[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 39 (Thursday, March 2, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3427-S3428]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          SENATE RESOLUTION 83--RELATIVE TO THE FEDERAL BUDGET

  Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself and Mr. Bumpers) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Budget and the 
Committee on Governmental Affairs, jointly, pursuant to the order of 
August 4, 1977, with instructions that if one committee reports, the 
other committee have 30 days to report or be discharged:

                               S. Res. 83

       Whereas the Federal budget according to the most recent 
     estimates of the Congressional Budget Office continues to be 
     in deficit in excess of $190 billion;
       Whereas continuing annual Federal budget deficits add to 
     the Federal debt which soon is projected to exceed $5 
     trillion;
       Whereas continuing Federal budget deficits and growing 
     Federal debt reduce savings and capital formation;
       Whereas continuing Federal budget deficits contribute to a 
     higher level of interest rates than would otherwise occur, 
     raising capital costs and curtailing total investment;
       Whereas continuing Federal budget deficits also contribute 
     to significant trade deficits and dependence on foreign 
     capital;
       Whereas the Federal debt that results from persistent 
     Federal deficits transfers a potentially crushing burden to 
     future generations, making their living standards lower than 
     they otherwise would have been;
       Whereas efforts to reduce the Federal deficit should be 
     among the highest economic priorities of the 104th Congress; 
     and,
       Whereas enacting across-the-board or so-called middle class 
     tax cut measures could impede efforts during the 104th 
     Congress to significantly reduce the Federal deficit:
       Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That it is the Sense of the Senate that reducing 
     the Federal deficit should be one of the nation's highest 
     priorities, that enacting an across-the-board so so-called 
     middle class tax cut during the 104th Congress would hinder 
     efforts to significantly reduce the Federal deficit.

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join with the 
senior Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Bumpers] to submit a resolution 
expressing the sense of the Senate that enacting an across-the-board or 
so-called middle-class tax cut during the 104th Congress would hinder 
efforts to reduce the Federal deficit.
  Mr. President, though I would certainly like to support a tax cut 
measure, especially one that provides a Well Deserved tax break to 
middle-class Americans, supporting that kind of proposal is simply not 
responsible right now, especially given the recent developments with 
respect to the balanced budget amendment.
  During a month of telling debate on the proposal, we have not done 
one thing that will actually help us achieve the widely shared goal of 
a balanced budget.
  Mr. President, it is time we did.
  We have been making some headway in reducing the deficit.
  President Clinton's 1993 deficit reduction package was a critical 
turning point in our fight to reduce the deficit, and we are now in the 
third straight year of progressively lower deficits.
  However, we need to do more, and I firmly believe we not only 
undermine those needed future efforts but could also jeopardize the 
progress we have already made if we rush along now and do tax cuts.
  Mr. President, let me emphasize that my opposition to tax cuts is 
bipartisan--the tax cut proposals of both parties are wrong.
  I publicly opposed the President's proposed tax cuts the same day he 
even announced them.
  An I think opposition to the tax cuts proposals of both parties has 
bipartisan support.
  In fact, I would like to take this opportunity to publicly thank the 
Senator from Oregon [Mr. Packwood], the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. 
Chafee], and the Senator from Maine [Mr. Cohen] for their support of a 
similar effort that I made as part of the debate on the balanced budget 
amendment.
  Their support was particularly heartening, and I think it reveals a 
growing consensus that deficit reduction must be a higher priority than 
tax cuts right now.
  As part of his fiscal year 1996 budget, the President, has proposed 
about $63 billion in tax cut over the next 5 years, and that is a 
figure that grows to $174 billion over 10 years.
  Even more troubling the Republican contract with America has proposed 
tax cuts totaling $196 billion over 5 years and the whopping figure of 
$704 billion over 10 years.
  To me, all of those figures represent the cost of a lost opportunity.
  The President's tax cuts are part of
   his budget package, and he has indicated that they are more than 
offset by $184 billion in spending cuts.

  And at least some of those supporting the Republican Contract With 
America tax cut package have indicated they too would be offsetting the 
cost of those tax cuts with spending cuts.
  However, even if they are fully offset--I hope we would agree that to 
be an absolute minimum requirement--we would do much better to forego 
those tax cuts.
  Eliminating the President's tax cut proposals, while doing nothing 
else to his budget, would result in $72 billion in additional deficit 
reduction over the next 5 years--the $63 billion in foregone tax cuts 
plus $9 billion in interest savings.
  Just doing that, and nothing more, would produce a Federal budget 
deficit of $170 billion in fiscal year 2000, $24 billion lower than the 
$194 billion projected as part of the President's budget.
  In fact, the figures for the Contract With America tax cuts are very 
dramatic.
  Assuming spending cuts are produced to offset that tax cut package, 
and then assuming we decided not to adopt those tax cuts, doing nothing 
else to the President's budget would result in $217 billion in 
additional deficit reduction over the next 5 years--$196 billion in 
foregone tax cuts plus $21 billion in interest savings.
  Just doing that, and nothing more, would produce a Federal budget 
deficit of $114 billion in the year 2000, $80 billion less than what 
the President projected.
  Over 10 years, just under this scenario, we would save $178 billion 
in interest costs alone by not adopting the Contract With America tax 
cut package, and could produce $882 billion in deficit reduction.
  Let me conclude by noting that tax cut proposals are grounded in the 
old politics of the free lunch--promise the people a tax cut and a 
balanced budget.
  [[Page S3428]] It is the kind of politics that created the fiscal 
mess which now confronts us and undermined the American people's faith 
in their Government.
  By resisting calls for tax cuts, we not only help alleviate pressure 
on the deficit, we also can begin to restore the lost confidence of the 
American people in their elected officials.
  I hope other members will join Senator Bumpers and me in persuading a 
majority of the Senate that it is irresponsible to cut taxes as we are 
trying to reduce the deficit and balance the Federal budget.


                          ____________________