[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 134 (Wednesday, October 1, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10270-S10271]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       SETTING GOVERNMENT LIMITS

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on two bills that 
I have introduced aimed at limiting the size of Government and 
restricting its growth. One reduces the Federal Government by 
restricting the ability of Congress to spend money, and the other 
limits Government by sunsetting the Internal Revenue Code.
  First, I will discuss the Economic Growth and Debt Burden Reduction 
Act. Although I have only been in Congress a short time, I have reached 
an inescapable conclusion, and that is that Congress is much better at 
exercising fiscal recklessness than fiscal restraint. Accordingly, I 
have authored legislation that specifically restricts Congress' ability 
to embark on spending sprees by making it illegal to use excess 
Government revenues for anything other than debt reduction or tax cuts.
  Congress has historically been wholly unable to exercise fiscal 
restraints when given resources in excess of the current demands of the 
Government. I believe we need to limit the size of the Government, and 
this bill forces it to do so.
  Mr. President, we are going to soon approach a historic opportunity. 
For the first time since 1969 we are going to balance the budget. It 
was the last time we actually had revenues and expenditures equivalent. 
Now is the time for us to begin this great national debate as to, once 
you go into balance and you start moving into surplus, how should those 
surpluses be spent. In other words, whenever revenues exceed 
expenditures, what should they be spent upon.
  We can say go on another spending spree and spend more money, or we 
can pay the debt down, or we can say we will cut taxes further on an 
American public that is taxed too heavily.
  The bill that I put forward puts it this way: If revenues are 
projected to exceed the agreement levels, those excess revenues are 
immediately captured and reserved for tax cuts. If tax cutting 
legislation is not enacted, the additional revenues revert to deficit 
or debt reduction. This prevents any unanticipated revenues from being 
plowed back into higher expenditures and higher spending. And it seems 
to me that is what the American public wants us to be. They want us to 
pay down this massive $5.4 trillion debt --and we get from deficit into 
debt, start paying the debt down --and if we can't agree on cutting 
taxes further, then we can apply that immediately and require that it 
go toward the debt reduction. So we can reduce the mortgage on America, 
which is on our children. They are going to have to reduce the overall 
tax burden in this country today, which is about 38 percent of the 
average two-wage earner, two-child family--a 38-percent tax rate. That 
is at all levels of government, including Federal, State, and local.


                  Sunsetting the Internal Revenue Code

  Mr. President, the other bill I introduced would sunset the Internal 
Revenue Code, except for the section relating to Social Security and 
Medicare. As my colleagues know, last week, the Senate Finance 
Committee held hearings on the Internal Revenue Service, and during 
those hearings, the Congress and the American people heard detailed 
accounts of endless cases of the IRS's abuse of power.
  I believe the IRS needs to be reformed and, more fundamentally, I 
believe our Tax Code needs to be changed. The current Tax Code, along 
with the regulations, consists of more than 10 million words. It is 
impressive in size and oppressive in operation. It is antigrowth, 
antifamily, and it is not

[[Page S10271]]

the sort of environment that we can put forward economically and hope 
to have the next century be another American century. That is why I 
have joined with Congressman Paxon on the House side in sponsoring a 
bill that would sunset the current Internal Revenue code by the end of 
the year 2000.
  What we hope to do with this is start the great national debate about 
what sort of tax system should be in place. Should we go to a flat tax 
or a consumption-based tax, or truly do tax simplification? But let's 
set the timeframe and a goal and work toward it like we have done on 
balancing the budget, when we said that, in 7 years, we would balance 
the budget and then we will figure out how we are going to get that. 
That is what we have done and that is why we are going to get it 
balanced. Let's do the same on fundamental tax reform. Let's set a time 
certain in which to accomplish it and let's begin the great national 
debate.
  I hope a number of my colleagues will join me in sponsoring this 
effort to sunset this Tax Code and start the next millennium in this 
Nation with a taxation system that is pro-family, pro-growth and pro-
American. We can do that and start this great debate now. I hope my 
colleagues will join in sponsoring both of those bills.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brownback). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________