Max Baucus: “I cannot answer that kind of hypothetical because there is no way of knowing what else might be in that bill the…”

“I cannot answer that kind of hypothetical because there is no way of knowing what else might be in that bill the President may not like, just as there's no way of knowing whether President Clinton would have vetoed a capital gains reduction standing alone. Presidents don't have the ability to line-item veto, so it is very hard to answer that question. But my basic point is clear: This bill contains no capital gains provisions, and for that reason, the amendment is nongermane. As I mentioned earlier, the amendment offered by my good friend from New Hampshire adds much greater complexity to the tax bill than already exists by making capital gains reductions apply only for a short period of time. We have had a difficult enough time as it is in this bill to try to fit a more progressive bill into the confines of $1.35 trillion over 11 years. We wanted to provide for marriage penalty relief, refundability of the child tax credit and expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit, lower marginal rates, increased pension benefits, education deductions for college tuition. It has been very hard to fit in all those provisions. Now the Senator from New Hampshire would add more complexity by making this capital gains provision active only for a short period of time. I believe a major amendment such as this one needs to be thoroughly vetted before we impose a new capital gains structure through this bill.”