On the recordOctober 1, 1999
Well, I was delighted to see that he, or that any prominent Republican, finally had joined our position on this. We've been saying this since the proposal was first floated. What they propose to do is unconscionable, and basically, instead of those people getting their tax returns on time like other Americans do, they would get it once a month, and it would cost them a lot of money not only in--they would actually lose some money and then the rest of the money they would get much later in the year. I think it's wrong, and I intend to do everything I can to stop it. And I believe I can stop it. But I will also say, as I said yesterday, that this is a difficult thing for the Republicans because unlike us, they don't want to provide reasonable offsets so that we can begin this year to segregate the Social Security surplus from the general revenue surplus and not dip into the Social Security surplus any more. That requires good, firm decisions with reasonable offsets, and we've given them to the Congress. And I hope that the reaction across the country to their idea to raise taxes on the poor will provoke them to reconsider the offsets we have offered. Let me emphasize again, however, that this only underscores my judgment that I did the right thing in vetoing their tax cut. They can't even pay for this year's spending without getting into the Social Security surplus. They certainly couldn't pay for this year's spending, the spending it will necessitate in the years to come, and the tax cut on top of that. Japanese Nuclear Accident
Source
govinfo.gov




