Senator George Smathers Radio Broadcast 146

you're going to get rid of this bill this week. Thank you. Yes, sir. Well, now that we've done this scene one take, 130 others were in worship on the excise taxes. On today's report from Washington, Senator Smathers discusses domestic and foreign problems of interest to the people of Florida and the nation.

Now here is the first question Senator matters that you're a member of the Finance Committee. Of course, being a member you've been very active in the long sessions were having on this tax measure, I wonder if you could bring us up to date. Some people say it's a rich bills rich man's bill, but you might clarify that point.

The bill calls for $11,000,000,600 billion tax relief. The theory of it is that rather than have the government collect this money and then spend the money in WPA projects building roads and so on, that we leave this money with private individuals and the private corporations for them to spend because it has been well established that a dollar left in a taxpayer's pocket and spent by him has a multiplier effect.

It moves, goes around the community 30 times more, and there's a dollar sent to the government and then spent by the government. Now, of the $11 billion. 300 million, which loss of revenue to the Treasury nine billion 200 million gold individuals and the balance of 2,000,100 two billion, 100 million goes for the relief of corporations, 85% of the $9 billion relief goes to those with incomes of less than $6.

So it's not a rich man's bill. Despite when anybody says the percentage of reduction and we believe in a graduated income tax in this country, the percentage of reduction is higher in the lower brackets of income than it is in the higher brackets. Now you look at it money wise, obviously a man who's paying $200 taxes a year.

If he gets a 10% reduction. He takes home a lot more pay than with a man who's paying $100 a year in taxes, and he gets even a 25% reduction. He only takes home the difference will say $25 but the other guys got more, but the percentage reduction is greater than the lower income groups, and the whole idea of it is to have a balanced bill which will stimulate consumer spending at the same time.

Give some corporations which will make them go out and bill plants and modernize their equipment in order to provide jobs. One very close vote was on the River Cop amendment, which had to do with education. In a way, I wonder if you'd clarify that I think it was 48 to 45.

That was a tough voting for everybody because everybody believes that people should be able to have some benefit of sending their Children to school. However, the Ribicoff bill and I've introduced bills along this nature before, but what this bill provided actually infected 85% of the benefit of that bill went to people when the income group from $10 and up.

Now it does not provide. This bill did not take Rybakov amendment did not take care of a needy student whose father first maybe didn't pay any tax. He was that poor. Maybe an orphan boy who had no possibility of going to school cause nobody was paying for it did not consider those type of meeting people needy and deserving young men at all.

Plus the fact that the president of the Florida State University, the president president of the University of Florida, the president of all the land grant colleges, agree that what would be the result of the River Cough amendment would be that all people would raise their tuitions by at least $350 which is the amount of money which would be given back to each parent who sent his child to school.

So overall, we didn't think it was the right approach, although we admit we should do something to make it possible for school to cost less for everybody. Didn't some say that it would mean a raising tuitions? Definitely if it went to the sponsor, the original sponsor who thought of the sliding scale, which Rybakov adopted, the doctor and the head of the Stanford University, he agreed that it would result in a rise in tuition at all private universities.

Well, thank you very much, Senator George Smathers, because the discusses bill. Of course, because we're doing this interview prior to the passage of the bill. What other things do you look forward to as being difficult to overcome. Well, we got several sections in the bill, which we're going to have a very close vote on.

Of course, the river cough vote was very close. That was one of the key votes that was one of the key votes. The next key vote will be on the elimination of the excise taxes. Now, once again, as I say, we're reducing the people's taxes by $11,000,000,600 million in this bill.

Surely we everybody would like to get rid of excise taxes. The First Amendment. It will be offered that will be to take it off, cosmetics, take it off, ladies, handbags and so on. Well, if you take it off that, then there's the next fellow says, Well, why don't we take it off light bulbs, which are infinitely more important to people, then cosmetics and so on.

And the next fellow says, Why don't we take the excise tax off automobiles and tires? Because automobiles and tires are huge in connection with the man's been as the next fella says, Why don't we take the excise tax officer transportation, airplane tickets and so on? Well, you were in favor of that as I required I was.

I'm the fellow who got to reduce from 10% 5%. And while I'm in favor of the reduction of excise taxes at the appropriate time, we cannot completely denude the Treasury of any revenue at all. We're reducing the revenue to the Treasury by 9 $11,000,000,600 million in this bill.

And if we put all the excise taxes, if we eliminated all that at the same time, we would run this bill up to about 16 or $17 billion lost in the Treasury and it would make us totally irresponsible. We'd have the biggest deficit we ever had in the history of the country.

And I think it's just as I say, irresponsible for us to do it Now. We have over the course of the year, has been decreasing gradually and we will eventually eliminate the excise taxes on everything but alcohol and tobacco. Well, now the senator's matters, obviously this will have to go to a House conference wanted.

That's going to be another problem and I'll be on that conference committee. I'll be Senator Byrd and Russell Long and myself on the Democratic side and John Williams and Bennett on the Republican side. We'll have to go and try to work out these differences between the House Bill and the Senate bill, which we passed.

I don't look forward to that because that'll take a lot of arguing and negotiating and everybody finally gets mad and we get up and walk out and say, We're not coming back And then we have to go back and they get up and walk out Say that we're not going to give in and react.

You know, it's a human poker game, sort of which is not much fun. But we'll finally resolve the differences, and finally, then the bill will be agreed by on agreed to by both House and Senate. And then it goes to the president for signature. You feel that will happen certainly before the end of the month of February.

I feel it will happen before the month of February. Yes, I will pass the bill before February 12th, which is Lincoln's birthday, Lincoln's birthday. Uhh. We'll go into conference shortly after that between the House and the Senate. I think it'll take us a week, 10 days to get through that conference after we come back.

The Republicans will be going over Lincoln's birthday because they go out and make those speeches to raise that money to run the campaigns in the fall. When the Democrats go a little later, then Democrats go a little later for Jefferson Jackson Day, and this is a tradition I wish we could get away from.

But nevertheless, we're in it, and this is part of it. But we'll come after between the Lincoln they recess. Why? Well, before we start the Jefferson Jackson Day speeches, why we will be able to pass a bill well facing the members of the Senate when they get back, we'll probably would be the question of the civil rights bill, which the House this week has been laboring on very diligently.

Do you have any strategy laid out, as you did in previous times where you had Senator Russell as your leader, so to speak? Yes. And those of us who oppose the so called civil rights bill will again be mobilized. Their only 18 of us, actually, and we will be mobilized to be on duty around the clock with Rob with Dick Russell are sort of Robert E.

Lee, and he's the general. And of course, what will happen is when the House passes the bill, which I think they'll pass by the time the people here this broadcast. Then that bill will then be sent over to the Senate and it will be put on the calendar.

And then the first argument will start when, when Mansfield or Humphrey, I will make the motion to take it up for debate without sending to the committee. And that will start. And that was right. Then the the filibuster will get underway and it'll start out sort of sweet.

It will get more difficult, more difficult, and I don't know what's going to happen. In other words, you visualize very difficult times ahead. In the coming weeks, I visualized difficult times ahead, not only the coming weeks, but even in the coming months. Thank you very much, Senator George Smathers.

I'll return you to your station announcer