The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“SURGING TAX BURDEN UNDER PRESIDENT CLINTON” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Commerce was published in the Senate section on pages S7053 on June 26, 1996.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
SURGING TAX BURDEN UNDER PRESIDENT CLINTON
Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, under President Bill Clinton, the Federal tax burden as a percentage of national income has risen to the second highest level in American history. As reported by economist Bruce Bartlett, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce, in the first quarter of 1996 Federal taxes consumed 20.5 percent of gross domestic product. Only during periods of war and other unique economic circumstances has the tax burden risen to such levels. For instance, at the height of World War II in 1945, and of the Vietnam war in 1969, Federal taxes took only 20.1 percent and 20.3 percent of GDP, respectively. During the late 1970's and early 1980's, double-digit inflation and a Tax Code that was not indexed for inflation pushed the tax burden to an all-time high of 20.8 percent of GDP. President Clinton's 1993 tax increase--the biggest tax increase in the history of the world--is largely responsible for raising the tax burden from 19.2 percent of GDP in President Bush's last year to today's 20.5 percent of GDP. In my view, there is absolutely no justification for imposing such a heavy tax burden on the American people. We ought to let American people keep more of what they earn so that they can do more for their families and communities. And the best way to accomplish this is to reduce income tax rates for everyone by at least 15 percent.
I ask that Mr. Bartlett's Detroit News editorial be printed in the Record immediately following my remarks.
The editorial follows:
A Surging Record of Clinton Tax Load
(By Bruce Bartlett)
Recently released data show federal taxes continuing their relentless upward trend. As I have previously reported, federal taxes consumed 20.4 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) last year--the second highest level in American history.
According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, however, in the first quarter of 1996 federal revenues have risen by another 0.1 percent to 20.5 percent of GDP. As the figure indicates, federal revenues have now risen by 1.5 percentage points of GDP during the Clinton administration.
This works out to an increase of just over 0.1 percent of GDP every quarter Bill Clinton has been in office. On this basis, we can anticipate that by the fourth quarter of 1996 federal revenues will equal their all-time high of 20.8 percent.
The Congressional Budget Office now estimates that gross domestic product will amount to $7,584 billion in 1996. Thus if revenues were simply to return to the level they were at when Bill Clinton took office, we would have to cut taxes by
$114 billion this year. And every quarter that tax revenues as a share of GDP rise another 0.1 percent, we must increase the size of the tax cut by an additional $7.6 billion.
Predictably, the Clinton administration is hostile to the idea of a tax cut. With the sole exception of John F. Kennedy, no Democratic president in history has ever proposed a major tax cut. Democrats always want to hold on to every last dollar of the taxpayers' money--no tax cut is ever as valuable to them as the equivalent amount of government spending.
Even if they were convinced that a tax cut was justified, it is always ``unfair'' to cut tax rates because that means that those who pay the most taxes get a bigger tax cut. That is why Democrats like tax credits, because they are tax equivalent of government spending. Republicans, by contrast, have historically supported tax rate reductions and increases in tax exemptions, which allow people to keep more of their own money.
Republicans in Congress, therefore, committed a fatal error when they made the $500 child credit the centerpiece of their tax plan. It essentially is Democratic tax policy. As a result, the differences between the two parties on the central issue of taxation have become blurred.
Moreover, the Republicans' obsession with balancing the budget at all costs has blinded them to the need for a tax cut vastly larger than the minuscule $122 billion over six years that they have proposed in their latest budget. They should be talking about a tax rate reduction of at least 15 percent across the board.
____________________
