Kay Bailey Hutchison: “That is correct. That could be a result. That is exactly correct. You see, there is another point here. When we are…”

“That is correct. That could be a result. That is exactly correct. You see, there is another point here. When we are talking about the underlying bill, we are talking about redistributing $887 million over a 5-year period. So we are holding everyone harmless. Every State is held harmless. And the low-benefit, high-growth States that need that extra help are going to divide the $887 million. But the Graham-Bumpers amendment does not redistribute $887 million. It redistributes $17 billion. It takes the entire pot of $17 billion, and it says, OK, we are going to put it on a 5-year plan, and at the end of 5 years every person in America is going to have the same amount. When you do that, someone has to pay. Let us look at what happens. New York loses $4.6 billion. In a $17 billion redistribution, one State loses $4.6 billion to pay for the redistribution to the other States. California is the biggest loser. California would lose $5.4 billion. So really you are talking about almost half of the entire amount-- actually more than half the amount of the entire amount--which is going to come out of two States. Madam President, we are a country. There is no State that can stand to lose that kind of money and make it. So that is why it is very important that we look at realism. What do you think is going to happen if this amendment passes? If this amendment passes, there is no welfare reform. The bill comes down. It is over.”