For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
April 2, 2001
Remarks by the President to the National Restaurant Association
Presidential Hall Eisenhower Executive Office Building
Listen to the President's
Remarks
2:11 P.M. EDT
THE
PRESIDENT: Well, Denise, thank you very much for your kind
introduction and your leadership. I'm honored to be here,
and I'm glad you all are here, as well. I'm so pleased with
the strong support that my budget and tax relief plan has received from
the restaurant folks all across America. It means a
lot. A lot of members of Congress and members of the United
States Senate eat in your establishments, so it's a pretty good place
to start the lobbying process. (Laughter.)
First, I
want to describe a little bit about the budget I
submitted. It's created some heartburn in Washington because
the increase in discretionary spending wasn't as large as some would
like to see it.
In the
past, during the last fiscal year, the last year that affected this
fiscal year, the discretionary spending in our budget went up by 8
percent. Now, that's a lot. It's a lot when
you're talking in terms of billions of dollars. It's a lot
when you're trying to preserve money for Social
Security. It's a lot when you're worried about the state of
our economy. It's too much -- the increase was way too
much. It's almost as if there was a bidding contest to
determine who got out of town first.
And so, we
came to town with a new attitude that said we can meet priorities if we
control discretionary spending. We can meet priorities, we
can pay down debt if we control discretionary spending. We
can meet priorities, pay down debt, set aside money for contingency,
and send back money to the people who pay the bills if we control
discretionary spending.
And so, I
submitted a budget to the United States Congress which passed the House
-- it's going to be voted on in the Senate -- that limits discretionary
spending to 4 percent. Now, for some who don't pay attention to all
this process, 4 percent sounds like a little bit. But it is
-- and it is, compared to what happened during the last budget
negotiations. But I want to remind you, it's greater than the rate of
inflation. It's greater than maybe some of the pay raises
that you're giving the folks that work for you. It's a
pretty healthy chunk of money. It's a big increase.
Yet, for
some, it's not enough in Washington. And what we're trying
to do is fashion the debate to say that 4 percent is plenty,
particularly since we strongly believe and I strongly believe that we
need real tax relief. We not only need to have tax relief
that gets money into people's pockets quickly, we need long-term tax
relief that will send a signal to the entrepreneurial class of America
that tax relief is real, it's permanent, you can make your plans based
upon a new tax system.
There are
some in Washington who would like to see the issue go away by saying,
here's some immediate money for everybody, and let's hope they forget
about long-term relief. My position is clear: For
those who want to accelerate tax relief, we're joining right with
you. We think it's important to have quick injection of cash
into our economy. But in order to make sure the environment
for entrepreneurial growth is consistent and strong, we have an
opportunity to have long-term tax relief.
And that's
what I'd like for you to help me convince members of Congress to listen
to. Because you see, the great American experience is to own
your own business, is to own your own home, is to own something. It's
that no matter where you're from or who you are or what you're -- how
you're raised, if you have an idea, you can go out and start a
restaurant. And it's your own.
And the
role of government has got to try to create an environment so that
people can -- that people feel comfortable about
investing. There needs to be certainty when it comes to
investment. There also needs to be recognition of the role
small businesses play in our society. The tax relief plan I
submitted cuts taxes on everybody who pays taxes. It affects
those at the bottom end of the economic ladder by dropping the bottom
rate from 15 percent to 10 percent, increasing the child credit from
$500 to $1,000 per child. But it also drops the top rate,
from 39.6 to 33 percent.
See, I
recognize that most small businesses -- and there are many small Mom
and Pop restaurant owners all across America who are not
incorporated. They're sole proprietorships. They
have subchapter S corporations, where they pay -- where the tax rate
they pay is not the corporate tax rate, not the C rate, but the high
individual rates. And so by dropping the top rate from 39.6
to 33 percent, we're saying to people who started their own business,
well, the environment is going to be better. You'll have
more cash flow so you can reinvest in your company. You'll have more
cash flow so you can employ more people.
This
Congress must hear loud and clear the role of small businesses in our
society when it comes to new job creation -- 75 percent of the new jobs
created in America are created by small business people. And so tax
relief is aimed not only at helping people at the bottom end of the
economic ladder, but the tax relief package also is aimed at
encouraging and stimulating entrepreneurial growth in
America. And that's what Congress must hear.
Now,
they'll try to debate the issue all kinds of ways and throw all kinds
of smokescreens up. But reality is that a real, meaningful
tax relief plan is good for investment in the private sector and job
creation.
One of the
most interesting moments of the budget debate came when I was in
Council Bluffs, Iowa, and a lady stood up and said, now she was a proud
mom and proud grandmother, and that she had baked cookies for a long
time in her family. And every time she left a plate of
cookies on the table her children, her grandchildren ate
them. She's really talking about the budget when she talked
about that story. (Laughter.) And so the
fundamental question is not only how do we stimulate economic growth,
but what happens to the cash flow if it's not returned back to the
people, or not taken in the first place -- let's put it that way.
And I can
tell you what's going to happen to it. It's going to be used
to increase the size of the federal government, that's what's going to
happen. And so this is not only a debate about how to
stimulate economic growth, it's a debate about who do you trust with
the people's money. And it's a fundamental debate and it's a
good debate, and I'm glad it's taking place here in Washington.
See, I
would rather trust you with your own money to make the proper
investment. Once we meet priorities -- and, remember, we pay
down $2 trillion of debt in the budget I've submitted -- we increase
discretionary spending by 4 percent, we've set aside money for
contingencies. Once we meet those obligations and
priorities, I would rather you have your own money so you can make the
investments you think are necessary.
I'd rather
working people have their own money so they can decide what to do with
their hard-earned dollars, as opposed to the federal government making
those decisions. And that's the debate. And
there's a big philosophical divide.
Oh, some
folks up here may not want to see it that way, but it's clear to me
that it's a matter of trust. And I'm here in Washington; I
readily concede I'm a part of the federal government -- proudly
so. But I trust people with their own money. I
would rather have people have -- once priorities are met -- I'd rather
have people have their own cash flow so they can decide how to save and
invest.
I don't
think 535 people ought to be making the decisions for people with money
that I don't think is necessary to remain here in Washington,
D.C. And I hope you help me spread that message, because
it's an important message for this country. It's a
fundamental debate about how wealth is created. It's a
fundamental debate about who does our government trust.
I like our
position, because when the people begin to hear outside the filter of
Washington, D.C., you know, when we get beyond those who decide how
words sometimes are translated out there in the hinterlands, once
people realize Social Security obligations will be met, and the
Medicare obligations will be met, once they understand, for example, in
the first four months of this year there's $40 billion more coming into
our Treasury than anticipated, that even though the economy ground down
to growth of one percent in the last quarter, $40 billion more will
come into our Treasury than we thought -- once people hear the facts,
they will realize that tax relief doesn't mean somebody is going to
suffer, tax relief is a positive.
For too
long in Washington, people had to put tax relief in zero-sum
politics. We've got one winner and one loser. If
you keep more of your tax money, somebody's going to
lose. But that's not reality. That's not reality.
Let me
reiterate what I just said -- $40 billion more in the first quarter of
this year, in spite of the fact -- anticipated -- in spite of the fact
that our economy grew at only 1 percent. The way I like to
put it is, it sounds like somebody -- somebody is
overcharged. (Laughter and applause.)
And there
is another issue that's going to be debated here pretty
soon. And that's the death tax. I firmly believe
that our nation must get rid of the death
tax. (Applause.) You know, I think of all the
folks that I met who are struggling with their own small business, not
only trying to fight the battles of cash flow and employment and
workers comp and all the issues that small business owners deal with --
liability -- but I'm also thinking about all those who dream about
leaving their assets to a child. And what a wonderful thought that is,
that somebody's worked all their life to start their own business, so
that a son or daughter can run it, as part of a family
legacy. And yet our tax code makes it really hard for that
to happen.
There's a
lot of small business owners, a lot of restaurant owners who inherent a
restaurant and are unable to pay the cash necessary to accommodate the
evaluation and, therefore, are out of business. There's a
lot of farmers and ranchers who have to do the same thing, and that's
not fair. It's not fair to tax a person's assets
twice. (Applause.)
I urge the
Congress to listen to the voices of the people who are working all day
long to build up their asset base and their business. It
doesn't matter who you are or where you're from, this affects all
Americans in a negative way. And I think we're going to get
a positive response out of Congress.
And you can
help. You can help by talking to the Congress people from
your district and the senators from your states. I truly
believe -- I believe you can have a great presence here in
Washington. I know there's a lot of frustrated folks outside
in the country that say, well, I can't influence
Washington. I disagree. I think you
can. I truly think you can.
I think one
of the reasons why we've gone as far as we have in the tax relief plan
is because a lot of people in America are beginning to hear reality and
hear the truth that we've got enough money to meet needs and let people
keep their own money. A lot of people are beginning to
realize that this is a plan that is fair, an eminently fair
plan. If you pay taxes, you ought to get relief.
The idea of
Washington, D.C. -- of people in Washington saying, we're going to have
targeted tax cuts -- you know what that says to me? It says,
people can decide you win, and you don't win. And that's not
good public policy. It seems like to me if you pay taxes,
you ought to get relief. And I think that's the American
way. (Applause.)
I think
most Americans understand the role of our government is not to create
wealth, but an environment in which small businesses can flourish, in
which people can work hard to realize their dream. So we're
making great progress.
I remember
campaigning during last summer, and people would say, well, are you
ready to abandon your tax relief plan? It doesn't seem like
anybody wants it in America. And I said, no, I'm not
abandoning it; it's the right thing to do. It's the absolute
right thing to do. And so now, the debate no longer is, are
we going to have tax relief; the debate is, how large will the tax
relief package be. And I appreciate your helping getting us
to this point.
But we need
to work more. Because until I sign that bill, I'm going to
be relentless on the subject. It is the absolute right thing
to do for America. It is the right thing to trust people
with their own money. It is the right thing for our economy
to accelerate tax relief. It is the right thing to create an
environment that is optimistic about the future by having real,
meaningful tax reform. It's the right thing to get rid of
the death tax. And the American people are hearing it, and
they're coming our way.
And a lot
of it has to do with leadership such as yourself, who go back to your
states and your communities, and says, let's pay attention to what's
going on in the Nation's Capital. It will affect us -- have
a direct effect on our livelihoods.
And so, I
want to thank you for giving me a chance to come and make my point and
make my case, and more importantly, Denise, I want to thank you and
your organization for joining us as we get something positive done on
behalf of the people
I am so
optimistic about the tone in Washington, it's beginning to
change. The habitual name-calling seems to be subsiding
somewhat. Even the President, me, when somebody says some
things I don't like, I'm willing to smile. (Laughter and
applause.) And there is a spirit of
accomplishment. We're beginning to get something
done. And that's so important. It's so important,
so that when people look at Washington, they're not disgusted at what
they see. What they see, as opposed to this needless
partisanship that sends a signal that, all of a sudden, the people
don't matter -- we need to replace that with a spirit of at least
respectful disagreement. And I think we're making pretty
good progress. (Applause.)
So I'm
pleased with the progress we're making. I'm mindful that
we've got a lot more work to do, and I want to thank you all for giving
me the chance to come and make my case. God
bless. (Applause.)
END
2:28 P.M. EDT
|