[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 131 (Wednesday, October 18, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10717-S10718]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Crapo):
  S. 3213. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow 
an individual to designate $3 or more on their income tax return to be 
used to reduce the public debt; to the Committee on Finance.


                  TAXPAYERS CHOICE DEBT REDUCTION ACT

  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I have introduced S. 3213. I want to take 
a few moments to talk about this important piece of legislation for 
paying down the national debt.
  As the 106th Congress comes to an end, I rise to make a few comments 
on the evolution of an issue of great concern to myself and to many 
Americans. The issue is the $5,661,548,045,674 national debt we had as 
of October 2, 2000.
  In August of 1993, while serving in the House of Representatives, I 
introduced House Joint Resolution 251 with the support of a number of 
my colleagues. The intention of this resolution was to amend the 
Constitution of the United States to provide for budgetary reform by 
requiring the reduction of the deficit, a balanced Federal budget, and 
the repayment of the national debt. During my years in the House, I had 
the good fortune to work with many Republican colleagues who were 
committed to these fiscally sound and enormously important issues.
  Today, a scant 7 years later, we are enjoying unsurpassed Federal 
budget surpluses and the many difficulties that accompany such 
prosperity. I am concerned that the running dialog in Washington is far 
too focused on today's spending, today's enormous Federal programs, 
today's immediate wants and needs. I am concerned that we are talking 
too much about spend today and not enough about the consequences of 
tomorrow. As we conclude the appropriations process, it is apparent 
that many Members of this body are eager to transform the Federal 
budget surplus into new Federal spending, creating more Federal 
programs that will begat future obligations.
  I am primarily concerned that efforts to recklessly spend every 
nickel of the taxpayers' money will threaten the long-term fiscal 
health of our Nation, the Nation our children and grandchildren will 
inherit. The majority of my colleagues on this side of the aisle are 
focusing on returning the surplus to its rightful owners--the American 
people.
  In recent months, the current administration has taken a hardline 
against tax cuts, making it clear that the President believes the 
Federal budget surplus belongs to Washington and not the hard-working 
men and women who send far more money to the Internal Revenue Service 
than they often save for retirement, college, or for buying a home.
  I find it frustrating and the height of arrogance to assume that the 
Federal Government can do more with this money than the taxpayers. So 
many of my Republican colleagues have such a profound conviction 
regarding returning the money to the working man and woman that, in 
fact, they have been hesitant to engage in development of a 
comprehensive long-term debt repayment plan.
  I have come to the floor before, and I will come to the floor again, 
to make clear what is required to manage the national debt in a 
comprehensive repayment strategy. The sheer enormity of the national 
debt demands such diligence. I admit that I have no desire to increase 
the growth of the Federal Government instead of paying down the debt. I 
am, as many of my colleagues, however, personally committed to cutting 
taxes.
  I have come to the floor today for no other reason than to make one 
thing crystal clear: We can pay down the debt and cut taxes. It is not 
an either/or proposition. It takes planning, and it takes commitment. 
It takes a plan to repay the debt and a commitment to cut taxes and the 
discipline to refrain from pouring ever more money into newer or larger 
programs.
  At the end of fiscal year 1999, the gross Federal budget was 
$5,656,270,901,615 and at the end of fiscal year 2000, the gross 
Federal budget was $5,674,178,209,886.

  Our past fiscal irresponsibilities have created this overwhelming 
mess, and an unpleasant task lies before us. For the health and well-
being of our national economy and the future security of our young 
people, we must commit to the elimination of this debt.
  The journey of 5\1/2\ trillion miles begins with a single step. Early 
in the 106th Congress, I introduced the American Debt Repayment Act. A 
year

[[Page S10718]]

later, I followed that legislation with the American Social Security 
Protection and Debt Repayment Act. I believe each of these bills 
provided a sensible first step toward debt repayment and the 5 trillion 
steps to follow.
  Both pieces of legislation suggested we treat the Federal debt just 
as every American treats the largest purchase they will ever make. That 
is their home. In February of this year, I came to the floor with my 
friends, George Voinovich, Rod Grams and Mike Enzi, with an 
amortization schedule for debt repayment to be offered to the budget 
resolution. Just as any American home buyer would amortize the purchase 
of their home with a mortgage, we offered a dutiful and moderate 
restriction on Federal spending combined with a specific debt repayment 
schedule. Our amendment was defeated. I believe the chief reason for 
the defeat of the amendment was the fear of being locked into a long-
term repayment plan that would prohibit future tax cuts. The July 2000 
budget economic and outlook update by the Congressional Budget Office 
disputes this understandable fear.
  According to the CBO, assuming spending is frozen at fiscal year 2000 
levels, the next 10 years will yield an on-budget surplus of $3.4 
trillion. If this Congress had exercised some discipline this year and 
appropriated within a freeze, the on-budget surplus in fiscal year 
2001, which we have just begun, is projected to be $116 billion.
  One criticism of the long-term debt amortization plan that I brought 
to the floor was that it would prevent tax cuts and tie the hands of 
appropriators by absorbing all of the surplus. My most recent plan 
simply dedicates $15 billion of on-budget surplus to debt repayment and 
adds $15 billion each year thereafter. The sum total after 10 years of 
structured debt repayment is $825 billion from on-budget surplus.
  This repayment schedule would have left $2.6 trillion remaining for 
tax cuts and new spending over the next 10 years.
  It is important to note that these numbers do not take into account 
the off-budget surplus created by Social Security. I have said on the 
floor many times before that paying down the national debt is one of 
the best ways to provide long-term fiscal stability to Social Security.
  In the past, I proposed restricted use of the Social Security surplus 
to help pay down the debt. This not only provides for the future 
stability of Social Security by paying down the debt but protects 
Social Security money from Federal discretionary spending.
  Social Security surplus money should be used for debt repayment only 
until such time as Congress can initiate sensible reform to preserve 
the long-term integrity of Social Security. Social Security reform has 
been a priority of this Congress, and we can act to reduce the debt and 
reform this important program in one commitment.
  When the new Congress convenes in 2001, I intend to continue to work 
with my colleagues on developing a sensible and concrete debt repayment 
plan. I am also interested in working with my colleagues on other 
innovative ways to reduce the national debt. Legislation was recently 
introduced in the House, and I am pleased to come to the floor today on 
behalf of myself and the Senator from Idaho, Mr. Crapo, to introduce 
the Taxpayers Choice Debt Reduction Act.

  Every year, millions of taxpaying Americans have the opportunity to 
designate on their tax form a $3 contribution to the Presidential 
Election Campaign Fund. This checkoff on all 1040 forms would allow for 
the taxpayers themselves to designate that $3, or $6 for joint filers, 
would be dedicated to a special Department of the Treasury account to 
pay down the national debt.
  Checking the box on the tax document would not increase the amount of 
taxes to be paid, nor would it decrease any refund. Checking ``yes'' in 
this box would simply provide a directive from the taxpayer that 3 of 
the dollars they were paying in taxes be used solely to pay down the 
Nation's debt. Importantly, these funds would be beyond any money set 
aside by Congress for debt reduction.
  In my annual town meetings around the State of Colorado, I often 
speak with my constituents over the enormous debt owed by this country. 
I can say with great confidence that this is an issue where the public 
desires action. It is my hope that with this legislation Congress will 
empower these concerned taxpayers to act on their impulse to eliminate 
the debt.
  Before I yield the floor, I extend my thanks to all of my Senate 
colleagues who have expressed an interest in debt repayment during this 
Congress, particularly Senators Voinovich, Enzi, Grams of Minnesota, 
Crapo, Reid of Nevada, and Feingold. I have enjoyed working with each 
of these Members over the course of the year as we have brought debt 
repayment amendments to the floor. I look forward to continuing to work 
on this important issue with my colleagues.
                                 ______