PROCEDURES SHALL BE APPLIED IN MAKING THOSE DECISIONS. AND,
           THREE, WHAT LIMITATIONS SHALL APPLY SUCH AS WHETHER MORE THAN
           ONE SEMIPOSTAL WILL BE OFFERED AT ANY ONE TIME. THE MCHUGH BILL
           ALSO REQUIRES THE POSTAL SERVICE TO ESTABLISH HOW THE COSTS
           INCURRED BY THE POSTAL SERVICE AS A RESULT OF ANY SEMIPOSTAL BE
           COMPUTED, RECOVERED AND KEPT TO A MINIMUM. ONE THING WE LEARNED
           FROM THE BREAST CANCER SEMIPOSTAL IS THAT THE POSTAL SERVICE
           DID NOT ESTABLISH AN ACCURATE ACCOUNTING SYSTEM FOR TRACKING

           THE COSTS OF SEMIPOSTALS. ACCORDING TO A RECENTLY RELEASED
           G.A.O. REPORT, BREAST CANCER RESEARCH STAMP, MILLIONS RAISED
           FOR RESEARCH BUT BETTER COST RECOVERY CRY TEAR QUA NEEDED.
           THAT'S THE TITLE OF THE REPORT. THE POSTAL SERVICE DID NOT
           TRACK ALL MONETARY OR OTHER RESOURCES USED IN DEVELOPING AND
           SELLING THE BREAST CANCER RESEARCH STAMP. THEY KEPT TRACK OF
           SOME COSTS, BUT WAS NOT ABLE TO DETERMINE THE FULL COST OF
           DEVELOPING AND SELLING THE STAMP. POSTAL OFFICIALS OBVIOUSLY

           SHOULD KEEP TRACK OF BOTH REVENUES AND THEIR FULL COST SO THAT
           THE APPROPRIATE NET CAN BE DETERMINED FOR DELIVERY TO THAT
           PARTICULAR CAUSE. THE MCHUGH BILL IS BEFORE THIS BODY. WHAT THE
           MCHUGH BILL DOES IN ADDITION TO AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF
           SEMIPOSTALS BY THE STAMP ADVISORY COMMITTEE, ALSO REAL
           AUTHORIZES THE BREAST CANCER RESEARCH STAMP. IT DOES BOTH
           THINGS, AND I HOPE THAT THIS BODY WILL TAKE UP THIS BILL AND TO

           ADOPT THIS KIND OF PROCEDURE IN ORDER TO ATTEMPT TO TAKE THIS
           ISSUE OUT OF POLITICS AND NOT PUT US IN A POSITION WHERE WE
           HAVE TO VOTE BETWEEN A STAMP RAISING MONEY FOR AIDS RESEARCH OR
           DIABETES RESEARCH OR ALZHEIMER'S RESEARCH OR PROSTATE CANCER
           RESEARCH ORGAN AND TISSUE DONATION RESEARCH, WORLD WAR II
           MEMORIAL, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND ON AND ON. I DOUBT VERY MUCH
           THAT WE WOULD WANT TO VOTE "NO" TO ANY OF THOSE. AND YET WE
           CAN'T POSSIBLY HAVE ALL OF THEM AT ONCE. THE POSTAL SERVICE

           CANNOT POSSIBLY HANDLE THE ACCOUNTING, THE DELIVERY, THE SALE
           OF ALL THOSE STAMPS. AND THEY'VE URGED US VERY STRONGLY NOT TO
           BE AUTHORIZING AND MANDATING THE ISSUANCE OF THOSE STAMPS. SO I
           HOPE WHEN THE BILL COMES BEFORE US, WHICH I HOPE WOULD BE ANY
           TIME, THAT WE WILL REAUTHORIZE THE BREAST CANCER STAMP. AGAIN
           THOUGH I VOTED AGAINST IT FOR THE REASONS WHICH I'VE GIVEN HERE
           THIS AFTERNOON, NONETHELESS, I THINK THAT GIVEN THE FACT THAT
           THE STAMPS HAVE BEEN PRINTED AND THAT THAT EFFORT IS ALREADY
           UNDERWAY AND THE HUGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE ALREADY BEEN

           INVOLVED IN PROMOTING THE SALE, THE WOMEN AND MEN FROM AROUND
           THIS COUNTRY WHO HAVE GONE OUT OF THEIR WAY TO USE THAT STAMP
           ARE IN PLACE. THEY HAVE BEEN OPERATING. THEY HAVE BEEN VERY
           SUCCESSFUL, VERY PRODUCTIVE. MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WILL BE RAISED
           THROUGH THAT. AND I THINK THAT THE PLUSES OF CONTINUING TO
           REAUTHORIZE THAT STAMP ONCE IT'S BEEN ISSUED AND ONCE THAT
           EFFORT IS UNDERWAY OUTWEIGH THE NEGATIVES WHICH I HAVE OUTLINED
           HERE THIS AFTERNOON. AND I HOPE AT THE SAME TIME THAT THAT --

           THE REST OF THE MCHUGH BILL WILL BE ADOPTED BY US SO THAT WE
           CAN PUT INTO PLACE CRITERIA WHICH WILL MAKE IT A LOT EASIER FOR
           US TO HAVE A SENSIBLE SYSTEM FOR THE ISSUANCE OF SEMIPOSTAL.
           NOW, MR. PRESIDENT, ON A MATTER THAT RELATES DIRECTLY TO THIS
           BILL, BECAUSE IT'S A TREASURY BILL, I WANT TO JUST SPEND A FEW
           MINUTES TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUE OF THE BUDGET SURPLUS AND THE

           RESPONSE OF THE CONGRESS TO THAT BUDGET SURPLUS. AND I WANT TO
           USE AS MY TEXT, AND THEN INTERPRESS SOME COMMENTS INTO IT, A
           MEMORANDUM THAT THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
           BUDGET, JAY COULD BE LEW, WROTE ON THE EFFECT OF CONGRESSIONAL
           ACTION ON THE BUDGET SURPLUS. AND THIS IS WHAT THE O.M.B.
           DIRECTOR WROTE. THIS MEMO IS IN RESPONSE TO YOUR REQUEST THAT

           O.M.B. ASSESS THE EFFECT OF LEGISLATIVE ACTION. ON THE BUDGET
           SURPLUS. OVER THE PAST SIX MONTHS CONGRESS HAS PASSED NINE
           MAJOR TAX CUTS RESULTING IN A COST OF $712 BILLION OVER TEN
           YEARS. DRAINING THIS SUM FROM THE U.S. TREASURY REDUCES THE
           AMOUNT OF DEBT REDUCTION THAT WE CAN ACCOMPLISH, THEREBY

           INCREASING DEBT SERVICE COSTS BY $201 BILLION OVER TEN YEARS.
           THEREFORE, THE CONGRESSIONAL TAX CUTS PASSED TO DATE WILL DRAW
           A TOTAL OF $913 BILLION FROM THE PROJECTED SURPLUS. IN
           ADDITION, THE CONGRESSIONAL MAJORITY HAS STATED CLEARLY THAT
           ITS TAX CUTS TO DATE REPRESENT ONLY A DOWN PAYMENT IN A LONG
           SERIES OF TAX CUTS THAT IT INTENDS TO REALIZE. WHILE THERE HAS

           BEEN LITTLE SPECIFICITY ABOUT THE SIZE AND NATURE OF THE ENTIRE
           PROGRAM, THE FULL RANGE OF ACTION TAKEN BY THE 106TH CONGRESS
           BOTH LAST YEAR AND THIS PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF THE TOTAL
           IMPACT OF THE CONGRESSIONAL TAX CUT PROPOSALS ON THE SURPLUS.
           IN THE FIRST SESSION OF THE 106TH CONGRESS THE MAJORITY PASSED
           ONE LARGE MEASURE WHICH INCLUDED A VARIETY OF TAX CUTS
           TOTALLING $792 BILLION. EXCLUDING CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL TAX CUTS

           WHICH PASSED THIS YEAR AS WELL AS LAST YEAR, SUCH AS
           ELIMINATION OF THE ESTATE TAX AND THE MARRIAGE PENALTY, THE
           COST OF TAX CUTS PASSED LAST YEAR AMOUNTS TO $737 BILLION. AND
           THE ADDITIONAL DEBT SERVICE AMOUNTS TO $148 BILLION FOR A TOTAL
           OF $885 BILLION. JACOB LEW GOES ON AS FOLLOWS, "THE

           BILL-BY-BILL APPROACH TO TAX CUTS IN THE ABSENCE OF AN OVERALL
           FRAMEWORK MASKS THE FULL IMPACT AND RISKS OF THE CUMULATIVE
           COST. I WANT TO REPEAT THAT BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT REALLY
           IS THE HEART OF THE MATTER. THE BILL-BY-BILL APPROACH TO TAX
           CUTS IN THE ABSENCE 6 AN OVERALL FRAMEWORK MASKS THE FULL
           IMPACT AND THE RISKS OF THE CUMULATIVE COST. IN THE ABSENCE OF

           MORE SPECIFIC INDICATIONS ABOUT THE CONTENT AND NUMBER OF
           FUTURE TAX CUTS, THE CONGRESSIONAL MAJORITY HAS STATED IT PLANS
           TO PRODUCE, WE HAVE USED THE TOTAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH TAX
           CUTS FROM THE 106TH CONGRESS AS AN ILLUSTRATION OF REPUBLICAN
           PLAN. IF THEIR PLANS REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH PAST ACTIVITY, THE
           FULL COST WOULD BE -- THE FULL COST OF THIS PROGRAM WOULD BE
           TAX CUTS OF $1.44 TRILLION, ADDITIONAL DEBT SERVICE OF $349

           BILLION FOR A TOTAL OF $1.796 TRILLION. THE EFFECT OF SUCH TAX
           CUTS WOULD BE TO COMPLETELY ELIMINATE THE PROJECTED NON-SOCIAL
           SECURITY MEDICARE BUDGET SURPLUS AT THE END OF TEN YEARS. EVEN
           BY THE MORE OPTIMISTIC PROJECTIONS, THE ENTIRE SURPLUS WOULD BE
           DRAINED. THE MOST RECENT C.B.O. PROJECTION ISSUED EARLIER THIS

           WEEK ESTIMATED A TEN-YEAR NON-SOCIAL SECURITY MEDICARE SURPLUS
           OF $1.8 TRILLION. O.M.B.'S RECENT PROJECTIONS ESTIMATE A
           TEN-YEAR NON-SOCIAL SECURITY MEDICARE SURPLUS OF $1.5 TRILLION.
           IN EITHER CASE, BECAUSE THE COST OF THE TAX CUT MATCH OR EXCEED
           THE PROJECTED BUDGET SURPLUS, THERE WOULD BE NO FUNDS AVAILABLE
           FOR ANY OF THE NATIONS OTHER PRESSING NEEDS, INCLUDING OUR
           PROPOSALS TO ESTABLISH A NEW VOLUNTARY MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION

           DRUG BENEFIT, PAY AN ADDITIONAL $150 BILLION IN DEFICIT
           REDUCTION TO PAY DOWN THE DEBT BY 2012, EXPAND HEALTH CARE
           COVERAGE TO MORE FAMILIES, PROVIDE TARGETED TAX CUTS THAT HELP
           AMERICA'S WORKING FAMILIES WITH THE COST OF COLLEGE EDUCATION,
           LONG-TERM CARE, CHILD CARE AND OTHER NEEDS, OR EXTEND THE LIFE
           OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE. THAT IS THE OPTIONS -- THOSE
           ARE THE OPTIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE FACED WITH IN THE NEXT
           FEW MONTHS. WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO TAKE THIS PROJECTED

           SURPLUS NOW OF EITHER $1.5 TRILLION OR $1.8 TRILLION -- WE'RE
           HERE ONLY TALKING ABOUT NON-SOCIAL SECURITY AND THE MEDICARE
           SURPLUS -- WHETHER WE WANT TO TAKE THAT SURPLUS WHICH THE
           C.B.O. ESTIMATES IS $1.8 TRILLION AND THE O.M.B. ESTIMATES AT
           $1.5 TRILLION, AND USE THAT ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY OR EXCLUSIVELY
           FOR THE TAX CUTS WHICH HAVE BEEN PROPOSED, OR WHETHER WE WANT

           TO USE A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THAT SURPLUS TO PAY DOWN THE
           NATIONAL DEBT FASTER, TO ESTABLISH A NEW VOLUNTARY PRESCRIPTION
           DRUG BENEFIT, TO EXPAND HEALTH COVERAGE, TO EXPAND OPPORTUNITY
           FOR COLLEGE EDUCATION AND TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF SOCIAL SECURITY
           AND MEDICARE. NOW I WANT TO PUT IN THE RECORD IN ONE MOMENT THE
           LIST OF THE PENDING TAX CUTS IN THE 106TH CONGRESS WHICH JACK

           LEW MAKES REFERENCE TO THE $934 BILLION APPROXIMATELY IN THE
           TEN-YEAR COST. THIS -- THESE ARE BILLS WHICH HAVE BEEN PASSED
           BY ONE BODY OR ANOTHER OR ONE COMMITTEE OR ANOTHER IN ONE BODY.
           MARRIAGE PENALTY CONFERENCE COMMITTEE, $293 BILLION. SOCIAL
           SECURITY TIER II REPEAL, $117 BILLION. ESTATE TAX IN THE HOUSE,
           $105 BILLION. THE PATIENTS' BILL OF RIGHTS IN THE HOUSE, $69

           BILLION. THE COMMUNICATIONS EXCISE TAX, $55 BILLION. THE
           TAXPAYERS' BILL OF RIGHTS, $7 BILLION. THEN THE SUBTRACTION FOR
           PROVISIONS IN MULTIPLE BILLS AND SO FORTH. AND THEN YOU HAVE TO
           ADD THE INTEREST COST OF THESE TAX CUTS. AND THAT COMES OUT TO
           BE ABOUT $900 BILLION. AND I WOULD ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT
           THAT LIST BE PLACED IN THE RECORD AT THIS TIME.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
           

           MR. LEVIN: MR. PRESIDENT, THERE'S PROBLEMS WITH EACH OF THE
           MAJOR TAX BILLS. AND I MAY JUST SPEND A MOMENT ON EACH OF THOSE
           PROBLEMS. ON THE ESTATE TAX BILL IT HAS PROBLEMS. THERE'S AN
           ALTERNATIVE WHICH IS A BETTER ALTERNATIVE, WHICH WOULD HELP
           MORE PEOPLE FOR THAT FEW NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO DO PAY AN ESTATE
           TAX, THE ALTERNATIVE DEMOCRATIC PLAN WOULD PROVIDE IMMEDIATE
           RELIEF, 100% RELIEF TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE LESS THAN $8 MILLION PER
           COUPLE, FOR FAMILY FARMS AND SMALL BUSINESSES. TOTAL AND

           IMMEDIATE RELIEF FOR THOSE PEOPLE IN THE ALTERNATIVE PLAN. THE
           BILL WHICH HAS BEEN ADOPTED HAS A MAJOR PROBLEM IN THAT IT
           FAVORS UPPER-INCOME, THE WEALTHIEST AMONG US AND MOST OF ITS
           BENEFITS GO TO THOSE PEOPLE RATHER THAN THE PEOPLE WHO NEED
           THIS THE MOST, WHICH ARE INDIVIDUALS AND MARRIED COUPLES THAT
           HAVE ESTATES THAT MIGHT BE, IN THE CASE OF A FAMILY FARM OR A
           SMALL BUSINESS, $8 MILLION. BUT THERE'S A BIGGER PROBLEM, IN MY

           JUDGMENT. WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE REPEAL OF THE ESTATE
           TAX OR THE MARRIAGE PENALTY TAX -- AND THERE WE HAVE AN
           ALTERNATIVE AS WELL, WHICH WOULD BENEFIT A LARGER NUMBER OF
           PEOPLE WITH A GREATER BENEFIT INSTEAD OF A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO
           ARE AT THE UPPER END OF THE INCOME LEVEL AND NOT WITH THE SAME
           PERCENTAGE AS WE WOULD DO IN THE ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM. BUT THE
           MAJOR PROBLEM THAT I HAVE WITH THESE TAX BILLS IS THAT WHEN YOU
           CUMULATE THEM, WHEN YOU PUT THEM ALL TOGETHER, WHAT IT MEANS

           WOULD BE THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO APPLY THIS SURPLUS TO THE
           REDUCTION OF THE NATIONAL DEBT. AND I'M OUT THERE, AS ALL OF US
           ARE, IN OUR HOME STATES, AND I TALK TO PEOPLE. AND I ASK PEOPLE
           IN ALL THE
           
           MEETINGS I HAVE: WHAT DO YOU PRIMARILY WANT US TO SPEND THE
           SURPLUS ON?
           YOU WANT TAX CUTS, PUT BE -- PUTTING ASIDE FOR THE MOMENT
           WHETHER THEY BENEFIT UPPER-INCOME FOLKS OR WHETHER THEY BENEFIT FAMILIES?
           PUT ASIDE THAT FOR THE MOMENT AND THAT IS A MAJOR ISSUE. YOU
           BASICALLY WANT US TO TAKE THIS $1.8 TRILLION AND PAY DOWN THE

           NATIONAL DEBT, OR DO YOU WANT THAT TO GO IN TAX CUTS?
           AND OVERWHELMINGLY, REPEATEDLY I HEAR BACK FROM PEOPLE THEY
           WANT US TO PAY DOWN THE NATIONAL DEBT. AND WHETHER WE'RE
           TALKING ABOUT YOUNGER PEOPLE, MIDDLE-AGE PEOPLE, OLDER PEOPLE,
           THEY ALL KIND OF COME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION. NUMBER ONE, WE
           CAN'T BE SURE THE SURPLUS WILL BE THAT LARGE, SO DON'T SPEND IT
           ALL ON ANYTHING, BE IT TAX CUTS OR OTHER PROGRAMS. SPEND MOST
           OF IT ON PROTECTING THE FUTURE ECONOMY OF THE UNITED STATES.

           SPEND MOST OF IT ON THAT $6
{END: 2000/07/26 TIME: 14-00 , Wed.  106TH SENATE, SECOND SESSION}