XXXX Voted Against a Smaller Tax Cut For Highest Incomes, Voted to Keep Repeal of Estate Tax. In 2001, XXXX voted against a smaller package of tax cuts than the trillion-plus dollar tax cut package. The measure McConnell voted against included only a 1 percent reduction in the top tax bracket – which was 39 percent – and not a 3 percent reduction. The provision also eliminated the repeal of the estate tax and increased the value of an estate that would be exempt from the tax and exclude family-owned businesses. The savings would be used for debt relief and infrastructure improvements. The vote was on an amendment to the Tax Relief Act of 2001. [HR 1836, Vote 123, 5/21/01; Congressional Quarterly Daily Monitor, 5/21/02] XXXX Voted Against Using the Social Security Trust Fund to Make Tax Cuts Permanent. In February 2002, XXXX voted for an amendment that would express the sense of the Senate that no Social Security surplus funds should be used to pay for making currently scheduled tax cuts permanent. The substitute amendment would reauthorize federal agriculture programs for five years, including a dairy provision that would authorize $2 billion in direct federal subsidies to milk producers. It also would re-establish programs that supply payments to farmers when commodity prices fall below a specified level. [S 1731, Vote 27, 2/13/02] 2003 XXXX Voted For 2003 Bush Tax Cuts. In May 2003, XXXX voted for the initial Senate version of a bill that cut taxes by $350 billion over 11 years, and suspended all taxes on stock dividends for three years” The bill cut dividend taxes in half in 2003 and suspended them entirely from 2004-2006 at a total cost of $124 billion. Democrats criticized the dividend tax suspension, saying it would come at the expense of married couples whose tax breaks were scaled back. Reductions in individual income tax rates already in place would be accelerated. [Vote 179, 5/15/03; AP, 5/15/03] XXXX Cast Crucial Vote for Bush’s Final 2003 Tax Cut Package. In May 2003, XXXX cast a crucial vote to approve the final version of President Bush’s $330 billion tax cut plan, which passed 50-50 with Vice President Cheney breaking the tie. Democrats, who were largely shut out of negotiations over the bill, said the bill would put the government deeper into debt. The bill benefited taxpayers with income from investments, lowering taxes on capital gains and stock dividends to 15% Previously, investors paid as much as 38.6% tax on dividends and 20% on capital gains. The bill also accelerated the 2001 income tax cuts. [Pioneer Press, 5/24/03; Vote 196, 5/23/03; AP, 5/23/03] XXXX Voted Against Eliminating $1.2 Billion From Bush Tax Cuts and Putting the Savings Into Social Security. In March 2003, XXXX voted to table an amendment that would have reduced the 10-year Bush tax cut by $1.2 trillion and put the money towards Social Security and deficit reduction. The amendment was killed 57-42. [Vote 58, 3/18/03; AP, 3/18/03] XXXX Voted Against Eliminating All Of The Bush Tax Cuts. In March 2003, XXXX voted against striking $1.34 trillion in tax cuts from the budget resolution. The amendment was rejected 22-77. [Vote 69, 3/21/03; CQ Today, 3/21/03] XXXX Voted Against Reducing New Tax Cuts And Cutting The Deficit By $1.1 Trillion. In March 2003, XXXX voted against reducing the 2003 Bush tax cuts by $980 billion and instead devoting funding to reducing the deficit. The amendment was killed 58-42. [Vote 75, 3/21/03] XXXX Voted Against A Compromise To Halve New Tax Cuts to $350 Billion. In March 2003, XXXX voted against a compromise measure to cut new Bush tax cuts in half, to $350 billion. The amendment was at the center of a debate between purists - those against any tax cut at all - and those seeking to do something to trim the size of the tax cut while preserving its intent to help the economy. The purists argued that cutting taxes was irresponsible, especially because the White House had not let Congress know how much it would seek in emergency supplemental spending to pay for the war in Iraq, a cost expected to range between $65 billion and $100 billion. [Vote 76, 3/21/03; Newsday, 3/22/03] 260