I support a significant tax cut for all Americans. I proposed and voted for a $900 billion tax cut. I think that is a level we can afford, one that will accommodate protecting the Social Security and Medicare trust funds, one that will permit us to set aside money to strengthen Social Security for the future, one that will allow us to reserve resources for important domestic priorities. I cannot support this conference report because it does not permit us to protect Social Security and Medicare. It threatens to put us back into deficit. It threatens to put us back into building debt after a decade of getting our fiscal house in order. This morning's Washington Post labels this conference report for what it is, 'Tax Fraud.' It says: The House-Senate tax cut conferees came up with a way, yesterday, to stuff even more cuts into the bill without appearing to break the cost ceiling that Congress virtuously imposed on itself earlier in the year. They went on to say: Without apparent embarrassment, they adopted the mother of all accounting gimmicks. To keep the supposed 10-year cost of the bill at $1.35 trillion, they will pretend that major provisions expire after nine years. What they have done is alter the calendar. In a bill that is to cover 10 years, they just took off the last year. What is the effect of that? The Washington Post says: This is a permanent tax cut masquerading as temporary. But the masquerade is all that matters.…
Kent Conrad: “I support a significant tax cut for all Americans. I proposed and voted for a $900 billion tax cut. I think that is a…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing opposition to a tax cut conference report and its implications for Social Security and Medicare.
Share
More from Kent Conrad
We tried to include some of these ideas in our Social Security reform package, to actually provide incentives in the system for people to continue to work.
We did a whole series of things in our Social Security reform not to discourage people from working, but to encourage them to continue working if they are able to do so.
Can I just respond quickly, Mr. Chairman, and say when Simpson-Bowles went down, a group of six of us in the Senate, three Democrats, three Republicans, were asked by leadership to see if we couldn't come up with a way forward to adopt the…
We all know that Social Security is going to have to be dealt with, or we are going to face by 2034 at the latest--many of us believe it will be earlier than that---an across-the-board 23-percent cut.





