[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 85 (Friday, June 18, 2004)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1189]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   AMERICAN JOBS CREATION ACT OF 2004

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. CAROLYN C. KILPATRICK

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 17, 2004

  Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, on June 17, 2003, I was in my 
congressional district on official business and unable to vote on H.R. 
4520. Had I been here I would have cast a ``yes'' vote on the motion to 
recommit, and a ``no'' vote on final passage. My opposition to H.R. 
4520 was based on a number of factors.
  First, the majority opted to employ a closed-rule which precluded 
consideration of the Rangel alternative that would have removed the 
provisions that provide incentives to move jobs overseas. The Rangel 
alternative included all the extenders that Representative Thomas added 
to his bill, such as small business expensing, R&D tax credit, and 
renewable energy--wind, solar--credits. The Rangel alternative would 
have provided the same temporary foreign income repatriation provision 
contained in the Senate Grassley/Baucus bill. The Rangel alternative 
provided a permanent solution on deductibility of State and local sales 
taxes, as opposed to the 2-year, limited provision under the Thomas 
bill. The Rangel alternative did not add to the deficit, and it dropped 
controversial revenue raisers from H.R. 4520--such as outsourcing tax 
collections to private debt collectors--and strengthened tax shelter 
provisions and rules that crack down on corporate expatriates.
  In essence Chairman Thomas cobbled together a variety of corporate 
tax breaks, extenders, and other sweeteners that have nothing to do 
with reforming international tax law. Fundamentally, H.R. 4520 pushed 
tax breaks for overseas investment and jobs abroad. During a time of 
historic job loss in America, H.R. 4520 retained as its core, $35 
billion in incentives to U.S. firms to invest overseas. In my district, 
there is a need for domestic jobs, not out-sourced jobs. My 
constituents want American jobs and companies to remain here. Finally, 
H.R. 4520 will add to the deficit. At a time of historic deficits and 
without a realistic budget plan, instead of simply solving a $4 billion 
problem, H.R. 4520 includes nearly $150 billion in gross tax cuts with 
a net cost of $34 billion over the 10 years.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4520 will generate tremendous economic misery on 
Americans who can least afford it, and will benefit corporations that 
have shipped desperately needed jobs in America overseas. Had I been 
here, my ``no'' vote would have symbolized my conviction that perpetual 
tax cuts and deficit spending have to stop.