[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 154 (Tuesday, December 4, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H6589]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  THE J. WELLINGTON WIMPY REVENUE PLAN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Well, yesterday the Republicans released a vague press 
release saying it constituted a counteroffer to the President's roadmap 
to avoid driving over the fiscal cliff.
  Now, the Republican plan purports to cut $1.3 trillion and raise $800 
billion in new revenues. It did contain four specifics. Four.
  Cut Medicare, specific number 1, $600 billion.
  Cut Medicaid, pays for nursing homes for seniors, of course, priority 
number 2.
  Cut the already inadequate COLA for seniors on Social Security, even 
though 40 percent of seniors depend principally or totally upon Social 
Security, and the COLA already underestimates inflation, particularly 
for medical care, prescription drugs, and other essentials they have to 
buy. Cut that. Not a driver of the deficit but, hey, why not? Cut that.
  One more specific, preserve the Bush-era tax rates for income over 
$250,000. Now, there's a big misunderstanding about that. It's not a 
tax increase on everybody who earns over $250,000. It's only the income 
over $250,000 that would get additional taxes if the Bush-era rates 
went away and the President's proposal was passed.
  But, no, they want to preserve that, totally preserve tax cuts for 
people with income over $250,000. They also want to preserve the 
reduced capital gains rate and dividends rate which principally 
benefits--who else--millionaires and billionaires.
  Now, they did promise the J. Wellington Wimpy revenue plan. Remember 
J. Wellington Wimpy? Popeye, I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a 
hamburger today.
  That's their revenue plan. Next year we'll close unspecified tax 
loopholes, but we're going to lower the tax rates on investor income, 
lower the tax rates on the people at the top. But they're going to 
raise $800 billion by closing unspecified loopholes.
  What would that be?
  Do they want to take away the middle class' one tax shelter, that is, 
the ability to deduct the interest on their home mortgage? Probably.
  If they're going to raise that $800 billion, it's going to come from 
something pretty big, and they don't want to touch the billionaire-
millionaire job-creator class.
  Now, that's a pretty interesting position, and their position is the 
job creators who earn over $250,000 a year will go on strike, strike if 
their tax rates go up. They won't produce jobs.
  Tell me about the jobs they have produced in the last decade with 
those tax cuts. It doesn't seem to work, does it?
  But in the Clinton era, when their rates went up to 39.6 from 35, 
they paid a little bit more and, guess what, the economy boomed. We had 
3.8 percent unemployment, we balanced the budget, and we paid down 
debt.
  But now they're saying if they went back to those Clinton-era rates, 
disaster would result. Well, you know what?
  That's the same thing they said when they opposed Clinton tax 
increases in '94. They said disaster will result. Not a single 
Republican, fiscal conservatives that they are, voted for the increases 
in taxes that President Clinton put forward, which ultimately led to a 
balanced budget and paying down debt for the first time in 50 years. 
Not one of them because they said it would bring economic disaster and, 
instead, it brought prosperity.
  So they just brought out that old broken record. They glued it back 
together, or maybe they, you know, translated it into a digital format 
or something, but they're playing it again, and it's as valid now as it 
was then.
  So it's the same old plan. Stick it to the middle class, stick it to 
the seniors, and benefit the ultra-wealthy in this country. That's not 
a new plan. That's the same old broken record.

                          ____________________