I think it is important to debate them here, on TV, and in townhall meetings. That is what democracy is all about. But she said to me: Senator, we are so frustrated. Nobody ever hears anybody say they want to cut spending, or they want to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse. So let me concede this point. For me, I don't think we do talk enough about eliminating the waste, eliminating the fraud, and eliminating the abuse. I think we should spend more time, and I am going to commit myself to that, because I know the American people say: Every time we ask for a tax cut, you say we can't afford it. Why don't you cut some spending, et cetera. Let me state that I voted for tax cuts. I am for tax cuts. I have even given tax cuts to people who do make higher than the $75,000 or $100,000 or $250,000, when we had a surplus, when I thought it was the fiscally responsible thing to do. Other people can disagree, but this is the first time I am being asked to provide a tax cut for people earning over $1 million with this kind of deficit.
Editor's note · Context
Senator Landrieu discusses the importance of addressing spending cuts and tax cuts in the context of fiscal responsibility.
Share
More from Mary Landrieu
I ask unanimous consent for 5 more minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered.
I generally support the goals of the enhancements to the FAST Act, and do believe, as Senator McCaskill said, that having--and both of you--a permanent director, a budget, a staff to give some strength to what you all are trying to do.
With all due respect, I say to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: let's let local law enforcement and the elected officials in city government do their job, and we should focus on ours.
Thank you for continuing your focus on this, because the work is not done, and there are billions and billions of dollars of projects that could be built.





