[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 25 (Wednesday, March 8, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1272-S1274]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          THE AMERICAN ECONOMY

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the Senate is about to engage in a debate 
about our Nation's budget for the next fiscal year which begins in 
October. When one tries to measure the values of politicians and 
political parties, the first place to look is how they spend money. 
Speeches are one thing, but the way we spend our money really explains 
who we are and what we value.
  There is a real difference of opinion now between Democrats and 
Republicans about how we are going to spend our money in the next 
budget. On the

[[Page S1273]]

Democratic side, we happen to believe we have a strong story to tell 
the American people about the progress that has been made in America 
under the Clinton-Gore administration for the last 7 years. In fact, a 
month or so ago, we completed the longest economic expansion in the 
history of the United States of America.
  It is every political party's dream to be able to stand in this 
Chamber and say what I just said. Under the leadership of President 
Clinton and Vice President Gore, America is moving in the right 
direction. We are creating more jobs, and we are solving problems that 
people thought were intractable and insolvable not that long ago.
  Take a look at the record from 1993 to the year 2000. We turned a 
record deficit of $290 billion in 1992 into a surplus of $176 billion 
in the year 2000. We have seen a paydown in our national debt. We have 
had 107 consecutive months of economic growth, and many new jobs and 
new houses and new businesses have been created.
  Take a look at what they said was going to happen. These are the 
experts who tell us what we can expect. They said in 1993 that we were 
going to have a debt increase. They projected it at $761 billion over 
the last 2 years. In other words, more red ink, more need for us to 
borrow money and pay interest on it.
  What happened instead under the leadership of this President? We 
ended up with a surplus. We actually paid down the debt of this country 
by $140 billion.
  There are a lot of young people who come to Washington, DC, to visit 
this Capitol and to see their Government in action. I say to these 
young people, the best thing we can do for you is to continue on this 
course. Once this debt starts to go away, the need to pay interest on 
it goes away as well.
  We collect $1 billion a day in taxes from families and individuals 
and businesses just to pay interest on old debt. We are moving in the 
right direction. America should not change course. We must keep 
expanding this economy and creating opportunity.
  Take a look at what has happened between the end of 1992 and 1999. 
More Americans owned homes. This is the American dream, and the dream 
has gotten better for millions of Americans because the economy is 
strong and interest rates are under control and inflation is in check.
  Take a look, as well, at the incomes of Americans across many groups. 
Those at the lowest income level all the way to those at the highest 
income level have seen a steady increase in inflation-adjusted income 
during the period of the Clinton-Gore Presidency. More people are 
buying homes, and income levels are going up for virtually every group 
across America.
  Take a look at the tax burden, too, because many people on the 
Republican side will say taxes have gone up. They have not. Take a look 
at the median income for a four-person family and the percent of taxes 
they are paying: 16.8 percent in 1992, 15.1 percent in 1999. The tax 
burden for the typical family in America has gone down.

  Of course, it is good news when it comes to employment. We have the 
lowest unemployment rate in 30 years: 7.5 percent when the President 
came to office, now down to 4.2 percent.
  The problem most American businesses tell me about when I visit them 
is: We need to find skilled workers; we have job opportunities; we need 
the workers to fill them.
  Now what are we going to do? We are going to debate a budget 
resolution in the Senate and the House where the Republicans will come 
forward and say we need to change all this; we need to try a different 
approach; things are not working as well as they could.
  I think we ought to let history be our guide, and it is suggesting to 
us that we are on the right path, we are in the right direction, and we 
do not want to change course and go out on a risky venture.
  The real question now is whether the Republican leadership in the 
Senate will come forward with a budget that has a tax cut proposed by 
their likely candidate for President, George W. Bush from Texas. It is 
a substantial tax cut and one, from my point of view, which goes too 
far and threatens the viability of the Social Security trust fund.
  Take a look at what the tax cut means. The Bush tax cut which was 
proposed during the course of his campaign--and I am sure it will be 
the centerpiece of his campaign from this point forward--says that if 
you happen to be in the top 1 percent of American earners with an 
income above $300,000 a year, your cut is $50,000 each year. Not bad. 
In the 60-percent range, with income below $39,000, the George W. Bush 
tax cut is worth about $29 a month.
  Does it make sense that we would jeopardize the growth of our 
economy, keeping our debt under control, paying it down, creating jobs, 
new businesses, and home ownership to give a tax cut of $50,000 a year 
to the richest people in America? The Chairman of the Federal Reserve 
Board, Alan Greenspan, said: Don't do it; it doesn't make sense; it is 
risky; it is dangerous.
  I hope we do not. But the Senate and House Republicans will present 
their budget, and they will tell us whether they stand behind Governor 
George W. Bush and their tax cut proposal or they want to stand behind 
the plan that has brought the economic prosperity we enjoy today.
  The President has come forward with a responsible budget. It pays 
down our national debt, it creates targeted tax cuts, and if we are 
going to take some of our surplus and give it to American families, it 
provides we do it for things they need: A $3,000 long-term care tax 
credit for the fastest growing group of Americans, those over the age 
of 85, to help the sons and daughters of those who are in older age 
situations to pay for their long-term care; expanded educational 
opportunity--we need a new college opportunity tax cut. This is going 
to help people across the board, regardless of income; A deduction of 
college expenses so that young people can go to school, improve their 
skills, and add to our economy and their lives.
  Marriage penalty relief is something I think should be done on a 
bipartisan basis. The President proposes it; money for new accounts, 
retirement, and expanding the earned income tax credit.

  This is the bottom line: In a matter of a few hours, the Senate 
Budget Committee, under the leadership of Senator Domenici, will come 
forward with a budget, and we will be able to see for the first time 
whether or not the Republicans on Capitol Hill support George W. Bush's 
call for a tax cut, a tax cut that has been branded unwise by Chairman 
Greenspan and one that, by any modest projection, is going to invade 
the Social Security trust fund.
  It will be a test to see what the real issue of this campaign will 
be: Whether the congressional Republicans back Mr. Bush's idea and want 
to venture out on some risky and perhaps dangerous venture that could 
jeopardize the growth in our economy or they want to stay the course on 
a responsible, fiscally disciplined approach that has come forward in 
the last 7 years.
  The American people are going to have a clear choice. If every 
election is a pocketbook election, we on the Democratic side welcome 
it. America's pocketbooks are better now than they were 7 years ago. We 
believe Americans want to continue this progress and move forward, 
addressing those people in America who have not benefited from this 
economic expansion, addressing serious challenges such as expanding 
education and health care, and doing it in a fiscally sensible way so 
that at the bottom line, on the last day, in the final chapter, we can 
say to the next generation of Americans: We paid down this debt, we 
gave you a strong America moving forward, and now it is your chance to 
take over.
  That is the best thing we can do, and we do not want to jeopardize 
that by giving tax cuts to wealthy people, spending money we do not 
have, and ignoring the reality of the progress we have made over the 
last 7 years.
  I can recall when President Clinton came forward with his budget 
proposal in 1993 that started us on this path of economic expansion.
  We could not get a single Republican vote to support it--not one in 
the House or the Senate. In fact, Vice President Gore cast the deciding 
vote for the President's budget plan. Not a single Republican Senator 
would support it. Thank goodness the Vice President was there to do it.
  When he cast that vote, we not only won on that issue, the American 
people won. We embarked on a course which has really given America a 
great opportunity. This is an optimistic and forward-looking Nation 
now.

[[Page S1274]]

  This Presidential campaign, and all of those who are candidates in 
congressional elections, will now put to the test the question as to 
whether or not we are going to continue this course of moving forward 
with the progress in our economy.
  To the naysayers who claim to have a better idea, I suggest that 
historically there has never been a period of greater economic 
expansion in this country. We want it to continue. We will see this 
Republican budget tomorrow and find out whether the leaders, the 
congressional leaders on Capitol Hill, want to continue this course 
that really moves America forward or if they want some risky new 
venture that includes the Bush tax cut.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. I ask unanimous consent to be able to speak for up to 
15 minutes as in morning business, after which Senator Gramm be 
recognized to go back to the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________