Senate Proceeding on Apr 1st, 2009 :: 3:48:40 to 3:59:20
Total video length: 10 hours 55 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Views:188 Duration: 0:10:40 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

3:48:36 to 3:48:59( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: with balanced priorities, and i urge the senate to pass it. i yield the floor, madam president. senator from kentucky. mr. bunning: madam president, thank you. i rise today to discuss the fiscal year 2010 budget. i also plan to discuss two

3:48:40 to 3:59:20( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Jim Bunning

3:49:00 to 3:49:20( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: amendments, number 817 and number 818, that i would like to see considered as a member of the senate budget committee. i spoke on this budget last week during the committee consideration. i was unable to support it then and unless truly major changes are made here on the senate floor this week, i will not be able t

3:49:21 to 3:49:41( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: comes up for a vote. since the president first gave us a preview of his plan, we have heard a lot about this year's budget. i have found it to be very troubling. the budget proposed by the obama administration is unworkable and i think everyone here knows

3:49:42 to 3:50:02( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: that. it spends too much, taxes too much and borrows too much. the numbers in the president's proposal were appalling to anyone that believes in any kind of fiscal it got each worse two weeks ago when the congressional budget office predicted that

3:50:03 to 3:50:24( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: numbers used by the administration were far too optimistic. the president's proposal would double the public held national debt to more than $15 trillion. trillion. annual spending would leap from $24,000 per household to about $32,000 per household.

3:50:25 to 3:50:49( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: this plan would also raise taxes by $1.4 trillion over the ten years. the increase in debt is also staggering. the president's proposal would double the debt held by the public in five years and nearly triple it over ten years. in fact, the proposal would

3:50:50 to 3:51:10( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: create more debt than every previous president from george with numbers like that, it is not surprising that the authors of this budget resolution before us today had to make some while i applaud the efforts of

3:51:11 to 3:51:32( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: chairman conrad to attempt to rein in some o aspects of the administration's budget proposal, it appears that we may only have an obama version in front of us. in fact, peter orszag, the director of the office of management and budget, tells us

3:51:33 to 3:51:54( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: that the two versions are the same. 98%. the budget here on the floor still has the same problems and in some cases new problems. president obama promised a new era of transparency in government. this is one reason why he

3:51:55 to 3:52:15( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: submitte proposal. however, the proposal before us is only a five-year projection. also, the president's budget assumed that congress would continue to patch the alternative minimum tax which digs deeper and deeper into the

3:52:16 to 3:52:38( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: middle class each year. the budget assumes that we will the first three years of this five-year budget proposal. everyone here knows that we are going to have to take care of those other two years, as we should. however, it looks like we still

3:52:39 to 3:52:59( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: have more it defies logic that this budget targets tax hikes on every person or people who are good at creating jobs we know that growth in the united states, when we had it, came from small

3:53:00 to 3:53:21( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: business. this budget penalizes the people who are responsible for two-thirds of the small business jobs. one of the most basic economic principles is that yo that if you have -- if you activity, you tax it more.

3:53:22 to 3:53:44( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: well, we must want less of job or maybe we only want to create jobs for government bureaucrats that spend other people's and our grandchildren and as i have outlined above, this budget has many other it spends too much, taxes too

3:53:45 to 3:54:06( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: much and borrows too much. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting changes that would make this responsible and fair piece of it w also like to take a few minutes to talk about the two amendments i will be introducing later in

3:54:07 to 3:54:27( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: the marathon we have tomorrow thursday -- that's tomorrow. the first is especially important for manufacture our seniors many of our seniors because it deals with my amendment sets up a deficit reserve found repeal the 1993

3:54:28 to 3:54:49( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: increase in the income tax on social security benefits. the house and before this chamber before. in fact, earlier this year stimulus bill, i offered an amendment to repeal this unfair

3:54:50 to 3:55:10( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: tax for just one year. that amendment failed. so with this amendment i am taking a different tack and using a deficit-neutral reserve fund tax increase completely. this should be familiar to the chairman of the budget committee

3:55:11 to 3:55:31( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: since he offered a similar amen deficit-neutral reserve fund during the budget consideration last year. i would like to remind my colleagues that his amendment passed last year ba vote of yeas and 46 nays. when the social security program was created, benefits were not

3:55:32 to 3:55:52( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: taxed at all. however, in 1983, congress changed the rules of the game by passing legislation to taxing up to 50% of a senior's social security benefit if their income was over $25,000 for a individual or

3:55:53 to 3:56:13( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: couple. in 1993, as i sat on the ways and means committee congress felt 50% o of the benefit wasn't good enough. that year congress passed and th-- president clinton signed a bill that would allow 85% of

3:56:14 to 3:56:34( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: the senior's social security benefits to be tax th taxed if their income was above $34,000 for a single taxpayer or $44,000 for a couple. the additional money this tax raises doesn't even go to help social security solncy. it goes instead to the medicare

3:56:35 to 3:56:57( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: part-a program. i oppos opposed this tax increase then and i oppose it today because 14 14 million senio 85% of their social security benefits being taxed. on one hd, we tell the seniors

3:56:58 to 3:57:18( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: to plan and save for retirement. on the other hand, we tax them for doing just t this amendment puts the senate on record that this 85% tax tier would be eliminated and the maximum amount of social security benefits

3:57:19 to 3:57:39( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: taxed would be 50%. if congress passed legislation to do this, millions of seniors would be able to keep more of their social security benefits i hope my colleagues can support this amendment when it comes up for consideration. i am offering another amendment to pave the way

3:57:40 to 3:58:03( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: taxpayers who have devastating capital losses during these troubled economic times. many taxpayers have been forced to sell their homes or stock or any kind of capital asset at a loss. our constituents will be stunned to learn that they can only

3:58:04 to 3:58:26( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: deduct $3,000 of those losses from their adjusted gross income. the $3,000 limit was set in of 1976 when tax writers seemed to be ignorant about the impact of inflation. the limit is ridiculous in today's

3:58:27 to 3:58:48( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: my amendment creates a deficit-neutral reserve fund for increasing the capital loss deduction. if it helps struggling taxpayers taxpayers, we have to do it because we raise that -- raised that deduction from $3,000, if

3:58:49 to 3:59:10( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: we just did it in inflation, it would be over what i propose at $15,000 that you could deduct from your adjusted gross. prominent economists have noted that by eliminating some of the downside risk of investing, increasing the capital loss deduction would stimulate

3:59:11 to 3:59:21( Edit History Discussion )

Jim Bunning: investment and economic growth. so this amendment is a winner for taxpayers and a winner for our economy.