[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 80 (Tuesday, May 15, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H5023-H5030]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        THE OFFICIAL TRUTH SQUAD

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I thank the Speaker so very much 
for the opportunity for presenting once again before the House of 
Representatives. I want to thank my leadership for allowing me to head 
up and chair this hour that is a Special Order hour. It is an 
opportunity for us in the minority party to come and try to shed some 
light on some issues that frankly don't get a whole lot of attention 
here on the floor of the House of

[[Page H5024]]

Representatives, and so I appreciate that opportunity once again.
  Madam Speaker, most of us go home every weekend and visit our 
district, talk to constituents. It is a wonderful time to be able to go 
back and get grounded, go back to that touchstone and those people that 
supported us as we came to Washington, to try to assist in moving our 
country in the right direction.
  And I have been struck over the last couple of months as I go home 
every weekend and talk to my friends and neighbors and fellow church-
goers in my Sixth District of Georgia on the north side of Atlanta, I 
have been struck by their concern about what appears to be from their 
standpoint a continuing decrease in the level of civility here in 
Washington.
  I am in my second term, initially elected in 2004, and one of the 
things that I thought I would hopefully be able to have some effect on 
would be to affect positively the level of rhetoric and the level of 
discourse here in Washington, and the level of frustration that my 
constituents tell me they have regarding what's going on here in 
Washington continues to increase.
  So one of the things that I and some other Members of our conference 
have tried to do is to come to the floor, try to do it at least once a 
week, sometimes we're not able to do that, but talk about issues in a 
light that is hopefully more positive, hopefully respects the history 
of our Nation in a way that allows us to kind of glean the role that we 
ought to play as the House of Representatives and as Congress and to 
hopefully chart out or to define a path that will continue to allow our 
children and our grandchildren to live in the finest Nation on the face 
of the Earth.
  In so doing, what we have tried to do is to talk about truth, to talk 
about facts. So often in the world of politics, in fact we have heard 
it just within the last few moments, Madam Speaker, the issue of 
politics over policy. So often when folks come to the floor of the 
House they talk more about politics than they do about policy, and I 
understand that. People have to get elected and I appreciate that, but 
when you're talking about things that are so incredibly important to 
the future of this Nation, it would behoove us as a House of 
Representatives to endeavor as much as we can to work together and to 
try to come up with the best solution for our Nation.
  All of us come from different backgrounds. I happen to come from a 
profession of medicine. I practiced medicine for over 20 years, and 
medicine is a little different endeavor than politics and legislating. 
In taking care of patients what we try to do is try to work together, 
all for a common goal, which is to get the patient well obviously. So 
it is a collegial activity. It tends to be an activity where we share 
information and support one another.
  Would that were the case on the floor of this House of 
Representatives, Madam Speaker, because I share my constituents' 
frustration with much of the partisanship that goes on here and much of 
the sniping and the politics over policy that makes it so very 
difficult, very difficult to move our Nation forward.
  So we have developed a group that we call The Official Truth Squad, 
and its desire, as I mentioned, is to try to shed some light on issues 
here before our Nation. We have a number of individuals that we like to 
point to as heroes over the history of our Nation. Many of our former 
Presidents were certainly individuals who sought the truth and sought 
to guide this Nation in a positive and an uplifting direction.
  One of the individuals that I like to quote is Daniel Patrick 
Moynihan. Mr. Moynihan was a Senator from the State of New York, and he 
had marvelous quips and marvelous phrases that he would use. One of 
them was this one right here. It says, ``Everyone is entitled to their 
own opinion but they are not entitled to their own facts.'' Everyone's 
entitled to their own opinion but they are not entitled to their own 
facts.
  So I was struck by that, Madam Speaker, just last week as I was 
working here late in the Capitol one evening, happened to run into a 
couple who was in the hallway, obviously tourists, and they were 
stopping at some of the statues here in the Capitol. They were 
interested in finding where the gallery to the House of Representatives 
was, and so I pointed them in the right direction and happened to see 
them up in the gallery.
  I had some friends from home who were visiting as well, and I got a 
chance to talk to them in the hallway. This young man was a physician. 
Come to find out he was a doctor who was serving in our military, and 
in 2 days or 3 days from last week when I met him, he was on his way to 
Iraq. He was on his way to try to help our men and women who are 
standing in harm's way and trying to protect our liberty and our 
freedom to make certain that they were given the finest care they 
possibly could be given in a difficult situation. He shared with me his 
frustration about the lack of not just civility but about the lack of 
attention to urgent problems.
  One of the things that we briefly talked about was the responsibility 
that this Congress has to make certain that our men and women who are 
defending liberty, defending us, making certain that our children and 
our grandchildren can live in this great Nation for generations to 
come, and the frustration that he had with the inability of this 
Congress to make certain that the resources, the money that's needed to 
be able to allow our military men and women to protect themselves and 
to protect us has not been forthcoming, and I shared my frustration 
with him about that same event.
  Madam Speaker, tomorrow I believe will be 100 days, 100 days since 
the President of the United States has sent to Congress his request for 
money, resources, for our fighting men and women in Afghanistan and 
Iraq, and if there was anything that demonstrated politics over policy, 
it has been this last 100 days. Very frustrating, Madam Speaker, 
frustrating for me, and I know that it is concerning and frustrating 
for our constituents all across this Nation, because what has happened 
has been a length of time that was played out to just apparently get 
headlines, it appeared to be.
  And then there was a supplemental bill that was brought to the floor 
of the House, and it had in addition to the money that had been 
requested to allow our troops to defend themselves, it had in addition 
to that a peculiar set of directions, benchmarks, timelines, for our 
men and women and our generals on the ground, so much so that they 
said, look, there isn't any way that we can accomplish what we need to 
accomplish if you, Congress, adopt this bill, adopts this piece of 
legislation.
  Many individuals on both sides of the aisle said, well, you're 
absolutely right, that sounds ridiculous. And so then what happened was 
that in order for the majority party apparently to pass this piece of 
legislation, they kept adding money on to it. So money in Washington 
does not start with an M. It starts with a B. So they kept adding 
billions and billions and billions, over $20 billion, to the bill in 
order to allow for folks on either side of the aisle who had concerns, 
enough of them to be able to say, okay, well, I can justify my vote for 
that bill if I am going to get those kinds of resources.
  And so that bill passed the House with a very slim margin and passed 
the Senate, was sent to the President, the President promptly vetoed 
it. It came back to the House of Representatives and was delayed for 
another 4 or 5 days by this majority, Madam Speaker. The only reason 
that anybody can determine was for, again, politics over policy.
  And just last week, another bill was then adopted which had a 
peculiar arrangement that would allow for some money to go for a while, 
and then if the Congress still agreed, within a month or two then there 
would be more money forthcoming. It was what many of us have called war 
on the installment plan, which is actually a worse plan than the 
majority party came up with initially.

                              {time}  1630

  Now, those are the facts. So that bill is passed, and we are waiting 
to see what happens from the Senate.
  But I get back to the point of that young man who shared his 
frustration and his concern with me about why Congress can't act on 
things that are so pressing for the security of our Nation and for 
those men and women who are serving in harm's way. It just, it is very, 
very concerning to men and

[[Page H5025]]

women across this Nation, that we, as a legislative body, the United 
States House of Representatives, can't put politics aside and work for 
the good of the Nation and work for the benefit and the security of our 
men and women who are defending our liberty and defending our freedom.
  So I just offer that as what I am hearing from home. I suspect it's 
what many of my colleagues are hearing from home as well. I am hopeful 
that we will be able to move forward with a clean bill, a bill that 
provides money for our men and women who are defending liberty and 
defending themselves in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  We have got a number of folks who will be joining us today, I hope. 
We will talk about a number of issues, the war supplemental, the budget 
and some other items, I hope.
  But I am pleased to be joined by my good friend and colleague from 
Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland) and look forward to your comments. I yield 
to you.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Thank you, Mr. Price. I appreciate you yielding 
your time to me. I appreciate you coming down here with the Truth 
Squad.
  Sometimes the truth is many things to many people. But at the end of 
the day, it's still the truth. As you know, sometimes the truth is 
ugly. I thought one of the comments you were making about the war 
supplemental bill, the very truth of what took place to get that bill 
passed was very ugly.
  In fact, this new ethical majority that came up, I felt, was pretty 
interesting, that, you know, one of the things was not leaving the vote 
held open to change the outcome, which we have seen several times, that 
it actually happened; the earmark reform, which is another smoke and 
mirror that has gone along. Then I think one of the other things was 
this big lobby reform about buying votes, and I think they called it a 
``culture of corruption.''
  But I think what we have seen since January is actually an in-house 
culture of corruption and the fact that they had to buy 218 votes. So 
that's something that's unique to the situation, because, typically, 
you don't think about using other people's money to buy votes, but 
that's what they are doing. They are using the taxpayer dollar, and, 
like you said, Congressman, it's up into the billions now. I believe it 
was $20 billion that it cost them to get that 218 vote.
  Let's talk about something else for a minute, because, I think the 
new majority party labeled the 109th Congress the do-nothing Congress, 
and we have labeled this, being the Truth Squad, and the honest people 
that we are, the smoke-and-mirrors Congress.
  So I want to talk about some of the empty promises, some of the smoke 
and mirrors that we have all been talking about. One of the things we 
can all relate to is high gas prices. Mr. Price, it's hard to believe 
that we talk about the good old days of gas being $2 a gallon. But we 
don't have to go back that far to where gas was $2 a gallon.
  I want to read a few quotes if I could, for you, to the people and to 
the Speaker. This was a quote: ``Democrats have a plan to lower gas 
prices . . . join Democrats who are working to lower gas prices now.'' 
This was a quote from now-Speaker Pelosi back in April of 2006, and I 
believe that gas was probably around $2 a gallon then. Now the 
Americans are paying $3.49 a gallon in California. That doesn't seem 
like that much of a reduction in the price of gas. In fact, it looks 
like almost 100 percent increase.
  Another quote: ``Democrats believe that we can do more for the 
American people who are struggling to deal with high gas prices . . . 
we have offered legislation that would actually do something about the 
rise in gasoline prices . . . '' This is a quote from Mr. Hoyer. That 
was back in 2005. I don't know what the gas prices were then in 
Maryland, but I know today in Maryland they are $2.98 a gallon.
  So these are some more empty promises; and not only empty promises, 
we got to see on some of the votes of the leadership, for the majority 
party, exactly how they vote.
  If you look at the ANWR drilling, no, no, no. No, no, no. If you look 
at the refineries, where we wanted to expand our capability of our 
refineries, and be able to refine more oil, no, no, no. I am anxious, 
aren't you, to see what their result is going to be? I am ready for the 
answer.
  They have left us hanging long enough. They have left us hanging for 
2 years, and 1 year, as to what their answer is going to be to relieve 
these gas prices, to lower them. If anything, since the election in 
2006, the gas prices have gone straight up.
  So, you know, either they don't want to do what it takes to lower the 
gas prices, they don't know what it will take to lower the gas prices, 
or the very economic policies they have adopted in this 110th Congress 
have caused the gas prices to go up.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate the gentleman's perspective on the 
issue of energy, because it's extremely important, because I hear that 
at home as well. Folks are frustrated by the level of inactivity by 
this Congress as it relates to many things, and certainly in the area 
of gas prices.
  As you recall, Congressman Westmoreland, and I know you appreciate 
that what we heard out of this new majority was that their bill, 
earlier this year, their part of their 6 for '06 plan was going to 
solve a lot of the problems as it related to energy, and what was that 
plan?
  As you will remember, that plan was to increase taxes on American oil 
companies. Increased taxes on American oil companies was somehow going 
to be this grand plan that would make it so that those mean and awful 
oil companies wouldn't be making so much money.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Do you think these are some of the same people that 
think increasing our taxes by the largest tax increase in the history 
of this country is going to make our economy better? Could these be the 
same people that think these economic policies are going to make us 
better?
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Well, I appreciate that observation as well, 
because that appears to be what they believe. But we are getting a 
little ahead of ourselves, because it's important to close the loop on 
this energy issue.
  Because what the majority party offered was this remarkable smoke and 
mirrors that said, as part of their 6 for '06, that if we just passed 
this bill, if we just increased taxes on the oil company, then what 
will happen is that they will, by some miraculous determination, lower 
the price of oil for folks at the pump.
  Well, as you well know, what increases taxes on American oil 
companies does is make it so that they are less likely to be able to 
compete in the world so that our reliance on foreign oil gets greater.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Just to interrupt you one more time, because I 
think this is important to understand that those tax increases on an 
oil company really come from doing away with the tax credits they were 
getting for new exploration on finding new oil.

  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Absolutely, without a doubt. There are some 
real keys, pivotal keys to the real solution to our energy challenges. 
One of them is conservation. We can all do more in the area of 
conservation. We can all probably do more on conservation. Probably the 
long-term solution is some type of alternative fuel. We have done a lot 
for that. In fact, most Members of the majority party are on record as 
opposing rewards for the provision of alternative fuel.
  But one of the mainstays, especially in the short-term, is to provide 
American energy for Americans. So, peculiarly, what this majority party 
did, and it's perplexing, frankly, because it doesn't solve anything, 
is to pass a bill to increase taxes on American oil companies, again, 
which makes us less competitive in the world, makes us more reliant on 
foreign oil, and, frankly, it means that what we do is finance those 
folks who like us less to a greater degree. That doesn't seem to make a 
whole lot of sense.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. I found two more quotes I found interesting: 
``House Democrats have a plan to help curb rising gas prices.'' Now, 
this is Mr. Jim Clyburn from South Carolina who said that on July 6 of 
2006. Gas prices in South Carolina are now $2.81.
  There is another one that says: ``With gasoline and other prices 
rising, America's middle-class families deserve better . . . Nobody 
thinks $2.50 a gallon is cheap; it's still expensive.'' Now that came 
from the Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel on June 2 of 2006. So, 
evidently, gas prices

[[Page H5026]]

were around $2.50 then. Now, in Illinois, they are $3.23.
  So, do you think, being the Truth Squad, that this could just be 
smoke and mirrors to get people to believe that they had some kind of 
answer to reduce these gas prices to make Americans make it easier for 
us to meet our energy needs here within this country, without going to 
foreign imports?
  So that seems to be the indication that this is just more smoke and 
mirrors that the 110th Congress, then the minority, was telling the 
American public to become the majority. It's kind of like a barking dog 
behind the fence. As long as that dog is behind the fence, he is going 
to bark and say and do things to make you think he is going to get out 
and get something done. But when you open that gate he becomes a little 
whimpering Chihuahua, does nothing. I think that's what we see in here, 
a bunch of little Chihuahuas whimpering around.
  I do thank you. I thank you for your time. I think the gentlelady 
from Tennessee may want to add something to that. I appreciate the 
opportunity.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate your comments so much. I think 
it's important. It's called smoke and mirrors; I think that's an apt 
title. I talk about politics over policy, which is what frustrates me, 
frustrates so many of our constituents at home.
  I am so pleased to be joined by my friend from Tennessee, 
Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn, who is a strong leader on the Energy 
and Commerce Committee. I look forward to your comments on this issue 
and others.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman so very much. I am pleased that 
we are talking about the issue that so many Americans are talking about 
right now, and that is the energy needs of our country.
  One thing that you touched on, I think, that is just so vitally 
important to see, the solutions that we work toward are going to be 
American solutions, and it is not going to be something that is simple, 
or you can't change it with the stroke of a pen. This is something we 
are going to have to work our way out of, things we can do right now. 
Right now, through conservation efforts, things that we can do over the 
next decade, through exploration, through the innovation, things that 
we can work over the next 25, 30 years toward, as we look at 
diversification of our supplies, and commercialization of new 
technologies and new forms of fuel.
  But the thing is, when you look at all of that diversity, and having 
a wide, broad answer, a sustainable American energy policy, we know, it 
is American solutions that will lead us to being free of the influx of 
foreign oil and foreign energy sources into our country. I think that 
what we have to do is look at the steps we are going to take over the 
next couple of years and the next couple of decades as being more or 
less next level steps to the building blocks that we have put in place.
  Our party has had a tremendously strong record of conservation. You 
can go back to Teddy Roosevelt and look at the efforts that he had 
toward conserving this Nation's natural resources and the legacy that 
was put in place there, and how we have moved forward through the 
decades now to where we look at our environment and energy and, say, 
you know, we passed a good bill in 2005. It brought forward, moved 
forward, a lot of our alternative energy sources, our renewable 
resources, and allowed for additional exploration of those natural 
resources that we have here.
  Now it is time for us to push it a little bit further down the pike. 
That's what the American people want to see. They know that fuel prices 
are high. They understand that. They know that our electricity use is 
going to increase over the next couple of decades. They understand 
that. They accept that.
  What they want us to do is to get the costs down, to be certain that 
we have access to an ample supply of affordable energy.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate your passion about this and the 
information that you bring. I suspect you see what I see at home, and 
you hear what I hear at home, that is, that Americans want us to be 
working towards solutions. They want us to come up with solutions and 
make certain that we are working together to put those solutions on the 
table and move them forward so that we can work to get that American 
energy.
  What they are concerned about is the lack of solutions that they see 
being put on the table by the current majority party.

                              {time}  1645

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. If the gentleman will yield. That is indeed one of 
their frustrations.
  And one of my constituents this past weekend said to me, you know, I 
appreciate all the talk that's out there about the environment. I 
appreciate the talk that is out there about energy.
  But, let me tell you something. Global warming is not a national 
security issue. And what I don't like is the fact that the liberal left 
is taking money out of homeland security. They're taking money out of 
intelligence. They're diverting funds from all sorts of budgets up here 
to study their fascination with global warming. And that is something 
that our constituents are not happy with. And as one of my constituents 
said to me, I don't think global warming had one single thing to do 
with September 11.
  They want us to focus on what should be our priorities. And as we're 
talking about the budget and the priorities of the House, one of the 
things we have continued to hear so much about is a tremendous amount 
of concern from the small business people that are in our district, all 
of our small business owners, especially our female-owned small 
businesses who are extremely concerned about the budget that the 
Democrat leadership has brought forward that would be the single 
largest tax increase in history.
  These are women who have stepped forward. They are taking a risk. 
They are taking the responsibility of running a company, and now they 
are getting ready to be hit with the single largest tax increase in 
history by a leadership that I guess does not understand the necessity 
of being a small business owner and looking at those books, being a 
single mom and wanting deductibility for that child tax credit; small 
business owners that are sharing in the ownership of this; married 
couples that are looking for marriage penalty relief that want to 
continue small business expensing. And every time they turn around, the 
government is wanting to take more of their pay check.
  My constituents want to know that they've got first right of refusal 
on that pay check, not the Federal Government. They know government has 
a spending problem. It doesn't have a revenue problem.
  And as I've said many times on this floor, a lot of my constituents 
believe if 10 percent is good enough for God, 10 percent is good enough 
for the government. And they feel like we should do a better job of 
managing the people's money, and they are exactly right.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Will the gentlelady yield?
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Indeed, I will.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate you bringing up the issue of the 
largest tax increase in American history that was passed by this 
majority on this floor. And folks at home say, well that can't be true. 
That just can't be true. We can't allow that to happen. What are they 
doing?
  And what they're doing is displayed in this chart right here, as you 
well know, because all of these tax rates, all of these tax rates, 
given the budget that has been adopted by this House, will increase to 
significant levels in relatively short order. Ordinary income going 
from the top rate of 35 percent to 39.6, capital gains going from 15 
percent to 20 percent, dividends going from 15 percent to 39.6 percent, 
estate tax goes from 0 percent in 2010 to 55 percent. That's the death 
tax. It goes to 55 percent in 2011. The child tax credit cut in half. 
And the lowest tax bracket, amazingly enough, goes from 10 to 15 
percent, which is a 50 percent increase.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. If the gentleman would yield, that is their 
projections for right now. We are just a few months into the new 
majority, and it took them just a couple of days to increase 
regulations and increase spending. It took them a couple of months to 
start raising taxes, and look at where they've gotten. They already are 
spending so much more than they should be that at this point this is 
where they are. And we haven't even gotten through the first year of 
this.

[[Page H5027]]

We haven't even gotten through the first budget. And we would see those 
rates on ordinary income tax go from 35 to 39.6 percent on January 1, 
2011. That's 1/1/11. And that is when they would raise that. We would 
see that child tax credit cut in half. We would see cap gains go back 
up, and we're just a few months into this. This is the Hold on to Your 
Wallet Congress, and I would recommend that people hold on to that 
wallet because they want to get their hand on your pay check. And I 
yield back.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate the gentlelady's perspective on 
that because it is so true. And when folks think about the ordinary 
income going up from 35 to 39.6 percent they say, well, that, you know, 
that's just all those folks who are at the top, all those rich folks. 
Well, as you mentioned and so clearly stated, that includes all the 
small businesses, and what that means is jobs for America. And so the 
largest tax increase in the history of our Nation is what has been 
passed on the floor of this House. Very frustrating. And when you talk 
with reasonable folks on the other side of the aisle about this, they 
say, oh, well, we're not going to do all that. We're going to change 
some of those numbers. We're going to make it so that the lowest rate 
isn't 15 percent, it comes back down to 10.
  But the problem is that their budget has spent all of the money 
that's to come from all of these tax increases. So if they're not going 
to get that money from one spot, then they've got to get it from 
another and raise them even more.
  So, Madam Speaker, I think that it is clear that this is a real 
problem that the American people are beginning to appreciate, that the 
leadership that they thought they were electing in November of 2006 is, 
in fact, not the leadership that they are getting. Again, politics over 
appropriate policy.
  This is a pie chart, Madam Speaker, that demonstrates who's going to 
be paying all those new taxes. And it talks about the billions, 
billions and billions of dollars that will be supposedly raised by 
those. In fact, what will happen is that it will so depress the economy 
that it is not likely that you'll see those kinds of revenues. In fact, 
what will happen is that we'll see fewer jobs, fewer amount of revenue 
to the Federal Government, and a significant change in what is a 
relatively good economic picture at the current time.
  I am pleased to be joined by my good friend from California (Mr. 
McCarthy), Kevin McCarthy, who is a member, of, I believe a member of 
the Budget Committee, and has been involved in certainly budgetary 
aspects and budgetary planning at the State level. And we're pleased to 
have you join us here in Washington this term as a new Member of the 
House of Representatives and look forward to your comments this 
evening.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Madam Speaker, I just want to 
congratulate this Member because I truly believe more people are 
listening than we've been hearing about. We see Nielsen's ratings out 
there and we see a number of people that watch C-SPAN. But I must tell 
you, there must be more because when I was sitting in my office, I was 
reading headlines, and the headline recently said, Congress has its 
lowest approval rating to date: 29 percent of the United States 
approves of what Congress is doing. And that means nothing.
  And I believe that a lot is coming from what you're talking about. 
You're giving people truth and accountability on what's gone on in this 
new majority and what has happened in this new majority.
  And that's really what I want to talk about today. Not much has 
moved. It's more about doing nothing. You talk about they are talking 
about putting politics before policies. And what I'd like to talk about 
today is actually a solution. I'd like to talk about putting people 
before politics. That's where we have to have a new direction and a new 
change.
  When you look at some of the graphs that are sitting down on that 
floor, you will see, and it is a direct comparison of what policy the 
Republicans believe in and the policy the Democrats believe in.
  A headline that I read just the other day was the largest amount of 
money coming in on April 15 in the record of the United States of 
America. The largest amount. And how did we come about doing that? We 
lowered taxes. It said, if you let people keep more of what they earn, 
they will invest. And what happens when they invest? They create more 
jobs. When you create more jobs, you create more homeowners. When you 
create more homeowners and more jobs, more people are able to go to 
college, get a greater education. That's talking about putting the 
people before politics.
  It all goes back to the 2003 tax relief bill, much of what your graph 
will say. It'll show greater job creation the Republicans went out to 
do, and it'll show greater investment and, in the end, greater amounts 
of money to America today.
  And what happens? It comes down to tell us that this is not a revenue 
problem in our deficit. It is a spending problem. But the Democrats 
look at it all different. They believe they should take more of what 
you earn. And I know I've said it before on this floor but I want to 
say it again. When you put people before politics, let's talk about 
taxes. Let's talk about what the Democrats proposed in their 100 days 
of increasing taxes which, Madam Speaker, our speaker just said on this 
floor, increasing taxes in every realm. If you have children, it's 
going to cost you more. If you're married, it's going to cost you more. 
If you're elderly, it's going to cost you more. If you're in the lowest 
tax bracket, it's going to cost you more.
  Now, I want to put it in perspective, because this is something that 
this floor doesn't talk about. What is the day-to-day life of an 
American? How do they pay taxes? Do they pay enough taxes? Well, I want 
to give you an average day. A person wakes up, they go in and they take 
a shower. Do you know, when they turn that water on they are paying a 
water tax?
  They get ready for work. They go out, maybe they stop off at a coffee 
shop, buy a cup of coffee. They pay a tax on that coffee.
  They look at their gas gauge. They go to the gas station. I am in 
California, paid $3.49 a gallon. A lot of that was in tax.
  Then I go into work. For the first 3 hours of work, I'm just paying 
State and Federal tax. Lo and behold, maybe I'm like most of Americans, 
I have to move in my job. I have to be able to go to other places to be 
able to sell because it's a global economy. I buy an airline ticket, I 
pay an airline tax. I rent a car when I get there. I pay a rental tax. 
I go and work part of the day. I come home, turn on the TV maybe to see 
our good speaker here on television. I pay a cable tax.
  And lo and behold that I was able to put a little money away after 
they tax me from morning till night, and I invest. I invest for my 
family. I invest for my children to go to college. I invest and take 
the risk and hopefully I got a little reward. And maybe I invest in 
some property. Maybe I invest in the stock market. And because the 
Republicans lowered the tax and more people are paying dividends, so 
I'm getting a greater income and my kids can go to a maybe more 
expensive college. Then maybe I can afford to send my kids to 
Disneyland a little more. Maybe I can afford to spend time with my 
family a little more, and that's what Americans want.
  But lo and behold, if I invested and I got a return on my investment, 
and I wanted to leave some money for my children and my grandchildren, 
what do the Democrats answer with? They answer they want 55 percent of 
that. They don't even want half. They want 55 percent. Because you 
decided to invest in America, they think you owe the government.
  What do Republicans say? Keep it and add on. Why? Because we believe 
that's your money. We believe the capital is good for America, good for 
the investment. It helps us to be more competitive in a global economy. 
Yeah, you're becoming more efficient; that you should, if you owned a 
small business, invest in new equipment because your employees will be 
able to be more efficient. America will be more efficient, and that's 
what this Congress has produced.
  There is a direct change in this Congress, and I applaud this 
individual on the floor, Mr. Price, because from the standpoint I 
believe more people are

[[Page H5028]]

listening. If it's rating a 29 percent, your Truth Squad is getting out 
that accountability is lacking here in Congress today.
  And I would like to just talk to you a little longer about this. 
Maybe you can dwell on a little more, you have a graph down there. 
Maybe you can talk a little bit about what you see from the 2003 plan 
to today's plan as well.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate the gentleman and the comments 
that he makes about every single tax that we pay with every single 
thing we do is so apt because this new majority seems to believe that, 
well, in everything they do, seem to believe that they have got a 
better idea. They've got better solutions. They know better than the 
American people about how they ought to do most anything, and 
especially how they ought to spend their money.
  And when I talk to my good friends on the other side of the aisle who 
appear to be interested in making certain that America sustains this 
economic vitality that it has, and you ask them, well, how did that 
vitality come about, and you point to things like this chart 
demonstrates, which is where job creation was before the appropriate 
tax reductions and what happened afterward, it's as clear as the nose 
on your face or the drawing before you. Before tax cuts were put in 
place, there was a staggering job growth and mostly negative job 
creation. But something happened in 2003, as you pointed out. Something 
happened.

                              {time}  1700

  And it resulted in huge, significant job growth, job increase, across 
this Nation. Literally 49 of the 50 States have increased employment 
since 2003. And one would think that if you had the responsibility for 
determining what the economic policies of this Nation ought to be that 
you would look at that point and you would say, well, it would help me 
understand what happened then in order to continue the economic growth 
that we have seen. And it is clear that this job creation, this job 
growth, was a direct result of allowing Americans to keep more of their 
hard-earned money. So it is without doubt that we need to continue 
those policies, in fact, to increase the ability for Americans to keep 
their own money and, therefore, continue the wonderful growth that we 
have had.
  I am pleased to yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. You make a great point. Numbers don't 
lie. You see it in a graph. You see it in the facts. You see it on 
April 15, the highest revenue ever to come in.
  Now, why do we continue to have these deficits? Because it is a 
spending problem, not a revenue problem. Just as when you live at your 
own house, you balance your checkbook. If you have got more money 
coming in, how come you are going further into debt? Because of the 
management and the lack of accountability here. You see the 
unemployment rate continue to go down from 2003. Why? Because if people 
are able to keep more of what they earn, they are able to invest.
  We want America to be the most competitive, to be able to be the most 
productive, and you need capital to do that. And do you know what else 
you want? You want the creation of small business. You want everybody 
across the board to have the opportunity for the American dream.
  Well, if you are taking a savings account that you maybe want to 
invest in your family, to invest for them in the next 21st century, to 
invest them in the ability to have a small business, invest them in 
taking a risk and a little reward, you don't want to give 55 percent to 
the government. You want to be able to hand it down.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Exactly right.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. And don't you want your grandchildren to 
be able to have a greater opportunity, greater education? It is not 
just the undergraduates we look at.
  As I told you before, I have two kids at home: Connor, who is 13; and 
Meghan, who is 10. And when I look at their education and we sit around 
our kitchen table, my wife Judy and I, all we do is talk about the 
future for our children. And I am not worried about our children 
competing with somebody from another part of California or even 
somebody in different parts of America. Do you know whom our children 
are going to compete with? It is a global economy. They are going to 
compete with the kids in India and China. And I will tell you in India 
and China they don't have a 55 percent tax rate on the death tax. They 
don't hold their children back like we are holding ours back. We don't 
have the opportunity to grow. And this economy is competitive. And for 
us to stay that way, we need actually a new direction in this Congress 
where the people are before politics. And the one thing I have seen in 
these 100 or so days, this November election never ended, that we 
continue to have politics on this floor in each and every way we go 
about doing it. We should now start talking about solutions. How do we 
solve the problems? How do we make America energy independent? Not how 
we simply fund greater dictators, not that we buy as much oil from 
Venezuela as we do from America, and you listen to what Mr. Chavez says 
about America, ``ending the evil empire.'' We want to make America and 
this world safer, freer, and leave it a better place for our own 
children. And we are not going to do it with the change in direction in 
this Congress. We are not going to be able to achieve those goals.
  That is why I want to congratulate you on the work you have done 
because you are bringing accountability to this floor. You are letting 
the American people see it. And what we want to derive from that are 
solutions, bringing people back before politics.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's 
contributing this afternoon and his perspective.
  And it is so appropriate and so uplifting, frankly, to have Members 
in the House of Representatives who understand and appreciate the 
connection between cause and effect, the connection between the actions 
that we take here and then what happens out in the real world. And it 
is one of those things, Madam Speaker, that frustrates my constituents 
and I know it frustrates Americans all across this Nation who are 
concerned that there are fewer and fewer individuals in this House of 
Representatives that appreciate that connection.
  I want to mention just a few more items as it relates to the economy 
and as it relates to our current situation and, hopefully, what will 
occur with the policies that are adopted by this House of 
Representatives and this Congress.
  This is a chart, Madam Speaker, that demonstrates the unemployment 
rate. And as you will recall, at the beginning of this decade, the 
unemployment rate was increasing significantly and got up to almost 6.5 
percent in the early part of 2003. If you were to look at this graph 
and to believe and appreciate that a low unemployment rate means a 
vibrant economy, that people are working, that people are being able to 
support their family, that they are able to change jobs, that they are 
able to move up in the job market, that is what happens when you have a 
low unemployment rate. And anything below about 5 percent is considered 
to be an extremely vibrant economy.
  So something happened in 2003 to result in a steady decline in the 
unemployment rate over the last 3 or 4 years. And what happened in 
2003, again, is that we, Congress, and this administration allowed for 
Americans to keep more of their hard-earned money. Now, when you look 
at that, it is an important thing to appreciate. It is also important 
to recognize that cause and effect. But it is also important to look at 
some other numbers and kind of dig a little deeper into what was the 
consequence, what happened with the decreases in taxes.

  As I mentioned, job growth, 88,000 new jobs were gained in just this 
past April, with nearly 2 million new jobs being created over the last 
12 months. Our Nation has added nearly 8 million new jobs since August 
of 2003. And, Madam Speaker, sometimes those numbers just kind of get 
lost. You say 8 million new jobs or nearly 8 million new jobs, and it 
is tough to know whether or not that is good or bad compared to maybe 
what the rest of the world is creating. What is happening in the rest 
of the world?
  Well, Madam Speaker, 7.8 million new jobs since August of 2003, that 
is more new jobs than all other major industrialized countries 
combined. That is more than all other major industrialized countries 
combined. That is

[[Page H5029]]

more than England plus France plus Spain plus Italy plus Scandinavia 
plus Japan plus all other industrialized countries combined. That is 
phenomenal, Madam Speaker. It would behoove us to delve into why that 
has happened.
  Our economy has seen job gains for 44 straight months, and employment 
has increased in 47 States. I think I should correct myself. I think I 
said 49 States earlier. It is 47 States within the last year. So the 
lower unemployment rate that we see, 4.5 percent, among the lowest in 
the past 6 years. And, Madam Speaker, that rate is lower than the 
average for the 1960s, for the 1970s, for the 1980s, and for the 1990s. 
That rate is lower than the average unemployment rate during those 
periods of time.
  Economic growth, this economy that has been in transition has shown a 
sustainable growth path, an increasing path over a period of time. Real 
GDP growth is up 1.3 percent in the first quarter of this year and 2.1 
percent over the last four quarters. Household spending, what are moms 
and dads across this Nation spending? Well, their spending is up 3.8 
percent, and it remains strong and really is expected to be that kind 
of firm foundation upon which we continue this positive economic 
activity. But it will only continue, Madam Speaker, if we are 
responsible and set appropriate policies that will allow Americans to 
keep more of their hard-earned money.
  By the same token, business investment continues to increase. Capital 
investment turned up in the first quarter. As my good friend from 
California mentioned just a moment ago, tax receipts were up. Tax 
receipts rose 11.8 percent in fiscal year 2006 on top of a 14.6 percent 
increase in 2005. And so far this year, we have seen growth of 11.5 
percent. And that is what is confounding to our good friends on the 
left who don't seem to appreciate the cause and effect of allowing 
Americans to keep more of their money. In fact, what they say over and 
over is, well, the government needs more money in order to X-Y-Z. Even 
if you believe that all of the things that Washington does are 
appropriate and even if you believed that there was no waste and that 
there was no fraud and that there was no abuse that you could squeeze 
out of the system, even if you believe that, what we see happens when 
you decrease taxes, when you allow Americans to keep more of their 
hard-earned money, is that revenue increases. So, Madam Speaker, what 
we see here on this chart is a chart that demonstrates Federal revenue. 
That is the amount of money coming into the Federal Government in 
billions of dollars. And over the first part of this decade, we saw a 
steady decline in the amount of money coming into the Federal 
Government. And then once again that magic line, that magic point in 
time in 2003, when this Congress acted responsibly, along with this 
administration, and allowed Americans to keep more of their hard-earned 
money, what happened, Madam Speaker, is a remarkable thing, and that is 
a significant and huge increase in the amount of money coming into the 
Federal Government.
  It ought not have been a mystery. Many people predicted it. Many 
people said that is exactly what would happen, and they knew that 
because that is what happened throughout history. President Reagan knew 
it when he decreased taxes on the American people and saw increasing 
revenue to the Federal Government. President Kennedy knew it when he 
enacted appropriate decreases in taxes on the American people in the 
early 1960s, and what we saw as a Nation at that time was an increase 
in revenue to the Federal Government.
  So, Madam Speaker, it is important that we look at the cause and 
effect. What we do here makes a difference in everything. It has 
consequences for the American people. And so when you have positive 
activity in our Nation as it relates to the economy, positive job 
growth, positive numbers coming into the Federal Government, positive 
business investment, increasing homeownership, low inflation, low 
unemployment, it behooves us to figure out why that happened. It 
happened because we allowed more Americans to keep more of their hard-
earned money, and we ought to continue those policies.
  Now, one of the great concerns that I have, Madam Speaker, is that I 
don't sense any amount of willingness on the part of our new majority 
to continue those appropriate policies. And, frankly, I don't sense a 
whole lot of willingness on the part of a majority of Congress on both 
sides of the aisle to do what needs to be done in the area of spending. 
As my good friend said earlier, we don't have a revenue problem here in 
Washington; we have a spending problem. And it is clear that that 
spending problem continues regardless of the party in power.
  So I am one of those who believes that there needs to be some 
restraints, some process restraints that ought to be put in place in 
order to decrease the level of spending appropriately and make certain 
that we hold people accountable and that we make certain that people 
are being responsible with the hard-earned money that Americans send to 
Washington, which is why I support a Federal Taxpayer Bill of Rights.
  And I have labeled this chart ``American Values and American Vision'' 
because, Madam Speaker, I believe that it is an American value to allow 
individuals to keep the benefits of their labor. I believe that the 
more we allow individuals to derive the benefits of their labor and 
their hard work and their entrepreneurship and their ingenuity that 
what we will do is create more Americans who will strive to do more, 
who will strive to create more, who will strive to risk more, who will 
strive to do more in order to succeed. And the more Americans that are 
willing to do that, I have all the faith in the world that we will 
continue to be a wonderful and productive and successful Nation.
  However, if we as a nation decide, no, we as a government know best, 
that we ought to tell you what to do, that we ought to tell you where 
to go, we ought to tell you how much you can make, that we ought to 
tell you when you make too much, what that does is stifle ingenuity and 
it stifles creativity and it stifles entrepreneurship and it says, no, 
we don't want you to be successful. We only want you to do this much, 
not more. We don't want you to truly reach your full potential. We just 
want you to do this much. We don't want you to dream big dreams because 
that wouldn't be a decision that we have made. Your dream may be at 
odds with some decision that Washington makes.
  Madam Speaker, that is not the America that I know. That is not the 
American value that I was taught. That is not the American vision that 
I have and that so many of my colleagues have.
  So the Taxpayer Bill of Rights that we have introduced in this 
Congress, Federal Taxpayer Bill of Rights, says a number of things, 
positively says a number of things. It says that taxpayers across this 
Nation have a right to a Federal Government that does not grow beyond 
their ability to pay for it. And what does that mean, Madam Speaker? 
What that means is that this bill, if enacted, would appropriately 
reduce the size of government or limit the size in the growth of 
government to an increase in the population of our Nation plus a cost-
of-living adjustment so that the government could rise but no more than 
the increase in population and the increase in inflation. That is a 
restraint on the kind of spending that occurs on both sides of the 
aisle here in Washington. That is the kind of positive solution that I 
and many people support.
  We believe in American values and an American vision and a Taxpayer 
Bill of Rights that says that taxpayers have a right to receive back 
every dollar they entrust to the government for their retirement.

                              {time}  1715

  The issue of entitlements, Madam Speaker, we haven't even touched on 
this afternoon, but it's an important issue. The issue of Social 
Security is one that is extremely important because it was a program 
that was put in place a number of decades ago, and it was put in place 
at a time when there were 15 or 16 workers for every retiree, a 
wonderful program to have in place to allow for seniors to have some 
nest egg or some cushion that they could rely on when they retire. It 
also, curiously, Madam Speaker, as you likely know, was put in place at 
a time when the average life expectancy in this Nation was less than 
when the benefits

[[Page H5030]]

would begin. That is the kind of program that the Federal Government 
likes. It means that you don't necessarily get what you put into the 
program itself.
  We believe that American taxpayers have the right to receive every 
dollar back that they put into the Social Security program. We believe 
that the Social Security trust fund money ought not be spent on 
anything but Social Security retirement benefits. We believe that is a 
right that Americans have. We believe that is a responsibility that 
this Congress has in a positive way to say we will limit the spending 
of that money to what it was intended for. We believe in American 
values and American vision, that Federal taxpayers have a right to a 
balanced budget without raising taxes.
  There are a number of ways that you can get to balancing the budget. 
You can get to it by increasing taxes. You can tax businesses and you 
can tax people, successful people and folks all across this Nation who 
work for a living. You can tax them and take more of their hard-earned 
money and for the short term you can balance the budget. Yes, you can.
  But the way to responsibly balance the budget that embraces American 
values and that embraces American vision and that allows people to 
succeed and dream and work hard and have the benefits of their labor, 
the way to do that responsibly is not to take more of their money. The 
way to do that responsibly is to decrease spending, is to decrease and 
restrain the growth of government, and to make it so that the Federal 
Government does what the Federal Government ought to and ought do only. 
And that requires, I believe, Madam Speaker, a balanced budget 
amendment.
  As I mentioned, folks on both sides of the aisle have difficulty with 
spending too much of the American taxpayers' hard-earned money. We 
believe that a balanced budget amendment is imperative.
  We believe also that Federal taxpayers have a right to fundamental 
and fair tax reform. My good friend from Tennessee mentioned earlier 
that on January 1, 2011, 1/1/11, that this new majority is destined for 
the largest tax increase in the history of this Nation. We believe that 
that's wrong. We believe that the manner in which this Federal 
Government gains revenue stifles entrepreneurship, stifles vision, 
hurts dreams, harms success, says to folks who are working hard out 
there across this Nation, Don't do that. Don't work hard. That's not 
what you want to do, because if you do that, we will just take more of 
your money. That is not the America I dream about and I believe in. So 
we believe that fundamental and fair tax reform is imperative.
  And finally, Madam Speaker, the Taxpayer Bill of Rights says that in 
order to increase taxes in this body, that we must have a 
supermajority. We must have more than just 50 percent plus one. We must 
convince a supermajority, a vast number of the individuals who serve in 
this body from all across this Nation, that a tax increase is 
absolutely necessary. It is one of the provisions that we had in place 
for the last 12 years, from 1994 to 2006. It's one of the things that 
was changed on the very first day of this new Congress, that a 
supermajority was no longer required. It is one of the reasons, Madam 
Speaker, why there was no significant tax increase over the last 12 
years. One of the reasons, Madam Speaker, that we've seen a significant 
increase in economic productivity across this Nation over the last 4 
years is because of appropriate tax decreases and not allowing 
increases by just a slim majority.
  So, Madam Speaker, I am honored to come to the floor this afternoon 
and to share an American value, American vision that talks about 
positive things about our Nation and congratulates the men and women 
around this Nation who are working hard, who are trying to earn for 
their families and save for their retirement, who are trying to 
contribute to their own American Dream.
  I believe that it is an incredible honor to serve in this United 
States House of Representatives. I believe it is incumbent on every 
single Member of this House to respect and value the hard work that 
each and every American performs each and every single day, regardless 
of the job that they're doing. Every single job has merit and worth and 
is deserving of our respect. And one of the ways that we ought to 
respect it is to allow men and women across this Nation to keep more of 
their hard-earned money and to be responsible with the spending that we 
perform here at the Federal level.
  So I am honored to have presented that American vision and that 
American value to my colleagues today. Madam Speaker, I appreciate that 
opportunity.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________