The tax cuts authorized in this resolution total $1.3 trillion over the next 10 years. Over the same 10 years, the Federal budget will run deficits totaling $1.4 trillion. The priority of those supporting this resolution is crystal clear: tax cuts today, in exchange for an even higher mountain of debt that will be paid by our children and grandchildren. So strong is the lust for tax cuts, the conference committee on the budget has gone so far as to develop an unprecedented gimmick by which the Senate and the House of Representatives will consider a portion of these tax cuts later in the year. Under normal procedures, a conference report is to be a consolidated single resolution of all of its issues. We are presented with what is called a conference report, which has a dramatic difference between tax cut allowances in the House--$550 billion, over 10 years--and tax cuts allowed in the Senate--$350 billion. The goal of the majority is to give the appearance of limiting tax cuts to the Senate-passed limit of $350 billion, while paving the way for fast-track tax cuts of $550 billion. During the debate on the Senate's budget resolution a couple of weeks ago, I voted against any tax cut in the budget. Why? Because, in my judgment, they do not reflect our Nation's priorities. This budget should seek to reduce the national debt.
Gwen Graham: “The tax cuts authorized in this resolution total $1.3 trillion over the next 10 years. Over the same 10 years, the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of tax cuts and budget deficits during a Senate floor debate.
Share
More from Gwen Graham
The declassified version was released to the public on July 24, 2003. I filed legislation, S. 1520, September 11, the Memorial Intelligence Reform Act, to implement those recommendations 1 week later on July 31, 2003. Each of these panels…
the death last week of President Ronald Reagan has focused our attention on the ravages that Alzheimer's inflicts not only on the person with the disease, but the entire family. Alzheimer's disease currently affects 4.5 million Americans…
we are here for two fundamental reasons. One, we are here to remove from our Tax Code a provision that has been declared illegal by the World Trade Organization, and certain industries in America are now being sanctioned for that illegal…
Does that mean the budget is even more out of balance in terms of providing services than the one the President submitted which would have had those increases in out-of-pocket costs?





