Jon Kyl: “In that event, Mr. President, I do not understand the argument of the Senator from Wisconsin, because we are not going…”

“In that event, Mr. President, I do not understand the argument of the Senator from Wisconsin, because we are not going to need 60 votes simply to reduce taxes. If we have a surplus, then the revenues that would be lost theoretically from a reduction in taxes would have to be offset. But there is no requirement in that case that there be a supermajority to cut taxes. The revenue that would result that would show up in subsequent years would be required to be taken into account in order to determine whether we had a balanced budget and whether we needed to reduce expenditures in subsequent years. But at the time that we would make the decision to cut taxes, there would not be a requirement for a 60-vote majority. To the other point that the Senator made, asking the question with regard to the Social Security trust fund, that I was somehow suggesting that we only honor our obligation when we have a surplus, I do not understand that either because, of course, that was not my point. That is not the fact. We have an obligation to our Social Security recipients, our retirees, that has to be satisfied regardless of whether the Social Security trust fund is in surplus or in deficit. That is a solemn commitment that we all understand and we are prepared to meet. Over the last several years, we have been building up a surplus theoretically, so we are in the situation now where there is a surplus. We are meeting the obligations. That is not at issue.”