John Spratt: “Mr. Chairman, one more time let me put our chart up. The reason we had zero in allocating the $50 billion tax cut to…”

“Mr. Chairman, one more time let me put our chart up. The reason we had zero in allocating the $50 billion tax cut to 2001 is that is what your resolution provided, until last night at 1 o'clock. Your resolution now provides $5 billion, no more in that particular year. We have, therefore, taken that single number, the only one you provided in breaking out the tax cut, and we have increased the $50 billion tax cut at the same rate that your $150 billion tax cut increased it every year. The same proportion. When you do that, in 2001 the tax cut becomes $15 billion. In 2002, the total tax cut becomes $29 billion. In 2003, it becomes $41 billion. In 2004, it becomes $55 billion. In 2005, it becomes $59 billion. The total tax cut over that period of time is $200 billion. As a result, using simple arithmetic, as a result of those adjustments, just trying to figure out how your $200 billion tax cut would distribute, we get a bottom line that is $5 billion in deficit in the year 2004, and in the year 2005, still negative, minus $2 billion. You are back in deficit, back in the Social Security surplus. If these numbers are wrong, come change them.”