[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 112 (Friday, July 25, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H7622-H7630]
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
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
The Clerk read as follows:
Ms. Solis moves that the managers on the part of the House
in the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses
on the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 1308
be instructed as follows:
1. 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 Growth Tax
Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. To the maximum extent possible within the scope of the
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.
5. 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. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis)
and a majority Member each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis).
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this motion would instruct our conferees to accept the
Senate amendment to H.R. 1308. This
[[Page H7623]]
amendment restores the child tax credit to 6.5 million families. It
restores a tax credit to military families with members serving in
combat zones overseas. It requires that restoring the child tax credit
does not become an excuse for further tax cuts for the rich.
We have had Democrats come to the floor every night this week to
demand a child tax credit for all Americans. We have done so because
while tax cut checks are going out today to some Americans, 6.5 million
families will get nothing in their mailbox today. These families have
12 million children. They will get nothing because last-minute changes
by Republicans prevent families with incomes between $10,500 and
$26,625 from receiving the child tax credits.
We will not let these families be forgotten, and I will not forget
the 140,000 families in my district in California that will get no
child tax credit under the House Republican plan. These are working
families, like the one pictured here, who told me how hard they are
working just to provide for the basic needs of their children. This is
a military family who saw fathers and mothers and sons and daughters go
off to war. Across the country, there are over 250,000 children of
active duty military families, such as this one depicted here, that
will receive no child tax credit at all.
Republicans had the nerve to say these people should not get any tax
relief because they pay no taxes. It is true that while soldiers are
collecting combat pay and are putting their lives on the line, they do
not pay taxes, but they pay their debt to our government, to our
society, with hard and dangerous work, with months spent far apart from
their families and loved ones, and sometimes even ending in tragedy.
It is true that families left behind by the Republicans do not pay
Federal income taxes, but they do carry a far higher tax burden than
the millionaires who would benefit the most from the tax cuts. This is
because these low-income families, like this one depicted, pay sales
tax, property tax and payroll tax. These taxes eat up a very high
percentage of this family's income.
When we learned of the exclusion of the low-income families from the
tax cuts, Democrats came forward and protested and the country listened
to them. Our colleagues in the other body quickly and overwhelmingly
acted to fix the glaring omission, but here in the House Republicans
only responded with more tax cuts for the rich. Under the guise of
restoring child tax credit, they passed an additional $82 billion tax
cut that benefits themselves more than the working poor like this
family here, more than our soldiers, more than 6.5 million families who
were left out of the original tax cut plan.
Mr. Speaker, under the House Republican plan, a Member of Congress,
like you and I, with two children will receive $1,750 while the same
size family earning $20,000, like this family from my district, would
only get $475. I did not come up here to represent myself, I came here
to represent the people of my district, like this family here. How can
I go back to my district and tell families such as this that their
children will get no tax relief because Republicans choose to protect
the wealthiest Americans in our country? How can I go home and tell
these military families who sacrificed for our country that they will
get nothing because Republicans would not even sacrifice a few thousand
dollars of the millionaires' $93,000 tax cut?
It is for these families and their children that my colleagues and I
rise to instruct our conferees to accept the Senate amendment. We ask
the House simply to accept language that restores tax credits to 12
million children. That is fiscally responsible, and that does not
neglect our military families. This is not a lot to ask for, and I hope
this motion will pass as it did on June 12. Just yesterday our
President, America's President, visited Michigan and Pennsylvania and
he said, ``The child credit must be given to low-income families as
well.'' Take a good look at this picture, and remember these families.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Lewis) is
recognized for 30 minutes.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Kentucky, a
member of the Committee on Ways and Means, for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, here we go again. What is before the House is a classic
example of not letting facts get in the way of impassioned debate. My
friend from California rightly has a concern for the working poor, and
I appreciate her mention of a specific family earning about $20,000 a
year. Now for the rest of the story where the silence has been
deafening.
Under existing law, we have the earned income tax credit specifically
designed for the working poor. For a single mom with two kids earning
$20,000 a year, a check is available from Uncle Sam for a total of
$3,335, according to the Tax Foundation. On top of that, in the All-
American Tax Act, we even expanded the child tax credit, not
inconsistent with what our President has said, so even more funds are
available.
It is true we expanded that child tax credit because we believe if we
accept the philosophy of my friends in opposition here, if it is
immoral to leave out children at the lower end of the socioeconomic
scale, likewise it is unfair to limit those two-earner families, like
the nurse practitioner who earns $63,000 a year and her spouse who is a
school principal in the Awatukee section of Phoenix, both of these
earning $64,000 a year, that should not invalidate their children
either.
What this majority has done in the House is to expand the child tax
credit while keeping intact the earned income tax credit. And, sadly,
the silence from the minority on existing policy is deafening.
It will be interesting during the course of this debate to see if our
friends will in fact acknowledge what they believed in public policy to
be a triumph, but now is suddenly forgotten. I will not impugn their
motives; but, Mr. Speaker, it is curious that for this entire week, my
friends on the left have developed a severe case of political amnesia.
Reject the motion to instruct, embrace expansive, fair and equitable
tax relief for all families, and we will work with the other body to
ensure that comes to pass in conference.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleagues that this administration is now
taking a very aggressive role to go after families that are seeking
earned income tax credits. In fact, we should be spending more time
going after the big guys like the Enrons, the WorldComs and all of the
other corporations that do not have anybody tracking their abuses and
fraud.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
George Miller).
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman
for bringing this matter before the House.
On June 9, the President made it very clear that he wants this tax
credit for low-income working people, the tax credit for their children
to be passed and put into law. He wants the Senate provision passed.
That was 2 months ago. In those 2 months, the House and the Senate have
done very little to advance this ball. Why? Because the extreme radical
position of the Republicans in the House of Representatives has
essentially kept a conference committee from taking place because they
have decided that to take care of a $3 billion oversight in the tax
credit, they want to spend $80 billion to get there.
That is unacceptable to the President of the United States, that is
unacceptable to the Senate on a bipartisan basis, and it is certainly
unacceptable to many of us in the House of Representatives. They made a
conscious decision in the last hours in the middle of the night in the
consideration of the last tax bill that these children of low-income
working parents would simply not get this credit. They had to make a
decision between the millionaires who would get $44,000 a year in tax
rebate; or if they gave the tax credit to low-income children's
families, they would only get $38,000 in a tax rebate.
The person making that decision was one of the big beneficiaries,
Vice President Cheney. The children had the tax credit when Vice
President Cheney
[[Page H7624]]
walked into the room; when he left the room, he had the tax credit and
the poor children's families didn't have the tax credit. That is the
history.
Yesterday as the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis) pointed out,
the President was in Dearborn, Michigan, where he was hailing the first
checks to go out to families seeking the tax credit, deserving of the
tax credit; and once again, he asked Congress to pass legislation, to
pass the Senate bill. He said he wants to extend it to all spectrums of
society.
Now maybe the Republicans in the House of Representatives think that
President Bush is a wild-eyed, radical liberal who wants to take care
of some families who are undeserving. I do not think he is. I think
what he recognizes is that this is a matter of equity. This is a matter
of whether or not people who go to work every day, work their tails
off, and at the end of the year end up poor, and that this Congress
decided we were going to place an additional value on the cost of
raising these children, and we were going to help America's families
with a child tax credit.
But the Republicans in this Congress decided the poor children were
not going to be worth as much. Just a cold-hearted calculation, stone-
cold decision that these poor children just are not worth as much. That
somehow, their parents are not as noble when they go to work every day
as millionaires are when they go to work every day.
Mr. Speaker, that is the calculation that this President has asked
this Congress, these Republicans to reject, and to pass the tax credit
so that these children will get their share of equity in American
society.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, there is a sense of fairness, as the gentleman just
spoke of a minute ago. In this Nation, it is really a great privilege
to live here and to have all of the blessings of freedom that we have
and all the opportunity that we have. But along with that blessing and
the wonderful aspects of what we have in this great country comes a
certain responsibility. One of those responsibilities that we have is
to pay an income tax.
We have in our system a progressive income tax system where those who
make a great amount or more money than someone else will pay a greater
amount of taxes, and those that make less money pay less taxes, and
those that reach a certain level in this country, they pay no income
tax whatsoever. They may pay payroll taxes and other taxes. In order to
offset those other taxes, there is the earned income tax credit that
gives back to families that do not make enough to pay income taxes the
money to offset the other taxes that they pay.
Now it seems to me that we have tried in this country to be as fair
as we possibly can to all those in whatever income level they may be.
When I think about this situation, those that are paying taxes are
providing for a lot of things that we all get an advantage for:
defense, infrastructure, highways, education, health care, law
enforcement, and I could go on and on. When we look at what people pay
in taxes, what they actually pay in taxes according to their income, I
think we have tried to be as fair as we possibly can. I think those
that are receiving earned income tax credits to offset their other
taxes is certainly something that I do not think our friends on the
other side of the aisle remember or understand or want to even talk
about.
H.R. 1308, the All-American Tax Relief Act does a lot of wonderful
things. It increases the child credit to $1,000 per eligible child
through 2010, eliminates the marriage penalty in the child credit,
celebrates the increase in refundable child credit, it provides tax
relief and enhances tax fairness for members of the Armed Forces that
my colleague mentioned a little while ago. It suspends the tax-exempt
status of designated terrorist organizations, provides tax relief for
astronauts who die in space missions.
Actually, the motion to recommit will do damage to a lot of families.
The Democrat's motion to instruct allows the child credit to drop from
$1,000 to $700 after the 2004 election. As a result, millions of low-
and middle-income families will receive a smaller child tax credit
right after the elections. The House-passed bill ensures that the child
credit remains at the $1,000 level throughout the decade. The
Democrat's motion to instruct does not eliminate the marriage penalty
in the child credit until 2010, and even then, it only does so for 1
year.
Under the Democrat's motion, millions of children will be denied the
child credit simply because their parents are married. The House-passed
bill benefits middle-income families by eliminating the child credit
immediately. The House-passed bill does not deny the child credit to
military families. Military families include those who are deployed
abroad who are already receiving a refundable child credit, and will
continue to receive a refundable child credit under the House-passed
bill.
The Democrat's 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.
This motion to instruct, I think, is without merit. I ask my
colleagues to vote ``no'' on the motion to instruct.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
California (Mr. George Miller).
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I find it incredible
that the gentleman on the other side of the aisle would suggest that
somehow these are not responsible people, that they accept the
privileges of living in this country, but they are not responsible
because they do not pay income taxes, so they are not entitled to the
tax credit.
These people would love to pay more taxes. They would love to be
rich. They go to work every day hoping that someday they might get
rich, might get a benefit. They would love to pay more taxes, but the
gentleman says they are not responsible. I guess that extends to the
soldier who is putting his life on the line to defend the privileges
that the gentleman talked about, and because he gets tax-free income
while he is in battle risking his life, his family should not get a tax
credit?
I think that soldier is a fairly responsible individual, and I bet
his family is fairly responsible. But he does not pay much in taxes
because we do not pay him much to do his job. That is your idea of the
trade-off in America between those who are entitled in America and
those who get privileges? This tax cut is denigrating families who work
hard every day, and their children, and the military.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. * * *
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is out of order.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. * * *
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Solis) and I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. George
Miller) for making it very clear about whether or not we in this
country really value work and ordinary workers.
Today is the day, July 25, that millions of child tax credits are
going to start to be delivered to families around the country.
President Bush went to Philadelphia to highlight those checks, to claim
credit for getting some extra money into the pockets of working
families.
My two children, each of whom have two children, are probably going
to get checks in the mail, and I am happy about it. They are modest-
income earners, and they are going to get their tax credit.
But this family, the Narvaez family, Maria and two of her three
children, she makes $20,000 a year. She works in a day-care center, she
works 40 hours a week. She is not going to get a check in the mail.
There is no check in the mail for her family. I want to tell Members
that this hardworking woman, I would think, is as deserving of getting
a check in the mail.
Let us compare that to Vice President Cheney who made the deal in the
dark of night to say well, let us see, the tax breaks went too high. It
exceeded our budget; who are we going to cut out? I have got it: Let us
cut out families like the Narvaez family.
[[Page H7625]]
Vice President Cheney will see a tax break of about $116,000 for 1
year. I am not talking income, I am talking tax break. Mrs. Narvaez,
Maria, would have to work 5.8 years to get as much as Vice President
Cheney is going to get in 1 year in a tax break.
Let us see, who is more deserving; how about all those people,
millionaires who go to work; no, maybe it is millionaires whose work is
to cut open those envelopes that have dividend checks in them. Those
people, do they deserve it more than the Narvaez family? I do not think
so. Let us pass this motion to instruct, and let us get a child tax
credit to the Narvaez family.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the comments of the gentleman
from California (Mr. George Miller). I certainly did not say that the
working poor are not responsible. They are very responsible. I have
been in that position. I have been among the working poor. I know how
hard it is to make ends meet.
But, I also was brought up in a family, my father a construction
worker, a pipe fitter that was many times without a job, that a full
day's work for a full day's pay; we accept things in our life that
sometimes we do not like. We try to make ends meet many times when that
is all we can do. Sometimes we cannot even make ends meet.
I think we have provided in this country an opportunity for people
that are working hard to receive an earned income tax credit to help
them through the tough times.
I am certainly someone who believes that we should help those that
cannot help themselves that are in need. It is our responsibility to do
that. I certainly appreciate our military for what they are doing. I
appreciate all the efforts that are put forward in this country by all
those who are willing to work and earn a full day's pay for a full
day's work, and we should support them and their families every way we
possibly can.
But we also have to remember the liability. As I said, we have a
progressive income tax system in this country. The liability, those who
talk about the rich and how much tax relief they are going to get,
well, how much are they paying in taxes? How much are those on the
lower scale, how much are they paying in taxes? It is always how much
refund are they going to get. Well, you have to pay income taxes to get
a refund. If you do not pay taxes, we do provide an earned income tax
credit. So we are helping.
But this idea of class warfare, sure there are families out there
working hard, they want to be rich.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut.
Ms. DeLAURO. I thank the gentleman, and I understand the point that
you are making, except the fact of the matter is that Enron paid no
taxes the last 4 out of 5 years. There are companies who are paying
zero in taxes, and yet they are the beneficiaries of a very, very hefty
tax cut.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, Enron is
being dealt with. No one appreciates what Enron did. It is a disaster
for a lot of people, and they are being dealt with. It was really an
embarrassment to our country that a corporation and the people that ran
Enron acted the way they did, but that happens. That happens.
Anyway, getting back to the subject, we are doing everything we
possibly can to provide tax relief across the board, provide people
that are not paying taxes as much help as we possibly can, and we will
continue to do that. But this motion to instruct does more harm to
helping families with children and receiving tax credit than it will do
good.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Tennessee (Mr. Cooper).
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Speaker, because of a very small group of Republican
leaders, they are preventing this House from helping 12 million poor
children around America. I would like to give my colleagues on the
other side of the aisle, the rank-and-file Republicans, the benefit of
the doubt. I do not believe that their heart is in this fight. I
believe they are being compelled by their leaders to do the wrong
thing. It is still not too late to do the right thing.
The checks are being mailed out today to the rich families in
America, and Members know it was a mistake made also 2 months ago to
prevent the other families in America from also getting help. That is
not just my opinion. Our President, George Bush, called once again
yesterday to help these children. President Bush is trying to be a
compassionate conservative, but the other side of the aisle is not
letting him do that. He has been calling for this 2 months now. Let us
listen to our President. It is not just our President; the other body,
by a vote of 94-2 has voted to do the right thing.
But too often we see in the House younger Members, Republicans,
compelled in some cases to do the wrong thing. It happened last week
when Member after Member came to this House to say that the chairman of
the Committee on Ways and Means had done the right thing; when,
thankfully, that same chairman came to the House floor this week to
admit that he had done the wrong thing.
Do not support Republican leaders when they are asking you to do the
wrong thing. Be the compassionate conservatives you claim to be. Help
these 12 million poor children. It is not quite too late; but 2 months
have passed, 2 months of waiting, 2 months of hurt for these families.
These people work hard every day. They pay their fair share of taxes.
Let us give them their fair share of tax help. Do the right thing today
and vote for this motion to instruct.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the
Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen).
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, do we not value all of this country's
children and families? This body has shortchanged our children too
often this year, and it is adding up to a heavy burden on their
families, all to make the wealthiest in this country richer.
Underfunding for Leave No Child Behind, block grants to States with
unmeetable requirements for Head Start teachers, and although it is a
demonstration program, this is meant to be the first nail in the coffin
of Head Start. We barely lost the vote last night, but Democrats will
continue to fight for this country's children, all of them, but
certainly those from lower-income families.
Today I am here with my colleague, the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Solis) and other Democratic colleagues to call on this House to
instruct the conferees first to act; and, second, to provide what the
President promised, tax relief to the 6.5 million families and over 12
million children. These families work hard, but in this economy this
President has created, they still need help, and especially for the
military families of soldiers who today are fighting for this country
and fighting for us.
{time} 0945
Democrats meant it when we said we will leave no child behind. Today
we call on the leadership of this conference, and specifically the
conferees, to expand the child tax credit and put our money where our
mouth is and where our heart and our values should be.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I listened to the gentleman from Kentucky,
and he expressed a lot of sympathy with the plight of the people, the
working poor and the people that we are trying to get some checks to
this morning. But I listened to the gentleman and I could not believe,
because he was suggesting that he was powerless to do something to help
the working poor and the children that have been left out and the
parents who are not getting this check.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I only have 2 minutes. I am trying to be
nice, not critical.
But the bottom line is this should not be ideologically driven. The
fact
[[Page H7626]]
that they are not paying income tax is not important. They are paying
property taxes. They are paying sales taxes. In a State like mine in
New Jersey, one could be paying a tremendous amount in property taxes
and sales taxes and all kinds of other taxes, payroll taxes.
So I am just asking my colleagues, do not be ideologically driven. Do
not say we cannot do this because they have not paid income taxes. My
colleagues on the other side have the power. This is a political
decision that is being made here.
The Republican leadership is making a political decision that they do
not want to help these people. They want to go home. They do not want
to go to conference. They want to go on break without helping these
people.
Mr. Speaker, the other body is not saying that. They are supportive
of what we are saying here. They want to send the checks and help these
people. The President wants to help.
So keep in mind, this is an ideology. Forget the ideology. I ask my
Republican colleagues to forget what they think about whether it is
good or bad from an ideological perspective. The bottom line is that
these people need help. The gentleman from Kentucky acknowledged that
he himself was in that position, or his family was in that position.
That is all we are saying as Democrats.
We know a lot of these people in the Armed Forces. Some of them are
serving in Iraq. They need help. We go home. We will see them. They are
constituents. They are having a hard time paying the rent and putting
food on the table. They need help. The economy is not good. We are not
doing well. They are having a hard time. Maybe if this was a better
time, we might say do not do this; but it is not. The economic times
are bad, and my colleagues cannot run away from this.
Mr. Speaker, it is the Republican leadership in the House that is
preventing this from happening. I urge my colleagues on the other side
to do it before they go home and before we have the recess and go on
vacation.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would just like to point out the child tax credit
under current law is refundable to the extent of 10 percent of the
taxpayer's earned income in excess of $10,500; salary and wages of
$15,000, $450 refundable tax credit; $20,565, plus the earned income
tax credit. It is $3,823 for a salary of $15,000; $2,770 for a salary
of $20,000.
So it is not like we are not helping. We are. And the fact is that
these individuals are not paying income taxes, and we are offsetting
those other taxes the gentleman just spoke of through the earned income
tax credit. So we are, under current law, helping these individuals
right now.
Mr. Speaker, I might just say, I spoke to a young man and his wife
not too long ago when we were debating the child tax credit for those
that pay no income taxes. And they work at a factory. They are factory
workers. They both work many hours of overtime. They have one child.
And they were asking me why they had to pay the taxes that they pay,
very high taxes, and they are taxed more because of the overtime that
they work. And they were excited about the child tax credit for their
own child. But when we were debating the issue of the child tax credit
for individuals that pay no income tax, they asked me why that would be
the case, that they were paying a lot of taxes, working very hard,
overtime pay to provide for their family, and they seemed to think that
was just a little, the playing field just was not level for them when
they were doing everything they could. And they were not making a lot
of money at that. I think $30,000 basically was their income.
But we are trying our best to do all we can. And I think the numbers
here show that we are helping the working poor, those that are paying
no income taxes. We are helping them through the earned income tax
credit and through child tax credit, 10 percent of the taxpayers that
earn incomes in excess of $10,500.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I do want to clarify something. There are over 337,000
children of teachers, classroom teachers that are left out of this
child tax credit. They pay payroll tax, gasoline tax, rent, property
taxes, and other types of taxes. I would think that their burden falls
very heavily on their children, and yet they get nothing.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today the Federal Government is sending out
checks to 25 million families in this country. More than 2 months after
this House passed the President's tax bill, among those receiving their
checks in the coming days will not be 6\1/2\ million taxpaying
families, taxpaying families, taxpaying families: property taxes,
payroll taxes, sales taxes. They pay taxes. They make low wages, yes.
So what is wrong with making low wages? Those who make low wages do pay
taxes.
My mother was a factory worker. She worked in the old sweatshops. She
did not make a lot of money, but she paid her taxes like others do. Why
should families not be allowed to have a child tax credit? These
families were denied what they were rightfully due, the extension of
the child tax credit, because they make low wages and for the last 2
weeks on this floor Democrats have been offering a motion to instruct
conferees. We have implored the leadership of this House: do what is
right; act on what the other body's legislation is.
Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have
criticized our motion. They argue that this would drop the child tax
credit from $1,000 to $700 immediately after the 2004 election. There
is a word for this type of argument: hypocritical. The child tax credit
will already drop after the 2004 elections. That is no coincidence. It
is a result of a deliberate decision made by the Republican majority to
drop the credit once these families go to the polls with the impression
that they are going to get the credit again in 2005.
Not so, my friends. Under the Republican-passed tax legislation, as
the law stands today, the $1,000 credit goes down, it goes up, it goes
down. It is more a seesaw than tax law.
When it came time to choose between a child tax credit or the tax
cuts for the wealthy, they chose the latter over and over and over
again. To meet their $350 billion goal, they cut out people who make
$10,500 a year to $26,000 a year in favor of those who make over a
million dollars a year who are going to get $93,000 in a tax cut every
single year.
The President said it yesterday, he said it in June: adopt what the
Senate has done. Fix this issue. Let us give these families what they
want.
Mr. Speaker, let us abide by that. Let us go with that. Let us make
sure that what we do allows today those 25 million people who are going
to get their child tax cut. Let us make sure that those families who
make $10,500 to $26,000 they get their child tax credit. They deserve
it. It is the right thing to do. It is the moral thing to do, and that
is the obligation of this House.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Woolsey).
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Solis) for organizing this morning's discussion,
because here we go. Is it not ironic that while the Nation is facing
one of the biggest budget deficits in history, at least $450 billion,
and I quote from the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Lewis), ``Enron
happens.'' Yes, it does. And we need to be doing something about it.
Republicans can find the money to provide tax cuts for the very
richest Americans and not enough for the children of America's working
families. Ha. The gentleman from Kentucky said Republicans are trying
their hardest. Well, I am telling my colleague, Republicans have to try
harder.
This supposed party of compassionate conservatism has exploited the
child tax credit issue to pass even more tax cuts for their wealthy
friends. Rather than bringing up the other body's child tax credit
which would have cost $3.5 billion, they passed a bill that costs $80
billion to benefit the wealthiest in this Nation.
Earlier this week, I joined my Democratic colleagues in writing a
letter to President Bush requesting that he lead the Republicans in
Congress to do the
[[Page H7627]]
right thing, to provide a tax cut that will benefit over 12 million
children of working families. One million of them, I remind my
colleagues, one million of them are children of military families.
Congress must not recess today without giving American workers and
their families the same consideration it gives the rich.
Why did Republicans in the United States House of Representatives not
follow the other body and bring a clean child tax credit bill before
us? According to a colleague from the other side of the aisle, and I
quote: ``If we are going to do it, we should get something in exchange.
If we give people that do not pay taxes a tax break, it is welfare.''
Well, Mr. Speaker, these families do pay taxes and they are not
seeking welfare. They are seeking the same acknowledgment for their
hard work as the rich receive in the Republican tax package. It is
unfortunate that the Republicans believe these forgotten children and
families do not contribute enough to deserve a break. Their actions
leave no doubt that their priorities are dead wrong.
Mr. Speaker, we want to pass this tax break and we want to do it
today before we go home to enjoy our tax breaks that we have passed in
the House of Representatives.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire about the time
remaining on both sides.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Solis) has 8 minutes remaining, and the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Lewis) has 15\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California for
yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the motion offered by my
colleague from California, and I want to thank her for her
extraordinary leadership. The Republicans are holding this measure
hostage because they really want to avoid doing what is right. They
knowingly left out millions of families in their tax bill.
Mr. Speaker, this is shameful and that is why we have been protesting
their failure to provide this vital relief for working families. When
the child tax credit was created in 1975, it was for the purpose of
helping families, not hurting them.
President Bush said that all Americans would receive tax relief, but
that was not the case. Initially, it seemed that the President's $400
per child increase in the child tax credit was meant to help all
families, but what we did not know was that the Republicans really did
not mean ``all families.'' Their idea of helping families did not
extend to low-income working families, the same people who were already
left out of the President's tax cut on dividends which President Bush
offered the wealthiest Americans.
When Republican negotiators went behind closed doors, suddenly these
families of 12 million children were excluded from the child tax
credit. Nationwide, that means one out of every six American children
were excluded. These children come from families where the parents work
hard and play by the rules. They deserve the same tax credit that other
parents will receive, but they really need it more. Their families do
not have the advantages that others have.
In the jobs depression this administration has put us in, the loss of
the $400 tax credit is like rubbing salt really in their wounds. Now
let us be clear about some of the people who will be hurt by this huge
inequity in the Republican tax plan, because the victims will be
disproportionately African American and Latino and other people of
color. 8.1 million taxpayers will receive no relief under the
Republican tax cuts; 1.6 million of them are Hispanic.
Mr. Speaker, 8.1 million represents 44 times the number of taxpayers
who have incomes exceeding $1 million, yet the President and the
Republicans have gone out of their way to help the wealthy. In fact,
those people with incomes over $1 million will receive an average tax
cut of $93,000 in 2003.
In terms of the child tax credit, one-half of all African American
families will not get the full tax credit, while one-quarter will
receive no tax credit.
And how can we abandon military families who are making tremendous
sacrifices? One million children of military families were excluded
from this tax package. So let us be for real in supporting our troops.
Mr. Speaker, the situation is outrageous, and it really does show the
Republican leadership's complete, complete lack of compassion in their
very conservative agenda.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, we are talking about tax credits here. Tax credits. One
has to pay income taxes to get tax credits. A credit is on a tax that
has been paid to get a refund.
My wife, not too long ago, said we needed a new automobile. And I
said, great. I think the automobile dealer in town is having some
tremendous rebates, so let's find the most expensive car we can buy so
we can get a greater rebate. She did not think that was a very good
idea because it was still going to be pretty expensive. So we are going
to have to look at the less expensive cars. But I think we ought to get
the rebate that the people who are paying for those expensive cars get.
I mean, it is only fair. Or maybe I should not buy the car; maybe I
should go down there and demand the rebate.
Mr. Speaker, that is what we are talking about here. What we are
talking about is taking money out of the pockets of people that are
paying taxes, income taxes, and putting it in the pockets of people
that are not paying income taxes. And on top of that, we are already
providing earned income tax credits, plus for those that are making
$10,500, we are paying child tax credits under current law.
So I do not know what we are talking about here, but I think that
there is some problem when we are talking about tax credits, when there
are those who want to take money out of someone's pocket, like the
couple that I was talking about a little while ago that works overtime,
works as hard as they can, and I am not saying that the working poor
are not working hard, but they are not paying taxes. They do not have
to pay taxes. They are not making enough to pay taxes. And to account
for the taxes that they are paying, to make up the difference, we are
paying earned income tax credits. Plus for those over $10,500, we are
paying child tax credits.
But, Mr. Speaker, I do not think we ought to be talking about tax
credits here. We ought to be talking about helping those who are not
paying income taxes. We are taking money out of one taxpayer's pocket
and putting it in the pocket of someone who is not paying taxes.
Now, I think there can be an argument there that that is being
compassionate. And being compassionate means that we are helping people
that at some point cannot help themselves, and I think we are doing
that. And I think the bill that we are talking about, H.R. 1308,
provides a lot of help for families. A lot of help. And what this
motion to instruct would do would reverse that. Again, I ask my
colleagues to vote ``no'' on the motion to instruct.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to clarify that, to my knowledge, there are
about 178,000 children from farming families that are going to be left
out with no child tax credit. Perhaps the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Reyes), our good friend and ranking member on the Committee on Armed
Services, can speak to that effect about his experience as a veteran
and how hard veteran families work.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Reyes).
Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California for
yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, time after time during these times that our families are
deployed overseas fighting for America's freedom and for the freedom of
others, we hear many Members of this body talk about how great our
soldiers are, and they are; how great their sacrifices are, and they
are; how great the sacrifice of their family and the sacrifices that
they are making, and they certainly are.
[[Page H7628]]
So perhaps I can clarify for my colleague here that one of the ways
that we judge ourselves as a Nation is not about talking about today's
heroes, but how we take care of yesterday's heroes. Cutting back
veterans benefits is certainly not one of those ways that we honor the
heroes of yesterday, because today's heroes fighting for our freedom
across the country and across the world you are paying attention.
Mr. Speaker, today, as we speak, tax rebate checks are being sent to
families around the country. But in my own district of El Paso and
across America, there are hardworking families and families of brave
members of our Armed Forces whose mailboxes will be empty. The tax bill
passed in May leaves behind 8 million children by denying their
families full access to child tax credit. This law fails to give the
child tax credit to those earning between $10,500 and $26,625 per year.
Of the 8 million children left behind in this tax law, 1 million live
with parents who are on active duty or are veterans. The children of
our working families, especially those of our armed services, deserve
better support from this body.
Mr. Speaker, there are over 16,000 military families with children
stationed at Ft. Bliss in my district. With loved ones serving in Iraq,
these families understand more than most what it means to sacrifice for
our Nation. These families certainly do not deserve to be left behind,
I would say to the gentleman from Kentucky that is handling the time on
the Republican side.
The tax bill passed by this House penalizes enlisted soldiers who are
serving in Iraq. For example, a staff sergeant with two children
earning $29,000 qualifies for the child tax credit. But if this same
staff sergeant is deployed in Iraq, 8 months, 10 months, 12 months, we
do not know what the duration is. That is why they are frustrated, his
taxable income drops and his children do not qualify for the tax
credit.
Mr. Speaker, this is no way to treat our soldiers. This is no way to
treat those that we exalt here on the floor of this great House who are
risking their lives for our country.
This motion will help these families. It instructs conferees to
include provisions to allow our men and women in uniform and their
families to include combat pay in their gross earnings for the purposes
of calculating eligibility for the child tax credit. They deserve it.
We ought to provide it for them. Let us send a message to our hard-
working families that they count too and that we recognize the
sacrifices being put on the line by military families around the world.
Let us pass the Solis motion.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the
distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), our Democratic
leader.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this very important
motion to instruct conferees. In doing so, I want to acknowledge the
excellent work and leadership of the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Rangel), the ranking member on the Committee on Ways and Means; the
gentlewoman from Connecticut, (Ms. DeLauro), who has taken a very
important role of putting this issue of fairness to America's children
forward; the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis), a member of the
Committee on Education and the Workforce, now a member of the Committee
on Commerce, for her leadership; representing the freshman class, the
gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud), the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Bishop).
Mr. Speaker, night after night, night after night for the past 2
weeks, Democratic Members have come to the floor to make the case for
America's children, the case for the children of America's working
families, the children of parents on active duty in the military.
Mr. Speaker, see, this is a copy of the check the President is going
around the country posing for pictures with, a check saying that this
is a good day because the check is in the mail for so many children in
America. The good news is that the check is in the mail for so many
children in our country. The bad news is, and the President knows this,
that the check is not in the mail for 12 million children, 250,000 of
them children of men and women on active duty.
The good news for those children is that their parents work hard,
care about them, and are the backbone of our country. The bad news is
they do not make enough money to be considered worthy of this tax
credit. I ask my Republican colleagues, why not raise the minimum wage
if they do not think it is high enough to get a tax credit for these
children? They say: Oh, no, we cannot do that.
The good news is that these children are children of men and women on
active duty serving their patriotic duty to our country. The bad news
is that although we honor their service on this floor of the House on a
regular basis, the service of our men and women in Iraq and
Afghanistan, at the same time we dishonor them by saying their children
are unworthy of receiving the tax credit because their pay does not
count and is not high enough for them to get the tax credit.
Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to our Republican
colleague who must have drawn the short straw to come to the floor to
defend the indefensible, cutting 12 million children out of the tax
credit, when he said that these people who cannot help themselves,
well, they want to help them. These people are helping themselves. They
are helping themselves. They are helping their children. They are
helping our country. They are entry level. They are people with
aspirations. They are people with young families. They are the future
of our country.
The gentleman from Kentucky also said, well, for them we have the
earned income tax credit. That should take care of them. Others have
said in the course of these couple of weeks, and on TV and again this
morning here, they do not pay taxes. My colleagues have pointed out
very clearly that they do pay taxes. I ask anyone who looks at his or
her paycheck whenever they get paid, do they not think paying a payroll
tax is paying taxes? Or paying sales tax is paying taxes?
The gentleman says, well, they get an earned income tax credit for
that. Interesting to note, my colleagues, since we are having a quiet
moment here this morning as Members come back to the Chamber after a
very late night, the IRS has recently said that they are going to
premonitor, premonitor, excuse me, I am using the wrong word, preaudit,
preaudit families, low-income families who might wish to claim the
earned income tax credit.
I ask my colleagues to think of it. These are people who make the
minimum wage. We have said that they will get an earned income tax
credit, and that is appropriate. The IRS is now saying they are going
to preaudit these poor families before they can make that claim for the
earned income tax credit by just listing their income on their income
tax and signing that this is what their income is.
At the same time, they have a very, very low audit rate for wealthier
individuals in our country. They have said on occasion that it is too
difficult and too expensive to fight the lawyers of those with
resources in our country, be they wealthy individuals or corporations.
But instead, the IRS is using its resources to preaudit poor working
families who may wish to claim the earned income tax credit. Just some
issues of fairness that I thought it was important to note this
morning.
Mr. Speaker, this check which will go out to many families of
children in America, and that is a good thing and we all support that,
this check for the poor children, though, of working families is
delayed. Delayed. Delayed.
The President says he wants this tax credit for poor children. That
is what the President said. That is what the President is saying on the
road. The Senate has already passed the legislation and sent it to
conference with the Republicans. It would take 1 minute for the
conferees to meet, to accept the Senate language, put the bill on the
President's desk, and remove this terrible embarrassment to the
Republican Party. It is no wonder no Republican Members showed up on
the floor today, leaving the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Lewis) to do
all of this heavy lifting by himself, carrying this unfortunate defense
of the indefensible.
It has a nice ring to it. It is reminiscent. Delayed by whom? Delayed
by DeLay. Delayed by DeLay. The child tax credit is delayed by DeLay.
I think the American people should know that. And if the President is
serious about wanting this tax credit for
[[Page H7629]]
all children in America, and I believe that he does, then I think he
should use his influence, his moral suasion, his leadership with the
Members of his own party to say let us end this embarrassment. Let us
end this embarrassment. Let us eliminate the delay caused by DeLay.
A couple of other thoughts that I wanted to convey to my colleagues
this morning as we get back into the legislative mode after a very late
night of debate and voting is that this delay for 12 million Americans
takes place within the context of the past few weeks. As recently as
yesterday, the Republicans strove to undermine, undermine Head Start.
By one vote, this House passed a block grant program under Medicare
that contained language that legalizes discrimination, but undermines
Head Start, removing standards so important for lifting up children.
And within the past couple of weeks, this body voted to underfund Leave
No Child Behind by $9 billion, leaving millions of children behind.
No tax credit if a child's parents do not make enough money, $9
billion out of no Child Left Behind leaving millions of children
behind. Undermining Head Start, removing the standards, turning it into
a block grant, on its way to being unrecognizable. These, sadly, are
the same children in many cases who are affected. The same children
fall into the categories for education for disadvantaged children,
children of parents making between $10,000 and $26,000 a year.
Mr. Speaker, that is not disadvantage. That is entry level. But
nonetheless they would qualify for some of those educational benefits
in Leave No Child Behind. And of course these children would take
advantage of Head Start.
So this is all part of a pattern. I call it the trifecta against
children that the Republicans have put forth. Actually, it is not my
idea. The gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) calls it the
trifecta, that great champion for children in our country.
So let us calm down after all the debates that we have had night
after night that we have tried to make the case to the American people.
This is almost like a Christmas carol or something where wealthier
people are treated better than poor kids. And the children of America
are in solidarity. They respect each other. They do not want other
children not to have toys at Christmas and food to eat and a home to
live in, the dignity of that kind of shelter.
Children are sympathetic to each other. Why can we not, as a
Congress, be sympathetic to all children? Because what we are doing
here today by saying this to these children, as I said again the
context of the Head Start legislation and the Leave No Child Behind
legislation, and when these children and some of the older siblings of
these children have a bigger struggle affording college and higher
education because of what this Congress is doing to Pell grants, this
is just not right.
Mr. Speaker, this is America's future. This is America's future. And
to every one of those children, how much better if we could say to
them: you are important to us. As President Kennedy said, children are
our greatest resource and our best hope for the future. He did not say
children of those making over $26,000 are our greatest resource, and if
their parents are even wealthier than that, our best hope for the
future. He said all children are.
So this is about aspirations. This is about the American Dream. This
is about making the future better. And day by day, quickly and surely,
the actions of this House, lead by the Republican Majority, are
undermining those aspirations.
It is not too late. It is not too late. We can accept the motion
offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis) to instruct the
conferees to agree to the Senate language. We can do it right now.
End the delay. Have our conferees go to conference. Agree to the
language. Put the bill on the President's desk. And would it not be a
wonderful gift to him who has said, the President who has said over and
over again that he wants this for America's children, all of America's
children, that when he returns from his trip he can immediately sign
the No Child Left Behind bill? In fact, they could probably get the
bill to him on the road so that history will never show that on the
same day that these checks were being received by some children, that
other children were getting nothing. Were getting nothing.
Mr. Speaker, with that I commend all who have worked so hard to make
the case for America's children, for America's future. I thank the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis) for her diligence, and all of
our colleagues, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), who I
see on the floor has been so much a part of this fight. I could name
practically every Member of the Democratic Caucus who has played a
major and significant role in making the case on this floor, to the
press, and across the country that fairness is a value that Americans
hold dear and that we agree with President Kennedy that children are
our greatest resource and our best hope for the future. All of
America's children.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I think fairness really is the
issue here. When I look at the child tax credit that is refundable to
the extent of the taxpayer's earned income in excess of $10,500, plus
the earned income tax credit, the earned income tax credit, here are
some numbers that I think are interesting. There are 18 million
families receiving earned income tax credits at a cost of $30 billion.
$30 billion, 18 million families. I think those numbers need to be
looked at.
But here are the actual numbers. The head of a household with two
children at $10,000 in wages would receive $4,010 in earned income tax
credit; $15,000, a refundable child tax credit of $450; earned income
tax credit of $3,823; $20,000, $565 child tax credit, an earned income
tax credit of $2,770. We are helping those that need this help.
And going back to the military, the House-passed bill does not deny
the child 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 Democrat motion to commit would only
increase the credit for some military families by allowing them to take
into account tax-free income when they compute their refundable credit.
Mr. Speaker, The House-passed bill provides more tax relief to
military families because it includes $806 million of military tax
benefits. These provisions have passed the House on numerous occasions
and are awaiting action in the Senate.
Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to
instruct conferees.
Mr. Speaker, it's a simple question: Will the Republican leadership
permit Congress to pass tax relief for millions of working and military
families before the August break?
Unfortunately, we know the answer, and it is not good news for the 4
million families with incomes between $10,000 and $26,000 who were left
out of the original Republican tax cut plan. And it is not good news
for the 262,000 children of military servicemen and women who currently
serve or have served in Iraq or other combat zones because their combat
pay actually reduces their tax credit.
With the Republican party in control of the White House, the Senate
and the House of Representatives, President Bush and the Republican
leadership have the political power to pass tax relief for these
families today. But do they have the political will?
I think that question was answered by Speaker Hastert, when he was
asked last Sunday if he and the Republican leadership would pass the
child tax credit before leaving town. Speaker Hastert dismissed the
question by saying that the families making between $10,000 and $26,000
``don't pay taxes.''
I hope the Speaker will talk to some of these families in his own
district. If he does, they will be glad to inform him that even though
they don't earn enough to pay income taxes, they pay plenty in Social
Security payroll taxes, sales taxes, and--if they are fortunate enough
to own a home--in property taxes.
Mr. Speaker, we should pass the child care tax credit bill today and
give working and military families the tax relief they deserve. As I
said at the outset, it's really a very simple question: Will the
Republican leadership permit Congress to pass tax relief for millions
of working and military families before we break or will they continue
to look the other way and go home?
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion.
[[Page H7630]]
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct
offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis).
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Ms. SOLIS. 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 motion are postponed.
____________________