[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 62 (Thursday, April 21, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H1900-H1905]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ENSURING INTEGRITY IN THE IRS WORKFORCE ACT OF 2015
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 688, I call up
the bill (H.R. 3724) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
prohibit the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service from rehiring
any employee of the Internal Revenue Service who was involuntarily
separated from service for misconduct, and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rodney Davis of Illinois). Pursuant to
House Resolution 688, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a
substitute recommended by the Committee on Ways and Means, printed in
the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the
text of Rules Committee Print 114-48, is adopted and the bill, as
amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
H.R. 3724
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Ensuring Integrity in the
IRS Workforce Act of 2016''.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON REHIRING ANY EMPLOYEE OF THE INTERNAL
REVENUE SERVICE WHO WAS INVOLUNTARILY SEPARATED
FROM SERVICE FOR MISCONDUCT.
(a) In General.--Section 7804 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(d) Prohibition on Rehiring Employees Involuntarily
Separated.--The Commissioner may not employ any individual
previously employed by the Commissioner who was removed for
misconduct under this subchapter or chapter 43 or chapter 75
of title 5, United States Code, or whose employment was
terminated under section 1203 of the Internal Revenue Service
Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (26 U.S.C. 7804
note).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply with respect to any employee removed from
employment before, on, or after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
SEC. 3. NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS AUTHORIZED.
No additional funds are authorized to carry out the
requirements of this Act and the amendments made by this Act.
Such requirements shall be carried out using amounts
otherwise authorized.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from South Dakota (Mrs.
Noem) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) each will control
30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from South Dakota.
General Leave
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to
[[Page H1901]]
revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on
H.R. 3724, currently under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from North Dakota?
There was no objection.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bipartisan bill, H.R.
3724, Ensuring Integrity in the IRS Workforce Act.
With tax day just behind us, most Americans have finished their tax
returns. They filled out form after form, giving the IRS some of the
most sensitive information possible, including their Social Security
numbers, their birth dates, wage data, and more.
In 2014, the inspector general for the IRS released a report that
raised serious questions about whose hands this information falls into
once it arrives at the IRS. More specifically, an audit of the agency's
hiring practices found that the IRS rehired hundreds of former
employees whom the IRS had previously fired because of conduct
problems.
And we are not talking about small infractions. The IRS rehired
employees who had falsified documents. They failed to pay their own
taxes. They accessed sensitive taxpayer information without permission.
To think that someone could inappropriately access tax information,
get fired for doing so, and then be rehired just a few months later is
completely unacceptable. But it has happened, and it has happened more
than once.
These stories border on the absurd. One employee had been absent
without leave for a total of 8 weeks worth of work. As a result, that
employee was fired, and the words ``do not rehire'' were stamped on
that personnel file. Still, the IRS rehired that person.
IRS leadership has failed to acknowledge its mistakes or change its
processes. Instead, they stuck their heads in the sand. According to
the inspector general, the IRS' response to the report was that it
believed its current process was good enough. Well, I don't buy it, and
if the IRS leadership thinks its current processes are protecting
taxpayers, they need a reality check.
{time} 0915
The Ensuring Integrity in the IRS Workforce Act is a simple,
bipartisan fix to a serious problem. The bill does what the IRS
bureaucracy in Washington won't: it stops the IRS from rehiring former
employees who had been fired for cause.
Now, my staff and I met with numerous frontline IRS employees from
South Dakota who are sincere and hardworking individuals. My bill is
not aimed at them.
This legislation is aimed at the IRS bureaucracy in Washington and is
intended to address a very real problem that they have refused to fix.
There is no reason that IRS leadership in Washington shouldn't be
held to the same standard to which it holds you, the taxpayers. With
this legislation, we can hold the IRS accountable to us for its hiring
practices and ensure a high-quality workforce for the agency.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, yield myself such time as I may consume.
We all agree that the IRS faces serious consumer service challenges
and needs to be more responsive to the American taxpayer, but this bill
is not a serious attempt at oversight of the IRS.
In fact, with respect to making the IRS more responsive to taxpayers,
this bill is a move in the wrong direction.
But the fact that Republicans are moving in the wrong direction on
tax policy really shouldn't be a surprise to any of us.
They are not only starving our entire government of the resources
that it needs to operate efficiently for the American public, but they
are deliberately standing in the way of actual productive policies.
Forget real tax reform that would bring positive benefits. They
aren't even doing anything to fix what is broken in the system today.
For example, the Republicans refuse to crack down on large
corporations that seek to avoid paying their fair share of taxes simply
by changing their mailing address from the United States to a low-tax
foreign country.
We see these stories on TV all the time, corporations renouncing
their American citizenship to not have to pay any--any--U.S. taxes.
But congressional Republicans have refused to take any action to stop
these corporate tax dodgers and the resulting offshoring of American
jobs.
In fact, the Republicans who run Congress have protected these
companies not only through their refusal to act to stop these tax
inversions, but by also refusing to repeal the tax break that
incentivizes U.S. companies to ship jobs overseas.
Yes, American companies can claim a tax break for firing American
workers and moving their jobs overseas, and my Republican colleagues
are doing nothing about that.
The real-world effect of the Republicans' refusal to go after these
corporations that invert themselves to avoid paying their share of
taxes is a heavier tax burden on the rest of our honest constituents
who are playing by the rules.
To address this problem, the Treasury Department recently issued new
rules to stop large corporations from simply changing their post office
box to avoid paying U.S. taxes.
Could my constituents imagine simply changing their post office box
address to eliminate their Federal taxes? Of course not. Because they
can't. But somehow multinational companies, which seem to have more
rights than American citizens, can.
Now, you would think the American Congress would support the efforts
of the American President to stop American companies from not paying
the taxes here in America. But, Mr. Speaker, you would be wrong.
The majority is threatening to stop the Treasury from advancing these
types of commonsense rules to make multinational corporations pay their
fair share of U.S. taxes just like everyone else.
Wouldn't our time be better spent and served if my Republican
colleagues held hearings--and passed bills--to stop companies from
moving their jobs and profits overseas?
Democrats stand ready to work with them to enact commonsense policies
to close the loopholes in our Tax Code that encourage companies to send
their profits and their jobs overseas.
Unfortunately, we will have to wait for another day before the
majority is serious about working together to make our tax system
fairer for working people.
But let me be clear. Americans will not wait any longer. They demand
that we act to close these loopholes to ensure that American
corporations don't cheat the system to try to avoid paying their fair
share of taxes here in the United States, letting the little guy have a
greater burden in their absence.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have a gentlemen here to speak
on behalf of my bill who has been a strong leader in bringing integrity
to the IRS.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, we are at a crossroads with our
tax system. Our Tax Code is outdated, overly complicated, and the IRS
has proven that it, in and of itself, is in need of serious reform.
Here is an opportunity for us to work together. From the opening
remarks of my colleague across the aisle, I am not sure if that is an
attitude of cooperation, but certainly this is a bill we can work
together on, I would hope.
Our Tax Code was last updated in 1986, a generation ago. It is
increasingly burdensome in this global 21st century economy. American
taxpayers need a simpler code that they can easily comply with.
Finally, they deserve an accountable and consistent IRS which
provides exceptional taxpayer customer service. It is long past time
for the status quo to change on these problems. We need tax reform.
This is why I stand in support of my colleague's bill, the Ensuring
Integrity in the IRS Workforce Act. The legislation would prohibit the
IRS from rehiring any individual who was previously employed by the
IRS, but fired for cause. This is inconsistent and unacceptable
behavior from an agency which requires the highest standard of tax
compliance from taxpayers. The IRS should apply the same rigorous
standard inside the agency itself.
[[Page H1902]]
Mr. Speaker, I wish we didn't need an act of Congress such as this,
but, apparently, we do. I urge my colleagues to support this important
legislation.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I have a friend and colleague here today who
has fought daily for years for hardworking taxpayers across America and
for his home district.
I am proud to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Sessions).
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from
Hamlin County, South Dakota, a very dear friend not only of every
Member of Congress, but, in particular, a great Representative
representing South Dakota at a time when South Dakota needs not only
strong representation, but a strong voice.
I want to thank the young Congresswoman for bringing this legislation
to the floor today.
Mr. Speaker, today is quite simple. The United States Congress has a
say in the matter about how our government is run and the conduct of
the government.
The Internal Revenue Service has, for quite some time, been at odds,
I believe, not only with their mission statement, but also at odds with
their duty to publicly serve, provide information, and to do the things
that enable taxpayers, who want to follow the law and need to follow
the law, to comply respectfully.
The Internal Revenue Service, over the last few years, has run afoul,
I believe, of the American people because the commonsense obligations
that they have have not been met.
Today we are here on the floor with Congresswoman Noem to talk about
H.R. 3724 that prohibits the Commissioner of the IRS from rehiring any
employee who was involuntarily--that means forced--out or involuntarily
separated from service for misconduct at the Internal Revenue Service.
The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration reported in
February 2015 that the IRS had rehired those employees who had been
fired from the Service for misconduct, hundreds of former employees who
were terminated for well-documented conduct or performance issues.
In fact, the IRS rehired 141 former employees who had substantial tax
issues. That means they were not paying their own tax bills.
Mr. Speaker, if we were going to hire a person in our office, we
would attempt to gain information about that employee.
Yesterday, as we were talking about this on the rule, a fellow
colleague said: What about your own employees? Do you make sure they
pay their taxes?
I said: That would be a good question.
No, I don't ask that question. But I would not have any idea what the
real answer was--the truth--if an employee did not tell me the truth.
The IRS does have the answer. They know who is paying their taxes,
and they know why they fired an employee, Mr. Speaker.
We are here saying that the Internal Revenue Service should not
rehire these employees who were unfaithful, unfaithful to their job and
unfaithful to the American taxpayer.
One hundred forty-one employees who substantially did not pay their
taxes represent 60 percent of all terminated for misconduct.
I think I know why: because the Internal Revenue Service at the
highest levels allows this to go on, and then they rehire the employees
who didn't even follow the law.
Mr. Speaker, that is not just misconduct. That is another level
giving them an opportunity that a normal taxpayer would not have to get
away with not paying their own taxes.
Other misconduct issues of rehiring employees include accessing
taxpayer information improperly without authorization, falsification of
official forms, unacceptable behavior and performance, and abuse of IRS
leave and property policies while on public time.
Mr. Speaker, Congresswoman Noem is doing the right thing and so is
the House of Representatives. I would like to see this be a bipartisan
issue, not a partisan issue.
We need the IRS. We need them to do a good job. But if this were at
the Federal Bureau of Investigation, would we allow that to happen? If
this were at the CIA, would we allow that to happen?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Texas an
additional 30 seconds.
Mr. SESSIONS. If this were at the Department of Justice, would we
allow that to happen? Why is this not a bipartisan issue?
Why can't we get together and say: Mr. Koskinen, you are the
Commissioner of the IRS. We respectfully would like to see you correct
what you are doing.
We are not on a witch hunt. We have the facts of the case, and we
believe the right thing to do is to offer some remedy.
That is why Republicans are on the floor today, and that is why our
young Congresswoman is leading this charge.
I stand behind her. I voted for the rule, and I am going to vote for
this. It does the right thing.
I thank the gentlewoman for the time.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, I would just add to that list of the gentleman from
Texas: If it were Congress, would we allow this to happen?
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, we have another colleague here on the floor
today who serves on the Ways and Means Committee and has diligently
worked on IRS issues and has been a leader on bringing some clarity to
the situations that we deal with in trying to bring integrity to the
IRS.
I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Renacci).
Mr. RENACCI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R.
3724, the Ensuring Integrity in the IRS Workforce Act of 2015, a bill
sponsored by my good friend and colleague, Representative Kristi Noem
of South Dakota. As the previous colleague said, this should be a
bipartisan issue. This is an American issue.
I spent most of my life in the business world. I have owned and
operated over 60 different businesses, employed over 3,000 people, and
created thousands of new jobs. Throughout my 30-year business career, I
have had the privilege of hiring many new, talented individuals.
When it comes to hiring at the IRS, the Treasury inspector general
stated, ``Selecting the best candidates for employment is essential to
providing the best service to America's taxpayers, maintaining public
trust in tax administration, and safeguarding taxpayer's rights and
privacy.''
However, the inspector general report from December 2014 found that
the IRS fell short of that standard. Last year the IRS hired hundreds
of employees who were terminated for misconduct. Those serious offenses
included willful failure to file tax returns, unauthorized access to
taxpayer information, falsification of official forms, and abuse of IRS
leave and property policies.
{time} 0930
As a businessman, but more importantly as a representative of the
American taxpayer, I find this IG report inexcusable. It seems obvious
to me, but not once did I rehire someone in the real world--in the real
world--who I had previously fired for misconduct.
The IRS needs to earn the trust of hardworking American taxpayers.
Rehiring employees who were fired for these serious offenses further
erodes that trust.
H.R. 3724 directly addresses this issue. It prohibits the IRS from
rehiring employees that were fired for misconduct. This is common
sense.
As a former businessowner, I know it is a very difficult decision to
let someone go, but rehiring an individual who was asked to leave due
to gross misconduct would be insulting to other employees who have
faithfully served the business, and would present a significant risk to
the health of the organization and its customers.
The IG report found the IRS doesn't take those risks seriously. In
fact, ``IRS officials stated that prior conduct and performance issues
do not play a significant role in deciding the candidates who are best
qualified for hiring.'' Because the IRS hasn't taken
[[Page H1903]]
those risks seriously, this straightforward, commonsense legislation is
needed to restore accountability and trust in the IRS.
I would like to commend Mrs. Noem for her leadership on this
legislation.
I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in
support.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, it appears that America will have to continue to wait
for action to stop companies from shifting American jobs overseas and
stopping corporate tax dodgers.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).
Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 3724.
I would think as we look around the country right now, the integrity
of what our government is and how our voters are represented and our
citizens are represented, is really the case here.
I thank the gentlewoman for bringing such a commonsense piece of
legislation forward because we know in this town there is nothing less
common than common sense.
The faith and trust of the American people is based on their belief
that the people who work for them are acting in their best interest,
always acting in their best interest--the interest of the American
people. Not in their personal interest, but in the interest of the
American people. We find out that there are folks who are working on
behalf of the American people, but they have somehow betrayed that
faith and that trust. And folks have lost confidence in their
government. They have lost confidence because of things that happened,
not things that were imagined, not some whimsical idea that somehow we
can get at somebody for doing this.
There is no agency that is feared more in this country than the IRS.
The question is: Why would they be so feared? Because they can
completely shut you down, they can freeze your bank account, they can
make you stay up late at night worrying about what is going to happen.
When you get that letter from the IRS, the next thing you do is
contact an attorney to represent you because you don't want to make a
mistake, you just don't want to do it. But then you find out that
within the IRS, people working for that agency, but, more importantly,
working for the people of the United States, have violated that trust.
These are substantiated results. This is not somebody's idea or way
of getting back at somebody. This is removing bad apples and saying:
you have violated, you have betrayed the trust of the American people,
you are going to leave the agency, but, more importantly, you are never
coming back in.
This isn't any way to somehow get back at a political party or get
back at anybody. This is a fact that if we cannot restore the
confidence the American people have in us--their faith and their
trust--why are we here? Why do we go through elections?
I don't come here to represent my ideas and my beliefs. I come here
to represent the values and beliefs of Pennsylvania's Third
Congressional District. That is 705,687 Americans, not Republicans, not
Democrats, not Libertarians, not Independents, but Americans.
This piece of legislation takes into account that these are
wrongdoers. These are not people who we want to associate ourselves
with. These are people who have used the power of their office or of
their position to somehow work against the very people who employ them.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. I would just say, at this moment in our
history, I thank the gentlewoman for standing up for every hardworking
American taxpayer and doing the best we can to restore the faith and
confidence of the American people that they can trust who it is that
they elect to represent them and they can trust us to make sure that
wrongdoers are punished and, once are asked to leave, are not allowed
to come back in.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would inquire how much time is remaining
on both sides.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York has 24\1/2\
minutes remaining. The gentlewoman from South Dakota has 15\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Utah
(Mr. Chaffetz).
Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Mrs. Noem and her drive to
address this very important issue.
I believe that the overwhelming majority of the people who work at
the IRS are good, hardworking, patriotic people who want to do the
right thing. I have a serious problem with management and I have a
serious problem with the head of the IRS, but on this issue, this is
just unbelievable that we can't come to a conclusive and absolute 100
percent agreement.
All we are asking for is that the bad apples, the people who will
disturb what is going on in the workplace, who aren't going to act in
the best interest of the United States of America, that they be
excluded from participation.
One of the things that is fascinating, Mr. Speaker, as we look at
this, is in response to the independent review that was done of the IRS
and their hiring practices. And the question here is: Should we go back
and review the personnel employment file prior to rehiring somebody?
This is what they said: ``Additionally, while it did find that a
review of performance and conduct issues could be accomplished earlier
in the process, the Department of Treasury, the Office of Personnel
Management, and the Internal Revenue Service believed that it was not
feasible to move the review of these issues earlier in the hiring
process. This action would greatly increase the cost of hiring, likely
increase cycle time beyond the Presidential mandate of 80 days, require
additional resources, and not likely yield a reasonable return on
investment.''
Come on. Come on. Are you kidding me? How long could it possibly take
to actually go back and review somebody's performance reviews, look
back at their employment history, and see if they have been acting in
the best interest of the United States of America?
Clearly, in the examples that are there, there are people that
willfully don't even file their own tax returns, there are people that
are doing some bad, stupid stuff.
They don't think they have the time and resources to look at it in
advance; we have to actually pass a piece of legislation requiring
this?
That seems entirely reasonable. It is not overly burdensome. Here you
have an organization, the IRS, that can actually destroy somebody's
life by a mere letter showing up in your mailbox, and they can't even
take the time to look at somebody's employment history, somebody who
has already worked at the IRS?
That is how absurd this organization is, and that is why this piece
of legislation is so easy to understand, it is so easy to vote for. It
is not a partisan issue. This is just saying: Do you know what? For all
the good people who work at the IRS, let's make sure that the new
people who come on, or the rehires who come on, in this case, are
actually addressed and we look at their information prior to hiring.
It is that simple. That is why I am in favor of this bill.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 seconds.
I am still waiting for a bill to keep American jobs in America and
not export them overseas through the Tax Code. I will continue to wait
for that bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, today, we are talking about a bill that will
bring integrity to the IRS, which will better serve our taxpayers into
the future.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I really want to thank the gentlewoman from
South Dakota for her leadership in bringing this bill forward.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is about restoring trust. This bill is about
holding the IRS accountable. Here we are, in a week where Americans had
to file their tax returns. And so often, just the letters I-R-S send a
chilling effect through people when they hear those
[[Page H1904]]
letters. Yet, you look at the arrogance over at the IRS, just the
attitude that they have and the disdain it seems that they have towards
the very people who pay their bills--the taxpayers.
Here you have a case where people who have been fired by the IRS for
abusing their positions are actually being rehired back to the IRS.
Again, this is the kind of disdain that disgusts people as they fear
the IRS. The IRS ought to have the same fear towards the people who pay
their salaries as people get when they get that letter from the IRS.
Mr. Speaker, we have had inspector general reports in the Treasury
Department. The inspector general found over 140 IRS agents aren't even
accurate in their taxes. The very people who are responsible for
auditing American citizens aren't even paying their own taxes.
This is the kind of disregard for the American people that we are
seeing over at the IRS, and it is time to rein it in. It is time to
bring some accountability and transparency back to the IRS.
Who is afraid of that? What is so wrong with saying: If somebody has
been fired for cause over at the IRS, with the access they have to such
sensitive personal information of taxpayers, why should they be rehired
back?
It is just basic common sense that if somebody has abused their
position at the IRS, enough is enough, and they shouldn't be able to
return and have access to that sensitive information anymore.
I want to applaud, again, the gentlewoman from South Dakota for
bringing this commonsense bill forward. I would urge adoption later on
when we have this vote on the House floor.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking my
friend from South Dakota for her leadership in holding the IRS
accountable for what we are seeing today.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3724, the
Ensuring Integrity in the IRS Workforce Act, to join in the outrage
with my colleagues today on what we are seeing at the IRS. With tax day
hitting earlier this week, I think this is an ideal time to highlight
the need for continued oversight and, perhaps, ramped-up oversight of
the Internal Revenue Service.
Last February, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
reported that the IRS had a tendency to rehire former employees with
serious misconduct and performance issues. In their review, they found
more than 100 former employees were rehired by the IRS despite having
significant performance and misconduct problems, like willfully failing
to file tax returns: a rather important thing for most of us, but
apparently not for IRS employees.
Mr. Speaker, the families in my district and I are 100 percent fed up
with adhering to a standard that the IRS doesn't even hold their own
employees to. We simply will not tolerate the rehiring of incompetent
individuals who fail to do their job in the first place. It is time to
put a leash on the IRS and prevent taxpayers from further double
standards and further abuse.
I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in voting for H.R. 3724.
Again, I thank my colleague from South Dakota for her excellent
leadership on this. I look forward to open debate and voting on this
matter as soon as possible.
{time} 0945
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
No disrespect to the sponsor of this bill whatsoever. I have great
admiration for her, as she knows, but I believe that this bill could
have been taken up on the consent calendar, quite frankly, with all of
this discussion about the support on both sides.
The reality is, though, that we are using precious time here on the
floor on an issue that, as I say, could have been on the consent
calendar. We are not addressing the real issue of concern to the
American people, which is of the continuing loss of jobs here in
America because of our Tax Code, which we refuse to fix, that is
shifting jobs and American corporations overseas to inversion and also
shifting American jobs overseas because of those inversions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. CROWLEY. I yield myself an additional 15 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, we are not having a hearing on this. We are not doing
anything here on the floor to address this issue. Instead, we are
taking up issues that, quite frankly, could have been on the consent
calendar.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I am
ready to close.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I believe this should be the beginning and not the end of a
discussion on how to best plug the giant corporate loopholes that are
allowing companies to skip out on paying the same taxes that all of our
constituents have to pay. This is one of the many major issues this
Congress should undertake; but, instead, we are all too busy governing
by press releases.
This Congress has done nothing to address the Zika virus, which could
be a threat to all women who are pregnant or who are looking to become
pregnant; but we have this consent bill here on the floor for debate.
This Congress has done nothing to address the crisis of lead in our
drinking water--a crisis vividly on display in Flint but one that lurks
in the pipes of hundreds of cities and towns across our great land; yet
we have this consent bill here on the calendar for debate.
This Congress hasn't even attempted to pass a budget for our
country--the majority has not proposed a budget for our country--which
is one of the most basic functions we can do as an institution to make
sure we make the necessary investments possible while also getting our
economic house in order; yet we have what I would consider to be a
consent calendar bill here on the floor today, taking up an hour's
debate.
But we will always have time for message bills. Sure, they don't
create a job for an unemployed person in New York or in Flint or in
Houston or in L.A., and they don't increase the take-home pay of any
underpaid worker or make college more affordable for middle class kids
or strengthen Social Security for our seniors of today and tomorrow,
but they will sound great on talk radio tonight and over the weekend--
we are going after the IRS again. They don't even deal with the Tax
Code even though this bill is advertised as the Republicans' idea of
tax reform. It does not reform the Tax Code in any way, shape, or form,
but that is what they portray it as.
Let me explain something about the Tax Code to my Republican
colleagues.
Our Tax Code is inefficient. You see that when large corporations are
paying less tax than the employees who work for them. It is overly
complicated. You see that when multinational corporations avoid paying
the same taxes as our constituents back home have to pay simply by
their hiring expensive lawyers that our constituents, quite frankly,
cannot afford. It is unfair. You see that when corporations can dodge
paying their fair share of taxes by simply switching their post office
boxes to foreign countries--something our neighbors back home, if they
attempted to do, would be arrested for, for tax evasion, but not
corporations. Individuals, if you do that, you are arrested for tax
evasion, but not an American corporation; yet my Republican colleagues
continue to refuse to address this issue.
Maybe more importantly than anything else, it does not promote job
growth here in the United States. You see this when Congress refuses to
repeal the tax breaks for companies to fire their workers here and move
their jobs overseas.
This Congress must tackle these serious issues, but we are not doing
that today. We continue to wait for legislation--for a hearing--on
these important issues.
Democrats stand ready to work with you all, my Republican colleagues,
on commonsense legislation that plugs the corporate tax loopholes that
are literally draining the funds our country needs in order to function
properly. Democrats stand ready to work with you to fix the Tax Code
that is not only inefficient, not only complicated, not
[[Page H1905]]
only unfair, but that does not promote job growth here in the United
States. That is something we want to work with you on in a bipartisan
way. Unfortunately, we have to continue to wait for another day before
the majority is serious about working together, in a bipartisan way, to
make our tax system fairer for all working men and women in the United
States. Let me be clear, once again, that the American people will not
wait any longer.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
We have heard repeatedly from my colleague on the other side of the
aisle about why we should not be spending time on this topic today,
about why we shouldn't have dedicated an hour's worth of debate to
making sure that we talk about H.R. 3724, Ensuring Integrity in the IRS
Workforce Act.
I think he has forgotten about what kind of information the people of
this country turn over to the IRS. They turn over their Social Security
numbers, their financial information; a lot of the security that they
have for their families, their homes, and their businesses they
completely trust the IRS to take care of, to protect, and to make sure
that they use in the correct manner so that they might abide by the law
and pay their taxes like honest, hardworking Americans do. To say that
we shouldn't spend time in making sure that criminals and people who
are fired for misconduct don't have access to that information, to me,
is silly. That is exactly what our job is. The IRS needs integrity, and
we are here to bring it today.
Mr. Speaker, the White House has issued a veto threat against this
bill. They said that the IRS would be forced to fire people, because of
this bill, if it were signed into law. I read the White House's
Statement of Administration Policy on my bill, and the statement reads
that it is unnecessary because current IRS processes already ensure
that the agency does not rehire former employees who have significant
conduct issues.
I guess the White House didn't read the report, for the inspector
general expressed concerns that the IRS continues to hire individuals
who have significant prior conduct and performance issues even after
the agency supposedly made upgrades to its hiring practices.
I remind you, Mr. Speaker, that the inspector general's review of
former employees who were fired for serious misconduct and who were
then rehired included employees with histories of fraud, a
falsification of documents, workplace disruption, absence, and an
unauthorized accessing of taxpayer information. The inspector general
identified approximately 140 individuals who are currently, today, with
the IRS who had been previously fired for cause. We are talking about
an agency that employs 80,000 people. Surely, it can find 140 people
who haven't committed fraud or falsified documents.
Mr. Speaker, the inspector general recommended that the IRS reassess
its hiring practices to determine in what part of the process it should
fully vet candidates in terms of their prior performance. In fact, the
IRS was given an opportunity to fully respond to the inspector
general's report. In its response, the agency insisted its processes
were sufficient. Yet, Mr. Speaker, the agency still only begins to vet
the candidates for employment only after the entire hiring process is
completed and after a formal offer of employment has been extended. So,
regardless of any changes the IRS has made to its hiring practices, the
inspector general said he remains very concerned because IRS documents
indicate it is hiring individuals who have significant prior conduct
and performance issues.
Mr. Speaker, because the IRS hasn't taken action is why we are here
today. This bill is simple. It just says that the IRS cannot rehire
employees who have been fired for misconduct. It is something the IRS
should have taken action on; and because they didn't, that is why we
are here today. It is our job to protect the taxpayers and to make sure
their information is safe with the agency that they, by law, need to
turn over to the IRS.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 688, the previous question is ordered on
the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________