[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 106 (Thursday, July 17, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H7106-H7112]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 1308, TAX RELIEF, SIMPLIFICATION,
AND EQUITY ACT OF 2003
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Bell moves that the managers on the part of the House
in the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses
on the
[[Page H7107]]
House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 1308 be
instructed as follows:
One. The House conferees shall be instructed to include in
the conference report the provision of the Senate amendment
not included in the House amendment that provides immediate
payments to taxpayers receiving an additional credit by
reason of the bill in the same manner as other taxpayers were
entitled to immediate payments under the Jobs and Growth Tax
Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003.
Two. The House conferees shall be instructed to include in
the conference report the provision of the Senate amendment
not included in the House amendment that provides families of
military personnel serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other
combat zones a child credit based on the earnings of the
individuals serving in the combat zone.
Three. The House conferees shall be instructed to include
in the conference report all of the other provisions of the
Senate amendment and shall not report back a conference
report that includes additional tax benefits not offset by
other provisions.
Four. To the maximum extent possible within the scope of
conference, the House conferees shall be instructed to
include in the conference report other tax benefits for
military personnel and the families of the astronauts who
died in the Columbia disaster.
Five. The House conferees shall, as soon as practicable
after the adoption of this motion, meet in open session with
the Senate conferees; and the House conferees shall file a
conference report consistent with the preceding provisions of
this instruction, not later than the second legislative day
after adoption of this motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Bell) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley) for the
majority party each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell).
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, if we listen closely around Capitol Hill, we can hear
many of my Republican colleagues often touting the slogan ``No Child
Left Behind.'' Recently President Bush thought it was important enough
to sign a new law that would provide tax cuts of $93,500 to the 200,000
taxpayers making over $1 million per year. And what I would ask, Mr.
Speaker, and what the American people want to know is while the fat
cats are getting fatter, what happened to the children?
Mr. Speaker, I will tell the Members, they got left behind with the
Bush tax cut along with the rest of America. In fact, 53 percent of all
taxpayers are going to get less than $100 under the GOP law that was
just passed, and this is just another example of Republican leadership
choosing the wealthiest Americans over America's working families.
But what about those children? Why did they get left behind, Mr.
Speaker? After it was all said and done, Republican leadership chose
not to expand the child tax credit to working class families. These are
the families that have to work the hardest, take home the least, and
need help the most.
When the American people voiced their anger over this and the
pressure was on, the Republican leadership finally buckled, but did
they put forward the child tax credit bill already passed by the Senate
and approved by the President as America wanted? No, Mr. Speaker, they
did not. The House leadership chose politics over good policy. They
chose politics over the needs of hard-working families. They put
forward a bill they knew would not pass in the other body. The House
leadership thumbed their noses at the American people and put forward a
bill they knew would never be passed into law, and they did it
intentionally.
Mr. Speaker, we have an opportunity to fix that. Today my Republican
colleagues have the opportunity once again to put the compassion back
into being conservative and to ensure that no more children get left
behind by the Republican House leadership.
The other body has passed a bipartisan bill that is actually good
policy for America. It is a bill that President Bush has already said
he will sign into law. It is a bill that will provide immediate relief
to the working families of America, much in the same way the House
Republican leadership saw fit to provide immediate relief to those
long-suffering millionaires out there with their tax cut.
The Senate version of the tax credit bill will help military families
pay the bills. The House version does not. These families are made up
of the very same men and women that we in this House sent into combat
just a couple of months ago to defend our freedom, and these are the
men and women that the House leadership have chosen to just leave
behind. In fact, the Republican bill actually penalizes military
mothers and fathers who serve in combat. If they fight for America,
they get a lower child tax credit.
Mr. Speaker, is this patriotic? Is this America? We owe it to the
working people of America to pass a child tax credit that is good
policy, not just good politics, and certainly we owe it to the fighting
men and women of America, many of whom live in poverty, to give their
children the tools they need to have a chance at the American dream.
In the future, I hope my Republican colleagues will remember that the
best kind of politics is the kind that helps the people we have all
been elected to serve. That is why I am asking my colleagues to support
my motion to instruct the conferees to pass the Senate version of the
child tax credit bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield, myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in objection to the Democratic motion to instruct. Let me
first state that if it is such a politically expedient way in which to
do things, why do they drop the date of allowing this credit to
continue? The Democrats actually have a window. It is right after the
election of 2004 where the $1,000 credit drops to $700. I do not know
why we would frame a bill that has such an expiration date. If it is
such a great idea, let us continue to give this credit past the
election of 2004 to many families who desperately need this help in
raising their children.
As a result of their bill, millions of low- and middle-income
families will receive a smaller child tax credit right after the
election. The House-passed bill ensures that the child credit remain at
the $1,000 level throughout the decade. The Democratic motion to
instruct does not eliminate the marriage penalty and the child credit
until 2010. And even then it only does so for 1 year. Under the
Democratic motion, millions of children will be denied the child credit
simply because their parents are married.
The House bill benefits middle-income families by eliminating the
child credit immediately. The House bill does not deny that credit to
military families. Military families, including those who are deployed
abroad, are already receiving a refundable child credit and will
continue to receive a refundable child credit under the House-passed
bill. The Democratic motion to instruct would only increase the
refundable child credit for some military families by allowing them to
take into account tax-free income when they compute their refundable
credit. The House-passed bill provides more tax relief to military
families because it includes $806 million of military tax benefits that
were not passed by the other Chamber. These provisions passed the House
on numerous occasions, and they are waiting action in the Senate.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), minority leader.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I also thank him for his leadership in bringing this motion
to instruct to the floor this evening.
Mr. Speaker, it is just after midnight in Washington, D.C., and once
again the Democrats have come to the floor to fight for the children of
working families in America. It has been about 43 days since the Senate
passed the expanded child tax credit and 33 days since the House passed
a bill. The President says he wants to sign a bill quickly. It is too
late for quickly. Let us move on to soon. Let us hope the President can
sign the bill soon.
All it would require would be for the Republican leadership in the
House to go to conference with the Senate conferees and agree on the
Senate language. What is holding it up? The Republican leadership in
the House. The House Republicans are the only ones standing between 12
million children and the extended tax credit. Those children include
250,000 children of our men and women in uniform.
On a regular basis around here, we come to the floor to honor our men
and women in uniform, to pay tribute to
[[Page H7108]]
their patriotism, their courage, and the sacrifices they are willing to
make for our country; and it is right that we do that. But we dishonor
them by saying that their children are unworthy of a tax credit because
they do not make enough money.
We are saying to the children of over 6 million families, that would
be around 12 million children, that they are not worthy of a tax credit
because their parents do not make enough money, because they do not
make above $26,000 a year. Many of these families have two wage
earners, both making the minimum wage. They still do not earn enough
money to receive this tax credit. We could raise the minimum wage, but
of course the Republican majority would resist that as well.
So all this is, is about fairness to our children. The Republicans
say that people making $26,000 a year do not pay taxes, so, therefore,
they should not get the tax credit. I would like to know anyone who
pays a payroll tax who does not think that he or she is paying taxes,
and I would like to know anyone who is paying sales tax every day does
not think he or she is paying taxes.
The sadness of it is, is that some of these families make in 1 year
what Members of Congress make in 1 month, and we can be sure that the
children of the Members of Congress who are of that age will receive
the expanded tax credit. So when Members of Congress leave here they
will be soon be receiving a check in the mail for their children. But
if they make under $26,000, the Republican majority says their children
are unworthy of that tax credit.
This is also good for the economy, Mr. Speaker, because we are giving
checks to people who need the money for necessities, and when they
spend that money on necessities, they will be injecting demand into our
economy, creating jobs, growing the economy. It is fair. It is fiscally
sound, as opposed to what the Republicans want to do in the House, and
it is fast acting in terms of stimulating the economy.
Time is running out for the children of America's working families
and military families. The Republican leadership must step aside and
allow the vote.
Just in case anybody missed the particulars on this, remember the
great night when the Republican leadership put forth a tax credit
giving an $88,000 tax cut to families making over $1 million a year. In
that bill, there was an expansion of the tax credit for children, and
that was good, except for children of working families who did not make
over $26,000 a year. No less a figure than the Vice President of the
United States presided over that decision to cut out children of
working families and the military in favor of giving a tax cut to the
wealthiest in our country.
We want to give tax cuts. We know it is possible to give tax cuts
that are fiscally sound, fair, and fast acting to grow the economy,
because that is exactly what the Democratic stimulus package did.
{time} 0015
But is it fair to say to these children, you do not deserve a tax cut
because we do not pay enough in the minimum wage to have your parents
reach a certain plateau?
So this is just part of what I call the trifecta that the Republicans
have as their assault on America's children this week, within one week.
Last week they cut $9 billion out of the Leave No Child Behind bill, $9
billion drastically affecting children from disadvantaged areas,
teacher training, every kind of after-school program, across the board,
a cut that affected the quality of education of America's children,
especially children of working families in America who make below this
figure. So the children took it in the chops on the Leave No Child
Behind bill; the Republican version left millions of children behind.
We have this refusal, resistance, this obstacle to giving a tax
credit to the children of working families in our country on the part
of the Republicans in the expanded tax credit refusal; and the third,
of course, is the unraveling of Head Start, which is a part of the
Republican agenda against the children of America. So this is part of a
pattern. It is part of their trifecta against the children. It is so
important that children get a different message about their value and
their worth to us, all children, not just children of families over a
certain income level in our country.
So I salute the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell) for his leadership in
bringing this bill to the floor at this hour. Usually the majority
allows us to bring them at a time when most people are not watching
television, to find out what the Republicans are up to. This is
absolutely outrageous. It has a moral undertone to it as well. So for
every reason, because it is right, because it is fair, because it is
good for the economy, it is important for the gentleman's motion to
instruct be accepted by this body.
Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me first state, and I want to be emphatic here about the payroll
tax provisions. Payroll taxes are there for the purposes of ensuring
the solvency of Social Security and Medicare. The payroll taxes that
are contributed by those workers earning $26,000 and below are there
for their future, to protect them in their old age, to provide health
care benefits, and to provide a retirement payment month by month.
Those payroll taxes that are paid by those workers earning less than
$26,000 and the payments they receive once they retire are
proportionally higher than those paying a higher amount of money. We
have blended the system to allow those taxpayers who have been
struggling with incomes to retire at least with a check that gives them
some security and safety.
I have heard a lot of talk around here about getting rid of payroll
taxes; let us suspend payroll taxes. And yet, at the same time, I hear
from the same people advocating that we have to preserve and protect
Social Security and Medicare. I agree we need to preserve those. But
sometimes I hear the arguments made by the other side of the aisle, and
it really does not wash with common sense. If somebody goes to
McDonald's and there are two burgers for a dollar, they cannot go to
the window and say, you know what, I earn so little money, give me the
burger and I am not going to give you the dollar. We are clearly taking
care of people in the lower rungs who are working hard by earned income
tax credits and other devices. There are things offered in the school
programs such as free and reduced lunches. We have community centers
set up for families for health care benefits. In so many of our bills
we are providing community health services for those who are either
disenfranchised or do not have insurance. We have worked hard in a
bipartisan fashion to provide for the vulnerable in our society. And
this constant harangue, if you will, that we are so mean-spirited on
this side of the aisle, strikes me as just a political attack, rather
than a sensible debate on public policy. If their tax credit is so
good, why do they not extend it past 2004? Maybe there are some
Senators who need to vote for reelection. Let us give it and let us
take it away after we have been successfully reelected.
So as we debate this, let us continue to discuss this, and I agree
with the gentlewoman from California. Those people that are making
$26,000 or below are paying sales tax. Regrettably, we cannot afford to
deduct sales taxes from our income tax. If one lives in a city or a
county or a State that has an income tax, you can deduct that income
tax against your liabilities for Federal income tax purposes. So if we
are going to have this conversation, maybe we should get into the
discussion of sales tax deductibility.
So I continue to assert that we have provided for particularly
military personnel, and I continue to rise in objection to the
Democratic motion to instruct.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds, because I want to
point out to the American people the opportunity that they have this
evening to hear, once again, the Republican double-speak on this
particular issue, on the one hand suggesting to the American people how
terribly concerned they are about working families in America and the
desire to provide tax relief, and then proceeding to criticize
everything about the child tax credit and what it would do for those
very same working families that they express such great concern about.
[[Page H7109]]
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the
distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell) and cite his unique and
special experience as a former member of the Houston city council
grappling with city budget issues and seeing firsthand the number of
citizens who would come to city hall who were extremely vulnerable,
either having lost their job or needing some particular assistance from
the city. It is because of that that I join my colleague this evening
and thank him for his leadership on this issue, and frankly respond to
my good friend, the gentleman from Florida, which I know is pointed,
but hopefully questioning perspective.
This lopsided tax cut of $550 billion is simply a flop. Our friends
on the other side of the aisle do not want to admit it and are
obviously, in many instances, believing that it is going to come, and
that is this investment in the economy, this infusion of an economic
engine that will see this economy move forthrightly and provide
opportunities for all. Right now, juxtaposed to why we are here on the
floor of the House tonight because of the need of a child tax credit,
is the rising unemployment rate and millions of Americans out of work.
So that is why this instruction is so very important tonight. This is
simply acknowledging that there are people out of work, but there are
people struggling while they are working, making some $26,000 a year
and yet, fighting every day to survive. The simplicity of this
instruction, the brilliance of this instruction, and I might note the
leadership of my good friend and colleague, the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), on this issue, is simply to provide a child
tax credit for hard-working Americans making under $26,000 a year.
And might I say that in that group, is it not a tragedy, is it not
shocking that in that group are those individuals who happen to be
parents who are overseas on the front lines of Iraq because it does not
ensure to those who leave their domestic home and to work overseas.
So this instruction is simple. It is to actually invest in the
economy, because those making $26,000 a year are consumers. They buy
the items that are necessary to stimulate the economy. They have to buy
the McDonald's, they have to buy the clothing for the children, the
books for the children. They have to buy goods and services because
they are in need.
We need a real jobs and growth tax bill. And to give this tax credit
to these hard-working Americans is actually an opportunity to increase
an investment in this country and, as well, to increase the opportunity
for more jobs. The tax cut that has been passed, there is no evidence
of more jobs. Mr. Speaker, $93,000 goes to 200,000 of the richest
Americans. Economic pundits will tell us that the richest of Americans,
if you will, harbor their funds. They put them in IRAs or they put them
in mutual funds or maybe just a plain savings account, but they do not
churn the economy with those dollars.
So, Mr. Speaker, I hope that the conferees may be listening to this
debate tonight. Do they want to leave out military personnel? What
about the tragedy of the Columbia, those astronauts who lost their
lives in the service of this country? Those great Americans deserve
that commitment. And it is interesting to note that again, as I have
said, the investment that was given or allegedly given on the $550
billion tax cut has been suggested by economic theorists and experts
that that, again, does not do what would be done if they had given it
to middle- and low-income working Americans, the very Americans that we
are talking about.
Let me just simply say that this Congress and this Republican
leadership have spent their time this spring, time after time,
providing lopsided legislation that interferes with the needs of
Americans who work hard every day. So here we go again. The conferees
are meeting, and the simple act of providing a child tax credit seems
to be beyond their reach. But yet, in this last labor-HHS bill, they
could cut monies for community health centers so that our children
could not access community health centers in their neighborhoods. They
could cut dollars so that States who are suffering from their own
budget crises can take 170,000 off of the CHIPs program in my own State
of Texas. They could cut job training programs that would help low-
income individuals or those who are unemployed seek employment. And
yes, the absolute insult: they could cut Head Start and rebuild a
program that works.
Mr. Speaker, I will close by simply saying that this is a lopsided
tax proposal, but the tax credit instruction that my colleague from
Texas is offering today is one that should be listened to and should be
voted on successfully for the children of America.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 45 seconds to also take this
opportunity to point out the fraud that is being perpetrated upon the
American people. I commented a moment ago about the Republicans' deep
desire, or expressed desire to move the child tax credit for the bill
that was passed on June 12. But people are not being fooled, Mr.
Speaker. The Wall Street Journal recently wrote about this in an
editorial and said the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) and others in
the House deliberately made their bill richer than the Senate version
because they knew that the Senate conferees would walk away and pass
nothing instead. Well, actually, the Senate conferees did not have to
walk away, because they have never even had to meet. Despite the
expressed desire to move this bill forward, this tax credit forward,
there has been no meeting of the conferees whatsoever.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut
(Ms. DeLauro), my good friend.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for
yielding me this time, and I thank him for his leadership and my other
colleagues who are here this evening. I think it speaks loud and clear
of the kind of commitment that our side of the aisle has to the issue
of the child tax credit, and I think it is important to put into
perspective the facts.
These families were and are eligible for this child tax credit. Those
families who make between $10,500 and $26,625 a year, tax-paying
people, hard-working people, they were in this package. In the middle
of the night, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle decided
that in their $350 billion tax package that they put together, they
could not find room for these folks. They could not find room for the
200,000 military families, or the 900,000 families of Head Start kids
who are in this category, and they yanked them out. All we are saying
is put them back.
I think it is also important to note that on June 12 this body voted,
we voted for something exactly like this motion to instruct, 205 to
201. It was a bipartisan vote and we succeeded. Yet I think one more
time it is important to note for the record and for their constituents
to know that there are a number of our Republican colleagues who, in
fact, now have decided that they are going to change their vote. They
do not think that these families are worthy any longer of a child tax
credit, and, in fact, what we ought to do is to make sure that those
184,000 millionaires get their $88,000 a year in a tax break.
{time} 0030
But we cannot find anything to do it. So those folks who voted one
way on June 12 and now have switched their votes in the last few days,
I think it is important to let them know who they are: The gentleman
from Ohio (Mr. Gillmor), the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass),
the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Boehlert), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Johnson), the gentleman from New York (Mr.
McHugh), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith), and just tonight the
gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) turned her back on these
6.5 million families and these 12 million children.
We will continue to let the folks of this country know who was with
them and who is not with them.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge conferees
on
[[Page H7110]]
H.R. 1308, the Child Tax Credit legislation, to do the right thing and
act now to give lower-income families the tax refunds they deserve.
Earlier this year we enacted a $350 million tax cut that lavished tax
breaks on millionaires but failed to provide low-income families with a
child tax credit.
Last month we attempted to right this wrong by passing a bill that
will provide low-income families with the same $1,000 child tax credit
other families will receive. However, the House failed to include an
important provision that would put these refund checks into the pockets
of low-income families in the same timely way that checks land in the
mailboxes of other families.
Conferees should do the right thing by these 12 million children and
insist upon the Senate-passed measure that would eliminate the delay
and provide rebate checks to these families in the same timely manner
provided to other families. This is what the President would like for
us to do, and failing to quickly correct this problem is simply wrong.
The Senate-passed measure has the added advantage of not adding to a
deficit rapidly escalating out of control, whereas the House-passed
version adds $82 billion to a deficit that is already staggering. If
the goal of this tax cut bill is to provide an economic stimulus and we
are serious about stimulating the economy, then we should act as
quickly as possible to get this money into the hands of families who
will immediately spend it.
Tax cuts resulting in an immediate return will result in a welcome
shot of adrenalin to our damaged economy. Families nationwide will be
receiving their tax credit this summer, just in time to purchase back-
to-school supplies for their children. We owe it to low-income families
to get their refund check to them in the same timely manner. This is
unquestionably the right thing to do.
Conferees should put an end to their delaying tactics and deliver
immediate tax relief to our Nation's neediest children by adopting the
Senate-passed measure.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on both sides?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gingrey). The gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Bell) has 15\1/4\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Foley) has 25 minutes.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez).
(Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California asked and was given permission to
revise and extend her remarks.)
Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of
the motion to instruct conferees on the Child Tax Credit proposed by my
colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell).
Mr. Speaker, I am calling on the conferees to immediately adopt the
major aspect of the bipartisan Senate-passed child tax bill. Working
families need real relief, especially in these difficult economic times
when we are experiencing an unemployment rate that has jumped to 6.4
percent. Amazingly, despite the sluggish economy and our moral
responsibility to help working families, House Republicans continue to
stall the Senate-passed Child Tax Credit bill in conference.
House Republicans got us into this mess in the first place since they
deliberately chose to drop the Child Tax Credit from their millionaire
tax cut bill, and they should get us out of it. Starting on July 25,
millionaires will be getting their rebate checks. However, 4 million
families across the country will not get a single dime, even though
they are in the greatest need of a tax break.
One of those 4 million families lives in my district. The Wolfalks
are like many families across the country that play by the rules. Mrs.
Wolfalk works full time as an administrative assistant, and her husband
is disabled. They are raising five children on an annual income of
$25,000. Mrs. Wolfalk told me that any additional money means that her
son will not have to wear shoes with holes in the soles. It means that
she will be able to buy additional uniforms for her children who
currently wear hand-me-downs. With this extra money her children will
be able to have new uniforms for school, school supplies and books.
Things are tight for her family right now, so she assures me that any
additional help would make a huge difference in her family.
It breaks my heart to know that Congress can do something to help
these families and Republicans are refusing to provide for families
just like the Wolfalks. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the motion
to instruct conferees on the Child Tax Credit. Let us show families
like the Wolfalks that they matter as much as millionaires.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger).
Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the leadership of the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell) for working to bring equity to the 6.5
million working families.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the motion to instruct
conferees on H.R. 1308, the Child Tax Credit bill. I am disappointed
that we are still here one month after that bill passed both the House
and the Senate asking yet again for this motion to instruct. Frankly,
time is running out.
The Treasury Department will send out millions of checks to American
families qualifying for the child tax credit provision on July 25.
Unless my calendar is off, those checks go out next Friday, the same
day the House leaves for recess; and when those checks are placed in
the mail, 6.5 million working and military, military families will be
left out, families from every district across the country, including my
own, Maryland's Second Congressional District.
The bill as it stands now ignores families already coping with
financial problems in this troubled economy through no fault of their
own. It denies tax relief that would help military families with loved
ones serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world fighting to
protect our freedoms. Congress has the ability to correct this
situation this week, today, right now.
Let the conferees debate the details but let the voice of those 6.5
million families be heard in the discussion. These American families
deserve a seat at the table, and I support this motion to instruct
because it will give them just that.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. Miller).
Mr. MILLER of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, when the House passed an
$82 billion child tax credit bill a few weeks ago, I was a problem
child among the Democrats. I wanted to vote for the bill. I wanted to
give the tax credit to the working families who were left out by the
House before. And to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley), I wanted
to extend it. I wanted to make it permanent for all the families who
got that child tax credit. I knew we could not afford it, but we cannot
afford any of tax cuts we have passed this year. And of all the tax
cuts passed by this House, only the child tax credit really helped the
middle class.
I want to give the middle class some tax relief; and if we are going
to dig a deeper and deeper deficit hole, why not let a couple of the
shovelfuls help the middle class?
I ultimately voted against the bill because I knew that what the
middle class, what working families would have to do without would hurt
middle class and working families far more than the tax credit would
help them, like funding for education, the health care reform we so
desperately need, a solvent Medicare and Social Security system and on
and on.
But I was very puzzled at the time by the explanation I heard from
others who had been in Washington longer than I had for why the leaders
of this House were passing, actually passing so generous a tax relief
package for the middle class when nothing else done by this House this
year has helped the middle class at all.
I heard that they really were sabotaging the child tax credit by
making the price so great that they knew the Senate would not go along;
and when the Senate did not go along, they would just run out the clock
rather than compromise and the working families would not really get
tax relief.
By voting against the tax credit bill, the argument went, we
supported a compromise with the Senate that would make it possible to
pass a tax credit right away and give immediate help to middle-class
families. I am new
[[Page H7111]]
here, but I thought I had fallen through the looking glass. The
Republicans voting for the tax credit were actually against it. The
Democrats voting against it were actually for it. Only in Washington, I
thought does yes mean no and no mean yes.
We have seen the Republican leadership move Heaven and Earth to pass
tax cuts that they really want. The inheritance tax, oh, I am sorry,
the death tax; the tax on dividend income. They did not get everything
they wanted. They did not get an outright repeal of the dividend income
tax, but they compromised and they got something because they were very
intent upon getting tax relief for the investor class. But tax relief
for the middle class, not so much.
In a sense that bill passed a few weeks ago. We have seen absolutely
no objection. We have not seen any effort to find a compromise and
provide real relief. The leadership of this House has not budged, and
they have been openly nonchalant about the need to pass this bill.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the majority leader, said that
of the Senate bill or agree to the provision of the Senate bill,
``Ain't gonna happen.'' And he said, ``There's a lot of other things
that are more important than that.''
The chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Thomas), said, ``There are worse things than it not
happening,'' the child tax credit bill.
And the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell) mentioned a few minutes ago,
the Wall Street Journal, the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal,
certainly a publication that knows very intimately the real motivations
of the Republican leadership of this House, the private thoughts of the
leaders of this House, they said, ``Mr. DeLay and others in the House
deliberately made their bill richer than the Senate version because
they knew the Senate conferees would walk away and pass nothing
instead.''
I very much want to hear the gentleman from Florida's (Mr. Foley)
explanation of these public statements by your party's leaders because
they stand in stark contrast to what you have said tonight on the floor
of this House for why the House should not adopt this motion to
instruct.
Now, the earlier vote on the child tax credit was a little hard to
understand. Yes meant no; no meant yes. But this motion is pretty easy
to understand, and you can understand it without the assistance of
magic mushrooms. If you really want to give tax relief to working
families, vote yes. And if you just want to play cynical political
games at the expense of working families, vote no.
Mr. Speaker, I will vote yes.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell) has 5\1/
4\ minutes remaining.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
It is now almost 12:45 here, 12:45 a.m. here in the Nation's capital.
And I salute my colleagues who have been willing to stand with me and
talk about this incredibly important issue that is not going away, and
I think the silence from the other side, the silence from the other
side speaks absolute volumes. If we are so wrong, why have we not heard
nary a word from the other side of the aisle for almost 20 minutes now?
Because I think they know that we are right. And if they know we are
right, then they should join with us and instruct the conferees to do
the right thing and pass the child tax credit as put forth by the other
body.
{time} 0045
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman have any further speakers?
Mr. BELL. No, I do not, just myself, and I reserve the right to
close.
Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I
will proceed immediately to allow the gentleman to have the remainder
of his time, Mr. Speaker.
I want to thank my colleagues for their courteous debate. Obviously,
we know the hour is late. I know the people in Hawaii probably enjoy us
speaking, but those who are working for the House chamber certainly
need to get home to their families, and I certainly want to
congratulate the Members for caring about all American families.
There is no question people are struggling at all ends of the
spectrum: teachers, police officers, married couples, single
individuals. We hope to find balance in the tax bills, and we certainly
think we have found balance in most of them. We can disagree on certain
provisions, but I do again appreciate them taking time to come to the
floor and addressing their concerns, and as we continue to negotiate
these bills, I am certain we will reach some reasonable compromises
that will benefit all of society.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of our time.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
Let there be no mistake about what is going on here, what we are
talking about, where the Democratic party stands on this particular
issue regarding a child tax credit and where the Republican party
stands, and I am going to repeat the quote that pretty much spells it
out for everyone. My colleague the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
Miller) referred to it, but it summarizes this debate so succinctly
that it bears repeating.
When originally asked about the child tax credit, the majority
leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), said, ``There is a lot of
other things more important to me than that. To me, it is a little
difficult to give tax relief to people who do not pay income taxes,''
and we have heard a little bit more about that here this evening from
the gentleman from Florida.
This is clear evidence of where the Republican priorities lie, and
they do not include the poorest children in America. They do not
include the children of working families across the United States.
I have to ask, what happened? What happened to No Child Left Behind?
It is a very catchy slogan. It is harder to live by it. Even the least
compassionate conservative it would seem, even the least compassionate
conservative ought to understand that working parents at the bottom of
the ladder spend money, pay bills, pay property taxes, pay sales taxes
and have to raise their children just like I do, just like the rest of
us do.
The gentleman from Florida used the clever example of McDonald's, and
I believe he said that if a person has not bought any hamburgers from
McDonald's then they are certainly not entitled to another hamburger or
a free hamburger from McDonald's, but I wonder, does he believe that
the person who owns the McDonald's should get a lot more hamburgers?
Are they the only ones who are entitled to the hamburgers or are the
people out there banging on the door, starving, entitled to a little
relief themselves?
I guess we can all use clever examples in this debate, but it really
does not come down to clever examples. It comes down to doing the right
thing, and the Republican leadership has consistently dragged their
feet in passing this legislation, and all evidence suggests that they
really do not care and they do not have any intention of passing this
legislation. They can come here and debate for maybe 5 minutes and sing
the same old verses from the same old song book, but they do not have
any intention of doing anything.
Let us look at the facts. This child tax credit they knew would go
nowhere because they knew the other body would never accept it. It was
passed on June 12. Here we are a month later. We have already adjourned
for the July 4 recess without getting tax relief for the American
families, without the conference committee meeting once, and the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley) suggests that a reasonable
compromise can be reached, but to reach a compromise, the conferees
would have to meet. And if there was any desire to reach a compromise,
then they would have already met.
No, that is not what is going on here at all. Legislation was passed
on June 12 to hoodwink the American people, to make them believe that
the individuals on the other side of the aisle actually cared about tax
relief for working men and women and the children of this great
country, but they knew that it would not be accepted, and they knew
that it would go nowhere, and that is precisely what has happened.
You act on everything else President Bush wants you to act upon, why
do
[[Page H7112]]
you not act upon what he wants you to act upon now? President Bush has
said he wants the House to pass this bill as soon as possible, and he
has requested immediate action. His spokesperson also said the
President believes what the Senate has done is the right thing to do,
it is a good thing to do and he wants to sign it. So why do you not
follow your leader? Why do you not follow what the President of the
United States has requested and instruct the conferees to pass the
Senate version of the bill?
Please do the right thing.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gingrey). Without objection, the
previous question is ordered on the motion to instruct.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct
offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell).
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this are postponed.