[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 68 (Thursday, May 8, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H3836-H3837]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       VOTE FOR DEMOCRATIC SUBSTITUTE ON JOBS AND GROWTH PACKAGE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, what I like about the 
opportunity in addressing colleagues and speaking about issues in a 
pointed fashion, we can simply cut to the chase.
  Mr. Speaker, it was in 1993 that a Democratic House and the President 
of the United States had to make a very difficult decision. But out of 
making that budgetary decision, we moved into the 1990s rebuilding our 
economy and generating the kind of surplus that America had not seen 
for 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 years. In 1997 again, when I was a Member of 
this body, the President of the United States, William Jefferson 
Clinton, and many of us, the Democratic Caucus, worked in a bipartisan 
manner to put forward a budget that really addressed the question of 
rebuilding the surplus.
  So we see that out of that work we do not have to give anecdotal 
stories. We do not have to speak to pie in the sky. We have real proof 
because in January 2001 we had a $5.6 trillion surplus built upon the 
sacrifices of Democrats and the willingness to invest in the American 
public.
  As we move through the Republican presidency, President Bush and the 
Republican Congress, under the Republican budget we now have a minus $2 
trillion deficit as given to us by the Congressional Budget Office and 
the House Budget Committee, two independent sources.
  Interestingly enough, we come over here to this question of jobs, and 
we hear that the bill on the floor of the House tomorrow is a job 
growth bill. We surely need jobs. I need jobs in Houston, Texas, and 
the State of Texas, jobs in New York and California, Mississippi and 
Kansas and Colorado, jobs all over the Nation. Well, from January 1993 
to April 1995, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will tell us that the 
labor market gained 6.8 million jobs, not pie in the sky, reality.
  Under President Clinton's policies and a Democratic Caucus working 
together from 1993 to 1995, we gained 6.8 million jobs. Then we get to 
January 2001, changing the administration and a Republican Congress, 
April 2003, we have lost 2.7 million jobs.
  That is why I believe it is extremely important that we look 
realistically at what we need to do tomorrow. Frankly, what we need to 
do is to pass a real jobs growth initiative. The Democrats have the 
answer. We know that millions of Americans are going to lose their 
unemployment benefits, working men and women who do not owe us 
anything, we owe them because they worked and put dollars into the 
economy. So we want to extend Federal unemployment benefits.
  We believe that we should support the States who are suffering. Texas 
alone has a $12 billion deficit. Republicans are down in Texas trying 
to redraw lines of congressional seats that will cost the State 
millions and millions of dollars. It is a nonsensical plan, but we are 
willing to commit money to the States to help with Medicaid, education, 
homeland security and infrastructure.
  We were just in Texas looking at the needs of the Port Authority, 
looking at the needs of hospitals and emergency rooms. This is a 
program that makes sense to put money into States and support them. 
Yes, we would like to make sure that we include a response to the 
Republican plan by creating jobs. Every single aspect of our particular 
proposal, the Democratic proposal, would do so.
  I hope there is a substitute. But, Mr. Speaker, frankly, I hope that 
it is a substitute that will draw the support of all of our colleagues, 
Democrats and Republicans, because if Members are truly interested in 
job creation, we cannot do it by giving a tax cut to 1 percent of the 
population or individuals making over $350,000. Those individuals 
making a million dollars and up getting $17,000 in a tax cut, and as 
the numbers go down to working Americans, we wind up with zero.
  People are hurting. The unemployment rate is increasing, but let me 
add another component to this. This is the month of May. I will be 
attending many, many graduations, young Americans looking for jobs. And 
I can say there are no jobs. The job numbers are down. Add to that the 
brave men and women from the United States military just returning from 
Iraq. Yes, many will maintain their service in the military, and we 
applaud that. But many of them will be ending their service in the 
military, brave men and women who were willing to offer themselves to 
fight for our principles, and they have no jobs, plain and simple.
  I do not understand how we can put forward a tax cut of $550 billion, 
ultimately $1.7 trillion, and suggest it is job creation when if 
Members speak to any of the CEOs of the Fortune 500 corporations and 
others they question whether or not the dividend tax cut would generate 
any dollars. What we need is investment in our small businesses, and 
investment in homeland security and infrastructure. That creates jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, I am about to submit to the Committee on Rules another 
amendment that decreases taxes, and that is for those hard-working, 
tax-paying employees that suffered the roller coast of corporate 
malfeasance and criminal activity of corporations like WorldCom, which 
went bankrupt, Enron went bankrupt, they gave them severance pay, and 
they had to pay taxes on the severance pay.
  I am putting forward an amendment which will decrease taxes on these 
hard-working Americans who lost their

[[Page H3837]]

jobs so that no one has to pay taxes on any kind of pay they get when 
the corporation went bankrupt because of malfeasance and criminal 
activity.
  Mr. Speaker, I conclude by saying vote for a real jobs growth 
program. Vote for the Democratic substitute and stop all of the 
poppycock about what a $550 billion tax cut can do except put money in 
the pockets of the rich.

                          ____________________