On the recordJune 20, 2000
we are hearing today from our colleagues on the other side that perhaps this measure is more symbolic than substantive and might not really accomplish that much. I could not more strongly disagree. The previous speaker, my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), made it very clear, and quite rightly, that absent this measure, there is absolutely nothing to stop Congress from spending this money. Of course, if one knows anything about the history of Congress, one knows that that is indeed the proclivity of this body, as well as the other Chamber to do exactly that. Let me touch on a specific situation and put this in some context. Where are we right now in the 2001 appropriations process? We are trying to pass a series of measures and the President is insisting that he needs another $20 billion or $25 billion above and beyond that record high level of spending that we are proposing. We hear our colleagues from the other side come down here every time we debate an appropriations bill to tell us we are not spending enough money. One of the ways that this spending can occur is by a devious little budget gimmick which involves reaching back into the previous year, in this case that would be fiscal year 2000, and spending the money there so that we create the illusion of some modicum of fiscal restraint, when, in fact, it is not recurring.
Source
govinfo.gov




