February 2003 Update

Our economy is not in good shape. We’ve gone from a $5.6 trillion surplus in 2000 to deficits as far as the eye can see. We’ve leapt from a low unemployment rate of 3.9% in April 2000 to a 6% unemployment rate today. Over 10 million are unemployed and looking for jobs.

The President has proposed $674 billion in new tax cuts as his solution to jumpstart our economy. The two largest provisions of his proposal are accelerating the implementation of tax cuts from his 2001 tax cut package, and complete elimination of the individual tax on corporate dividends. These two provisions alone are heavily tilted toward wealthy taxpayers. Unfortunately, economists say that these wealthy taxpayers will not spend the money they receive from the tax relief, but instead will save or re-invest it. This will not help create jobs, address state and federal budget shortfalls, provide for our children’s welfare or help us with the war on terrorism.

According to the Children’s Defense Fund, the money lost by the President’s dividend tax cut could alternatively be used to provide comprehensive health care coverage for all 9.2 million uninsured children and still expand Head Start to cover every preschool-aged child.

To further highlight my concerns with this pro

posal, do the math yourself. The Administration says that their proposal (which costs $59 billion in 2003) would create 190,000 new jobs next year. That means that the government will spend $311,000 for each new job! I can’t imagine many of these newly created jobs would pay that salary. We’d be much better off cutting out the middleman and giving it straight to the struggling families who need it most and would actually spend it.

His proposal simply does not work and is not one I will support. Instead, I have joined with Democrats in the House to propose a one-year economic stimulus plan that will put tax relief money directly in the pockets of all working families and provide immediate financial help to states and localities. In contrast to the President’s proposal, our package costs $100 billion. The plan includes targeted aid for Homeland Security, transportation, and Medicaid. It is also more evenly distributed across all income levels.

I’m all for revitalizing our economy. But, to do so we must pass legislation that achieves that goal. Our proposal is the real answer. I encourage you to review the chart below to see the differences for working families.

The quality of our children’s education is the key to their future – and our nation’s. I am working hard for greater Federal investment to improve and modernize our public schools and make college more affordable. We must support the hiring and training of quality teachers, reduce class sizes, make sure students have access to financial aid, and ensure California receives its fair share of Federal education funds.

The President and Congress passed landmark bipartisan education reform legislation called

the “No Child Left Behind Act” in 2001. This was an important step, but now the President's budget provides $13 billion less than is needed, and promised, to make this legislation real.

Just what exactly will these cuts in education mean? If the cuts move forward as planned, there will be as many as 18,000 fewer teachers trained next year. After school programs and special education will face drastic cuts. And there will be far less money for financial aid to help students and their families afford the rising cost of a college education.

For California, cuts in Federal investments in education will only making things worse. With California’s $26-35 billion budget deficit, the State is resorting to cutting education to balance the budget. In some cases, local schools districts are considering closing schools. If the Federal Government fails to fully fund the Leave No Child Behind Act, California students will be even more negatively impacted.

It is so shortsighted to slight our children’s education as a

means of budget cutting. Such short-term gains will become long-term budget losses. That’s why I’m working with like-minded colleagues in Congress to see that these proposed cuts are reversed and that we follow through with our commitment to leave no child behind. Our children’s ability to learn and succeed must always come first.

As a strong advocate for the environment, I know we are facing a tough year. The President’s appointees to key Federal posts overseeing environmental policy hail from interests and industries that have long fought responsible environmental stewardship. The result is no surprise. The Administration is continuing its effort to roll back longstanding protections that safeguard our environment.

In the past year, there has been substantial harm inflicted on the Clean Air and Clean Water Act that weakened sensible health and safety standards and created lax enforcement against corporate polluters. Now, they're pursuing initiatives to underme efforts to protect the forests, wilderness areas and pristine public lands that belong to all Americans.

The Administration is pur