CSE RESPONSE TO THE CLINTON STATE OF THE UNION: NO GORE TAXES!!! CONCORD – In his final State of the Union address last night, President Clinton claimed credit for the economic prosperity being enjoyed by this nation. He then turned around and proposed big government spending and regulatory schemes – all of which would not only take more money out of the pockets of Americans, but also put the brakes on our thriving economy.

On the day of the biggest snowstorm of the year, CSE staff plodded through blizzard-like conditions to keep the important issues in front of the candidates. On Tuesday alone, CSE staff asked: George Bush about international trade, John McCain about Internet taxation, Steve Forbes about tort reform and Bill Bradley about scrapping the code.

I am excited and enthusiastic to be here today. We are on the cusp of a new century and I am in a hall filled with women who are helping shape the new millennium. You have had a tremendous impact on Texas politics as this century comes to a close. You have worked in campaigns across the state and are largely responsible for Texas having all 29 statewide office holders Republicans. You are a powerful group, and I am grateful to be here.

A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cut the Pork, Don’t Spend Our Tax Cut

Lacking the political courage to cut waste, redundancy and obsolete programs from their spending bills, House Appropriators have resorted to indefensible budget gimmicks in order to "comply" with the discretionary spending limits required by the 1997 Balanced Budget Act. In the past week, Appropriators have declared nearly $10 billion in spending for routine programs – such as the 2000 decennial census and veterans health care – as "emergency" spending, which does not have to be offset by cuts elsewhere in the budget (meaning, it is funded with surplus dollars) and does not count against the discretionary spending caps.

Lacking the political courage to cut waste, redundancy and obsolete programs from their spending bills, House Appropriators have resorted to indefensible budget gimmicks in order to "comply" with the discretionary spending limits required by the 1997 Balanced Budget Act. In the past week, Appropriators have declared nearly $10 billion in spending for routine programs – such as the 2000 decennial census and veterans health care – as "emergency" spending, which does not have to be offset by cuts elsewhere in the budget (meaning, it is funded with surplus dollars) and does not count against the discretionary spending caps.

Before giving money to federal programs, Congress has a moral obligation to ensure that these programs can account for every tax dollar they spend. This week, when the Senate considers increasing the budget for the Department of Commerce by $2.1 billion ($1.7 billion of which is dedicated to the 2000 Census), lawmakers should take note of a recent General Accounting Office report that most agencies within this department "lack the basic financial and performance information they need to manage their programs and activities and improve their performance."

According to recent Department of Agriculture statistics, America has become a nation of middle-class, part-time farmers. Yet some lawmakers are suggesting that because of the recent dip in crop prices, farmers should be given as much as $9 billion in direct crop support payments and subsidies for disaster programs such as low-cost crop insurance. Before throwing $9 billion to a handful of part-time farmers, lawmakers should consider the following information reported in the USDA’s Agriculture Fact Book for 1998:

Let the people vote! Historically, the citizens of North Carolina have had the opportunity to vote on bond proposals in our state. Now, however, the General Assembly is rushing consideration of a three billion dollar bond issue that bypasses the public’s traditional role in approving the state’s education bond issues. Such a move not only would put the state’s consumers at risk for higher taxes, bypassing the people’s right to vote on the University bond issue will cost taxpayers 40 million dollars and cause a huge $247 million budget shortfall next year.