[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 7458-7459]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                TAX CUTS

  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the budget 
resolution on which we will be voting later this afternoon. Let me note 
at the outset that this budget resolution is one of the most important 
documents we will consider in the Senate. It contains within it 
thousands of decisions with respect to our national life.
  We really set our national priorities by our budget, making 
fundamental decisions within the budget--how much shall we allot for 
this spending program, what shall we do on the tax side. In addition, 
the aggregate budget and the projected deficit can have a profound 
effect upon our overall economy, not only this year but extending well 
into future years.
  We are considering this budget in the context, first and foremost, of 
the military conflict in Iraq and, secondly, in the context of a 
domestic economy which is clearly sputtering.
  Last month, we lost over 300,000 private sector jobs. The number of 
long-term unemployed continues to go up. Now almost 2 million people 
have been out of work for more than 26 weeks. Consumer confidence is at 
a nine-year low.
  Moreover, our fiscal situation has deteriorated significantly over 
the course of this administration. In January of 2001, when President 
Bush took office, the Congressional Budget Office was projecting a 
budget surplus over 10 years of $5.6 trillion. In fact, the President 
pointed to that projected surplus as a rationale for doing the 2001 tax 
cuts. Now the Congressional Budget Office is projecting a $2.1 trillion 
deficit over the same period, assuming the President's tax proposals 
are adopted. That is a swing of more than $7.5 trillion in our fiscal 
position, from a projected surplus of $5.6 trillion to a projected 
deficit of $2.1 trillion. Despite this severe economic deficit outlook, 
the fight over this budget resolution has focused primarily on whether 
to encompass within it sufficient room for another very large tax cut 
which the President is seeking.
  It is asserted by the Administration that this is going to be a 
growth stimulus package. It is not going to be a growth stimulus 
package. It is only a flagrant example of discredited trickle-down 
economics.
  Instead, this budget is going to drive us deeper into the deficit and 
debt hole. It is going to leave us with deficits projected out into the 
indefinite future. We are really mortgaging away our future. This is 
bad macroeconomic policy.
  In addition, within the budget, our urgent national priorities are 
not being adequately addressed. There is not enough for homeland 
defense. We have a pressing health care problem in this country, with 
regard to both the uninsured and prescription drug benefits for our 
senior citizens. We have an affordable housing crisis, in which 
millions of working families cannot afford even a modest apartment in 
many high-cost cities. We have the question of supporting our first 
responders. The mayors across the country are saying they are not 
getting sufficient support from the Federal level in order to meet 
their responsibilities. Instead of providing fully for education so we 
leave no child behind, the proposed tax cuts are designed to leave no 
millionaire behind.
  But I want to address a somewhat broader issue dealing with fairness 
and equity. I first want to note that in every previous instance when 
we went to war, we didn't cut taxes; we raised taxes to help pay for 
the war and to meet its costs. The President has now submitted a $75 
billion supplemental, and it is very clear that that is a downpayment 
only. No one asserts that is going to cover the full cost of the war 
and the reconstruction. So clearly the $75 billion represents the 
initial downpayment, and there is more to follow.
  That further raises the question whether this is the appropriate time 
to commit away significant resources to a tax cut to benefit the 
wealthy. Analysis of the tax cut, which the President is seeking and 
which his supporters in the Senate are trying to carve out room in the 
budget resolution to accommodate, shows that almost half of

[[Page 7459]]

the benefits of the proposed tax cut will go to the top 1 percent of 
the population. Almost three-quarters of it goes to the top 5 percent 
of the population. The proposed tax cut is very heavily skewed toward 
those at the very top of the income and wealth scale in this country; 
this at the very time when the Nation is being rallied, as it should 
be, to support our men and women in the Armed Forces. This at the very 
time when we are talking about sacrifice. And it is appropriate that we 
should talk about sacrifice at a time like this because one cannot 
follow the events taking place now in Iraq without some deep 
appreciation of the sacrifice our fighting men and women are making and 
the risks they are taking every minute.
  What sacrifice are those who are most favored in our society in terms 
of their economic position making at this critical juncture in our 
history? Not only are they not making a sacrifice, they are getting a 
very large tax cut skewed to their benefit which, in turn, will put our 
economy in a more difficult position into the future. It will build up 
deficits and debt which the fighting men and women, when they return 
home, will have to pay off well into the future. They are being called 
upon to make a double sacrifice, now and in the future.
  What is the sacrifice here at home that the beneficiaries of this tax 
cut will be making? Winston Churchill, at the beginning of World War 
II, when he became Prime Minister, told his nation, ``I have nothing to 
offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat.''
  Our young men and women positioned in the Middle East are called upon 
to sacrifice even as we debate this budget resolution. There will be 
sweat. There will be tears. There will be toil. And there will be 
blood. What sacrifice will be made by those who are the most well off 
in our society? At a time when we face these critical challenges, 
should they not be making a contribution instead of reaping a large 
economic benefit?
  Mr. President, I urge the defeat of this budget resolution.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Utah is 
recognized.

                          ____________________