(As Prepared for Delivery)

M. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support our economic recovery, endorse fiscal responsibility, and bolster the middle class by voting to extend tax cuts on income up to $250,000.

M. President, Minnesotans are still struggling, and we need to act now so people making under $250,000 can keep their tax cuts. Middle class families need every bit of help that they can get. At the same time, we need to make sure that the richest two percent of Americans are paying their fair share so we can pay down the deficit. It would be irresponsible not to.

Now, thanks to the smart policies of the Recovery Act, we've emerged from one of the worst recessions in generations and actually stopped it from becoming the second great depression.

That being said, too many working families are still struggling to find work, pay their rents or their mortgages, find affordable child care, and send their kids to college. By extending tax cuts to these families, we'll be putting more money in their pockets. And in turn, they'll likely go out and spend that money in their communities, at their local small businesses, and further bolster our recovery.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle look at this a bit differently. They've put forward a proposal that would extend tax cuts on income over $250,000 a year as well, which would cost us over $800 billion in revenue over 10 years. They argue that if we let taxes go up on the richest two percent of Americans, we're inviting another recession-we're stifling growth. Well, they can make that claim over and over again, but there's just no evidence of this. It would be more helpful to examine the facts, and what recent history has taught us.

First, it's essential to clarify who exactly would get a tax cut under the Democratic proposal. Luckily, the answer is easy: essentially everyone. If we pass the bill proposed by the majority leader and extend the tax cuts on the first $250,000 of income, everyone who currently pays income taxes will get a tax cut extension.

If you make $50,000, our bill preserves your entire tax cut. If you make $100,000, this bill preserves your entire tax cut. If you make $250,000, the tax cut you get is a lot bigger than the tax cut that the guy making $50,000 or $100,000 is getting. That might not be clear from some of the rhetoric that we've been hearing recently, but it's true.

People making over $250,000 would still get a tax cut worth thousands of dollars. The only portion of their taxes that would increase is on any additional income above $250,000. If you make $250,001 dollars, you'd pay 39.6 percent on that 1 dollar. That's a difference of 4.6 cents, less than one nickel. So for those people, under this plan, they'd still get the benefit of thousands of dollars in tax cuts, minus one nickel.

Secondly, claims that allowing extra tax breaks for the richest two percent will cause harm to the economy just aren't supported by history. Let's take a look at President Clinton. When he proposed his deficit reduction plan, every Republican in the House and Senate opposed it, claiming it would lead to a recession.

What really happened in the ensuing years? Not only did we have an unprecedented expansion of our economy for eight years, creating more than 22 million new net jobs, but we turned the biggest deficit in history into the biggest surplus in history. President Clinton handed President George W. Bush a record surplus. So the only time in the last 30 years in which we actually had the budget in balance was after we raised taxes on those at the top.

Between 1993 and 2001, this country created an unprecedented number of jobs, and did so while benefiting everyone up and down the economic ladder. There was income growth in every quartile. We witnessed a decrease in the number of Americans in poverty, and saw the creation of more millionaires and billionaires than ever before. President Clinton's deficit reduction plan not only reduced the deficit as planned, it eliminated it entirely. So not only did we create all that prosperity, President Clinton then handed off a record surplus incoming President George W. Bush.

In fact, when President Bush took office, we were on track to completely pay off our national debt with $5 trillion of surpluses projected over the next 10 years. In other words, we would have zeroed out our national debt last year. Zero. No debt.

The decision before us today is a fundamental one-should we extend these tax cuts on income up to $250,000, preserving tax cuts for everyone, but asking the richest two percent to pay their fair share? It poses a question about choices: we can choose to do the economically responsible thing, or we can choose to provide additional tax cuts for people who least need them. When everyone pays their fair share, our nation can get back on a path to fiscal responsibility, and at the same time invest in quality education, infrastructure, and R&D for high-tech industries. We can create good jobs in our manufacturing sector and other emerging industries.

In fact, investing in the middle class is a win for everyone. The buying power of the middle class is what sustains our economy and makes it grow. Our economy doesn't grow from the top down, it grows from the middle class out. President Clinton understood that, and President Obama does, too.

I have friends who have been very successful in the business world. I have enormous respect for them and for what they've accomplished, as I do for most Americans who have been successful in building their businesses. And this is what my friends tell me: when the middle class is strong, they have customers, and when they have customers, they grow their business and can make more money. Believe me, they'd much rather pay a 39.6 percent rate on $2 million of income than 35 percent on $1 million. And that's the difference between a booming economy and a stagnant one. It's just common sense. Policies that support and grow the middle class benefit everyone and increase prosperity, all along the economic spectrum.

So in the end, we've got a big decision to make today. Do we stand up for our economic recovery and for middle class families and for addressing the budget deficit with the Democratic proposal? Or do we continue to give extra tax breaks to the richest two percent of Americans instead of extending improvements in the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit-affecting more than 13 million working families, while adding hundreds of billions to the deficit? The choice is clear to me.

I hope we can show the American people that common sense still prevails here in the Senate by acting in unison-across the aisle-to do the responsible thing. I urge all of my colleagues to extend the middle class tax cuts and vote for the majority leader's bill.