[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 202 (Tuesday, December 12, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H9836-H9840]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE IN CONGRESS?

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2017, the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, one of the tasks of having the second 
Special Order Hour is to find myself sitting here in this Chamber 
listening to the most absurd, ridiculous conversation that I think I 
have ever heard anywhere. My esteemed colleagues were here for the last 
hour in a different world, in a completely different universe, not of 
this world, but a different universe, And I am thinking: What in the 
world are they saying?
  By my recollection, every one of our intelligence agencies said that 
Russia was involved in the campaign and developing information that was 
supporting the current President. I am thinking: I think that is what I 
heard over the last 9, 10, almost 14 months now. And yet my colleagues 
are up here and in a different world.
  I will tell you what it is all about. This wasn't the subject matter 
that I was going to talk to tonight, but it was really about another 
scam, another scheme that is being perpetrated. This is all about, this 
last hour's discussion was all about somehow turning the table so that 
Special Counsel Mueller is demeaned, his work is somehow not authentic 
so that the investigation that is coming closer and closer to the Oval 
Office is discredited, setting the stage for what may very, very well 
be an extremely important task that this House has.
  As that investigation continues, we will hear even more shrill 
discussions from the President's supporters tearing down that 
investigation, undermining the integrity of it, so that when that task 
comes to the House of Representatives in an impeachment resolution, 
they will simply say: Well, his entire investigation is discredited 
and, therefore, we are not going to proceed.
  The American public isn't buying it, gentlemen. The American public 
is not blind. They are not deaf. They are listening, and they are 
understanding that an honest investigation is underway, based upon what 
our intelligence agencies discovered, based upon the fact--the fact--
that the Russians did hack the DNC and did hack the chairman of the 
Hillary Clinton campaign and then weaponized those emails that were 
stolen. That is a fact, gentlemen, and you cannot wash away that fact.
  And from there, we now have a special prosecutor, a special counsel 
in place who is carrying on an investigation, and indictments have come 
forward and penalties have been assessed and people have pleaded 
guilty.
  All of that is the fact, and it is pointing closer and closer to the 
White House; and, therefore, I understand, gentlemen, I understand why 
you are so upset. I suppose if I were somehow to stand here and be an 
advocate for the President, I might be upset, too, because the net is 
drawing tighter, because information is coming clearer.
  So come to the floor, do what you can, do what you can to undermine 
the investigation; do what you can, through your falsehoods, through 
your incorrect interpretations of plain facts, to undermine the 
integrity of an investigation. I understand why you would be intent 
upon doing so.
  But the purpose of this evening isn't that. It is something that will 
affect America for the next two decades, at least. The purpose of this 
hour is to talk to the American people about what is happening here 
while these foolish floor discussions are going on.
  What is happening here in Congress at this moment, this week, is one 
of the biggest transfers of wealth ever in America's history; the 
transfer of wealth from the working men and women of America, from the 
poor, from the elderly, to the superwealthy of America.
  What is happening here in Congress now, in a conference committee, is 
the drafting of legislation, tax legislation, that will dramatically 
affect the American economy for decades.

                              {time}  1815

  Transferring wealth, benefits that the elderly receive in Medicare, 
transferring benefits that the poor receive in food stamps, in Meals on 
Wheels, in Medicare, Medicaid, children's health programs; transferring 
those necessary benefits that these men and women need to survive, to 
be able to live; transferring those benefits to the superwealthy in a 
tax proposal that gives to the largest American corporations and to the 
top 1 percent, over $5 trillion over the next decade, that is what is 
happening.
  Here is a fact: American corporations that have already seen their 
share of burden to finance this government, to educate the Americans, 
to keep our military, to deal with national security, they have seen 
their share of the Federal revenues drop from some 20 percent--
actually, 30 percent in 1939, 15 percent in 1960, down to somewhere in 
the 5 to 10 percent range. At the same time, the burden is shifted to 
the middle class. That is what is happening.
  Here is what should be happening. Here is the way we ought to look at 
it. On The Mall here in Washington, we have the FDR Memorial. Etched in 
the marble is this: ``The test of our progress is not whether we add 
more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide 
enough for those who have little.''
  I presented this upside down almost on purpose because that is 
precisely what our Republican colleagues are doing. They are taking 
that value and turning it upside down. Instead of doing more for those 
who have little, they are doing much for those who already control the 
greatest amount of wealth ever in the handful of a few people since the 
1400s, when the Spanish Empire was ripping off the Western Hemisphere. 
That is what is happening.
  Of all of this money, the top 1 percent and America's biggest 
corporations are gaining, and the rest of Americans, over the next 5 to 
7 years, are going to pay for that. We have to stop this tax cut. We 
have to stop it because it is terrible public policy.
  American corporations don't need more money. It was reported today 
that Apple--the world's largest, most valuable corporation, Apple, in 
my State of California--is sitting on $2.5 trillion of cash today in 
the United States, and another $2.5 trillion of cash outside the United 
States, and they want their tax rate reduced. They are almost paying 
nothing now because they are able to escape American taxes.
  They say: Lower the corporate tax rate so that there will be 
investment in America.
  It ain't so. In the last 20 years, there has been a cataclysmic 
change in the way in which corporations use their profits.
  In the 1970s, 50, 60 percent of the after-tax profits of corporations 
went into building their business, building new equipment, new 
manufacturing plants, adding employees, increasing wages. The remaining 
40 percent or so went to dividends.
  Where are we today?
  Less than 10 percent goes to increasing a company's manufacturing, 
the company's employment, wages for workers.
  Where does the rest of it go?
  It goes to stock buybacks and to dividends. It goes to the 
shareholders.
  And who are the shareholders?
  The top 1 percent.
  This is the scam of all times. They say we have got to reduce the 
taxes on corporations so that they will employ more Americans. If only 
they would. If only they would.
  I am sure you have heard of AT&T. Do you know what the effective tax 
rate of AT&T is?
  Not 35 percent, not 30 percent, not even 20 percent, as this tax bill 
would set as the maximum rate of corporations. The effective tax rate 
for the last 10 years for AT&T has been 8 percent. Eight percent.
  And during that time, did they use that after-tax profit to add 
employees, to increase wages?
  No. They laid off 80,000 American workers.
  What did they use that money for?
  Stock buybacks, corporate executives, $124 million to the CEO just 2 
years ago.
  I could go on and on, but I would like to bring to this debate Mr. 
Cicilline,

[[Page H9837]]

who has determined that there is a better deal, better wages, better 
future, better jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. 
Cicilline).
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and friend from 
California for not only organizing this evening's Special Order hour, 
but for his long-term advocacy for working people in this country and 
for his extraordinary advocacy for the people of the State of 
California.
  As my colleague described what the Republicans are attempting to do 
in this tax proposal, it is very clear to me that this isn't tax 
reform. It is not a tax bill. It is a tax scam. It is a scam in that 
the American people are being sold a bill of goods.
  All across this country tonight, there are millions of Americans who 
will go to sleep tonight worrying about whether or not they are going 
to be able to make it through the next week, whether they have enough 
to pay their bills, to take care of their family, to set aside a little 
for their retirement. The reason that they are worried about this is 
they are not making enough money.
  So what the Republicans propose to do in this tax bill will make that 
problem worse. We have spoken over the last several months about an 
agenda that is really at the heart of this problem, that raises incomes 
for families, that reduces the costs in people's lives, and that 
ensures that they have the tools to be successful in the 21st century.
  It is an agenda that really focuses on addressing the fundamental and 
economic anxiety facing millions of American families all across our 
country. We know it is because people are struggling. They are just not 
making enough money.
  The same can't be said of the biggest corporations in this country, 
where we are seeing record profits, Wall Street through the roof. So 
people understand something is not working right in our economy. They 
are struggling. They haven't seen their wages go up for a very long 
time. America hasn't had a raise in a long time, yet corporate profits 
are through the roof and the stock market is through the roof, and 
people are saying: This isn't working.

  So what we should be doing is investing in the creation of good-
paying jobs that will result in better jobs, better wages, and a better 
future. But what this Republican proposal does is it relies on this old 
Republican theory of trickle-down economics: if we just let people at 
the very top have more money, it is going to trickle down to the rest 
of us and we will all benefit.
  We know this doesn't work. We have seen time and time again this 
doesn't work. And part of the reason it doesn't work is because people 
at the top can only buy so much stuff. The way you really grow the 
economy is you grow the middle class. Make sure people have a job, have 
money in their pockets to buy the goods and services that business 
produces.
  If you go to any small business in my State of Rhode Island and you 
ask small-business owners, ``What do you need to add an employee, to 
add jobs to your company,'' they will give you the same answer, ``I 
need customers. I need people to buy what I make and I sell.''
  That is why growing the middle class and focusing on raising incomes 
of working people is actually how you create jobs. Those are the job 
creators: working people, the middle class of this country who are 
creating the demand that leads to job growth.
  But what this tax scam does is it gives 67 percent of the tax cuts to 
the top 1 percent, huge benefits for the biggest corporations in this 
country, further incentivizes companies to ship American jobs overseas, 
and to realize profits from doing that. It cuts important deductions, 
in the House bill at least, for student loan interest, medical 
expenses, State and local taxes. It is going to raise taxes on 87 
million Americans, middle class folks, working people.
  In order to finance this tax cut for the richest people in this 
country and the biggest corporations that don't need it, the middle 
class and working people are going to pay for it and the next 
generation is going to be burdened with $1.5 trillion in debt over the 
next 10 years.
  We are borrowing money to give tax cuts to big corporations, the 
wealthiest people in this country, and we are going to shoulder the 
next generation with that burden?
  Shame on them.
  So this conference committee is meeting and going to come up with 
some proposal that apparently is going to be pleasing to their donors.
  We know in the Senate some of the donors had the provisions of the 
bill before Members of the Senate had them. They came out with 
handwritten notes in the margins because they were so desperate to get 
this done for the moneyed class. In fact, some of our colleagues 
admitted it and said something like: Look, if we don't pass this, our 
donors said, Don't bother calling us.
  What we need is tax reform that provides a tax cut to working people 
and the middle class. We could have done that in a bipartisan way. The 
last time there was tax reform, there were hundreds of witnesses, 
months of testimony. This stuff is complicated.
  What happened in the House?
  Not one hearing, not one witness. Jammed through, as Congressman 
Raskin said, in the dark of night, at the speed of light. Because the 
more the American people hear about this tax scam, they know it is not 
for them. They know they are not going to benefit. They know the same 
old corporate special interests that have so much influence in this 
town helped write this bill, and that they are going to benefit from it 
and they are determined to jam this through, regardless of the public 
sentiment.
  The American people are against this bill 2-1. That number is going 
to grow the more people learn about it. That doesn't seem to matter.
  So I thank the gentleman for inviting me tonight and allowing me to 
speak. He has been here longer than I have. I can say with all honesty 
that the day that bill passed the House was one of the worst days I 
have ever been in this Chamber because I know how this tax scam, this 
effort by the Republicans in the House is really going to hurt the 
American people. I have never seen a situation in which public 
sentiment was so strongly opposed to this measure. Despite that, our 
colleagues are moving forward with it.
  I don't know that my colleague has seen an occasion like this before, 
but I would like to hear Mr. Garamendi's thoughts on that.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I actually have seen something like this 
before. Last summer, the repeal of the Affordable Care Act, or at least 
the attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act, where 24 million 
Americans were going to lose their health insurance, this House rammed 
it right through, just totally ignoring the welfare. And I am not 
talking about corporate welfare. I am talking about the well-being of 
24 million Americans who stood to lose their insurance.
  Now that is being repeated. In fact, in this legislation, there is a 
provision that it would only cause 13 million Americans to lose their 
insurance.
  So not only are they doing this tax scam, as the gentleman so well 
described it, but they put in a provision that would cause 13 million 
Americans to lose their insurance over the next several years, and 4 
million Americans next year.

                              {time}  1830

  A person might say: What morality do you have? What are your values 
when you do that kind of thing?
  So, yes, I have seen it, and we are seeing it once again.
  So what is the value? It is not this. It is not the test of our 
progress of what we do for those who have little. It is the upside down 
of that. It is: How can we do more for those who have much, the top 1 
percent:
  Mr. Cicilline is from Rhode Island. I am from California. I think the 
view from ocean to ocean and somewhere in between, there has got to be 
some sanity here, if you will.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GARAMENDI. I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I think the other thing that is very important to acknowledge here, 
and I think we have heard the Speaker say this--we have heard Senator 
Rubio make reference to this--is that the American people, I hope, 
understand that this is part one of a multipart story. Our Republican 
colleagues have made it very clear that this tax scam, this sort of 
giveaway to corporate

[[Page H9838]]

America and the richest people in this country, is just part one.
  Next year, after you give away $1.5 trillion, unpaid for, you come 
back next year and you say: We have no money. We are going to have to 
cut Social Security, cut Medicare, cut Medicaid, cut Pell grants, cut 
investments in healthcare, and cut investments in rebuilding the 
infrastructure of our country.
  So our Republican colleagues are setting this up as an effort to gut 
Medicare and Medicaid. Let's be clear about that. You can't give away 
$1.5 trillion that you don't have.
  And next year they are going to be heard to say: Geez, we have no 
money. We have to cut all of these programs that middle class Americans 
and working families rely on to survive and to prosper and to get a 
shot. And their answer is going to be: There is no money.
  And why isn't there any money? Because we gave it away to 
millionaires and billionaires and corporations and people who didn't 
need it. As a result of it, you are going to pay for it by cutting 
Medicare and cutting Social Security and cutting Pell grants.
  The immorality of this is stunning.
  So I think we have to not only defeat this tax scam, but call it out 
for what it is. This is an effort by our Republican colleagues to 
finally get what they want. I think our Speaker has said: I dreamed 
about it, or, I drank beer thinking about cuts to Medicare and 
Medicaid.
  They call them entitlements. They are not entitlements. These are 
earned benefits that people get after a lifetime of hard work, of 
playing by the rules, of doing what is right.
  This is phase one of a multiphase plan which will hurt working people 
in this country, and we have to call them out on it.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. I thank the gentleman. He is absolutely correct.
  It used to be, I think just 2 or 3 months ago, that, on this floor, 
you would hear the sound of the deficit hawks. You would hear them 
screaming, crying out about the huge deficit. And, indeed, we do have a 
huge deficit. If you take a look at the growth of the deficit, this is 
2027. At the end of this tax bill, it is growing at $500 billion a year 
without the additional deficit created by the tax bill. They would cry. 
They would lament the situation.
  Suddenly--maybe it is because it is winter, and, like the Canadian 
geese, they flew south--they have disappeared. They are nowhere to be 
found around Washington, D.C. But I suspect, with the new year, as the 
days grow longer, as it warms up, the deficit hawks will return, and 
they will come back with a vengeance, just as the gentleman said.
  Wait a minute. The gentleman didn't say it. He repeated what the 
Speaker of the House of Representatives said, what our Republican 
colleagues voted for in their budget proposal just ahead of this tax 
proposal. They said it very, very clearly. They intend to take $500 
billion out of Medicare, right out of the healthcare for seniors.
  They intend--they did it in their budget. They did it in their words. 
The Speaker did it in his own words. They intend to cut Medicare $500 
billion and Medicaid by $1.5 trillion so that the deficit that they 
created with the tax scam that gives all of that money to the wealthy 
and to the corporations, they are going to take it right out of the 
pockets of the elderly. They are going to take it right out of the 
pockets of the poor.
  Keep in mind that some 50 to 60 percent of Medicaid money goes to 
seniors in nursing homes and in extended care facilities.
  Something is dramatically wrong. Where is the morality of this? Where 
is the human value? Where are the words? Where are the words of FDR? 
Blowing in the wind, long gone.
  Mr. Cicilline, I have noticed we have been joined by one of our 
colleagues. I don't know if she wants to join me.
  Mr. CICILLINE. A very distinguished colleague.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. We will just continue.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GARAMENDI. I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, it is important to note here--I think my 
memory is correct on this--that the $1.5 trillion in debt which will be 
generated by this tax giveaway is exactly the same number that they cut 
from Medicare and Medicaid in the budget they just voted on. So we 
don't have to wonder whether that is the plan. They have already done 
it in the budget that they have proposed. And as you said, the Speaker, 
Senator Rubio, and others have already acknowledged this.
  So this should be clear. We are going to vote, and have already 
voted, to give a tax cut
  Mr. GARAMENDI. The word ``we'' is incorrect.
  Mr. CICILLINE. The gentleman is correct. They have already voted to 
cut $1.5 trillion to give a tax cut to the wealthiest people in this 
country, to the biggest corporations; and in order to pay for that, 
they intend to gut Medicare and Medicaid and a whole range of other 
very important investments we make, that our country makes, in 
supporting and strengthening the middle class.
  It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone when, next year, as the 
gentleman said, the deficit hawks return in the warm weather to say: 
Oh, my goodness, there is no money. We are going to have to end the 
guarantee of Medicare. We are going to have to cut Social Security. We 
are going to have to eliminate or cut Pell grants. We are going to 
reduce all of these investments which matter so much to working 
families in this country.
  They are intent on doing that. They have tried to do it for the last 
several years, but not to the magnitude of success that they expect 
when they drain the coffers by giving away the money, which is exactly 
their strategy. And it is why we have to fight hard against this tax 
scam because it is not just a tax giveaway to people who don't need it. 
It is what it will do to the economy.
  I think there was a New York Times analysis of 38 economists. Not 
one, not any economist I have ever heard of yet, has said that this tax 
cut will pay for itself.
  We keep hearing our Republican colleagues: Oh, this is going to pay 
for itself. The economy is going to grow, and jobs are going to. It is 
a pipe dream. There is not a single economist, Republican, Democrat, 
Independent, who says these tax cuts will pay for themselves because, 
of course, they won't.
  Who will pay for them? The middle class of this country.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, we have heard that argument over and 
over. If I am not mistaken, the economy is working pretty close to 
maximum right now, 3 percent. The unemployment rate is 4 percent or in 
that range, maybe a little lower, and the Federal Reserve is looking at 
increasing the interest rate to slow down the economy. Our Republican 
friends say they need to beef up the economy.
  So tell me how it works. When the Federal Government borrows more 
money for this deficit, that will cause interest rates to go up because 
they are competing with other folks who want to borrow money. The 
Federal Reserve is increasing interest rates. So we can look for 
interest rates going up. The economy is slowing down.
  So how does this increase? It just doesn't work in macroeconomic 
terms in any way.
  But I don't want to be an economist. What I want to be is just 
factual. So if I might, for a moment, these are 10 popular deductions 
that the Republicans are limiting or repealing in their tax bill, the 
list of horribles: limits the State and local tax deduction, which is a 
big problem for California, a big problem for New York, a big problem 
for, really, every State because every State has taxpayers who deduct 
State and local taxes.
  For California, in my district, 32 percent of the taxpayers use this 
deduction, and it is over $10,000. We are a high-cost State, housing 
and so forth.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GARAMENDI. I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, one thing to remember there is that 
States that are investing in their infrastructure, investing in public 
safety, that are asking for local taxpayers to do their part, you 
punish them, and you incentivize States that are not making that 
investment. It is bad public policy.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. The gentleman mentioned this one, but I think we need 
to focus on it.

[[Page H9839]]

  Right now, if you are going to go to college, almost every person is 
going to have to borrow money. Student debt is over $1.2 trillion. 
Young men and women who graduate are burdened by that student debt. 
They are not buying cars. They are not building any business. They are 
trying to pay off the debt. They are able to deduct the interest on 
that debt. It helps them out a little bit.
  So what do our Republican friends do? They eliminate the interest 
deduction on student debt. The gentleman has spoken to this.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GARAMENDI. I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island.
  Mr. CICILLINE. I started to interrupt. I was just going to say that, 
for young people, what this tax scam does is particularly damaging 
because it not only saddles the next generation with $1.5 trillion of 
debt, but in addition to that, it makes their cost of pursuing higher 
education more expensive.
  Who in their right mind thinks it is a good idea to make it harder or 
more expensive for young people to go to college? We ought to be making 
it easier and more affordable, less difficult. Young people are already 
graduating with enormous debt, going to a tough job market in terms of 
what they can earn, and the Republicans are taking away the deduction 
so they can finance a tax debt for the richest people in this country.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. That is precisely what they are doing.
  The gentleman talked earlier about a better plan. He talked about 
better education, about better opportunities. We know. And the 
gentleman and I have been on this floor talking about how to build the 
American economy. In that discussion, we know that the economy grows on 
research. It grows on research at universities all across this Nation.
  What do our Republican friends do in their tax bill? They are going 
to make it extremely difficult to do research at the universities by 
placing a very onerous tax on graduate students who are working in 
those research institutions.
  Right now, graduate students get paid a stipend, a small amount of 
money to do the research in those research institutions, and they get 
their tuition free. Our Republican colleagues, for reasons that make no 
sense whatsoever, would tax that tuition that is not paid. So these 
young men and women in these graduate studies are going to have to pay 
a tax, and they never receive any cash to pay the tax.

  What would be the result? Universities across the entire Nation are 
saying: Stop it. Don't do this. We will not be able to hire graduate 
students to do research because they cannot afford it.
  How stupid. If we are going to have a better economy, if we are going 
to have better jobs, better wages, education is the essential 
foundation for that. And yet what do they do here with this? They go 
right after the students.
  When it comes time for cuts--the gentleman said it before--Pell 
grants, other kinds of stipends, other kinds of assistance for 
education, gone. One of the fundamentals of the Democratic program is a 
better education, a better educated workforce so that there will be 
better jobs, better wages, better economy.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GARAMENDI. I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, an important part of that is doubling the 
investment in apprenticeship programs, career and technical education, 
making sure we are creating pathways to produce better wages, better 
jobs for a better future. And the last thing families need, because the 
focus has to be on raising family incomes, is a tax scam that is going 
to raise their taxes.
  That is exactly the reverse of what most middle class and working 
families need. They need more money in their pockets, not less.
  And when I hear my Republican colleagues say: This is a tax cut for 
middle class, that is not true. For 87 million Americans, their taxes 
will go up. For many Americans, the deductions that they take will be 
eliminated, and 67 percent of the tax cuts go to the top 1 percent.
  So it is important, again, that they are trying to jam this through 
quickly because I think they understand that, if they don't, the more 
the American people learn about it, the less they like it, and the more 
they are going to attempt to stop it.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. I have gone through three of the horribles here, the 
student loans and the graduate deductions.
  We have seen disasters across America: floods, hurricanes, California 
fires, thousands of homes lost in California. So what does this 
brilliant tax thing do? It eliminates the casualty loss deduction.

                              {time}  1845

  It eliminates the casualty loss deduction. So if your home burns down 
in a fire--maybe it is one of the catastrophic fires that are now 
burning in California--your home is gone. Comes time the next year to 
pay your taxes, you can deduct the loss that you had incurred. Not 
anymore. Not what our brilliant tax writers on the Republican side 
would do. The casualty loss disappears.
  If that is not enough, you have lost your home, you have lost your 
job, and you need to move. You need to move your family. They eliminate 
the moving expense deduction.
  How is a family going to get a better job?
  You used to be able--you would today--to eliminate--you would be able 
to write off the moving expense. But not with the tax bill.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Except if you are a corporation. They keep that 
deduction. So think about that. If you have to move to follow your job, 
you can't deduct that from your taxes; but if your company moves your 
job overseas, the corporations can deduct the cost of moving your job.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. But the individual can't deduct the moving expense to 
follow the job.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Correct. Correct.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, something is terribly wrong here. Four in 
my family are teachers. It is a little thing, but it means everything. 
It is little. Teachers are able to deduct from their taxes $250 for 
expenses that they have paid for classroom supplies. Gone. It is gone. 
If you want to hurt the system, stick it to the teachers.
  Why would you do that?
  It is not a big thing. It is a little thing, but it means everything 
to that classroom. It is the additional paper, the crayons, the 
chalkboard, whatever.
  How small is that? Is that a better deal for America?
  I don't think so.
  The casualty loss deduction hurts. Three hundred homes in my district 
were lost in the October fires. The casualty loss deduction is gone. I 
don't know, maybe they will be able to rebuild. But when it comes time 
to address that deficit, I can assure you that they will do everything 
they can to cut the programs that would support that family as they 
attempt to rebuild.
  So you get the program, you lose on the front end, your tax deduction 
is gone, and you lose on the back end when you go to get mortgage 
assistance.
  There has got to be a better plan. There has got to be a better way 
to do it.
  Mr. Speaker, over the years, in the last several months, Mr. 
Cicilline and his colleagues on the Democratic Caucus have put together 
a program for a better life for Americans. It involves much of what we 
talked about here. It involves a tax program that is balanced, one that 
provides the incentives for businesses to stay in the United States. We 
haven't talked about the corporate tax program that allows for 
territorial taxing, a specific effort in this legislation to encourage 
corporations to go offshore where their corporate income will never be 
taxed.
  That is not a better plan. That is not a better program for building 
American jobs and wages. It is a way for corporations to continue to 
escape. Someday soon I would hope Mr. Cicilline and his colleagues 
would bring to this floor--the three of them who have put together this 
program on how we can build the American economy--well, the gentleman 
can talk in specific ways about how we can have educational programs, 
apprenticeship training programs, and job training programs, how we can 
encourage corporations to invest in America, and how we can Make It In 
America.

[[Page H9840]]

  I would love to join Mr. Cicilline and talk about a bill that we are 
soon going to introduce that would require that, when we export a 
strategic national asset--our oil and natural gas--that it would be on 
American-built ships with American sailors. We could employ hundreds of 
thousands of people in our shipyards by changing the laws and by 
providing incentives for Americans to stay here and to work here.
  Mr. Speaker, I know this is Mr. Cicilline's effort. I know the 
gentleman wants to get to it. Perhaps we can wrap up.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Absolutely. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman again 
for including me. I look forward to the opportunity to come back and 
talk in more detail about the economic agenda that we collectively have 
put forward as the House Democrats working with the Senate Democrats 
that is focused on better jobs and better wages for a better future, 
the creation of 10 million full-time, good-paying jobs, expanded 
investments in apprenticeships and work-based learning, ensuring that 
we are providing investments in career and technical education, 
affordable childcare, reducing the cost of prescription drugs, 
rebuilding the infrastructure of our country. The list goes on and on, 
all focused on creating good-paying, full-time jobs, raising family 
incomes, reducing the costs that families bear on everything from cable 
bills to prescription drugs and healthcare, and making sure people have 
the skills necessary for the jobs of the 21st century so they can be 
successful.
  It is exactly the opposite of what is going to be achieved in this 
Republican tax scam.
  Mr. Speaker, I look forward to coming back with my distinguished 
colleagues, Cheri Bustos from Illinois, Hakeem Jeffries from New York, 
and Mr. Garamendi so that we can talk in a lot of detail about our 
economic agenda that will focus on supporting and strengthening working 
people in this country and giving a better deal to the American people 
than the raw deal they are getting from our colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Cicilline so very much for 
joining me tonight.
  I really want to go back and plow this field one more time. I am just 
a farm boy from California. I don't know that we have said it enough 
nor have we said it all. We do know that in this tax scam there is a 
$1.4 trillion reduction in corporate taxes with no assurance that that 
is going to create jobs in America. But quite the opposite. It will be 
a great boon for the superwealthy, who will see their stock values go 
up as that additional after-tax income for the corporations is spent on 
stock buybacks, dividends, and executive pay.

  We know that the alternative minimum tax will disappear, and that is 
about $900 billion to the, again, top income earners.
  We know in California and across the Nation that the State and local 
tax deduction will be gone. That will probably cost those 32 percent of 
the taxpayers--the tax filers in my district that use that deduction--
$1,000 to $2,000 in additional taxes.
  We know this is going to go on and on, and we know that the deficit 
is going to be increased. There may be some growth. There has been one 
analysis that said there may be a couple hundred billion dollars of 
growth, but it is not going to make up for the $1.5 trillion deficit on 
top of the existing deficit.
  We know the deficit hawks will be back. They have said it very 
clearly. They are going to come back and they are going to cut Medicare 
and Medicaid. We know they are going to take it out of the healthcare 
for the poor. They know they want to end insurance in the Affordable 
Care Act for 13 million Americans. All of that has been laid out. We 
know all of those things.
  Oh, just in case you are one of those people who have high medical 
costs, like a senior 50 years of age, who has a serious medical 
condition and you have been able to deduct from your taxes the medical 
costs, forget it. Our Republican friends are eliminating the medical 
cost deduction.
  Why would they do that? Why would they take after people who have 
serious medical problems?
  Their out-of-pocket costs are covering all of that.
  This is a long story, but for my colleagues here on the floor, 
Democratic and Republican, be very, very careful because this 
particular tax bill, should it ever become law, is going to take this 
Nation a decade, maybe two decades, to get out of from underneath the 
extraordinary burden that it is going to place on the American economy, 
on the working men and women, and on the poor in America.
  The things we need to do, Mr. Cicilline talked about infrastructure. 
The President says: I am going to have a $1 trillion infrastructure 
program.
  Really? Really? He is going to do that?
  He just ripped the guts out of the American Treasury.
  Where is the money?
  Oh, it is going to be private money. No. He has already given up on 
that. His words, not mine.
  So where is the public investment?
  Five trillion dollars disappears. Five trillion dollars. Some of it 
made up by the elimination of these deductions that I have talked 
about.
  Still, there is at least a $1.5 trillion hole. The only way that they 
can possibly make up that after giving away all of that money to the 
corporations, all of that money to the superwealthy--and did I mention 
the estate tax?
  I probably should have. The House bill eliminated the estate tax.
  What does that mean to our esteemed President?
  Well, he says that he is worth $10 billion.
  Who am I to argue with him?
  If he is, and he were to die, it means $4 billion less tax to his 
children. Four billion. Now, others say he is only worth $4 billion. So 
let's take $4 billion. For his children, it is simply a tax reduction 
of $1 billion.
  What does that amount to?
  That is what this is about. This is all about the wealthy. This is 
all about those who have much. It is most definitely not about what FDR 
said. Etched in stone on the FDR Memorial: ``The test of our progress 
is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much. It 
is whether we provide enough for those who have little.''
  So where is our heart? So what is our moral value? Is it morality? Is 
it right to add more to those who have much? Or is the purpose, the 
central value of this Nation the opposite, to add more to those who 
have too little?
  That is where I am. That is where my Democratic colleagues are. I am 
afraid my Republican colleagues are proving the opposite.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________