[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 118 (Monday, September 13, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10748-S10749]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               TAX RELIEF

  Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, as we look to the future, most of us, in 
our families, in our businesses, in our civic organizations, in our 
churches, like to deal with some sort of plan. As a matter of fact, 
there is a lot of buzz or talk these days about financial planning, 
making sure we have the capacity to meet the demands of the future when 
they come to us and when they fall upon us.
  It is incumbent on the Congress of the United States to engage in 
some planning, to take a look at the future and find out exactly where 
we ought to be going and how we ought to get there, and the things that 
are important and what we ought to do to protect our interests. It is 
with that in mind that we, the Members of the Congress, are delivering 
to the President a financial plan for the next decade. He will have an 
opportunity to act on that plan this week. That plan has been talked 
about, the tax relief contained in the plan, but it has not been spoken 
of very generously in terms of the other major features of this 
financial plan for America for the next 10 years. I think we can only 
understand the plan by looking at it as a whole, understanding what we 
are doing to protect the interests of this country in the years ahead.
  The first thing I think people want us to start to do is to be more 
responsible in the way we in Washington handle their money. One of the 
areas of irresponsibility in the past has been the Social Security 
trust fund. When there has been a little bit more in the trust fund--or 
a lot more in the trust fund--than was needed for that particular year, 
Members of the House and Senate have been a part of budgeting that 
money for expenditures not related to Social Security, to support the 
operational costs of Government.

  Americans are duly concerned because they know the reason there is a 
surplus in the Social Security trust fund is that big bulge of us baby 
boomers are paying in, but they know when this big bulge of baby 
boomers starts to consume instead of contribute to the trust fund, we 
are going to need the surplus. So the first thing we have done in our 
financial plan for the future is to put an end to that. We are going to 
stop the practice of spending the trust fund. So the financial plan 
which will go to the President this week says $1.9 trillion--trillion 
being a thousand billions and a billion being a thousand millions; I 
mean, it is almost impossible to think of it that way--$1.9 trillion is 
going to be reserved for Social Security, a major step forward. 
Americans have a right to expect us to plan to do that and we are doing 
it. That is a big part of the financial plan for the future.
  No. 2, people say over time most families, most organizations want to 
reduce their debt; they would like to get their debt down to manageable 
levels. Most of us take 30 years to pay off a home. We have decided to 
start paying down the national debt. In a part of the plan which I 
think is very important, we are taking the publicly held debt of the 
United States of America from $3.8 trillion down to $1.9 trillion, a 
50-percent decline in the national debt held by the public of the 
United States of America. What a tremendous decline in debt. As part of 
a rational plan, the debt to the gross domestic product ratio goes from 
43 percent to 14 percent over that 10-year plan we are sending to the 
President. First, we protect Social Security. Second, we pay the debt 
down by 50 percent.
  No. 3, as the chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Domenici, has 
indicated, we put aside about $505 billion for contingencies over the 
next 10 years, things we might want to spend money on over and above 
what we are spending now. So not only do we have a reservation of $1.9 
trillion for Social Security, not only do we cut the publicly held debt 
of this country in half, but we also reserve a half trillion dollars 
for expenditures we are not now making.
  It is only in the context of these three items--the saving of the 
Social Security surplus for Social Security; reducing the national 
debt, the publicly held debt of America, by 50 percent; putting aside a 
half trillion dollars for contingencies--that we understand what the 
tax relief is all about. The tax relief is what is left over. Americans 
earn the money. We trust Americans to earn this money; we should trust 
them to spend it. The question is whether we are going to fund families 
or bureaucracies.
  We got the President to agree with us on saving Social Security to 
the extent of putting $1.9 trillion aside, and I commend him for 
getting there. He wasn't there in his State of the Union Message. I 
commend the President for being willing to pay down the national debt. 
But the President, after that, wants to spend so much more of what is 
left over on more Government programs.
  Frankly, we ought to be giving a tax relief package, 1 percent, to 
every bracket. We ought to be doing away with the marriage penalty tax. 
We ought to allow parents and grandparents to invest money so their 
kids can have money for education, and the growth of that money can 
have a tax preferred status. We ought to allow people to buy health 
care in a more tax beneficial way, especially the self-employed who do 
not get it on their jobs.

  It is with that in mind I think this package is delivered to the 
President to say this is a comprehensive financial plan for the future. 
The tax relief only amounts to 23.8 percent of the total surplus as we 
have defined surpluses historically because we have been so responsible 
as to set that Social Security surplus aside. It is not part of what we 
will spend. And we start to knock down the national debt, take down the 
publicly held debt of the country 50 percent in the next 10 years and 
set aside a half trillion dollars for contingencies, and then work on 
abolishing the marriage penalty and tax, saving for education and 
expanded IRAs, and knocking every tax rate down by 1 percent--a 1-
percent decline for folks at the top brackets and a 1-percent decline 
for folks at the bottom brackets.
  It seems to me that is the kind of plan upon which a nation can march

[[Page S10749]]

forward. I call upon the President of the United States to reevaluate 
his position. He has expressed real doubts, serious reservations about 
this. Seeing it in the context of a financial plan for the future of 
the United States is to see it as a roadmap to opportunity and success 
and prosperity.
  I close with this. Because we had the two biggest tax increases in 
history in this decade, Americans have paid in far more money than we 
are going to need. It is like going to the grocery store and you hand 
the man a $10 bill for a $2.45 gallon of milk. You expect change. You 
expect to get something back when you pay more than is needed for what 
you have ordered. You would not think much of the grocer who said: I'm 
going to give you two more gallons of milk and a pound of bacon, 
whether you need it or not. That is what has happened. The President 
said we have the Government covered, the costs are covered, but they 
have overpaid. Now we are going to give them a whole bunch more 
Government, whether they have ordered it or not.
  I think we need a little change. Americans deserve some tax relief, 
and I am pleased to have had this opportunity to present this financial 
plan which the President should sign.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I think we have used the time that has 
been allocated. I ask unanimous consent for an additional 10 minutes. 
Since I am the only one present, the chances are probably pretty good.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________