The problem with our economy is that there is too little employment and too little growth. This plan will do nothing to improve that condition and will actually make it worse.
Like this two-sided coin, the Clinton budget bill has two sides. One side is a tax increase-the largest tax increase in the world, and most Americans know that. But the other side of this coin-of the Clinton budget plan is something else, and it's not spending cuts; it's spending increases: $165 billion in new domestic spending, adding $1.2 trillion to the deficit, growing Government by 20 percent over the next 4 years, all charged to our children and grandchildren. Mr. Speaker, with most coins it is: Heads, you win; tails, you lose; but with the Clinton budget bill it is: Tax increases, the American people lose; spending increases, the American people lose. There is something new about this coin, but there is absolutely nothing new about the Clinton proposal. It is tax and spend: Heads, you lose; tails, you lose.
The Clinton tax hikes on income would have a devastating impact on long-term economic growth. In particular, the increase in the tax burden would reduce savings and investment, thus hampering the economy’s capacity to generate new jobs and higher wages. Specifically, higher tax rates on income would punish productive economic activity, reduce tax revenues, lead to increased federal spending and higher budget deficits, reduce job creation and penalize small business.
These new taxes will stifle economic growth, destroy jobs, reduce revenues, and increase the deficit. Economists across the ideological spectrum are convinced that the Clinton tax increases will lead to widespread job loss.
Mr. Chairman, the President's budget plan which is incorporated into this budget resolution imposes higher taxes and more deficit spending. We have been told that that kind of a budget package will have an impact on the economy. Certainly I agree. However, it will be the kind of impact that this country can't absorb. It will slow economic growth, contribute to the massive Federal deficit, and increase Government spending.
As a result, even though the Clinton proposal contains a very steep increase in the nation's tax burden, the actual amount of money the government collects may fall if enough workers lose their jobs and the taxable incomes of individuals and businesses decline.
But, I will tell you, this program will not give you deficit reduction. It will be a disaster for the performance of the economy because of the repressive impact of these taxes and, of course, the possible inflationary impact of the taxes, along with the labor-cost-increasing mandates that are already a part of the president's agenda.
[In 1981] we, as a nation, finally recognized that it is patently unfair to take more and more from a worker simply because he or she works harder, or longer, or takes more risk, or displays more innovation.
For years now we have moved inexorably toward a larger and larger share of resources being absorbed by government. This has translated into a greatly expanded role for government in business, society in general, and in our personal lives. Obviously, this involvement has carried a price tag—which has translated into fewer resources available for more productive use in the private sector.
It should have been obvious from experience—but wasn’t—that additional hard work, genius, creativity and risk-taking were all discouraged by high marginal tax rates.
