[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 157 (Friday, December 3, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8474-S8475]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TAX RELIEF
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise this afternoon to speak about the
debate we are having on the fundamental question of what type of tax
relief will be considered by the Senate.
Not too often does a debate offer such clear differences in
priorities between the two parties. We have before us a sensible
package, put together by Chairman Baucus, which would ensure that any
family in America who makes up to one-quarter of a million dollars in a
year would get a permanent tax cut instead of one that expires a few
years down the road, as the Bush tax cuts will do.
If Republicans would work with us, we could give businesses
certainty, middle-class families tax relief, and create jobs at this
very moment. Solving these issues has, at least from my perspective,
broad bipartisan support. Everybody says they want to give business
certainty, they want to give middle-class families tax relief, and they
want to create jobs. So if we have that agreement, both sides should be
able to come to support this proposition.
Both sides have agreed we should move forward extending tax cuts for
middle-class families, do more to create jobs, and ensure that the
alternative minimum tax doesn't ensnare more than 30 million Americans
this year. Unfortunately, the question isn't, Who is going to cut your
taxes? That is not the question. The question is, Whose taxes are going
to be cut?
We could pass this bill today, give middle-class taxpayers certainty,
take care of the AMT, the alternative minimum tax problem, which
protects, right now, in terms of how we have responded to it to create
relief from that--and we want to extend that relief not only to 30
million people in the country but 1.6 million New Jerseyans whom we
have saved from being bit by that AMT. Failure to act would mean they
would pay an additional tax bill of up to $5,600.
These are middle-class families who were never intended to pay a tax
that was meant originally for those in our country who paid nothing
toward the common good. Hence, the Congress created an alternative
minimum tax, so those using the deductions in the code who paid nothing
to the common good, to the Nation's defense, and its well-being had to
pay something. But since that was 20, 25, 30 years ago, it was never
indexed. We have now seen that has been biting middle-class families.
In the case of middle-class families in New Jersey subject to the AMT,
they would be bit by another $5,600.
We also need to extend the desperately needed unemployment benefits
to the 2 million Americans who lost their jobs through no fault of
their own. That is all in this package. We could pass a number of job
creation measures, such as an extension of Build America Bonds which,
true to its name, puts people to work rebuilding communities across
America. My proposal is to give them the tools they need to put people
to work on projects that deliver safer and cleaner water to families
through private activity bonds--something that gets the private sector
putting up money in a way that creates jobs. Unbelievably, my
Republican colleagues have pledged to stop this bill, to do that by
what we call a filibuster, to insist that instead of a simple majority
of the 100 Senators, there have to be 60. All these benefits, permanent
tax benefits for middle-class families making one-quarter of a million
dollars or less, the opportunity to create jobs, the opportunity to
take care of a couple million Americans who lost their jobs, the
opportunity to bring the private sector back again, the opportunity to
give the private sector certainty, none of that is good enough for
them. They will not simply vote against it; they are seeking to block
this bill, by using the filibuster, from even being considered by the
Senate.
The difference in the priorities between our two parties is rather
clear. Republicans would rather that taxes increase for all Americans
than allow tax rates for millionaires and billionaires to revert to
Clinton-era prosperity levels. So all of us have to face an increase in
taxes in order to give an extra tax benefit to the wealthiest in our
country.
It happens to be a fact that the wealthiest in the country still see
a tax cut under this bill, and it will be bigger than a middle-class
family's tax cut. We are simply asking not to extend additional tax
cuts on top of the tax cuts they will already receive. So everybody in
America gets a tax cut under our proposal. As a matter of fact, that
tax cut, instead of expiring a few years down the road, stays
permanent. But, no, they want to give an additional tax cut to those
who are millionaires, multimillionaires, and billionaires. Simply put,
Republicans believe it is more important to deliver massive tax breaks
to CEOs than to the people who work for them. They argue that
millionaires paying tax rates at the levels they paid in 2000 would
decimate the economy. The problem is, that position is simply not
supported by the facts or the experience of the last decade.
People who have worked hard and built personal wealth should be
applauded for their success. I applaud people who, through their hard
work, creativity, and ingenuity, have created wealth. They should be
applauded and admired. I admire them. People who work hard and prosper,
they love their country too. They are in the best position to be
helpful to their country in this tough economic time. Many of them are
willing to contribute if we ask. We know from experience that reverting
to the tax rates that the wealthiest and most successful paid during
the Clinton-era prosperity will certainly not break our economy. As a
matter of fact, it was that era that balanced the budget for the first
time in a generation, created record surpluses, low unemployment, low
interest rates, and had the greatest peacetime economy in over a
generation. It certainly didn't break our economy.
So I just don't understand why my colleagues on the Republican side
of the aisle continue to oppose what is good for America, for our
children, and for our future. We are on the eve of the holidays.
Middle-class families are sitting around the kitchen table at night
wondering how they are going to afford to buy the gifts for their
children this year. Middle-class families are wondering how they are
going to make the next mortgage payment, how they are going to pay
tuition for their college-age children next semester. These are tough
conversations around that kitchen table.
I can assure you those Republicans who are fighting for millionaires
and billionaires are not worried this holiday season. Yet we are being
asked to give them an additional tax windfall while middle-class
families are struggling. Our Republican colleagues are playing Santa
for the millionaires and Scrooge for the middle class.
Those who make over $1 million, they want to give them a big fat
check, averaging $104,000, with a bow on it. For our children, they
want to give them a big fat $4 trillion bill to be paid back with
interest for generations to come. I guess that is their version of
happy holidays, America.
[[Page S8475]]
Does it make sense to anyone but our Republican colleagues who, once
again, are telling us that rewarding the wealthiest helps us all, that
that wealth somehow trickles down and creates jobs? I say: Show me the
jobs. We cut taxes for that universe of taxpayers, the highest income
taxpayers in the Nation, and they said it would create jobs. Well, show
me. Where are they? In the year the Bush tax cuts were passed,
unemployment was under 5 percent. After nearly a decade under Bush's
tax policy, unemployment has doubled. It now stands at nearly 10
percent. Now they are saying we need to reward the rich again and it
will create jobs. Well, in my view, the Bush Republican tax cuts for
millionaires and billionaires has been the biggest failed jobs program
in our Nation's history. But what it did do is add enormously to the
debt.
I have listened to those who have come here talking about the
consequences of debt. Yet they are rushing to add to that debt in
dramatic ways, all for the wealthiest people in our country. So my
question to my Republican colleagues who believe that only debt-
financed tax cuts for millionaires can fix the economy is this: Where
is the prosperity that President Bush promised to the middle class when
these cuts were passed a decade ago?
In fact, let's look at that decade. The Bush decade will go down in
history as one of the worst decades the middle class has ever faced.
While the wealthiest saw their incomes swell and their taxes plummet,
middle-class salaries remained stagnated. Families' costs, such as
health care and college tuitions, skyrocketed, and jobs disappeared
overseas. The stock market sputters along at the same levels it
achieved under the Clinton-era tax rates. Middle-class wages have
continued to lose ground to inflation and health care costs, and
millions more now live in poverty than before these tax cuts were
passed.
When the unregulated greed on Wall Street led to millions of
Americans losing their jobs, Republicans said: You are on your own--
literally. Literally, on this very floor--while leading a filibuster
against an extension of unemployment benefits, and asked, How is it you
can do that to these people who, through no fault of their own, face
the unemployment line--one Republican retorted: Tough--and the rest of
it you can fill in the blank--to pleas from families desperate for
help.
If Republicans were truly in this debate to create jobs and protect
the middle class, then why did the Republican leader introduce a bill
that is actually a tax increase on millions--a tax increase on
millions--of middle-class American families? Yes, a tax increase. That
is right. The Republican bill offered by their leader spends $1
trillion more. Yet the vast majority of Americans would see their taxes
increase if it were to become law. Why? Because President Obama's tax
cut for 95 percent of Americans--for so many middle-class families--was
not a large enough priority to make it into their package. Gutting the
estate tax was but additional middle-class tax relief was not.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office--the one entity both
Democrats and Republicans depend upon for the scoring of our efforts,
for thinking about what are the best job-producing initiatives and
whatnot--has found the most effective way--this is them, through their
studies--to create jobs. They say the ``biggest bang for the buck'' is
extending jobless benefits, and ranking right behind in terms of
effectiveness are payroll tax cuts and small business tax incentives.
The chairman's bill contains all of that--all that the Congressional
Budget Office has said are the biggest creators of jobs.
The Republican leader's bill contains none--zero--of those
initiatives. The Congressional Budget Office has determined the
Republican package does not contain even one of the most effective
ideas for job creation. So if Republicans are in this debate to create
jobs, why don't they include the proposals that economists are telling
us are the most effective in creating jobs?
We know Republicans have said no to everything. We know the
Republican leadership's top priority is not middle-class families but
defeating President Obama. But we cannot tolerate the harm their
political strategy will do to middle-class families. They are even
willing, for the sake of their political strategy--which is to have
this President fail, which means not whether the President fails but
whether the country fails--to hold hostage permanent middle-class tax
relief, for multimillionaires and billionaires.
I urge my colleagues to remember those who are struggling this
holiday season to keep their homes, to find a job, and to provide for
their families. I urge my Republican colleagues during this kind,
forgiving time of year to open their hearts and change their political
playbook. Their political playbook maybe has brought them some success,
but it puts middle-class families at enormous risk. There is no reason
the Senate cannot have a bipartisan vote or a simple majority vote on
making reality permanent tax cuts of $250,000 or less for our families
and to give businesses the certainty they need by creating an extension
for those who are unemployed, which will create opportunities for the
private sector and Build America Bonds to get us working again. That is
all in this package. It will give relief from the alternative minimum
tax.
That is the vote we are going to have--all of that. Saying no to that
in order to help the wealthiest people in the country--those we applaud
for their hard work and ingenuity, but those who are willing, I
believe, to help their country and have the best wherewithal to do so--
is just simply a political game book that should be ultimately
abandoned. If not, in this vote, Republicans will have abandoned the
middle class of this country at a time in which they need our support
the greatest.
With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the
absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Menendez). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________