[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 27, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1597-S1598]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET PROPOSAL

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I wish to address my colleagues for a 
few minutes about the budget proposal that the President will put 
forward tonight. I look forward to the proposal. I think it is going to 
have a number of priorities for the country and the direction in which 
the country should move. These priorities include fiscal restraint, 
debt reduction, and responsible tax relief. It is these three areas 
that I want to address briefly today. The President will put forward a 
budget request that certainly has plenty of spending in it--in my 
estimation, probably too much. It is a $1.9 trillion budget. That is a 
very large proposal. It includes responsible tax relief--$1.6 trillion 
in tax relief over a 10-year period of time. This will set the stage 
for an honest discussion of taxes and needed tax cuts.
  As colleagues know, the budget surplus projected by the Congressional 
Budget Office is lower than it would have been without the increases in 
spending by Congress over the past few years.
  I have a chart that points out what happens with surpluses. We should 
be saving the surplus and cutting taxes with it, however people say: We 
have all this money, let's spend it. This is what happened during the 
spending spree in the last 6 months of last year, which reduced the 10-
year surplus by $561 billion alone. That happened during a 6-month 
period at the end of last year. There is an iron rule of government 
that if you have money lying on the table, it is going to be spent. We 
need to pay down the debt and cut taxes; we don't need these sizes of 
spending increases across the board. We need increases in some areas, 
and we need to cut spending in other areas.
  The second point is fiscal discipline, particularly in the area of 
corporate welfare. Now is the time, as we look at re-prioritizing--
putting more money in some areas and less in others--to address 
corporate welfare and zero these areas out, putting funds from these 
areas in such places as the President has proposed, and increasing the 
budget for the National Institutes of Health.
  The President is proposing an increase in NIH funding of $2.8 
billion, or almost 14 percent. I think this is something for which we 
can all be proud. It is a basic research function. It helps us in 
discovering what we can do to live longer, healthier lives. That is 
very good. Let's take the increase in funding from places like 
corporate welfare and put it into NIH without a huge growth in the 
overall spending.
  I am particularly heartened that the President is looking at doing 
exactly this--cutting in some areas to produce increases in other 
areas. Yet, at the same time, the President is trimming the growth of 
Government spending down to a 4-percent growth rate. This constitutes 
important increases in funding for programs in Government that deserve 
more funding, as well as reductions in other areas of Government that 
need to be reevaluated.

  I want to point out two other things because there are a number of 
people saying the size of the tax cut is too big. It is $1.6 trillion 
over a 10-year period. To give the overall example of what is taking 
place, here is a pie chart of the Bush tax cut as a portion of the 
total revenue during this 10-year time period. Total revenue is $28.4 
trillion; the Bush tax cut is $1.6 trillion. The Bush tax cut proposal 
is a small portion of total revenue. In a situation where we are 
overtaxing the public, we can afford to do this.
  What about the allocation of this surplus that we have? Are we using 
enough to pay down the debt? The answer is, yes, we are. We should pay 
down the debt, and we can pay down the debt. The remaining surplus is 
$1.1 trillion; the Bush tax proposal is $1.6 trillion. The Social 
Security and Medicare funds set-aside are $2.9 trillion. This is an 
allocation of where the overall surplus is going. Most of it is going 
to Social Security and Medicare.
  So what we need is a good, honest debate about tax cuts.
  A final point I want to make is about triggers on tax cuts. Some say, 
well, OK, we will do tax cuts, but if our receipts aren't as large as 
projected, if the surplus isn't as big as it is projected to be, let's 
cut the size of this tax cut. I don't think that is a good idea. Tax 
cuts need to be firmly in place for the community and the Nation to be 
able to react and say: I am going to have more confidence and 
wherewithal to spend if I know the tax cut will be here.
  I don't think triggers are a good idea. But if triggers get put in 
for a smaller tax cut--say, if our receipts are lower than we project 
and we put in a trigger to make the tax cut smaller--we should say if 
the surplus is bigger than projected, let's have a trigger for a bigger 
tax cut. If we are going to produce a trigger for a smaller one, let's 
look at a trigger for a bigger tax cut if receipts are larger than 
currently being projected in the budget.
  This is an exciting time for us in the country as we look at the 
prospects of the new President putting forward his budget allocations. 
There is going to be a lot to talk about, in a positive sense, on 
fiscal restraint, debt reduction, and tax relief--important topics for 
this body and for the American public.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brownback). The Senator from Minnesota is 
recognized.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, if there is time remaining for the 
majority party, I won't take their time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. I believe there will be. The time expires at 
11.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Fine.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, what is the parliamentary status?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. We are in morning business.

[[Page S1598]]

  The Senator from Wyoming is recognized.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I would be pleased to speak for the 
Republican Party if the Senator wants me to.
  Mr. THOMAS. If the Senator would care to, I would be surprised but 
certainly happy about it.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I will follow the Senator.

                          ____________________