Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I thank him for his leadership on this issue.
Tonight the President will deliver his State of the Union address setting out the challenges facing America in the war on terrorism and his plans for economic recovery. From my seat in this Chamber, I will be listening for one word in particular, "sacrifice."
The word sacrifice should be a natural for a State of the Union address given at a time when the Nation is at war, when we are confronted with the need to defend against new and varied threats to our security, everything from small pox to shoulder-launched missiles that can shoot down commercial aircraft.
Our men and women in uniform are certainly sacrificing. Tens of thousands have been called up, leaving their jobs, their families, often on very short notice and at great financial and personal costs. But what about the average American who is not on active duty or in the reserves? How will we be called upon to make our own contribution to the security and prosperity to the United States?
The centerpiece of the administration's new agenda, and likely his speech tonight, is a $674 billion tax cut weighted heavily towards America's wealthiest families. Can this be the sacrifice that we will be called upon to make with our most prosperous families being asked to make the largest sacrifice by suffering their taxes to be cut the most? In every conflict since the Civil War, the Commander in Chief has called for an increase in revenues to meet the national defense. Can we have more butter, more guns and no sacrifice? Apparently not.
Senate appropriators just cut $8 billion for increased security at our ports, cut $362 million for border security, cut $500 million for police and fire departments who will be first on the scene of any terrorist disaster, cut $534 from job training, cut $1 billion from our schools, underfunding the President's own education initiative. The President's proposal also does nothing to alleviate the States' own budget crises and their correspondingly massive cuts in health care, education and welfare.
Ending the taxation, the double taxation of dividends might be good policy in a vacuum, taking some of the vast fluctuations out of the market. Coupled with reforms that end the no-taxation of other corporate earnings, the provision could be made revenue-neutral; but the administration's proposal is not coupled with other reforms and at a cost of $364 billion is far from revenue-neutral. Because the plan would have little effect on current spending and is permanent, it would also do little to boost our sagging economy, while doing a lot to increase our long-term national debt.
But most importantly, the President's proposal is not made in a vacuum. We have so much work to be done to protect the homeland, and we still suffer the lingering effects of a recession. We have lost almost 2 million jobs in the last 2 years and cannot afford tax cuts that would neither stimulate the economy nor help those most in need. Many of us that supported tax cuts when we were at peace and enjoying historic surpluses must vigorously oppose them now that we are at war and in debt.
As the President's own economic advisors will be the first to admit, small business is the driving force for economic growth and the government's ability to positively impact the economy through fiscal policy is limited.
Probably the most significant contribution the Federal Government made to the prosperity of the 1990s was the difficult decision to balance the budget and keep interest rates low. But now we are back to the days of deficits as far as the eye can see. White House budget director Mitch Daniels can only say that the new red ink is nothing to hyperventilate about, which raises the question, where have the fiscal conservatives gone?
Americans are a proud and generous people who are more than willing to sacrifice in a worthy cause. If, instead, we are to give ourselves a gift no other war generation has given itself, we will denude our ability to defend the homeland or, at best, shift to our children responsibility to pay for our economic health and safety.