From: bounce-budgetgroups-6563 at lyris.ombwatch.org [mailto:bounce-budgetgroups-6563 at lyris.ombwatch.org] On Behalf Of Ellen Taylor Sent: Friday, August 13, 1999 4:30 PM To: Budget News & Analysis Subject: TAX CUT ALERT!
TAX CUT ALERT!
There is a well-funded and organized campaign taking place over this August congressional recess to garner support for the massive tax cut bill recently passed by Congress. Its goal is to weaken the President’s resolve to veto the tax bill or, at least, to pave the way for a compromise, "middle ground" tax cut -- less than $792 billion, but still too much. It is vital that everyone who is concerned with domestic investment carry on an equally energetic unpaid campaign opposing tax cuts at ANY level.
There are 3 simple messages you can use in meeting with members of Congress while they are back home:
(1) The surplus that is supposed to pay for tax cuts is based on severe cuts to domestic discretionary spending. Without deep and unconscionable reductions in important domestic programs, there is no money for tax cuts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
mbs: only if you don't count the surplus to the
Social Security trust funds, which are twice
again as large as those from the "on-budget"
surplus . . .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
(2) If tax cuts are enacted, discretionary spending, especially domestic discretionary spending, will be dangerously restricted for years to come. The tax cuts are designed to explode in future years, gobbling up federal resources. Assuming that we do not create a deficit, it will mean massive cuts in government spending.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
mbs: Under democrats, domestic spending will be dangerously
restricted for years to come if they follow thru on their
demented crusade to pay off the national debt without reducing
by much defense spending (see my post, "Dee-fense"). Such a
crusade is fortified by phrases like 'assuming that we do not
create a deficit . . . '
Also, $800 b is not really that large, considering the size of GDP and prospective revenues. Neither would an $800 b spending increase be large, except by comparison to what's in store, which is virtually zilch.
It is little known but the Clinton budget itself contemplates
a revenue reduction of $441 billion if one includes their proposed
USA saving program (which they categorize as a tax cut). Its
saving grace is some marginal ease of restrictions on spending
(i.e., smaller cuts).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
(3) The tax cuts primarily benefit wealthy Americans and special interests. The tax cuts unfairly give tax relief to the wealthy and special interests. It is estimated that 81.1% of the tax cut benefits would go the wealthiest 20% of taxpayers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
mbs: Who (whom?) does debt pay-down benefit? The Administration likens a fall in interest rates -- which fall they stipulate and for which they take credit -- to a tax cut. Hmmm.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
PLEASE CALL AND MEET WITH YOUR REPRESENTATIVES OVER THE RECESS AND URGE THEM TO OPPOSE ANY TAX CUTS. . . .
mbs