[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 172 (Tuesday, December 21, 2010)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2225]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 TAX RELIEF, UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE REAUTHORIZATION, AND JOB CREATION 
                              ACT OF 2010

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. RUSH D. HOLT

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, December 16, 2010

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4853) to 
     amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the funding 
     and expenditure authority of the Airport and Airway Trust 
     Fund, to amend title 49, United States Code, to extend 
     authorizations for the airport improvement program, and for 
     other purposes:

  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chair, it is with regret that I rise in opposition to 
this legislation. Less than two weeks ago, I joined a majority of this 
House in passing middle class tax relief that balanced the needs of 
working families with our nation's need to get its fiscal house in 
order. Unfortunately the Senate failed to pass this bill.
  The legislation we are considering today is deeply flawed. We should 
try to put money in the pockets of working families, and I do not fault 
President Obama and many of my colleagues who want to get something 
done on behalf of the millions of Americans who need help. But, this is 
the wrong way to do it.
  Yet, at a time when income inequality in the United States has risen 
to its highest level in decades, the bill under consideration would 
shift the burden of funding the federal government further onto middle-
class and working-class families. The bill would give away tax breaks 
to the wealthiest two percent of households at a cost of more than $120 
billion charged to the national debt.
  I am most concerned, however, that the bill undermines the very idea 
of Social Security. Social Security has been a pillar of our society 
for generations. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Frances Perkins, and 
others created Social Security in 1935, it was a political 
masterstroke. Social Security was created as an insurance program and 
has remained intact for 75 years because Americans have a real sense of 
ownership for the program.
  In good economic times and in bad, regardless of which political 
party is in power, this sense of ownership--that Americans will get out 
that which they put into the Social Security--has allowed it to survive 
despite the efforts of determined enemies.
  A provision in the bill would reduce an employee's contribution to 
Social Security from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent of salary. This could 
have a beneficial stimulative economic effect. The $112 billion cost to 
the Social Security trust fund of this payroll tax holiday is supposed 
to be replaced with money from the general treasury fund. But that is 
just the problem. In Social Security's history such a commingling of 
payroll taxes and money from the Treasury at this scale is 
unprecedented.
  This is not just about the financial health of Social Security, 
rather it is about Social Security's rationale that has worked well for 
generations. This bill places Social Security on the table with tax 
breaks for business expenses, tax breaks for the top two percent of 
Americans, the estate tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax--essentially 
making it just another bargaining chip. If we allow Social Security to 
become a bargaining chip for dealing politicians, then it will not be 
long for this world. As much as we need economic stimulus now, we will 
need Social security for decades to come. Rather than taking money from 
Social Security, I would support a tax credit--similar to President 
Obama's Making Work Pay tax credit--that would give working families a 
sizeable tax break with money from general revenues.
  In a message to Congress on January 17, 1935, FDR insisted that 
Social Security should be self-sustaining and that funds for the 
payment of insurance benefits should not come from the process of 
general taxation. FDR's message is as correct today as it was 75 years 
ago.
  To be sure, the legislation before us today contains many good 
provisions that I would support on their own. The bill contains a one 
year extension of emergency unemployment benefits. According to the 
Labor Department, there are five job-seekers for every job opening in 
the U.S. Extending unemployment is the right thing to do morally and 
for the economy. The legislation would extend middle class tax relief 
for two years along with many family-friendly tax breaks such as the 
Child Tax Credit, Earned Income Tax Credit, Alternative Minimum Tax 
relief, and marriage penalty relief. The bill also would extend 
expanded transportation benefits for commuters and tax credits like the 
research and development tax credit to help businesses grow and create 
jobs.
  Congress needs to provide unemployment insurance for Americans 
searching for work, extend tax relief working families, and find 
solutions to our budget crisis. Yet these must not come at the expense 
of Social Security. It is too important to lose.

                          ____________________