Kent Conrad: “I have been amazed at the argument from the other side, absolutely amazed. My amendment is not as good as the status…”

“I have been amazed at the argument from the other side, absolutely amazed. My amendment is not as good as the status quo? Their proposal is better? What math are they using? I grew up in North Dakota, went to North Dakota schools where one and one is two; two and two is four; four and four is eight. That is the math I learned. I don't know what math they are talking about. Let's talk about the difference between my proposal before the Senate and their proposal. Let's talk about current law. They say mine is not as good as current law. Under current law, next year the exemption will be $1 million. That is 2003. Under my proposal, the exemption is $3 million. So the rate for an individual who has an estate that is taxed next year below $3 million, the rate is zero; their rate above $1 million is 41 percent. Which is better? A zero rate up to $3 million, as in my proposal? Or their proposal, which is a 41-percent rate over $1 million? Can we do the math? Which proposal means less tax to the individual in the family? Zero percent up to $3 million? Or their proposal that says a 41-percent rate over $1 million. Compare it to current law. My rate is zero percent up to $3 million. They have zero up to $1 million. That is current law. But over that the rate is 41 percent. Let's see, are you going to pay less tax under my proposal or their proposal? Are you going to pay less tax under my proposal or under current law? Come on.…”