[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 129 (Wednesday, September 29, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1988-E1989]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


            OPPOSITION TO CONFERENCE AGREEMENT ON H.R. 2488

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. MAX SANDLIN

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 29, 1999

  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I have heard my friends on the Republican 
side talk about how their budget sets aside $2 trillion of the $3 
trillion projected surplus for debt reduction. While this certainly 
sounds appealing to those of us who have been talking about the 
importance of paying off the national debt, the facts just don't match 
the rhetoric.
  My Republican friends neglect to point out that they are double-
counting the Social Security surplus in order to claim that they are 
reducing the debt. This body has overwhelmingly voted to exclude Social 
Security surpluses from budget calculations. These surpluses are 
essential to meet future obligations to Social Security. Every Member 
of this body, Republican and Democrat alike, have said that Social 
Security surpluses should only be used for Social Security, and should 
not be counted for any other purposes. But despite all of the rhetoric 
about Social Security lockboxes and taking Social Security off-budget, 
some folks on the other side of the aisle keep counting the Social 
Security surpluses when it suits their purposes.
  Using the Social Security surplus to reduce debt held by the public 
simply offsets the increased debt held by the Social Security trust 
fund. If all we do is save the Social Security surplus, we won't reduce 
the total national debt by one dime, and we will have done nothing to 
reduce the burden we leave to our children and grandchildren. In fact, 
despite all of the rhetoric from the other side of the aisle about 
saving money for debt reduction, the total national debt will increase 
by $200 billion over the next five years under the Republican budget.
  The truth is, they don't want the American people to know the 
consequences of their massive tax cuts. They don't want them to find 
out that, if we want to be fiscally responsible and stay within the 
spending caps we agreed to in the 1997 budget, passing their tax cut 
bill will require a 38% reduction in spending on important programs--
programs like FEMA, class size reduction, and law enforcement. Both 
parties agree that defense spending needs to increase if we want to 
preserve military readiness, but if the Republicans pass their tax 
cuts, our military will suffer as well. While these important programs 
that benefit all Americans will have to be cut, two-thirds of the tax 
cut will benefit only those people who fall in the top income tax 
bracket.
  The fiscal irresponsibility does not stop there. The new trick in 
Republican accounting books is the ``emergency'' spending designation 
being used to bypass the spending caps. They have even resorted to 
calling the 2000 census an ``emergency''--an outrageous claim 
considering that the Constitution requires a census every ten years! 
This ``emergency'' spending comes straight out of the ``projected'' 
surplus Republicans want to use to finance their tax cut.
  This creative accounting is unacceptable. I am a strong advocate of a 
sound budget and fiscally responsible tax cuts, but the best tax cut we 
can give the American people is a promise we will first pay down the 
national debt by setting aside some of the true surplus--the non-Social 
Security surplus. The Blue Dogs have put forward a proposal that would 
lock up half of the true budget surplus to pay down the national debt. 
This approach will truly reduce the burden on future generations.

  I am proud to be an original co-sponsor of this legislation. The Blue 
Dog's Debt Reduction Lockbox bill would save 100% of the Social 
Security surplus by requiring that the budget be balanced excluding the 
Social Security surplus. It also helps ensure a fiscally responsible 
budget by establishing a point of order against any budget resolution 
that contains an on-budget deficit or any legislation that would result 
in an on-budget deficit and would prohibit OMB, CBO and other federal 
government entities from including the Social Security trust fund as 
part of budget surplus or deficit calculations.
  While the Republican tax cut bill's debt reduction provisions are 
merely a rhetorical gesture at best, the Blue Dog bill delivers on debt 
reduction. It places 50% of the projected on-budget surplus over the 
next five years in a Debt Reduction Lockbox, away from those who would 
squander it on irresponsible tax cuts.
  The Blue Dog bill also delivers on our promise to save Social 
Security and Medicare by reserving the Debt Reduction Dividend--the 
savings from lower interest payments on the debt resulting from its 
reduction--for these two programs. Seventy-five percent of these 
savings would be reserved for Social Security reform and 25% for 
Medicare reform.
  Mr. Speaker, the fundamental tenet of the Blue Dog proposal--debt 
reduction--has been recklessly omitted from the Republican bill. Our 
primary goal as we debate how to divide the projected budget surplus 
should be to maintain the strong and growing economy that has 
benefitted millions of Americans. Irresponsible tax cuts, however, are 
not the means to achieving this end. Using that simple objective as our 
guide, it is clear that the best course of action this body could take 
is to use the budget surpluses to start paying off the $5.6 trillion 
national debt. Reducing the national debt is clearly the best long-term 
strategy for the U.S. economy.
  Economists from across the political spectrum agree that using the 
surplus to reduce the debt will stimulate economic growth by increasing 
national savings and boosting domestic investment. Paying down our debt 
will reduce the tremendous drain that the federal government has placed 
on the economy by running up a huge national debt. Quite simply, 
reducing the federal government's $5.6 trillion national debt takes 
money that is currently tied up in debt and puts it back into the 
private sector where it can be invested in plants, equipment and other 
investments that create jobs and economic output.
  Federal Reserve Board Chairman, Alan Greenspan, has repeatedly 
advised Congress that the most important action we could take to 
maintain a strong and growing economy is to pay down the national debt. 
Earlier this year, Chairman Greenspan testified before the Ways and 
Means Committee that debt reduction is a much better use of surpluses 
than are tax cuts, stating:

       The advantages that I perceive that would accrue to this 
     economy from a significant decline in the outstanding debt to 
     the public and its virtuous cycle on the total budget process 
     is a value which I think far exceeds anything else we 
     could do with the money.
       We should follow Chairman Greenspan's advice by making debt 
     reduction the highest priority for any budget surplus.
       There has been a lot of discussion here in Washington about 
     a ``grand bargain'' on the budget that would divide the 
     surplus between tax cuts and higher spending. Our 
     constituents are giving a very different message. I would 
     encourage my colleagues to ignore this inside the beltway 
     speculation, and listen to the American public. Our 
     constituents are telling us to meet our obligations by paying 
     down the national debt.
       The folks I represent understand that the conservative 
     thing to do when you have some extra resources is to pay your 
     debts first. They don't understand how we can be talking 
     about grand plans to divide up the

[[Page E1989]]

     budget surplus when we have a $5.6 trillion national debt. 
     They want us to use this opportunity to pay down our debt.
       We hear a lot of talk about ``giving the American people 
     their money back''. I would remind my colleagues that it is 
     the American people who owe the $5.6 trillion national debt 
     we have run up. If we are truly interested in giving the 
     surpluses back to the American people, we should start by 
     paying off the debt we have run up on their credit card.
       I would suggest that the best tax cut we could provide for 
     all Americans, and the best thing that we can do to ensure 
     that taxes remain low for our children and grandchildren, is 
     to start paying down our $5.6 trillion national debt. 
     Reducing our national debt will provide a tax cut for 
     millions of Americans by restraining interest rates. Lower 
     interest rates will put money in the pockets of working men 
     and women by saving them money on variable mortgages, new 
     mortgages, auto loans, credit card payments, and other debts. 
     The reduction in interest rates we have had as a result of 
     the fiscal discipline over the last few years has put at 
     least $35 billion into the hands of homeowners through lower 
     mortgage payments. Continuing this fiscal discipline and 
     paying down the debt is the best way to keep putting money 
     into the hands of middle class Americans.
       Just as importantly, reducing the national debt will 
     protect future generations from increasing tax burdens to pay 
     for the debts that we have incurred. Today, more than twenty 
     five percent of all individual income taxes go to paying 
     interest on our national debt. The amount of income taxes the 
     government will have to collect just to pay the interest on 
     the debt will continue to increase unless we take action now 
     to pay down the national debt.
       Every dollar of lower debt saves more than one dollar for 
     future generations. These savings that can be used for tax 
     cuts, covering the costs of the baby boomers retirement 
     without tax increases or meeting other needs. We should give 
     future generations the flexibility to deal with the 
     challenges they will face, instead of forcing them to pay 
     higher taxes just to pay for the debt we incurred with our 
     consumption today.
       I urge my colleagues to vote against reckless spending by 
     voting against the Republican tax cuts--but let's not stop 
     there. Join me in supporting the Blue Dog Debt Reduction 
     Lockbox bill and let's eliminate our debt.

     

                          ____________________