspective, all I heard is China complaining, frankly, that the U.S. is not allowing the technology transfer that they like under the U.S. Export and Control Act.





