[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 18767-18768]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                    THE DEBATE ON THE BUDGET SURPLUS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, in the last couple of weeks we have seen a 
vigorous debate here in the House and in the other body. I think it is 
one that resonates across the country. That is, what to do with the 
projected $3 trillion budget surplus.
  There are those who want to argue that the path to prosperity really 
begins and ends here in Washington, that bigger government and higher 
taxes and taking away control from our everyday lives is the way to go.
  There are those who feel that the path to prosperity is paved across 
every street across our great Nation; that rewarding people to go out 
and work hard, and to allow hard-working Americans to keep more of what 
they earn, that is the direction we believe is the right way to go; to 
strengthen personal freedom, to strengthen individual liberty, and to 
allow economic growth to create more jobs and to put more people to 
work.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a debate that is just beginning, but one I think 
every hard-working American taxpayer needs to take note of.
  As a reference, I cite a statement that was given about 36 years ago 
from then President John Kennedy. These were his remarks.

       The most direct and significant kind of Federal action in 
     aiding economic growth is to make possible an increase in 
     private consumption and investment demand--to cut the fetters 
     which hold back private spending. In the past, this could be 
     done in part by the increased use of credit and monetary 
     tools, but our balance of payment situation today places 
     limits on our use of those tools for expansion.
       It could also be done by increasing Federal expenditures 
     more rapidly than necessary, but such a course would soon 
     demoralize both the government and the economy. If government 
     is to retain the confidence of the people, it must not spend 
     a penny more than can be justified on grounds of national 
     need and spent with maximum efficiency.
       The final and best means of strengthening demand among 
     consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private 
     income and the deterrents to private initiative which are 
     imposed by our present tax system. This administration 
     pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-
     bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes to be 
     enacted and become effective in 1963.

  Madam Speaker, President John Kennedy then, like Ronald Reagan 
several years ago, recognized what it meant to invest and truly believe 
in the spirit of the American people. This American spirit to produce, 
to invest, to create, and to give back is what this Nation is truly all 
about.
  Currently we engage, as I say, in this debate, and although it is 36 
years later, the core principles still remain the same. On one side are 
those who do not believe in the American spirit or the American people. 
According to this view, bigger government, higher taxes, and more 
government control is the answer and the salvation.

[[Page 18768]]

  The alternative view, however, places trust and wisdom in the 
American people. Our views seem to strengthen personal freedom and 
reward individuals for the efforts they are willing to undertake. We 
wish to promote economic growth by reducing the tax burden on hard-
working Americans and essentially telling the American people, we 
believe in you, we trust you, and we want you to keep more of your 
hard-earned money in your pockets, so you are allowed to spend that on 
your families, on your education, on your vacation, on your car, making 
that mortgage payment, buying the new washing machine.
  Because ultimately it is not about, well, we are going to destroy 
this program or destroy that program. No, it is about reminding folks 
what is important: to protect and strengthen social security and 
Medicare, to strengthen our national defense, and so many other vital 
programs that are critical to our Nation.
  But when we are confronted with a projected $3 trillion budget 
surplus generated by the American people, who are working hard every 
single day, I do not believe, nor do I think it is unfair, but in fact 
I think it is not right unless we give a portion of that money back to 
the people who earned it.

                          ____________________

                          ____________________