[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 132 (Monday, September 28, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11017-S11018]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      TAX CUTS AND SOCIAL SECURITY

  Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, the subject about which my colleague 
from Texas just spoke and the subject addressed by a couple of my 
colleagues earlier today, the question of a proposed tax cut, is one 
that I think will engender a great deal of debate in the coming weeks, 
not with respect to the question of whether the American people could 
use a tax cut or deserve a tax cut, not about whose money it is. The 
issue, instead, is going to be, that there is an election 5 weeks from 
tomorrow.
  On Saturday of this past weekend, the House of Representatives passed 
an $80 billion tax cut. And the discussion by many, including those on 
the other side of the aisle, and by those on the other side of the 
Capitol, is about what to do with the so-called ``surplus.''
  I want to make the point again, as I have made before, that there is 
not at this point a budget surplus, evidenced by the fact that even 
though there are those who say there is a budget surplus, the Federal 
debt will increase this year to next year, and next year to the year 
after.
  Now, why would the Federal debt be increasing if there is a surplus? 
The answer is, the Federal debt is increasing because there is not a 
surplus. What is called a surplus, in fact, is the Social Security 
dedicated funds that are to go into a ``trust'' fund to be used on 
behalf of future generations.
  This chart shows that what is called a surplus can only be called a 
surplus if you take these Social Security funds and put them over here. 
Take the Social Security moneys away, and you don't have a surplus in 
the 5-year budget window. Instead, you are short $130 billion. The 
point is that, without using the Social Security revenues in the trust 
fund, there is no surplus.
  Now, there have been two arguments made in the last days about this 
subject. One is we are not using Social Security trust funds; the 
second is that we are only using 10 percent of the surplus. Those 
arguments don't mean very much to me. These numbers do not lie.
  The Federal debt will increase. To those who argue for this tax cut 
by saying that there is a surplus, I would simply point to the 
following fact: the Federal debt will continue to increase because 
there is no surplus.
  We have made enormous progress in tackling this Federal budget 
deficit. Most people would not have predicted we would have been this 
successful. And we have very nearly balanced the Federal budget, but 
not quite. We will have truly and honestly balanced the Federal budget 
when you can call it ``in balance'' without using the Social Security 
trust funds, and that is not now the case.
  If we here in the Senate debate using Social Security trust funds for 
this tax cut, we should be honest and call it theft. It will be a 
theft; yes, theft. It will be a theft to use the trust funds to give a 
tax cut. If that debate exists, I will offer an amendment to take the 
word ``trust'' out of the trust fund. Why call it a trust fund if 
people reach in and grab the money and use it for something else?

[[Page S11018]]

  I happen to believe that most of the recommendations on tax changes 
are recommendations that I support: Eliminating or substantially 
reducing the marriage tax penalty makes good sense; full deductibility 
for health insurance for sole proprietorship, and I've supported that 
for years. I can go down the list. All of them, or almost all of them, 
make good sense.
  But none of them make good sense if they are paid for with Social 
Security trust funds, the funds that were taken from American workers' 
paychecks and pledged to go into a trust fund to be used for only one 
dedicated purpose.
  What the supporters of this tax cut are saying is, let us use those 
funds now, 5 weeks from election day, so we can tell the American 
people we gave them an $80 billion tax cut in the coming 5 years. I 
believe that those who support it should have to say, we took $80 
billion out of the Social Security trust funds. We took that money 
despite the fact we told you we were going to save it for your future. 
We took it and we used it for something else.
  That is not honest budgeting. Try to do that in a business, try to 
claim in a business that you have now reached a break-even stage, or 
you are even seeing profits in your business because you have been able 
to take your employees' retirement funds and show them as part of your 
business profit, you would get sent off to 5 years of hard tennis at 
some minimum security prison someplace. That is against the law. You 
can't do that. That is stealing from the funds. You can't do that. And 
you ought not be able to do it in Congress.
  One thing the American people ought to be able to rely on is that 
when taxpayers put money into trust funds that comes straight from 
their paychecks, and which we promise is going to stay in this trust 
fund to be used for their future, we ought not allow this money to be 
used, 5 weeks from an election day, so that the majority party can brag 
to the American people that they handed out a tax cut.
  If they do that, and if they brag about it, I want them to brag with 
full disclosure. Let's see if they will brag about taking money out of 
the Social Security trust funds. That would be theft in any other 
avenue of public or private life, and it ought to be theft here as we 
describe it.
  This will consume a fair amount of debate in the coming couple weeks 
of the closing days of this Congress. I would like to see a tax cut. I 
support most of the provisions of the tax cut that was debated this 
weekend, but I will not ever support a proposition that says take the 
trust funds from the Social Security accounts and use those to give a 
tax cut 5 weeks before the election.
  That is not good government, not good politics, not good for this 
country's future. I hope in the next 10 or so days of legislative 
activity those of us who feel that way will band together and say to 
this majority that appears determined to want to do this that we will 
not let them. When this country has truly balanced its budget, when we 
have finished the job--and we have come a long way and made a great 
deal of progress on fiscal policy--then, and only then, is it time to 
talk about the kind of tax cuts that are being discussed.
  I yield the floor.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized.

                          ____________________