[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 200 (Thursday, December 7, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H9748-H9753]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS: GOP TAX SCAM
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Mitchell). Under the Speaker's announced
policy of January 3, 2017, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin) is
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to be here on behalf of the
Congressional Progressive Caucus.
We are going to have some discussion about recent developments in
Congress over this week, and we are going to focus on the proposed tax
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms.
Jayapal), vice chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. She is
going to talk about what that plan means for working people in America.
Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Raskin for his continued
leadership in our caucus. It is such a pleasure to serve next to him on
the Judiciary Committee. We have a lot of work to do. It is really
terrific to be able to do it with him, to talk about the tax plan.
I don't think this is a tax plan. I think it is tax scam. I think it
is a heist. I think that the middle class in this country is not going
to benefit from this. Middle class Americans who are hoping for a tax
break for the holidays are going to be sorely disappointed. Maybe they
get a few lumps of coal.
[[Page H9749]]
In fact, polling shows, across the country, that this is the
singularly most unpopular bill that Congress has considered in a very
long time. Seventy-five percent of Americans across this country don't
think it is a good idea. They are not fooled by the promises that are
being made about what this bill does.
Let's really talk about what this bill does.
We know that the wealthiest will benefit. The wealthiest 1 percent
will receive 50 percent of the tax cuts. In 2019, 18 percent of the tax
cuts in this bill will go to the wealthiest 1 percent. But by 2027,
that number climbs to 62 percent, with an average tax cut of $33,000.
What else do we know about this bill?
We know that the largest corporations will benefit. To pay for this
massive tax cut for corporations, the Senate tax bill will repeal the
individual mandate part of the Affordable Care Act, something that
Republicans have tried to do over and over again this year.
The American people have spoken up and said: No, we know that
healthcare is a right, not a privilege. We want our healthcare. We know
the Affordable Care Act is not perfect, but it has done much to protect
the healthcare of people across this country.
Yet, in spite of that, the repeal of the individual mandate has been
put into the Senate tax bill, and it would result in 13 million more
people being uninsured. It would also result in a 10 percent increase
in premiums for Americans across the country, according to the
Congressional Budget Office.
We know, also, that this bill is wholly fiscally irresponsible. It is
funny. For years, Republicans have yelled and screamed about the huge
deficits we have, yet this bill would add between $1 trillion and $1.5
trillion in deficits to what we already have. That would lead to a
mandatory cut in critical programs.
Let's just talk for a minute about what exactly this tax scam will
mean for ordinary Americans across the country.
In order to pay for the tax cuts that we have talked about for the
wealthiest and the largest corporations, it means that millions of
working families and poor folks across this country are going to end up
paying more. Not only that, there are incentives in this bill that
would actually create an incentive for American companies to take jobs
off of Main Street, close factories here in the United States, and move
those jobs overseas. It will make it harder for families to make ends
meet.
The Senate bill would raise taxes on 78 million middle class
families, and millions of families across the country would lose their
healthcare. In my district alone, nearly 31,000 constituents would lose
their healthcare.
This bill would also put real roadblocks in the way of young people
looking to get ahead.
Two of the eliminations of tax exemptions in this tax bill that
offend me the most and should offend all Americans across the country
are, number one, there is, essentially, a tax on being sick. There is a
tax on long-term care for Americans across this country.
Right now, if you have a family member who is in long-term care or
has a serious illness, the expenses that you pay for that individual,
that family member, you can deduct those medical expenses. With this
tax scam, the tax heist that is being proposed, you would no longer be
able to deduct those medical expenses. So you are being taxed for being
ill or for needing care as you get older.
In addition, we are taxing education. We already know that there is
$1.4 trillion in student loan debt across this country, more than even
credit card debt in this country. Young people have to make these
terrible choices about whether they are going to go $80,000 into debt
or whether they are not going to get higher education. That is wrong.
This tax bill would actually take away some of the tax benefits that
we give to graduate students, for example, when they get help to be
able to complete their graduate education. It would take away the
exemptions that currently exist.
If you are a teacher and you buy pencils or paper or supplies for
your classroom, that is currently a deductible expense. It would take
that away for teachers, but not for corporations. If corporations buy
supplies, that is tax deductible, but not if you are a teacher. That is
just crazy.
It prioritizes the wealthy by allowing wealthy families to avoid the
estate tax. Let's talk about the estate tax for just a minute.
There are 5,400 families across the country that pay the estate tax.
It is a very small number of the wealthiest families. But, in fact,
what this does is say that is even too much. We are going to double the
exemption. Now, $11 million, even fewer families are going to pay that,
but it is going to cost middle class families a couple of hundred
billion dollars in revenue.
The experts across the spectrum are arriving at the same conclusion:
this bill is bad for regular working families.
The National Association of Realtors has said this: The Senate tax
bill ``puts home values at risk and dramatically undercuts the
incentive to own a home . . . our estimates show that home values stand
to fall by an average of more than 10 percent, and even greater in
high-cost areas.''
How about the Fraternal Order of Police? ``The FOP is very concerned
that the partial or total elimination of SALT deductions,'' something
very important to my home State of Washington, ``will endanger the
ability of our State and local government to fund these agencies and
recruit the men and women we need to keep us safe.''
That is a quote from the Fraternal Order of Police.
The American Council on Education has said this: ``As a result, we
are deeply concerned that at a time when post-secondary degrees and
credentials have never been more important to individuals, the economy,
and our society, the tax reform proposal approved by the Senate could
make college more expensive and undermine the financial stability of
higher education institutions.''
Let's be clear about what is happening here. The Republicans have a
plan, and it is like a little three-step dance:
First, transfer trillions of dollars of wealth from middle class
families and the poorest amongst us to the wealthiest corporations who
are already not paying their fair share.
Second, when you do that transfer, explode the deficit. The estimates
are that $1.4 trillion, $1.5 trillion would be added to the deficit.
Finally, use the fact that you are exploding the deficit to actually
cut programs that are critical to Americans across the country, like
Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. We know that, as written, this
bill would trigger mandatory spending cuts to Medicare and Medicaid of
significant amounts.
So the reality is that we are in a situation where this is incredibly
unpopular. The polling shows right now that Americans are not buying
this tax scam: 68 percent say that the tax bill helps the wealthiest;
54 percent say the tax bill favors big Republican donors; 61 percent
say that Medicare and Social Security cuts would ultimately end up
being the vehicle that is used to pay for these tax cuts to the
wealthiest; and 68 percent say that changes to the Affordable Care Act
should not be in this tax bill.
{time} 1745
Here is where we are. The House passed its bill on November 16. In
the early hours of December 2, just last Friday, the Senate passed its
version.
We are going into conference committee now, which means that a group
of legislators from the House and a group of legislators from the
Senate get together and they try to work out the differences between
the two bills. Then, ultimately, whatever that compromise is, if it is
worked out, would come back for a vote in the House and the Senate.
So, now, more than ever, we need the voices of people across the
country to call and to talk about the concerns that working people
across this country have. We do need a real reform of the tax system to
simplify it, to make sure that people are paying their fair share. But
that is not what this is. This is a tax scam. It is a heist. It is
transfer of trillions of dollars in wealth from middle class families
and the most vulnerable to the wealthiest who do not need that money.
The reality is that we need to be investing in the American people.
We
[[Page H9750]]
need to be investing in jobs and in education. We need to be making
sure that middle class families are getting a break, that they can
actually think about a future for their kids, for the next generation,
that is better than the one they have.
We have very little time, but, Mr. Speaker, I am very sure that we in
the Progressive Caucus and we in the Democratic Caucus are going to do
everything we can to fight for working people, for the most vulnerable
among us, and to protect things like CHIP, the Children's Health
Insurance Program, to protect temporary protected status for immigrants
across the country, and to make sure we are passing a clean Dream Act.
These are the kinds of priorities we should be focusing on, not lining
the pockets of the wealthiest corporations and transferring jobs from
the United States to tax havens elsewhere.
We have a lot of work to do to make sure that, in this very short
period of time, people speak up and speak out and make sure that we do
not pass this bill, make sure that we, instead, work together in a
bipartisan way for tax reform that actually benefits working families.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Raskin for his leadership on the
Progressive Caucus.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Jayapal for her
wonderful remarks and her terrific leadership here on behalf of the
people of Washington and on behalf of middle class and working class
Americans all across the country.
Mr. Speaker, may I trouble you to ask how much time I have remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Francis Rooney of Florida). The
gentleman from Maryland has 47 minutes remaining.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, the Progressive Caucus greatly appreciates
this time to talk with the American people. For me, it is always one of
my favorite moments in the tremendously busy weeks that we have got
here on Capitol Hill and in Congress.
I represent 800,000 people in Maryland's Eighth Congressional
District, which includes Montgomery County, Frederick County, and
Carroll County. I have the honor of going to work for them,
essentially, 7 days a week. I live just about 25 minutes from Capitol
Hill, and I take the Metro or drive to work, come back home, and I get
to spend pretty much every day both with my district and with my
colleagues here in Congress.
This is a special time of the week for me because so many of my
colleagues are on airplanes or on trains going back to where they come
from, and they spend a lot of their time on Mondays and Fridays
traveling. I get to be here, and I get to work. I have a little more
time to think, Mr. Speaker.
Because we are so buffeted by events, tweets, conflicts, and
controversies, we don't always have time to think. I get to use the
time on Mondays, Thursday nights, and Fridays to be a little bit more
reflective and deliberative about what it is we are doing here in
Washington.
I want to start by just bringing everybody up to date about an
alarming new legislative development before I get back to the tax bill,
which will be next week's problem.
Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed something that they
call the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017. The entire bill is
fraudulent, beginning with its name, because it asserts that it has
something to do with reciprocity, but it doesn't.
Right now, any State that has a law governing the issuance of
concealed carry permits to its citizens can decide to work with its
neighbor to allow a reciprocal arrangement. About half of the States
have done that; they have deals with their neighbors.
But this act would wipe all of the reciprocity agreements out. It
would impose one national standard on everybody in America, reducing
everybody to the lowest, most permissive States in the Union in terms
of concealed carry.
Now, in my State, in Maryland, we have a number of very serious
hurdles to get over before you get the right to carry a loaded
concealed weapon. You can't be mentally unstable or dangerous. You
can't be a domestic offender. You can't be a violent criminal convict,
a felon, or a misdemeanant. You have got to show that you know how to
use weaponry, and so on. We take it very seriously.
Several dozen States have similar laws; others have much laxer and
much looser laws. That is federalism. Everybody decides for themselves.
But this legislation that they passed yesterday would wipe out the
State laws of every State in the country and drag us down to the
bottom. It is not a race to the bottom; it is a plunge to the bottom.
They say that if you can get a concealed carry permit in any State--
and in some States like Florida, there are 1.7 million people with
concealed carry permits--you can go anywhere in the country. It is a
passport to override the laws of every other State in the Union.
There are more than 14 million concealed carry permits in the United
States, and now, suddenly, that is 14 million more people with guns who
can come to your State, over your State laws, when you don't want it.
Oh, and guess what else they have snuck in here. The people who claim
not to like litigation have created a whole new cause of action. They
can sue the police officers if they feel the police officers have
detained them too long. But, of course, the police officers are going
to detain them too long because they have to figure out whether or not
they have a right to the gun.
In the nationalization of concealed carry, have they created a
bureaucracy, a computer where we are able to figure out whether someone
is carrying a real concealed carry permit or a fake ID concealed carry
permit? No, not at all. That is put upon you, your State, to try to
figure it out. If you hold the person too long, they can sue you, and
guess what: attorneys' fees for the police officers, attorneys' fees
awarded against the sheriffs, attorneys' fees against our law
enforcement officers for trying to keep us safe by trying to enforce
our State laws.
Now, we have two opportunities to stop this. One is in the U.S.
Senate.
I already spoke to one Senator who was absolutely dumbfounded and
amazed that such legislation would even be introduced, after more than
two centuries of the history of the United States, somebody would put
in a bill to try to extinguish the State concealed carry laws all
across the country and give other people who wouldn't have the right to
get a gun in your State the right to come there; and this after some of
the worst firearms massacres and disasters in our history: the Las
Vegas attack, which led to the deaths of 59 of our countrymen and
countrywomen, and the attack in Sutherland Springs, Texas, which killed
dozens of people.
The gun violence has even come here to Washington and to the Capitol
and to the Members of Congress, ourselves, and still we haven't done
anything.
We don't take up a universal criminal background check to close the
internet loophole, to close the private sale loophole of people selling
guns in the parking lot at 7-Eleven, so we close the loopholes that
make us an absolute outlier in terms of the civilized world. We don't
take that up.
We don't take up legislation to ban military-style assault weapons,
like the ones that were used in Newtown, Connecticut, to assassinate 20
schoolchildren at pointblank range. We don't take up that legislation.
We don't even take up the legislation that they promised, which we
thought that they wanted to do, which was to get rid of the bump
stocks. No, that faded away, too.
Instead, they bring us this proposal to drive us deeper into the
cycles of gun violence and misery that the NRA and the GOP have taken
us to in America.
So, there are two opportunities to stop this madness. One is in the
United States Senate, but the other is this: the pretended champions of
the U.S. Constitution are violating the Constitution; they are
trampling the Constitution.
Why?
Well, the Congress of the United States is an institution with
limited enumerated powers. We don't have the right to do whatever we
want as Congress. We have to exercise a real power.
Well, what power is being exercised here?
Well, there are only a couple of possible candidates. One, they say
we are regulating commerce, but that is patently absurd. There is no
commerce
[[Page H9751]]
that is being regulated in any way at all. It doesn't say anything
about business and it doesn't say anything about money. There is no
commerce.
The Supreme Court authority is very clear about that. That is why the
Supreme Court struck down the Gun-Free School Zones Act, which my
friends across the aisle were totally opposed to. They said: Well, that
has nothing to do with commerce. The possession of a gun within a
school zone has nothing to do with commerce. You have to strike it
down.
Well, equally, the possession of your concealed carry weapon has
nothing to do with commerce either. So that doesn't help them.
Then they would say: Well, really what we are doing is we are
vindicating the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment gives you the
right to do it.
There are a couple of odd things about that. One is that, if the
Second Amendment gave you the right to take a concealed carry gun
anywhere you want in the country, why has no court ever said that, and
why aren't they just bringing a lawsuit?
The Federal courts across the land have been overwhelmingly clear
that the Second Amendment does not give you a right to carry a loaded
concealed gun. You don't get that right under the Second Amendment. If
you have that right, you get it from your State government.
I thought that was something that my friends across the aisle
believed in: federalism and State powers and State rights. But, no,
they would say: Well, this is an enforcement of the Second Amendment.
I suppose the Supreme Court also struck down that bit of trickery in
a case called City of Boerne v. Flores, which dealt with the Religious
Freedom Restoration Act. There, Congress said, overwhelmingly--I think
it was unanimous--we are going to overrule, essentially, the laws of
the States and say that any burden on people's religious free exercise
is presumptively unconstitutional, unless you can show that there is a
compelling interest in your State against it.
The Supreme Court said: Wait, where does Congress get the power to do
that?
Congress said: Well, we are just enforcing people's free exercise
rights.
The Supreme Court said: You don't enforce people's rights by changing
the meaning of the right.
Similarly, you don't enforce the Second Amendment right, which,
undoubtedly, exists under the 2008 Heller decision, which said you have
a right to a handgun for self-defense, you have a rifle for purposes of
hunting and recreation, but you don't extend those rights, change the
meaning of those rights in the name of the Second Amendment and then
say that is where Congress gets its power. On that theory, the Supreme
Court said in the RFRA case--striking down the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act as it applies to States--there would be no limit at all
to Federal power, and that can't be right.
My friends celebrated yesterday having passed an unconstitutional
bill--unconstitutional. We have no power to trample the handiwork of
the States all over the country. The State legislatures have the power
under the 10th Amendment, and Congress lacks the power in Article I to
define what concealed carry policy is going to be in the States. That
is up to the States.
So, if they want to become the absolute enemies of the State
legislatures and State power and State rights, be my guest. But what
they have is an unconstitutional piece of legislation as well as a
deeply dangerous and ill-thought-out piece of legislation.
The last thing I want to say about it is, like almost everything else
they bring to us now, there were no hearings on it.
Now, think about that. Here we are, one of the greatest legislative
bodies on the planet Earth--Abraham Lincoln sat in this body; John F.
Kennedy sat in this body; some of the greatest legislators who ever
existed were here--and they are passing bills without so much as a
single hearing. They just bring it up for a vote.
So we whip out our phones, and we are trying to google to find out
about the issue. That is how I found out, for example, that more than
1,100 people carrying concealed carry weapons had committed homicides
or mass shootings or killing of police or suicides--with their guns.
And now they want open season.
If you want to allow anybody in your State to get a concealed carry
weapon, be our guest. Don't impose that rule on the people of Maryland.
We don't want it, thank you very much. We have already decided what we
have got, and that is true of State legislatures all across the land.
{time} 1800
Their so-called reciprocity legislation is actually a demolition of
reciprocity, because lots of States have entered into reciprocal
agreements that will be extinguished by their law.
So without so much as a hearing, without any real debate or
discussion, without them even realizing that they are violating the
Constitution, they go ahead and pass this law.
All right. But that, of course, is just a distraction from the main
order of business this month, which is demolition of America's middle
class. I am sorry to put it in such cogent and compressed terms, but
there is no other way to describe what The New York Times calls the
worst piece of tax legislation ever introduced in the history of our
country.
Now, America has gotten the point about the GOP tax plan. People know
it is highway robbery. People know it is a mugging of the working class
and the middle class by the largest corporations and the richest people
in the country. They know it is an outrageous decision to drive the
country into $1.5 trillion more deficit, more debt, all to enrich the
robber barons and the cyber barons of our time.
They want to cut corporate taxes from 35 percent to 20 percent at a
time of record corporate profits.
Why? Why would you do that?
They say that if we bestow this extraordinary windfall, bonus present
on corporate America, that somehow we are going to get more jobs out of
it. But wait a second. We are at a time of record corporate profits
right now. If all they needed was more profits, more dividends to
create jobs, then we would be seeing them right now.
We are in a time of economic growth, and any economist you ask, who
is not in the pay of the proponents, will tell you it is a deranged
thing to cut corporate taxes at a time of record corporate profits.
Why would we do that?
They say it will lead to economic development. Nonsense. Show me one
example where trickle-down economics has ever worked. It doesn't work,
for a very simple reason. You give more money to the people at the top
of society, they pocket it, they send it overseas to their Swiss bank
accounts or to the Cayman Islands or more yachts. That is what they do
with it.
If you want economic growth, you do what Franklin D. Roosevelt did.
You invest in the middle class, you invest in working people.
Business growth comes from demand, and demand comes from a strong
middle class that is able to buy stuff. If you starve the middle class,
there is no demand. The rich take their money and they park it
overseas. That is what our oligarchs do. That is what the Russian
oligarchs do.
That is how Donald Trump has stayed in business. The Russian
oligarchs have been renting out his condos and offices in the Trump
Tower in New York and coming to the Trump Hotel. They have got their
surplus profits they are exporting from Russia going right into the
Trump enterprises. Our oligarchs do the exact same thing.
You want real growth, you want strong growth, you want fairness, you
want a democratic society, you invest in the middle class, not the
largest corporations, not the wealthiest people in the country.
Now, there is a strong link here to our campaign finance regime.
Again, every public opinion poll shows Americans know it. You think you
can fool the American people. You cannot fool the American people.
Americans know this tax bill is a great deal if you have your own
lobbyist; it is a great deal if you have your own Political Action
Committee; it is a great deal if you are in the Trump Cabinet, it is
going to be perfect for you; and if your last name is Trump, this is
absolute utopia. But if you don't have your own PAC, if you don't have
your own lobbyist, watch out, watch out in this bill.
[[Page H9752]]
The Boston Globe's Annie Linskey had a great article with the title:
``The Koch brothers (and their friends) want President Trump's tax cut.
Very badly.''
Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity, a Koch group,
said: ``It's the most significant Federal effort we've ever taken on.''
Congratulations to the Koch brothers. They are about to get their own
signature tax bill. All the GOP politicians are saying the same thing
in the newspapers. You can just check it out.
They say the same thing: We are calling up the millionaires and
billionaires for campaign contributions, and they say, ``You deliver us
that tax bill first. You get nothing from us until you deliver us that
tax plan. You guys haven't done anything in Washington. You haven't
thrown 30 or 40 million off their healthcare yet. We haven't gotten
what we wanted. You deliver us that tax bill. That is what we want.''
Of course, Trump's Cabinet needs no outside push even from the
campaign donors. It is the wealthiest Cabinet in U.S. history.
Guess what it is worth. $20 million? $50 million? $100 million? $1
billion?
No. The Trump Cabinet is worth $4.3 billion. $4.3 billion is what
their Cabinet is worth.
They all love the tax plan, and they should.
You know why?
They wrote it.
You know who they wrote it for?
Them.
Just like for the Trump family, they are going to abolish the estate
tax, which applies to only 2 out of every 1,000 richest people in the
country. It is only the wealthiest people who pay the estate tax now,
and they want to wipe it out, costing the rest of us $65 billion or $70
billion.
They want to collide, they want to contradict, they want to trample
an essential principle of America that our Founders started off with,
which is opposition to hereditary government, like kings, and
opposition to hereditary wealth, hereditary aristocracy. The Founders,
like Ben Franklin and Tom Paine and Alexander Hamilton, they knew that
the intergenerational transmission of huge fortunes was a threat to
democracy.
At a certain point, people don't want to just buy a bigger house or
another house or a third house or a fourth house or a yacht. At a
certain point, they want to buy a governorship, they want to buy a U.S.
Senate seat, they want to buy the Presidency of the United States.
So what is at stake here is not just whether we are going to have
some semblance of fairness in the economy. It is bad enough that we
have got one of the most unequal economies on Earth today. That is bad
enough. They want a government that is plutocratic, a government that
responds only to the wealthiest class in society.
So they want to abolish the estate tax. They want to abolish the
alternative minimum tax. That is the only reason that Donald Trump paid
any taxes at all in the one year that we know he paid any taxes in the
last 2 decades, the alternative minimum tax. So of course they want to
get rid of that.
For the middle class, well, no breaks there. They want to get rid of
the college student loan interest deduction. If you are struggling to
get into the middle class, to go to college, if you had a deduction on
the college student loan interest: Gone. They don't want it.
Healthcare expenses. You spend more than 10 percent of your income on
healthcare expenses, long-term care for someone in your family who has
Alzheimer's disease; you have a kid in your family who has autism going
into a private school for kids with special needs, right now you can
deduct that. They want to get rid of that.
They want to get rid of the State and local tax deduction, which half
of my communities use, targeted right at those States, like Maryland,
Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, California, and Illinois, that
invest heavily in education and infrastructure. So they just want to
get rid of that.
Here's something else, another snake writhing in the grass of this
terrible bill. They want to repeal the Johnson amendment. This is named
after Lyndon Johnson when he was a Senator. So we are taking you back
to the 1950s and 1960s. It was a very simple amendment that is
essentially a logical corollary to the First Amendment, to the
Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. It says that
501(c)(3) organizations, churches, universities, not-for-profit
entities cannot engage in political campaigning, in electioneering.
Guess what the Koch brothers and the Mercers have tucked into this
one. They are going to get rid of the Johnson amendment. So the Koch
brothers, if they want to spend $1 billion trying to define American
politics in the name of plutocracy, now it will be tax deductible.
Right now, they can spend it under Citizens United, they can spend
whatever they want, but they have got to pay for it.
Now they put it into a church or to churches, the ``Church of the
Golden Plutocracy,'' and then they can deduct it on their taxes and the
church can now be involved in politics, it can spend money in politics,
it can electioneer, it can endorse candidates for office, and it
remains a tax-exempt entity.
Now, the smart churches, which is most churches, have opposed it.
They said: Don't give us that power, because the next step is people
are going to turn around and say, ``Wait a second. Why are we getting
tax deductible contributions in churches? Why are we tax exempt if we
are getting involved in politics like everybody else?''
That will be the logical question. Indeed, it threatens the very
existence of the 501(c)(3) organization by tearing down that wall over
tax-exempt contributions, which Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers
and the Mercers want so badly. Very clever, their divine dark money
loophole, very clever.
They are going to find a way that they can control our politics,
deduct it from their taxes, and corrupt the entire not-for-profit
sector, the churches and the synagogues and the mosques and so on.
I wish I could leave you with cheerier news tonight, but the U.S.
Congress is on the verge of passing the worst tax proposal in American
history that offends every value that we cherish in this country.
Why are the people who are pushing it, who are doing quadruple
backflips in the middle of the night, hiding it from us?
It took us 2 years and 10 months to pass the 1986 bipartisan tax
legislation. Here, this is behind the scenes in the dark, speed of
light, dark of night, the whole thing.
Why are they willing to do it even though it is rejected now by 2-1
or 3-1 in every public opinion poll?
People understand it is highway robbery.
Why are they willing to do it?
Well, what is the worst that could happen to them?
Think about it. The worst that could happen to somebody who votes for
this is they lose and they go to work for the Koch brothers, they go to
work for the Mercers, they go to work for Sheldon Adelson, and the
highway robbery is complete.
Now, popular protests stopped the plan to throw tens of millions of
people off their healthcare. Despite the fact that the GOP controls the
House, the Senate, the White House, and even the Supreme Court--they
control all of it--yet popular protests around the country stopped it.
Mr. Speaker, that is the only thing that can stop us now, because so
many of my colleagues across the aisle have decided to walk the plank
for the Koch brothers and for the billionaire cabinet. They have
decided to throw in with the oligarchs, the American oligarchs, and the
plutocrats.
So popular protests, people speaking out and contacting their
Members, will be our only hope of showing that this is an absolute
insult and affront to American democracy; not just middle class
economics, economics for everybody, but democratic politics; politics
for everybody, not just the elite.
I thank the Speaker for granting us this opportunity to allow us to
express our intense anxiety about what might happen next week. I wish
the Speaker a good weekend. I hope that everyone will have the
opportunity to consider the implications of what is taking place.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
[[Page H9753]]
____________________