Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I did not intend to come on over to the floor, but I wanted to respond to some of the comments I heard being made about the President's brief remarks this evening on national television and the majority leader's remarks which followed the President's comments, the distinguished Senator from Kansas, Senator Dole.

I know it is not typical at this kind of a moment to want to commend, I suppose, the leadership, but I want to do so. I thought the President gave a very fine speech this evening, and I want to commend the majority leader for his remarks.

One thing that is clear to me is that people in this country would like to see the people in this town put aside the partisan bickering and try to come up with some answers to a problem that has been growing over the last 15 or 16 years.

This President arrived in this town 30 months ago, having served as the Governor of a State, not unlike the Presiding Officer tonight in the Senate, and was not a party to the events which unfolded beginning in early 1980.

I noted earlier that this President for 30 months now has made a significant effort, and a successful one, in deficit reduction. For the first time in many, many years, going back to the Truman administration, we have now had 3 years of significant deficit reduction, $600 billion. We still have a long way to go to achieve that goal.

I looked at the candidates running for the Presidency, the announced candidates, and I am looking at 100 years collectively of experience in this town. Some go back to 1960; many go back to the 1970's. They were here as this mountain of debt was accumulated. So to point an accusing finger at this President as if somehow it was his fault for what has happened over the last 15 or 16 years I think is unfair.

Mr. President, the point is this: We can go through this process over the next 7 or 8 weeks or months and score our political points one on the other, and maybe one party or the other will prevail in the elections of November 1996, but if at the end of all of that we have not really done what the American public has asked us to do, then one party or one candidate or another may be successful, but the country will be that much worse off 9 or 10 months from tonight.

So I rise to commend the President for offering a proposal, laying one on the table which is different than what was passed in the House and the Senate, but does lay out some options for us to consider;

hopefully, for some common ground to come around the issue of how we reduce this deficit and do so in a balanced and fair way so that the country moves forward.

Deficit reduction is a critically important issue. But the wealth of this Nation is not merely tied to just deficit reduction. It is also the investments we make. It is also the pace at which we achieve that deficit reduction.

Who pays in the process for trying to achieve that goal? The President this evening laid out a 10-year proposal rather than a 7-year proposal. He offers to cut Medicare by one-third the cuts that have been proposed by the budget that was adopted in this body and the other. He does so by suggesting that those cuts could come not from the beneficiaries but from providers and others.

I have my concerns about it, but I see it as a more moderate proposal as we try and beef up and shore up the Medicare trust fund.

The President has offered a tax cut. I, frankly, would not have any tax cuts over the next several years. I think, frankly, deficit reduction is a far more important goal. Incorporating the tax cuts in that mix, I think, is unwise.

But the President's tax cut proposal is some $66 billion over 7 years, rather than something between $250 and $300 billion over the same period. His tax cuts go toward middle-income people in this country, particularly those with children and those who have children of college age, to try and defer, or at least lessen some of those costs.

The President also suggests that we can do this, achieve this balanced budget, in 10 years, by cutting some 20 percent out of the existing programs. That, I am sure, will be a tremendous battle here over the coming months.

However, he has put a proposal on the table. He has extended the hand. He is not a Member of Congress. He is not the head of the political party. He is not a Governor. He is the President of our country. He will be so until January 20, 1997, if he is not reelected.

The President is leading. He is offering all--Republicans and Democrats in this body--an opportunity to put aside that bickering, to put aside that name-calling, and to come to the table and deal with America's problems.

People in this country do not wake up in the morning thinking of themselves as Democrats or Republicans, conservatives or liberals. They get up in the morning and think of themselves in terms of the problems they face--their jobs, their kids' education, their health care. Those are things that most Americans worry about--not the process in Washington.

They would like to see those Members elected to office to try and put aside some of that political campaign rhetoric, at least for a time, and wrestle with their problem.

The President has put an offer on the table, and Bob Dole, to his credit, I think, has extended up to that offer, and has suggested that we might come together here and work out these differences.

I think the country was well served by both comments tonight, by the President's speech and by the majority leader's response.

I think all in this body have an opportunity now to reach that judgment of history and to step forward and try to solve this problem.

Stop pointing the fingers. Stop the accusing and name calling. Let Members go to work on the problems that we will all be judged, historically, as to whether or not we have the courage to meet the challenge.

I thank Members for the opportunity to share these few short comments.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent we vitiate the previous order for the Senate to be in recess.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

END