Thomas Daschle: “Let me just say that our concern for the accelerated rate cut reduction at this point is based on three concerns. First…”

“Let me just say that our concern for the accelerated rate cut reduction at this point is based on three concerns. First, it is not in keeping with the principles we laid out. We said it ought to be stimulative. We said it ought to be temporary. It is neither of these. So for those reasons, we are opposed to the accelerated rate reduction. Second, we said it ought to be cost conscious. Of course, this is a very expensive proposal, at least $52 billion, and as much as about $125 billion depending on what kind of acceleration we are talking about. So there is a very significant cost associated with it. When we recognize that this money is coming from borrowed funds, the Social Security trust fund, that will be troubling. Third, of course, is who benefits. What we want to do is put it into the hands of those who will benefit and who is most likely to spend the money so that there is something of consumptive value and whatever it is we are doing in an economic stimulus will be most appreciated. This does not have much consumptive value. This does not have much value in terms of both economic as well as fairness factors and considerations.”