dr. elmendorf. >> thank you. >> dr. elmendorf, thank you very much for your testimony, and he focused quite a bit of your time on what's coming up, which it would not keep -- not careful, could be pretty bad. but we're getting right now with a 14 trillion-dollar national debt, plus 14 trillion plus national debt, and fairly massive deficits today. and we've been charged to come up with savings from these current and past deficits of at least 1.5 trillion. and so, let me ask, a chart that i have. the first chart is actually a charge of cbo's work done in 2001 that i would like to have raised. it's called changes in cbo's baseline projection of the surplus since january 2001. and what i would like to do on that chart, if we get that up, is point out what would be projected by your office back in 2001, and then analyze and i think all my colleagues have copies of those charts with them, and analyze that it is a very difficult to make out the stables and make much sense of them, but for those who can make out the lines, the

dr. elmendorf, because fortunately in the super committee, one of the issues that is very much in play is the prospects of pro-growth tax reform. you and i have talked about it before but i want to walk you through a different aspect of it because it goes right to the heart of this debate about stimulus, particularly stimulus right now. as you know, over the last five years, i've had the chance to work with two colleagues on the other side of the aisle, certainly call themselves conservatives. senator gregg, former senator gregg and senator coats, and senator begich, two democrats and two republicans have worked on this over the last five years. and i want to talk about the stimulative affect what would happen if tax reform was enacted, certainly in 2013. in other words, there is discussion about the time of 2012 and 2013, but let's talk about, say, 2013. under the legislation that i put together, bipartisan effort, if you're a couple that makes $50,000 a year, $60,000 a year, $70,000 a year, you would get permanent tax relief, permanent tax relief, of three to $4000 a year, the typical p

dr. elmendorf was before this committee. it shows a widening that is existing in our country today. and it covers the last 30 years. now, we have 31,043 counties in the united states. of those 3,143 counties, 474 of them, 15% of those counties, have been more than 20% of their citizens have been living beneath the poverty level for the last 30 years. it is kind of interesting because i did not think about this through the weekend, because about several months ago, i joined with congresswoman

dr. elmendorf was before this committee. it shows the widening wealth gap that is existent in our country today. and it covers basically the last 30 years. now, we have 3143 counties in the united states. of those 3143 counties, 474 of them, 15% of those counties has more than 24% of fair citizens have been living beneath the poverty level for the last 30 years. and it is kind of interesting because i didn't think about this to the weekend because about several months ago, i joined with the congresswoman amherst and i'm trying to direct resources. back when we did the american recovery and reinvestment act, the stimulus bill, and the rule development section of the bill, we were successful in getting that bill to focus on the discounted by direct expenditure of 10% of those funds into those counties that were third of a percent or more beneath the poverty level for the last 30 years. so when this report came out from the cbo a couple weeks ago, it focused my attention once again to those communities. now when i first came on

dr. elmendorf, in the super committee, one of the issues in play is the prospect of pro- growth tax reform. you and i have talked about it before. i want to walk you through a different aspect of it. it goes through the heart of the debate about the stimulus, particularly the stimulus right now. over the last five years, i have had the chance to work with two colleagues on the other side of the aisle that call themselves conservative. two democrats and two republicans have worked on this over the last five years. i want to talk about the stimulus to give effect of what would happen -- the states elective -- the stimulative affect of what would happen in 2013. under the legislation i put together, a bipartisan effort, if you are a couple that mixed $50,000 a year -- a couple that makes $70,000 a year, you would get a permanent tax relief of $4,000 a year. that comes about largely because what we do is triple the standard deduction for those families. a couple against $10,000 gets triple to $30,000. for a couple making $60,000 or $70,000 a year, it puts half of their income off-limits from t

dr. elmendorf. unfortunately, in the super committee, one of the issues very much at play is the topic of pro-growth tax reform. i want to walk you through a different aspect of it then goes to the heart of the debate about stimulus and particularly stimulus right now. over the last five years i've had the chance to work with two colleagues on the other side of the aisle that would certainly call themselves conservatives, senator gregg and senator coats, and senator bagitch. i have worked with two democrats and two republicans on this. tax reform is enacted, certainly, in 2013. there is discussion about 2012, but let's talk about, say, 2013. i put together a bipartisan effort. if you are a couple that makes $50,000 a year, $60,000 a year, $70,000 a year, you would get permanent tax relief. permanent tax relief of 3000 to $4,000 a year, the typical person. we tripled the standard deduction for those families. the couple now gets about $10,000. it would triple to $30,000. for a couple making $60,000 o