Senator Collins Discusses Tax Amendment

Ms. COLLINS. I would like to add one other point of clarification on this provision. By no means do we intend to prohibit States from using the revenuesharing portion of this amendment on services or other spending that the State cut in its most recent budget. If a State wanted to use a portion of these funds to restore all or part of a vital service it was forced to eliminate or reduce, it should be allowed to do so. We know that the State is the best judge of how to prioritize these funds, not the Federal Government.

Madam President, I thank my colleague and close friend, the Senator from Nebraska, for his leadership and for making such an excellent case. I know there are others who are waiting, so I will conclude the debate on this by making just one final point. Forty-nine States are facing severe budget shortfalls. This is not an isolated problem. It is a problem that affects all but one State. This isn't a case where States have been fiscally irresponsible, spending wildly.

In fact, the States are coping with the demand for services and a decline in revenues at the same time. It is not something they brought upon themselves. That is why we should step in temporarily—these are not permanent assistance programs—to provide help. It will help ensure that 1.7 million Americans will not lose their Medicaid services. It will help ensure that they might just have a little bit of help as they make the painful, difficult choices that are necessary to close their budget gap. It will help ensure that it has a direct stimulative effect, which is, after all, the entire purpose of this package. It is to get our economy growing again and create good jobs. Fiscal aid to States will help to achieve that critical goal.

I want to take this opportunity to ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment.