've undstand that each permit haceain sce and must be followed and ovseenbyt builng deptmt. is allows properne windows. i brought ou existi photos of property line ndows that looke out. thiphogph, what you n see the exngropert line windows. bridget youould see the isng pperty line wdo. this is our house next door. the proposed new windows would looknto veral newur home. theseul potentially invade our pracy. when does, he saidto caure th view we areon a slope a the middl of the blk my longti te does not ke the idea of prerty line windo either. this permit will allow for four newbathroom vents a to t to the exri, provid -- are to ventto the exterior. where e these? i am coerned out the so ne to my ster bedroom ll.e this isheretwellareproposedo id in andalso where proped elator wilgo. on pag -03, there ia proposedalternate ex sign off by the fire departme. here was also habitable ce inside e garage. thwill fin the lit was on the northfade, which is neo my they're going to provide mezzanines and exterior decks at the rear. all of this is stamped and approved by the d.a. this pro

. >> rose: i could undstand that if it was 75% to 80% but not at a marginal tax rate of, what? >> 40%. >> rose: 40%. >> that's what we're talking about. well, every little bit seems to matter. there's no mac cutoff. there's no threshold. when rates came down in the 1986 act, they came down from 50% to 28%. at the top and less at lower rates and there was a big response to that. so it wasn't 70%, 80%, it was 50% to start. >> rose: so whatever john kennedy did in the early '60s... '60 or '61, '62, what the argument was then that he found out if you lowered taxes you could increase revenue, correct? >> there was a certain amount of pure knesianism in that. that's not what i'm talking about now. i'm talking about in an economy which one of these days is going to be a fully employed economy >> rose: what date do you perceive that to be? >> well, 1986 was a time when reducing tax rates was not about stimulating aggregate demand, it was about impving incentives. and, in fact, it was done in a revenue-neutral way. they broaden the tax base, they got rid of a lot o tax expendites and ta

and we came close enough together to where my good friend, the majority leader, while i undstand he's, he believes that he didn't fully endorse it but at least went down there to advocate what we thought we could agree to on that sunday afternoon. and the president said no. and so i became convinced that even though my friend the majority leader and i would love to work this out, we can't do it by ourselves. has to have the only native american america who can -- it has to have the only native american america who can sign something into law. so my suggest to my good friend, the majority leader, is let's have the voten his proposal. it isn't going to ps. and let's get to talking to the administration again in the hopes that we can come together behind something that can pass both the senate and the house and be signed into law before tuesday. now, you know, i don't blame anybody for being confused about what's beenoing on in congress this weeks, but i'd like to take a moment to explain whas going on right now. last night the democrats who control the senate proposed a bill that would