[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 15]
[Senate]
[Pages 21832-21833]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]





                    TAX CUTS HELP AMERICAN FAMILIES

  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, the Congress has just sent to the 
President a tax relief package. I believe very strongly that we can do 
three things: We can cut taxes, we can make substantial strides in 
paying down the debt, and we can save Social Security.
  I do not think that asking for a tax cut of between 3 and 3.5 percent 
of the total anticipated budget spending in the next 10 years is being 
irresponsible. That is how this administration--the President and the 
Vice President, Al Gore--would like to characterize it. We have the 
highest tax burden since 

[[Page 21833]]

World War II. I think this Congress is being responsible to the American 
people in saying: You deserve some relief, too.
  I am very disappointed that the President is saying he is going to 
veto this tax-relief package. I have believed all along that he really 
does not support any tax cuts. I have believed all



along that he really does not want to pay down the debt and that he 
really does not care that much about Social Security. I have believed 
all along that his real agenda is spending. As we move forward this 
fall with some of the debate, I think it will become more and more 
clear that the President's agenda is really spending, while the 
Republicans' agenda in the Congress--and I want to be part of that 
team--will be to fight to keep taxes down, will be to fight especially 
hard to pay down the debt, and to save Social Security.
  I would like to take a moment to make some comments on tax cuts. I 
believe we took an important step toward addressing our Nation's future 
by passing the $792 billion tax cut package last month. We passed a 
bill that pays down the debt, ensures that our obligations to Social 
Security are met, and provides tax relief for millions of Americans.
  This tax cut package returns the tax overpayment to those who paid 
it. I believe this is a far better option than the plans we have seen 
from the other side of the aisle that would merely spend the extra 
money. Under our plan, a middle-class family of four will receive over 
$1,000 a year in tax relief when the plan is fully implemented.
  In addition to broad-based relief for all taxpayers, the tax bill 
provides relief in many important areas, including the marriage 
penalty, the alternative minimum tax, savings and investment, 
education, health care, the estate tax, and housing.
  I, for one, believe in the ``opportunity society.'' I believe in 
success and that people should not be punished when they succeed and 
prosper. The surplus belongs to those who are succeeding and paying 
record levels of taxes. When we cut taxes, people are motivated to work 
harder, and the economy does well. When the economy does well, everyone 
does well.
  Some are trying to claim that the Republicans want to return money to 
the people instead of paying down the debt. Nothing could be further 
from the truth. In fact, in 2000, the Republican plan, along with a 
significant tax cut, leaves the public debt $220 billion less than the 
President's budget proposal. The Republican plan saves 75 percent of 
the total surplus, as compared to the President's plan which only saves 
67 percent of the surplus.
  I also point out that the Republican plan saves every penny of the 
Social Security surplus. The President's budget spends $29 billion of 
the Social Security surplus.

  These numbers come from the Congressional Budget Office, which 
Members of Congress can rely on, on a nonpartisan basis, to provide us 
with accurate figures.
  Clearly, the recent debate in the Senate was not about debt 
repayment. The debate was about what to do with the surplus money after 
addressing debt repayment. I happen to believe we should refund this 
overpayment to the taxpayers. Some of my colleagues believe we should 
spend it. I believe the American people are in a better position to 
know what they need than the Government, particularly the Government 
here in Washington. I believe we should let the people keep more of 
their own money to spend on their priorities, not Washington's 
priorities. I believe the tax package we passed will do just that.
  By contrast, the President's budget increases taxes--I repeat that, 
increases taxes--by nearly $100 billion over 10 years. I find it 
interesting that the President claims we cannot afford $792 billion in 
tax cuts but believes we can afford $1 trillion in new spending.
  Although some have tried to portray the tax-relief package as large 
and irresponsible, I have to disagree. The tax cuts only equal 3.5 
percent of what the Congressional Budget Office projects the Federal 
Government will take in over the next 10 years. In light of the fact 
Federal tax receipts are already at a record high, I consider this tax 
cut to be extremely modest.
  In response to the claim that tax cuts only help the rich, first of 
all, tax cuts are for taxpayers. If you do not pay taxes, you can't get 
a tax cut. Under the recently passed tax bill, every American who pays 
income taxes will get an income tax cut.
  Our income tax system is progressive. The top 1 percent of earners 
make 16 percent of the income but pay 32 percent of the income taxes. 
The top 25 percent of earners pay 81 percent of the income tax, and the 
top half of earners pay nearly all of the income taxes.
  Looking more closely at who pays the income taxes, as I noted, the 
top half of earners pay nearly all of the Federal income taxes. As 
taxpayers, they will be the ones to receive a tax cut.
  I would like to examine who those so-called rich are. The rich are 62 
percent of all homeowners; 66 percent of those between the ages of 45 
and 64; 67 percent of those with a child in the home; 68 percent of 
those who have attended college, even just one quarter of college; 69 
percent of married couples; and 80 percent of two-earner households.
  I want to comment about the 80 percent of two-earner households. I 
believe most of those are young Americans who are trying to get 
started. They are young families, people who have just graduated from 
college, maybe just come from high school and have the first job. They 
are trying to buy a house, get a family started, and pay for a very 
expensive education. In order to do that, both the husband and the wife 
work. We are taking 80 percent of those two-earner households and we 
are taxing them at record levels. This particular tax bill is going to 
help young families getting started, future citizens of this country, 
the future leaders of this country.
  I think this is a very good piece of legislation. I remind Senators, 
again, to remember when they hear our Democrat colleagues talk about 
the rich who benefit from those tax cuts, this is really who they are 
talking about.
  I am pleased this body has taken steps to address tax relief for 
hard-working Americans. I will continue to support efforts to cut taxes 
and downsize Government. I believe Congress should reject new taxes and 
new spending in favor of meaningful tax relief. It is time we return 
Government money to the rightful owner--the American people.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative assistant proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Santorum). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________