[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.