to the Editor
TAX CUTS EQUAL MORE FREEDOM - IT'S THAT SIMPLE!
March 13, 2001
Congress considers Pres. Bush's proposed $1.6 trillion dollar tax
cut and the Democrats' $900 billion dollar tax cut counter-proposal
(both over 10 years, which means little money in the pockets of
most people during the first few years), there has also been floated
an idea by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) to grant Congress a "per
diem" consideration. Yet both the Speaker of the House Denny
Hastert (R-IL) & House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-MO)
have opposed the idea for now. However, we still must be vigilant
about Congress spending our projected budget surpluses to fatten
their already bloated pocketbooks as they debate about doling out
a meager phased-in tax cut to us taxpayers.
to the Senate Historical Office & Senate Disbursing Office &
the Congressional Research Service, Congress already has had 3 pay
increases since 1993 (In 1993, 1998, & 2000) during the Clinton-Gore
Administration. The Republicans gained control of both houses of
Congress in 1995 but their fiscal discipline went out the door in
1998 through 2000. You can view Congress's entire pay history at
At the end of 1992 members of Congress who were not party leaders
or the House Speaker or the Senate President pro-tempore received
$129,500 per annum. Now they get $141,300 per annum. That's an increase
of $11,800 NOT COUNTING THEIR OTHER BENEFITS & GENEROUS HEALTH
CARE & RETIREMENT PLANS. It has been calculated that a new per
diem rate of $165 attached to Congressional REIMBURSABLE or EXPENSE
ACCOUNTS could add an additional $25,000 per year per Representative
or Senator. HOW MANY PEOPLE DO YOU KNOW IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR ONLY
EARN BETWEEN $11,800 & $25,000 PER YEAR? DO YOU THINK THE GENERAL
PUBLIC GETS THAT MUCH MORE REPRESENTATION FROM CONGRESS? HOW MANY
PEOPLE DO YOU KNOW IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR HAVE RECEIVED 3 PAY INCREASES
IN THE PAST 8 YEARS? HAS YOUR COST OF LIVING ALSO INCREASED IN THE
PAST 8 YEARS? Yet a large group (mostly Democrats) of Representatives
& Senators are reluctant to give us taxpayers a break that Pres.
Bush proposes. It seems that we no longer can trust either party
in control of Congress when it comes to any fiscal discipline unless
it's on the backs of us working, taxpaying people.
that we need a larger tax cut than the one proposed by Bush or at
least implement his proposal much earlier by enacting his ending
tax rates NOW rather than being phased-in over 10 years. This would
not only stimulate the economy amidst current recession fears &
the roller coaster effect of the current stock market but also would
impose more fiscal discipline & restraint where it matters the
most: on a spendthrift federal government. WHAT DO THE WORKING PEOPLE
OF AMERICA WANT? A TAX CUT! WHEN DO THEY WANT IT? NOW! That is the
cry our federal politicians need to hear!
we will hear the pleas from the politicians that they need our tax
cut money instead to balance the budget, pay for defense & social
programs, to pay for foreign aid for our allies, & to pay for
their SECOND HOUSE in Washington, DC or it's suburbs. Most Americans
are barely able to pay their first mortgage while Congress says
they need their SECOND HOME. I say "B.S." to their argument.
They only work 4 days a week now & most of their self-imposed
protracted time & expenses are spent dealing with lobbyists
who pay those alleged extra expenses anyway. Instead, I maintain
we need to continue to cut back government -- not to make a new
class of millionaires who occasionally throw some crumbs of meager
tax relief in the faces of the working taxpaying Americans.
money in the hands of working Americans means more freedom for the
people, while more money in the hands of the government means more
control for the politicians.