[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 18583-18584]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         PAYROLL TAX EXTENSION

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, yesterday, Republicans, led by Senator 
Heller, introduced what we believe is a much smarter approach to 
extending the temporary payroll tax cut than the one proposed by 
Democrats involving permanent tax hikes on job creators.
  Similar to Democrats, we think struggling American workers should 
continue to get this temporary relief for another year. There is no 
reason folks should suffer even more than they already are from the 
President's failure to turn this jobs crisis around. But there is also 
no reason we should pay for that relief by raising taxes on the very 
employers we are counting on to help jolt this economy back to life. We 
would not be helping anybody by making it less likely that small 
businesses actually start hiring people

[[Page 18584]]

again. Senator Heller's proposal would achieve the same result, the 
same relief, without a gratuitous hit on job creators. Even better, our 
plan protects Social Security and reduces the Federal deficit by more 
than $111 billion.
  How do we do it? Consistent with the recommendations of the 
bipartisan Simpson-Bowles Commission, our payroll tax plan would 
institute a 3-year pay freeze on Federal civilian employees, including 
Members of Congress. It would also reduce the Federal workforce 
gradually by 10 percent, not by firing anybody but by only hiring one 
replacement for every three Federal employees who leave Federal service 
until a 10-percent reduction that the Simpson-Bowles Commission 
recommended is reached. So over this period, only hire one worker for 
every three who leave until it achieved a 10-percent reduction in the 
Federal workforce. This is a recommendation in the Simpson-Bowles 
Commission.
  Our bill would also save money by means testing Medicare benefits for 
millionaires and billionaires. What does that mean? One of the things 
the economic downturn of the past few years has revealed is that a lot 
of people out there are getting a pretty good deal from the government 
at every level, all on the taxpayers' dime. Let me give you an example. 
Yesterday, a CBS affiliate in Philadelphia reported that a former 
Philadelphia school superintendent who got a nearly $1 million buyout 
in August is now putting in for unemployment benefits. The lady was 
shown the door, given $905,000 not to finish her 5-year contract with 
the school district, and on top of that she now wants the taxpayers to 
subsidize her unemployment benefits to the tune of about $30,000 a 
year. Our proposal helps minimize this kind of thing.
  What we are saying is, anybody who makes more than $1 million a year 
should not get an unemployment check on top of it, paid for with tax 
dollars of folks struggling just to make ends meet. No more 
unemployment checks or food stamps for millionaires. No more 
unemployment checks or food stamps for millionaires. We don't think 
these folks would mind having to pay the full freight on their Medicare 
premiums either. Millions of seniors need help covering their monthly 
Medicare premiums; Warren Buffett is not one of them.
  Here is another way we think folks such as Warren Buffett can offset 
the relief we are giving working Americans through our proposal of a 
temporary extension of payroll tax cuts, which would also incorporate 
legislation from Senator Thune, that would allow people who want to 
voluntarily help pay down the Federal debt to do so on their tax 
return. There would actually be a new line right on Warren Buffett's 
tax returns enabling him or anybody else, for that matter, to give as 
much as they want. That way those who want to go that route can feel 
they are contributing in a way they want to contribute, and small 
business owners who want to help our economic and fiscal situation by 
growing their businesses and creating jobs can do that too without 
Washington dictating one way or the other.
  This is the kind of balanced plan Americans are looking for. It is 
focused on helping middle-class Americans without asking them to fund 
benefits for the wealthiest among us, and it does so without 
hamstringing the economy--as the Democrats would--with a permanent tax 
on job creators. Bear in mind what they are doing here is ``paying for 
a temporary payroll tax relief with a permanent tax increase on job 
creators.'' It also helps rein in the bureaucracy in Washington.
  Millions of Americans have had to go without or to live with less 
over the past few years. Yet all they see here is that Washington just 
keeps getting bigger and bigger and richer. It is about time Washington 
took the hit for a change. We think this is a plan that those who are 
fed up with Washington and Wall Street can embrace but, as I have said 
before, we are never going to turn this economy around as long as we 
are focused on these temporary measures.
  Yesterday, I outlined our vision for a tax-reform plan that restores 
basic fairness, helps put businesses on a level playing field, and puts 
our tax rates in line with our competitors overseas. That is the kind 
of thing that will get this economy charging again and we will continue 
to press for it. Meanwhile, we will also continue to point out what 
this administration is doing to prevent job creation right now.

                          ____________________