Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 106th Congress, Second Session, Volume 146, Part 11 Page: 15,063
[1526] p.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
July 18, 2000
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Pursuant to that re-
quest, I ask unanimous consent to
speak for 10 minutes in morning busi-
ness.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
FEDERAL SURPLUS
Mr. DURBIN. The United States has
changed a lot in the last 712 years. Mr.
President, 712 years ago we were deep
into deficits. We were spending more
each year than we collected in taxes.
We were running up the largest na-
tional debt in the history of the United
States. We have $6 trillion in debt to
show for that experience.
Many people have lost faith in the
ability of this institution to correct
this problem and to respond to what
was truly a national crisis. In fact,
some went so far as to suggest we
should amend the Constitution of the
United States to pass what was known
as the balanced budget amendment.
On the floor today with me is Sen-
ator ROBERT BYRD of West Virginia, ac-
knowledged to be probably the most
gifted Senator when it comes to the
rules of this body and knowledge of the
Constitution. He fought a battle, some-
times lonely but ultimately successful,
in stopping Members from amending
the Constitution and giving power to
the Federal courts to tell the Congress
to stop spending. Some in this body
thought that was the only way we
could stop the red ink cascading over
the Treasury in Washington, DC. Sen-
ator BYRD prevailed. The amendment
was defeated.
Amazingly, we stand today in this
Senate, in this Capitol, in Washington,
DC, with a complete change of events.
We are no longer talking about the
yearly deficits. We are talking about
the yearly surpluses, the fact that the
economy is so strong, so many people
are working, so many people are earn-
ing a good income, businesses are suc-
cessful, people are building homes,
America is on the move. For 712 years
or more now, we have seen that pros-
perity not only lift the boats of the
American people but also bring a new
opportunity in Congress. For the first
time in many years, we can honestly
sit back and discuss and debate what to
do with the surplus in the Treasury.
I think many Democrats share the
feeling that we should be conservative
in our approach with this surplus. I am
not sure what tomorrow, next year, 3
years, or 5 years down the line will
bring. I think the decisions we should
make as to this surplus should be
thoughtful. First and foremost, let's
retire our national debt, the $6 trillion
debt. We collect $1 billion a day in
taxes from Americans, businesses, fam-ilies, and individuals to pay interest on
our old national debt. It is as if to say
to our children, we are going to leave
you the mortgage on the home we en-
joyed our entire lives.
I agree with President Clinton and
most Democrats; our first priority
should be reduce the publicly held na-
tional debt to zero. We can do it. We
can do it in a short period of time. It
will call for some discipline and some
honest dialog with the American peo-
ple. We can take the money from our
surplus, pay down the debt in Social
Security, pay down the debt in Medi-
care, strengthen those two very impor-
tant programs, and bring down our na-
tional debt. That is our policy on the
Democratic side of the aisle. That, we
think, should be the first step that we
make, the most important, the most
conservative, the most disciplined.
The Republican side sees things quite
differently. They believe if we are
going to have a surplus, the first and
most important thing we should do
with that surplus is to give tax cuts.
There isn't a politician alive who
wouldn't like to address a crowd in his
hometown and announce a tax cut.
There is just no more popular set of
words we can use in this business than:
I'm going to cut your taxes. Is it the
right thing to do? Is it the responsible
thing to do?
Equally important, if we are to give
tax cuts, who should be the bene-
ficiaries? If we are going to have a sur-
plus for the first time virtually in mod-
ern memory, what are we going to do
with that surplus? Who will benefit
from that surplus?
Over the last week and a half, we
have heard the Republican answer to
those questions. They have suggested if
we have a surplus in America, if times
are good and we can help somebody in
America, the very first people in line
for help should be the wealthiest in
America. Now, is that the conclusion
most American families would reach? I
don't think so.
If you take a look at the proposal of
the Republicans to eliminate the estate
tax, and the bill that just passed to
eliminate the so-called marriage pen-
alty, you can see who the winners are.
This chart I am presenting shows the
Republican tax plan, their spending of
our surplus. Almost half of our surplus
is going to benefit the wealthiest peo-
ple in America. The biggest winners?
Mr. President, 43 percent of the total
tax cut proposed by the Republicans
goes to people making over $319,000 a
year. They get 43 percent of the tax
breaks. It means for them, on average,
an annual tax cut of $23,000. That is al-
most $2,000 a month.
The Republicans believe in good
times, after we have been through all
this pain, and we now have a surplus,
the first group who deserves a break,
the first group to deserve a benefit is
the wealthiest people in America, those
making over $319,000 a year.What about those on the other end?
What about the people who get up and
go to work every single day and may
make a minimum wage or a little bet-
ter than that? How will they fare under
the Republican proposal? How were
they considered when the Republicans
sat down and said where our priorities
will be, here are the people we will
help. The lowest 20 percent of wage
earners in America, those making less
than $13,600 a year, get less than 1 per-
cent of the Republican tax cut. It is
worth $24 a year to them, $2 a month.
The Republicans didn't forget them,
they will send them $2 a month. For
the wealthiest, it is almost $2,000 a
month.
The next group, those making up to
$24,400, see about $82 a year from the
Republican tax cuts. That comes to $7
a month. Think about that for a sec-
ond. If we are going to help the people
in America who need help the most,
shouldn't we be rewarding hard-work-
ing families who get up and go to work
every single day, play by the rules, try
to buy a home, try to build a commu-
nity, try to provide for their children
and their future or should we take this
surplus and give it, first, to those who
are making over $300,000 a year?
Some people say that being in Con-
gress is about a question of being "in
touch" or "out of touch." The Repub-
lican tax plan is in touch with the
wealthiest people. It is out of touch
with regular families.
The Democratic side believes after
bringing down the national debt, we
should target tax cuts to help these
working families who have been vir-
tually ignored by the Republicans in
their tax benefits.
On the floor of the Senate, we offered
an amendment to say every family in
America, every single family, can de-
duct every year $12,000 in college edu-
cation expenses. I have seen a lot of
families with new babies. Everybody is
happy to see the child arrive. After a
few minutes, people turn and say: What
a cute little boy. How in the world are
we ever going to pay for his college in
18 years? People know that cost is
going up. The average family knows
how tough it is to pay it.
We say on this side, you deserve a
helping hand to help your son or
daughter be the absolute best they can
be. We offered an amendment. Instead
of the Republican plan for the wealthi-
est, we said let the people of America
deduct $12,000 a year in college edu-
cation expenses from their taxes. It is
a deduction which would mean, for
some families, as much as $3,000, and a
helping hand to pay for tuition. Re-
jected, rejected on the floor of the Sen-
ate last week. They don't want that
kind of tax cut. They want the kind of
tax cut that gives $23,000 a year to the
wealthiest people in America but would
not give to average families, worried
about their kids going to good schools15063
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 106th Congress, Second Session, Volume 146, Part 11, book, 2000; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc31029/m1/32/: accessed May 12, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.