Judd Gregg: “I wished to comment on a couple other points. We went through this when we debated the budget and the Senator from North…”

“I wished to comment on a couple other points. We went through this when we debated the budget and the Senator from North Dakota used his charts and I responded with an occasional chart, not quite as many. But I think it is important to make these points in a couple of areas. He says there is a 2-percent difference now between his tax revenues and the President's tax revenues over the 5 years. When he brought the budget out, it was 3 percent; 3 percent came out to $1/2 trillion. He is at the 2 percent number now because he has factored in the fact that they reduced taxes or they at least allowed some of the tax extenders to go forward with the Baucus amendment which, basically, by accepting that amendment as a first amendment, the Senator from North Dakota made our argument for us, which was that they were raising taxes. That 2 percent would translate into about $300 billion today, a lot of money. If you decide you are going to create a chart and you use small enough incrementals, you can end up with those two lines being together, but $300 billion is big-time dollars. That is the American taxpayer having to pay a lot of money in order to cover new spending under the Democratic proposal.”