Congressional Budget For The United States Government For Fiscal Year 2008
Floor Speech
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 -- (Senate - May 09, 2007)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, this motion to instruct conferees should sound familiar to my colleagues. This actually was an amendment to the budget resolution that received 63 affirmative votes in a bipartisan show of support for what I believe is a commonsense provision. This provision says that before we raise income taxes, we need to have a 60-vote point of order to do that.
This made so much sense that my colleague, the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee, said he would be willing to accept the amendment by voice vote, although we went ahead and had a vote. I thought the vote was necessary to demonstrate, and did demonstrate, the broad bipartisan support for this amendment. This amendment, which was section 210 of the Senate-passed budget, creates a 60-vote budget point of order against any legislation that raises income taxes on taxpayers, including, of course, hard-working, middle-class families, college students, entrepreneurs, and you name it.
As I pointed out, this was a bipartisan vote, which is an insurance policy of sorts so that Congress can look and make sure any increase in income taxes is justified and that it would require a vote of 60 Senators to overcome the budget point of order before proceeding. The reason I thought this was a good idea in the first place is that before we look at raising taxes on hard-working American taxpayers, we ought to look at ways to eliminate Government waste, fraud, and abuse.
We all know the power to tax is the power to destroy, and, indeed, it is a powerful tool at Congress's disposal but one we ought to use advisedly. This point of order puts in place a safeguard that will protect the pocketbooks of all of us.
Some, though, are now advocating that we pull the rug out from under our economy and roll back the kind of tax relief and low taxes--progrowth policies--that have resulted in an incredible blossoming and blooming of the American economy. The last thing we should do would be to throw a wet blanket over this kind of economic growth that has created so much prosperity, so much opportunity, and so many new jobs over the last few years.
The progrowth tax relief has helped this economy grow and particularly in the small business sector, which has created a lot of jobs. We should view this as a matter of great pride because it is one of the good things that this Congress has done in the last 4 years. These progrowth tax policies are working. As a matter of fact, we have some charts that demonstrate 22 straight quarters of growth and almost 7.9 million new jobs. That is nothing to be sneezed at. There have been almost 7.9 million new jobs over the past 44 consecutive months, with 22 quarters of growth.
As we move forward, the last thing we should consider doing is reversing the policies that have helped bring about America's booming economy, which has reduced the deficit by producing more money for the Federal Treasury and also put more money in the pockets of hard-working American taxpayers.
As a matter of fact, I think we ought to take a further step and make these tax relief provisions, which are set to expire unless we fail to act, I think we ought to make them permanent. If we don't, we will not only jeopardize future economic growth but also the financial well-being of millions of Americans, all of whom will face higher tax bills unless we act.
Not making this tax relief permanent will result in a tax increase for every American taxpayer. For example, a family of four, with two children, making $50,000 in annual income would see an increase of $2,092 in their tax bill or a 132-percent increase.
This point of order will not hinder our efforts to close down illegal tax shelters or close perceived loopholes in the IRS Code, a concern that I know the chairman expressed. In the colloquy we had when the amendment was passed, I think I was able to satisfy him that we would still be able to do what we both agree needs to be done but not see a tax increase on American taxpayers virtually assured.
The point of order covers the tax tables contained in the 1040 form the IRS sends to taxpayers every year. It will not hinder efforts to overhaul the IRS Code. I support efforts to overhaul the IRS Code by making it fairer, flatter, and simpler. Any tax simplification and reform efforts will need bipartisan support in the Senate, so I ask my colleagues to support my motion to instruct the conferees to include the point of order against raising income taxes on hard-working taxpayers through the budget conference committee.
I might add, in closing, I have had conversations with the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee. I know he has concerns as a result of conversations he has had with the Parliamentarian. There has been some suggestion that to include this provision in the conference report would render the conference report unprivileged. I believe there was demonstration of broad bipartisan support for this provision, which enjoyed a 63-to-35 vote on the Senate floor. While I certainly understand the budget chairman's desire to maintain a special privileged status for the budget resolution, I think in this case it would be warranted.
Including this provision will act as an insurance policy against undesirable and unnecessary tax increases, especially until such time as we do our dead level best to reduce the waste, fraud, and abuse that, unfortunately, is present in Government today and to try to save money there before we begin raising taxes. It is particularly important because we have this silent tax increase that is, unfortunately, included in this framework that will now occur if we do nothing. This will be the only tax increase I am aware of that will actually happen if we fail to act, but that is what, unfortunately, we are on course to do with this budget resolution.
So I would respectfully ask my colleagues to support the motion to instruct conferees on this matter.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, if I can respond briefly to the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee, I appreciate his willingness to take this motion to instruct because he said it will not survive; it will not see the light of day; it is going to be killed in the dark recesses of the conference committee room.
Mr. CONRAD. Even in the lighted room.
Mr. CORNYN. So it is a very strange process we are engaged in here. I respect the distinguished chairman, but I remind him, at the time we voted on this, to quote him, the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee said, ``It certainly will not do any damage to this resolution if it were to pass.''
I understand there was a subsequent conversation with the Parliamentarian that raised this issue. But I suggest in most proceedings that I am familiar with, there is some notion of waiver, that you have a responsibility to speak early, rather than to create a false impression that we are going to do something here to keep taxes low, to create a 60-vote budget point of order, rather than lay low and then raise an issue late in the game that could have been raised and addressed earlier.
None of that is to impute any bad faith to the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee. It is just to say this is a very strange process, one I think the American people, anybody who happens to be listening or watching, would say: This must be a Washington, DC phenomenon where we suspend reality, we accept amendments by a bipartisan vote and now a motion to instruct, only to ignore them even though they represent the will of the Senate. I think that does not enhance the image of the Senate or the Congress in the eyes of the American people. The fact is, if we do raise taxes, it will be like a wet blanket on the American economy.
I want to allude briefly to an article that was in the Wall Street Journal today that I think demonstrates my point. It is entitled ``April Revenue Shower.'' It says:
Tax receipts for April were $70 billion above the same month in 2006, and April 24 marked the single biggest day of tax collections in U.S. history, at $48.7 billion.
It is the low taxes and the progrowth policies that this Federal Government has embraced since roughly August of 2003 which has generated the economic activity which has resulted in a windfall to the Treasury. As a matter of fact, this article goes on to say:
The deficit this year could tumble to $150 billion, or an economically trivial 1 percent of GDP.
That is the kind of benefit--one of the kinds of benefits--I think low taxes have produced. I think it would be a crying shame to raise taxes and jeopardize job growth and economic development in this country.
I understand what the Senator says, that he doesn't intend that there is going to be a tax increase, but we have seen proposals for dramatic increases in spending. The money has to come from somewhere. We have adopted a pay-as-you-go provision which has a built-in bias against tax cuts because it says before you can have a tax cut, you are going to have to have some way to balance it out, a revenue raiser, which means in the end we are going to see a dramatic increase in taxes, whether--and I take him at his word that is not his intention. But we are on a dangerous course to seeing a huge tax increase, perhaps one of the biggest in our Nation's history. That, I believe, is against the best interests of the American people in this big economy.
I accept what the Senator has to say. He is willing to accept my motion to instruct, but it will not be to any effect. It will be ignored. I guess that is the way it is. But I think the American people, and particularly the hard-working taxpayers, are the losers. I think that is a shame.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source