[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 220 (Monday, December 28, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H9153-H9160]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        CARING FOR AMERICANS WITH SUPPLEMENTAL HELP ACT OF 2020

  Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 9051) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase 
recovery rebate amounts to $2,000 for individuals, and for other 
purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 9051

       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 ``Caring for Americans with 
     Supplemental Help Act of 2020'' or the ``CASH Act of 2020''.

     SEC. 2. RECOVERY REBATE AMOUNTS INCREASED.

       (a) In General.--Section 6428A of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986, as added by the COVID-related Tax Relief Act of 
     2020, is amended by striking ``$600'' each place it appears 
     and inserting ``$2,000'', and by striking ``$1,200'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``$4,000''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     are contingent upon the enactment of the COVID-related Tax 
     Relief Act of 2020 and shall apply (if at all) as if included 
     in the enactment of section 272 of such Act.

     SEC. 3. DEPENDENTS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN DETERMINING CREDIT 
                   AND REBATES.

       (a) Recovery Rebates.--
       (1) In general.--Section 6428(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``qualifying children 
     (within the meaning of section 24(c))'' and inserting 
     ``dependents (as defined in section 152)''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Section 6428(f)(2) of such Code is amended by inserting 
     ``and subsection (a)(2) were applied by substituting 
     `qualifying children (within the meaning of section 24(c))' 
     for `dependent (as defined in section 152)' '' before the 
     period at the end.
       (B) Section 6428(g) of such Code, as amended by the COVID-
     related Tax Relief Act of 2020, is amended--
       (i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``qualifying child'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``dependent'',
       (ii) in paragraph (2)(C), by inserting ``(determined after 
     the application of subsection (f)(2))'' after ``subsection 
     (a)(2)'', and
       (iii) in paragraph (3)(B), by inserting ``or dependent'' 
     after ``child'' both places it appears.
       (3) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     are contingent upon the enactment of the COVID-related Tax 
     Relief Act of 2020 and shall apply (if at all) as

[[Page H9154]]

     if included in the enactment of section 273 of such Act.
       (b) Additional 2020 Recovery Rebates.--
       (1) In general.--Section 6428A(a)(2) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986, as added by the COVID-related Tax 
     Relief Act of 2020, is amended by striking ``qualifying 
     children (within the meaning of section 24(c))'' and 
     inserting ``dependents (as defined in section 152)''.
       (2) Authority to make advance refunds without regard to 
     modified definition of dependent.--Section 6428A(f) of such 
     Code is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(7) Authority to make advance refunds without regard to 
     modified definition of dependent.--To the extent the 
     Secretary determines appropriate to make or allow the maximum 
     number of advance refunds by the deadline described in 
     paragraph (3)(A)(ii), the Secretary may determine the advance 
     refund amounts under this subsection without regard to the 
     amendments made by paragraphs (1) and (3) of section 3(b) of 
     the CASH Act of 2020.''.
       (3) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Section 6428A(f)(2)(B) of such Code is amended by 
     striking ``qualifying child'' and inserting ``dependent''.
       (B) Section 6428A(g) of such Code is amended by striking 
     ``qualifying child'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``dependent''.
       (C) Section 6428A(g)(4)(B) of such Code is amended by 
     striking ``such child'' and inserting ``such dependent''.
       (4) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     are contingent upon the enactment of the COVID-related Tax 
     Relief Act of 2020 and shall apply (if at all) as if included 
     in the enactment of section 272 of such Act.

     SEC. 4. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

       (a) Statutory PAYGO Scorecards.--The budgetary effects of 
     this Act shall not be entered on either PAYGO scorecard 
     maintained pursuant to section 4(d) of the Statutory Pay-As-
     You-Go Act of 2010.
       (b) Senate PAYGO Scorecards.--The budgetary effects of this 
     Act shall not be entered on any PAYGO scorecard maintained 
     for purposes of section 4106 of H. Con. Res. 71 (115th 
     Congress).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.


                             General Leave

  Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include 
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, we are here today at a moment of extreme hardship for 
families across the country. Last week, both the House and the Senate 
passed bipartisan legislation that would provide relief for people who 
are struggling to make ends meet. That package includes a wide variety 
of provisions that will allow Americans who are at the end of their 
ropes to stay in their homes and to put food on the table.
  Despite the fact that the Trump administration was part of the 
negotiations for the legislation and approved of all the measures that 
it contained, the President unexpectedly decided to delay signing the 
package into law for several days. This stalling was an act of theater 
that cost the American people millions of dollars in terms of pandemic-
related unemployment assistance that they desperately need.
  Fortunately, last night, the President finally signed the bill. At 
last, workers and families can exhale a bit, knowing that aid is on the 
way.
  The primary reason that the President provided for holding up his 
signature was the enactment of this important legislation that we are 
about to undertake in the next 40 minutes.
  Democrats agree that families deserve more, and that is why I 
introduced the CASH Act on Christmas Eve to increase the payments in 
the relief package to $2,000, the exact amount the President said he 
wants.
  Madam Speaker, I introduced this legislation on Christmas Eve with 
the following parable in mind. Jacob Marley forewarned that the three 
ghosts would visit Ebenezer Scrooge to warn him about the path to 
redemption. He started with Christmas Past, and we might start here 
with Christmas past, acknowledging that, 3 years ago, one of the 
largest tax cuts in American history that overwhelmingly came to people 
at the very top, including a top individual rate cut of 39 percent to 
37.5 percent and a corporate rate cut from 36 percent to 21 percent, 
were part of that endeavor.
  In the Christmas present, there are 20 million Americans who are 
receiving unemployment insurance, more than 350,000 dead, and 19 
million people infected with this pandemic.
  For Christmas Future, Marley warned Ebenezer Scrooge that there was a 
way for redemption, and that was through a new generosity and a new 
kindness. We could emulate that here this afternoon by raising that 
impact payment from $600 to $2,000. The miracle of this season would 
remain the triumph of light for those who desperately need our 
assistance.
  Madam Speaker, we could have passed this bill 4 days ago, but our 
colleagues on the other side went against the President's wishes, and 
they blocked it. So, here we are today, back again to try to get a 
bigger check for the American people. I sincerely hope that the House 
Republicans have had a change of heart and will join us in passing the 
CASH Act.
  Madam Speaker, let's pass this bill and do what is right for our 
neighbors back home as they simply try to survive each day.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, last fall, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Washington 
Democrats refused to accept a bipartisan COVID relief bill, insisting 
instead on more than $3 trillion of absurd policies, from marijuana 
banking to early release of criminals. Months ago, they even rejected a 
nearly $2 trillion COVID relief proposal by President Trump. Many 
Americans knew right then that leading Democrats were sabotaging the 
economy ahead of the election for political gain.
  During those crucial months, while Speaker Pelosi stalled COVID 
relief, thousands of Americans died, tens of thousands of small 
businesses closed, and hospitals and nursing homes struggled, while 
millions of Americans were left jobless.
  In the election, Democrats and Congress paid a steep price for this 
cruel inaction, with voters giving House Republicans nearly two-thirds 
of the seats needed to take back the majority.
  I thank President Trump for signing bipartisan legislation, even with 
its flaws, that included several separate bills that hitched a ride on 
the annual funding bill for the government, including COVID relief, a 
first-ever ban on surprise medical bills, and $328 billion in urgent 
tax relief for families and local businesses.
  Madam Speaker, I recognize that today's CASH Act will pass with 
bipartisan support, Republicans and Democrats alike, and I respect the 
decision of each Member of Congress. But for me, I worry that this 
whopping $463 billion won't do what is needed: stimulate the economy or 
get the jobless back to work.
  At this point in the recovery, the fact is, it is hard to stimulate a 
Main Street that is locked down by local politicians.
  This won't help local restaurants get their workers permanently back 
or hospitality and convention industries rehire their workers for the 
long term, and it won't help get energy workers back on the job.
  Will this stimulate our local economies? Not a lot.
  What we know is that much of this extra $1,600 will go to pay down 
credit card debt or savings or even make new purchases online at 
Walmart, Best Buy, or Amazon.
  So, rather than merely sending checks to credit card companies, this 
half-trillion dollars could more than double the number of small 
businesses and midsize businesses getting PPP forgivable loans to hire 
their workers and stay alive through the recovery. It could make sure 
airline workers have secure jobs for more than just a few months and do 
more to replenish frontline healthcare workers.

  Madam Speaker, we should be focused on the families that are hurting 
most, none more than the 8 million Americans who lost their jobs due to 
COVID. Our top priority, in addition to defeating the virus, is to get 
them back to work. So far, Congress has already approved more than 
$20,800 directly to a family of four with one parent out of

[[Page H9155]]

work. That is on top of their State unemployment benefits.
  Madam Speaker, if we want to do even more for the jobless, this same 
huge amount of money today could give every unemployed worker from 
COVID and their employer a $50,000 incentive to return to work. With 
this huge amount of money, you could even give the bottom 90 percent of 
workers in America an income-tax-free year for 2021, a full year where 
you go to work each day for yourself rather than for Washington.
  Can you imagine what a no-tax 2021 would do for low-and middle-income 
families, workers, and the local economy?
  Or we can simply hold this money back, not hastily spend another 
half-trillion dollars we don't have, while we assess the impact 
vaccinations are having on consumer confidence and the unlocking of the 
economy.
  Madam Speaker, there are a lot of ways to spend money, if that is the 
goal. But in my view, let's be smart about it. Let's target assistance 
to those who need it most. The Committee on Ways and Means should be 
the place to explore and analyze these options, not just have a bill 
that spends over $400 billion hastily dropped on us at the last minute.
  I know, working together, Republicans and Democrats, we can do better 
to help people get back to work and truly help this recovery.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership on 
this and for recognizing me.
  Madam Speaker, I stand in strong support of this legislation. The 
American people are struggling. We hear from them every single day, and 
they need this additional relief now. The recent coronavirus relief 
bill passed by Congress obviously is long overdue. The House wanted to 
pass relief last May, but Republicans refused. Then, the pandemic has 
only gotten worse, and the pain has been worse for so many families and 
small businesses.
  While the relief bill does supply short-term relief, it was 
regrettable to see President Trump delay signing this legislation. That 
decision, that delay, had consequences. It hurt families with greater 
uncertainty and, in some cases, caused people to lapse their benefits.
  I did support the legislation that included the $600 stimulus checks 
because that was all we could get the other side to agree to. But it is 
obviously not enough. That is why I support this legislation, $2,000 in 
direct payments for Americans who are struggling.
  I, along with my Democratic colleagues, have pushed for these higher 
payments for some time, and now, President Trump agrees. The leader of 
the Republican Party stands in support of this effort.
  These $2,000 payments, every Member of Congress should support them. 
This would make a difference in the lives of Americans who are facing 
the greatest uncertainty that they have experienced, for many of them, 
in their lifetimes, putting money in their hands, allowing them to pay 
their bills, which will help them support those small businesses. 
Probably more importantly, it can give them some of the financial 
support they need in order to make the decisions that they have to make 
to protect their families.
  President Trump changed his mind and supports this legislation. That 
is why we acted. We would have included much larger payments in the 
legislation had he spoken up sooner, but it is never too late to do the 
right thing.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentleman.
  Mr. KILDEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
  This is a moment we can all come together, Democrats and Republicans, 
including the President of the United States, and do something big and 
bold that would help American families get through this most difficult 
time.
  Madam Speaker, I commend the chairman for his work in moving quickly 
and putting this legislation together. I commend those on the other 
side who will stand with us today and support this.
  It is my hope that this legislation will quickly go over to the 
Senate. They will get the message and send this legislation on to the 
President, wherever he may be. He will sign the bill, and we can get 
this help to the American people.

                              {time}  1615

  Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Schrader).
  Mr. SCHRADER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak against the CASH 
Act. This is an ineffective and poorly targeted approach to aiding 
Americans in distress. It is clearly a last-minute political maneuver 
by the President and extremists on both sides of the political spectrum 
who have been largely absent during months of very hard negotiations. 
They have chosen to tweet their opinions instead of coming to the table 
to get aid in the hands of Americans and small businesses who need it 
most.
  Over the last 6 months, and especially in the last few weeks as the 
holidays loomed and COVID cases skyrocketed, the Problem Solvers Caucus 
worked with Senators on both sides of the aisle and House and Senate 
leadership to craft legislation that includes vetted programs like the 
PPP and unemployment compensation that have been improved upon since 
the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.
  I feel for all of those who are suffering today due to financial 
hardship and look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues on a 
bipartisan, bicameral basis to continue to find ways to help provide 
relief.
  People who are making six-figure incomes who have not been impacted 
by COVID-19 do not need checks. We have had 9 months to fix this 
program to get aid to the people who need it most. That has not 
happened. Let's reverse course and target those in need.
  Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Suozzi), who did a great job on the surprise billing 
legislation that passed in the COVID Act.
  Mr. SUOZZI. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Chairman for his leadership on 
the CASH Act and also, as he mentioned, on the Ban Surprise Billing 
Act. It is really amazing the relief we are going to be giving to 
consumers this year on a bipartisan basis with his leadership. We are 
going to be making people's lives a lot better. So I thank him so much 
for the work he has done on both the CASH Act and on the work to 
address surprise billing.
  Madam Speaker, the effects of this pandemic have been cruelly uneven. 
Some remain unscathed, working remotely and still healthy, while 
millions of others are awash in misery, unable to return to work or pay 
their bills, even funeral bills for lost loved ones.
  While the stock market has hit a new record today, there are still 
bodies stored in refrigerator trucks. While online retail and grocery 
stores are booming, airline, Broadway, and mom-and-pop store employees 
have been laid off, and life savings invested in small businesses have 
been wiped out.
  The President's cynical ploy to threaten the COVID relief package to 
obscure his dark-of-night pardons has now resulted in a fighter's 
chance that we can pass this $2,000 stimulus check legislation if we 
can only get Mitch McConnell to finally show some empathy.
  Let's pass this bill, and then let's immediately work to send the 
billions necessary to save our State and local governments before they 
fire police officers, teachers, and frontline workers, which will only 
result in more unemployment checks from us and financial ruin for those 
families and the communities they serve.
  Let's rebuild our infrastructure and put Americans back to work. 
Let's build back better. We can do this if we remember why we are here 
and we, both Democrats and Republicans, recognize that outside of this 
Beltway fantasyland, millions of Americans are desperately pleading for 
our help.
  Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).
  Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, as I look around the room here, it looks 
like I am in the U.S. Congress. I mean, I see the American flag there; 
George Washington is over there; it says ``In God We Trust.'' But 
looking at this bill

[[Page H9156]]

today, it makes me feel like we are in the Parliament of Afghanistan, 
Burundi, Yemen, or Bolivia.
  Do we really think the way to improve the quality of life for 
Americans is to just print more money from the Fed? If you look around, 
we are going to be printing another $400 billion.
  Has anybody looked lately at what is going on with the monetary 
supply? M1 up 50 percent; M2 up 20 percent.
  Don't people realize that just printing more is not a way to make our 
citizens wealthier; it is just a way to debase the currency?
  The way for a wealthy country is to work hard through frugality and 
through improving one's skills, not by having the Fed print money.
  Last time, when we sent out $1,200 checks, I stopped by my local 
Walmart, and the people in charge of the electronics section said they 
had never seen such sales in their life.
  Is that really going to improve the lot of Americans, to go over and 
buy some more electronic junk from China? Apparently so.
  And let's not forget when we look at inflation. We have inflation 
right now. Twice, in the recent past, we have changed the definition on 
what inflation is.
  So we do have inflation; it is just that we keep changing the 
definition to mask it. That is why the market is up. The market is up 
because we really do have inflation.
  We are in the U.S. Congress. We should not think the way to 
prosperity is just printing money. We should act like we are the United 
States. That is why, for my whole life, other countries like to invest 
in the dollar. They respect the value of the dollar more than the 
national currencies of Burundi, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Bolivia. Those 
are four poor countries; that is why I picked them out.
  So I encourage Senator McConnell to hold the line here, to act 
responsibly.
  Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, might I remind the gentleman that this is 
not about creating a path to prosperity. This is about creating a path 
to liquidity, which subsequently creates a path to demand for people at 
the lower end of the economic spectrum, 20 million of whom are not 
working at the moment through no fault of their own.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Beyer), an excellent member of the Ways and Means Committee.
  Mr. BEYER. Madam Speaker, I rise to support the CASH Act, which will 
send $2,000 checks to the American people.
  I want to thank Chairman Neal for coming together very quickly to 
create this act in a thoughtful way.
  The American people are hurting this holiday season, and they need 
our help. Our bill would increase those payments to $2,000, which would 
also include adult dependents and students.
  We realize that $600 is not enough for people facing eviction and 
hunger. For many, this will just pay a past-due rental bill for July.
  It is good and important that we are sending support to small 
businesses, strong unemployment aid, nutrition and rental assistance, 
but this relief is coming 7 months later than it should have. It is 
vital that Congress not penny-pinch the American people now.
  This CASH bill is bipartisan, and if Senator Mitch McConnell would 
put it on the Senate floor, it would be bicameral.
  Let me push back, too, that this is too much.
  We have 40 million Americans who work full-time and made less than 
$18,000 last year. With the minimum wage at $7.25, there isn't a single 
two-bedroom apartment you can rent in a county in America for that 
money. There are tens of millions without healthcare.
  My family sells new cars and used cars. I have watched the debt 
burden of so many people just rise and rise and rise over the years.
  Is there a better way? You know, my Republican friends hate it when 
so-called Big Government decides what we need. The best way to let 
people manage their family is to put the money in their hands, give 
them that American freedom.
  Somehow, we can print money to do a $4 trillion tax cut over 20 
years, but we can't print enough money to help the American people.
  This is a good bill. I salute Chairman Richard Neal, and I hope every 
Democrat and every Republican will vote for it.
  Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McClintock).
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Speaker, let's get this straight. The small 
shopkeeper who has lost their entire savings because of the lockdowns 
will get the same $2,000 grant as the government bureaucrat who has 
been enjoying a steady paycheck at home for the past 10 months.
  This money is wholly inadequate for those who have been harmed by the 
lockdowns and wholly unnecessary for those who have not.
  This free money doesn't come from Heaven. It comes from the future 
earnings of those who will be struggling to get back on their feet, 
making the post-lockdown recovery more difficult and prolonged.
  Much of the burden of this debt will fall on the young, who have 
already borne the brunt of these lockdowns. It is, in a real sense, a 
massive wealth transfer from the future to the present, from the young 
to the old, and from those who have been hurt by the lockdowns to those 
who have not.
  There is only one way to end the suffering caused by these lockdowns, 
and that is to end them.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas 
(Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman and the chairman 
of the Ways and Means Committee for his distinguished leadership.
  I thank our Speaker for her persistent leadership.
  I thank all of the Democratic Members and Republican Members who 
understand what this legislation is.
  It is a survival cash payment for Americans making under a certain 
amount, which means they are on the survival pathway.
  Maybe they haven't spoken to the constituents of, I believe, probably 
90 percent of the Members of this Congress who have said they are on 
the edge and they are about to go over. They can't pay their rent or 
buy food. They are in food distribution lines. Before I came here 
Sunday, I was at a church, and we were giving out food.
  I asked during the spring for $3,000. I was willing to go for $600 so 
that desperate Americans could get enough to survive.
  Mr. Speaker, I am supporting this. I ask my friends and colleagues on 
both sides of the aisle to recognize that, when you are privileged to 
stand in a place like this where the constitutional Fathers gave us the 
opportunity to lead this government, stand for the American people.
  I support the CASH Act because it is survival for Americans.
  Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary, 
on Homeland Security, and on the Budget, I rise in strong support of 
the CASH Act, a bill to provide $2,000 in direct payments to 
individuals.
  It was welcomed news that the President signed the COVID-19 relief 
bill that also includes the Omnibus Appropriations for Fiscal Year (FY) 
2021.
  This bill:
  Accelerates vaccine distribution and crushes the coronavirus;
  Provides rent, food, unemployment, and direct payment to put money in 
the Pockets of the American People through: direct payments worth up to 
$600 per adult or child;
  Averts the sudden expiration of Unemployment Insurance benefits for 
millions and added a $300 per week UI enhancement for Americans out of 
work;
  Delivers key tax benefits for Struggling Families--through changes to 
the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit that help ensure 
that families who faced unemployment or reduced wages during the 
pandemic are able to receive a strong tax credit based on their 2019 
income;
  Provides strong support for Small Businesses by providing: $284 
billion for first and second forgivable PPP loans, $15 billion in 
dedicated funding for live venues, independent movie theaters, and 
cultural institutions, and $20 billion for targeted EIDL Grants which 
are critical to many smaller businesses on Main Street;
  Funds Education, Child Care & Students by providing: $82 billion in 
funding for colleges and schools, and $10 billion for childcare 
assistance to help get parents back to work and keep childcare 
providers open;
  Provides Pell Grant expansion to reach 500,000 new recipients, 
ensuring more than 1.5 million students will now receive the maximum 
benefit; and

[[Page H9157]]

  Supports the Global Fight Against COVID--with an additional $3.36 
billion for a total of $4 billion for GAVI, the international vaccine 
alliance, recognizing that we are not truly safe until the whole world 
is safe from the coronavirus.
  I will vote for the CASH Act because it increases direct payments to 
individuals from a $600 direct payment to $2000, which will help 
families struggling with the economic impacts of COVID-19.
  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that as 
of December 23, 2020, that 18,170,062 cases of COVID-19 resulting in 
321,734 deaths had been reported in the United States.
  The new year will mark a terrible milestone for the United States--
the last time we saw death like this in our nation was during the 1918 
Flu Pandemic, which recorded a total of 675,000 deaths in the United 
States.
  What the costs will be to our nation for the over three-hundred 
thousand deaths have yet to be fully calculated.
  It is a tragedy that too many households who have lost a member to 
COVID-19 are struggling to accept these deaths, but it is also the 
friends, co-workers, business owners, professionals, students, 
teachers, wives, husbands, brothers, sisters, aunts, cousins, and 
grandparents who also are feeling these losses because someone that 
mattered to them is no longer here.
  Each of these lives could have had dozens of connections with other 
people who were not able to be with them during their final moments on 
this earth who are lost to us because we too often only consider the 
immediate household.
  My deepest concerns are for the medical professionals who are seeing 
more death than soldiers who have fought on battlefields in defense of 
our nation since World War II.
  Death every day for medical professionals who pride themselves on 
robbing death by keeping the very ill or critically injured alive are 
themselves wounded by each loss in ways that we cannot understand.
  Too many of our medical professionals are losing that battle with 
death as they attempt to treat extremely ill COVID-19 patients because 
they do not have access to: sufficient amounts of essential therapies, 
or the special trained staff to administer interventions that could 
save lives.
  Medical people also have not had the universal support of political 
leaders who are willing to promote wearing of face coverings, social 
distancing, and handwashing to limit the spread of severe acute 
respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) the infection that 
causes COVID-19.
  There is a hidden cost to the fool-hearty disregard for the 
seriousness of this moment in American history.
  My concerns are for the economic impact and the long-term damage to 
our nation's health care delivery system.
  Today we will focus on the economic injuries caused by COVID-19, and 
I look forward to working with my colleagues on addressing the systemic 
long-term issues caused by unequal access to the health care.
  Small businesses and working men and women of this great nation are 
the life blood of the economy, and who pay the lion share of federal 
taxes, now find themselves, through no fault of their own, in need of 
assistance in the form of direct payments that will provide a bridge to 
them and to the economy for the next few weeks so that the next 
Administration will have time to assess and craft the relief package 
needed to get the nation over the last hurdles of the pandemic's 
economic impact.
  Since the 1980s, corporate income tax revenues have become a smaller 
share of overall tax revenues paid to the federal government.
  In 2017, President Trump signed into law P.L. 115-97, which 
substantially and permanently changed the U.S. federal tax system for 
the wealthy and large corporations.
  Most of the changes to the individual income tax system in P.L. 115-
97 for those less well off are temporary and scheduled to expire at the 
end of 2025, after which the rates for these individuals will return to 
what it was for 2017.
  In contrast, many of the tax cuts made in P.L. 115-97 affecting 
corporations and wealthy individuals are permanent, in other words they 
will keep the drastic cut in corporate taxes.
  The facts are that working individuals and small businesses support 
the U.S. government's federal tax system.
  The largest source of revenue to the federal government is the 
individual income tax, which in 2019, generated $1.7 trillion.
  The second-largest source of federal revenue is payroll taxes, which 
is collected by employers and is often paid quarterly.
  In FY2019, payroll taxes generated $1.2 trillion in federal revenue 
or thirty-six percent of the total revenue for the federal government.
  The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that federal income 
tax revenues in FY2020 will be $1.5 trillion, and payroll tax revenue 
will be $1.3 trillion.
  In FY2020, it is projected that about 47 percent of federal revenue 
will be generated through the individual income tax.
  In FY2019, corporate tax receipts were only $230 billion, or nearly 7 
percent of federal revenue, and in FY2020, corporate tax receipts are 
expected to be $151 billion, less than 5 percent of federal revenue.
  Receipts from other sources are also projected to increase in FY2020 
to $298 billion, from $271 billion in FY2019, which will result in 9 
percent of total revenue up from 8 percent the previous year.
  Obligated social insurance federal program payments for Social 
Security and Medicare are paid through payroll taxes and are expected 
to generate an additional estimated $1.3 trillion, or 35 percent of 
revenue in FY2020.
  The $2,000 in payments to individuals will be used to pay bills, 
rent, utilities, car notes, or purchase needed items like winter coats, 
and other essentials, which will translate into income for small 
businesses.
  All of this spending will generate local, state, and federal tax 
revenue as it fuels consumption and the provision of services that are 
still available through the economy.
  Overtime basic Keynesian economics has proven itself to be a reliable 
economic model and has repeatedly proven that money turning over in the 
economy makes more money.
  There is a reason why it is important to stimulate the economy during 
a deadly unchecked pandemic, the chief of which is its depression of 
the national and global economies resulting in a downturn creating 
recession conditions.
  We know the end of the COVID-19 pandemic's vice on the economy is 
insight with the delivery of a vaccine, but we are not there yet--we 
must help the American people, and most importantly our small 
businesses, endure until we reach seventy percent herd immunity.
  The use of direct payments is the Keynesian solution that is winning 
the day across the globe for countries able to support their economies 
in this way.
  Payments to individuals allow them and not the government to make 
spending decisions on their household's essential life-sustaining needs 
such as paying for housing, utility bills, food, and clothing which 
allows money they spend to circulate through the economy like blood 
throughout the body.
  People in this nation can and should be trusted to make decisions 
regarding how they spend the funds provided by the stimulus because 
they know their needs.
  Consumers will spend money with small businesses who should have the 
freedom to pay their workers and suppliers, workers and suppliers will 
be free to buy goods from other businesses, and those businesses will 
pay their workers and suppliers, and so on.
  In this way, the $2,000 in spending by each individual is actually 
spent more than once as the effect of each dollar spent creates more 
spending.
  This is called the expenditure multiplier effect: an initial increase 
in spending, cycles repeatedly through the economy, and has a larger 
impact than the initial $2,000 amount spent.
  The economy needs to be inoculated against recession, which is what 
the $2,000 in individual payments will do, and it will need a booster 
in about thirty to sixty days.
  If the overwhelming majority of those who will receive the $2,000 
were planning to put it in a bank account and not spend it, then this 
bill would not be needed because the basic needs of the people would be 
satisfied, but we know this is not the case.
  No one is benefiting from the COVID-19 economy.
  The U.S. poverty rate has grown at a historic rate over the past five 
months, with 7.8 million Americans falling into poverty after the 
expanded $600 a week in unemployment assistance expired at the end of 
July.
  This represents the greatest increase since the government began 
tracking poverty sixty years ago.
  In the city of Houston, nine key service sectors accounted for 
seventy percent of all jobs lost which totaled 1,343,600.
  Houston workers lost jobs in the following areas:
  Healthcare 391,000; retail 303,600; food service 267,000; finance 
166,000; private education 63,400; arts and entertainment 37,400; 
accommodations 28,700; air transportation 20,200; and other services 
115,800.
  In addition to these positions, jobs were also lost in other areas, 
the largest of which was construction which shut down 30,700 jobs; 
professional and business services followed, with 25,300 jobs lost, 
although 13,900 were in temporary and provisional jobs in employment 
services; upstream oil lost 12,300 in March/April; and non-oil 
manufacturing lost 7,700 jobs.
  Americans out of work due to COVID-19 have generated 86 million 
jobless claims, with

[[Page H9158]]

new claims being filed in recent weeks topping 800,000.
  Millions of Americans who lost their jobs during the pandemic have 
fallen thousands of dollars behind on rent and utility bills, a clear 
warning sign that people are running out of money for basic needs.
  If this is not enough evidence of what is happening, look at the 
miles of vehicles lined up outside of food distribution centers for 
assistance; we have all seen this occurring in each of our states.
  Moody's Analytics warned in November 2020 that 9 million renters said 
they were behind on rent, according to a Census Bureau survey.
  The Bureau of the Census reports that twenty-one percent of all 
renters are behind on their rent, of which twenty-nine percent of Black 
families and seventeen percent of Hispanic households are behind on 
theirs.
  The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia's analysis of persons who 
were employed prior to the pandemic reports that 1.3 million of these 
households are now an average of $5,400 in debt on rent and utilities, 
after those people had lost jobs and their family's income dropped.
  The new COVID-19 stimulus bill, already agreed to by both the House 
and Senate and signed by President Trump, restores unemployment 
assistance, but cuts that assistance from $600 a week to $300 a week 
without consideration for the facts on the ground for the millions of 
Americans who remain out of work due to COVID-19 public health policy, 
and have been without sufficient income since August 1, 2020.
  In fact, the decision about a $600 a week in addition to unemployment 
benefits is a good idea for those in labor markets with high costs of 
living like New York and Washington, D.C., but may have far outstripped 
the going rate for labor and the actual cost of living where the 
spending power of $600 exceeded market costs for living expenses.
  The Congress may need to revisit models for future programs of this 
type and provide a formula that is based on the actual spending power 
of funds provided so the ability of meeting the cost-of-living needs 
can be more in line with the intent of the funds provided.
  This may mean that, depending on where someone lived at the time a 
disaster of this nature was declared, the amount they would qualify for 
receiving may be different depending on the spending power of a dollar 
where they live.
  Today, we have twenty million Americans who are receiving some kind 
of unemployment aid, and about 12 million of the unemployed stopped 
receiving their benefits.
  The nation is on the cusp of a recession that is in danger of 
becoming a double-dip event that would plummet the economy into a 
precarious economic state that will take much more than a $2,000 
payment to each individual to overcome.
  For all these reasons, I urge all Members to join me in voting for 
the CASH Act to increase individual payments from $600 to $2,000.
  Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would point out to my colleague that nothing in this 
bill helps anyone get back to work: not a dime to the 8 million people 
who are left unemployed because of COVID, not a dime to help our small 
and medium-sized businesses, not a dime for Main Street.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Green).
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, at some point on the infinite 
continuum that we call time, we will all have to account for our time.
  We are all going to have to answer the question: Where were you when 
a pandemic was gripping the land? What did you do when you had the 
opportunity to put money in the pockets of people who needed it? Where 
was your courage when you had the chance to cast a vote to make a 
difference in the lives of people?
  I say to you, my dear friends, this is the time for us to take a 
stand for the American people. Let's vote ``yes'' to put money in their 
pockets, because we caused them to stay home as a result of the 
pandemic. The government is for this reason. This is why the government 
exists: to take care of people.
  Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, let me remind the Members of this Chamber why we are 
here today.
  The CARES Act passed this House with, I think, five dissenters in the 
entire Chamber. That was months and months ago. People exhausted the 
$1,200 that we allocated, based upon our tax system. And even the 
difficulty we had in trying to find adequate identification for those 
in America, as joint filers, making under $24,000 a year, single filers 
making under $12,000 a year.
  Who can live on $12,000 a year? That is $1,000 a month.
  People have exhausted that benefit. They have tried earnestly and 
seriously to overcome these obstacles that were created for them, not 
because of anything they did. We are not here because of malfeasance, 
speculation that derailed Wall Street in 2008, or corruption. We are 
here because of an international pandemic, and members of the American 
family at the lower end of the economic spectrum are hurting.
  When we sought advice on putting together the CARES Act, the Speaker 
and myself, in particular, in those very earnest days with Secretary 
Mnuchin, sought the advice of the best economists--former Treasury 
Secretaries, members of the Federal Reserve Board, people who do this 
every single day--and they all said you need to act with speed and 
determination, speed to get that money into the hands of the people who 
will actually spend it.
  And that is precisely what we did. We got it to people at the lower 
end of the economic spectrum.

                              {time}  1630

  As we proceed now to the new year, these people need another infusion 
of cash. I am going to go back to this point that I think is something 
that we need to remember. Three years ago, this House, over the 
objection of myself and many others, passed a tax cut that clearly 
benefited the people at the very top of the economic spectrum, the top 
1 percent, in particular--dividends, buybacks, a top cut in the 
corporate rate from 36 percent to 21 percent, and the top rate on the 
individual side from 39 percent to 37 percent.
  And we can't find it in our hearts in this holiday season, again, 
based upon the Charles Dickens' parable of ``A Christmas Carol,'' to 
provide $2,000 worth of assistance to our brothers and sisters at the 
bottom end of economic income? This Chamber is better than that.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, you can say a lot about this Congress, but you cannot 
say we have not worked together and appropriated remarkable funding to 
help families defeat this COVID, to get back on their feet, and to save 
small businesses.
  A good example is that, so far, Congress, both parties, has already 
approved more than $20,800 in direct cash payments to a family of four 
with one parent out of work. That is on top of an estimated $18,000 of 
State unemployment benefits, a little less than $40,000 to help working 
families survive this COVID pandemic.
  But, today, we do nothing in this bill to help 8 million Americans 
who lost their jobs due to COVID. We could double the amount of money 
that goes to small businesses or midsize businesses so they can rehire 
the workers and keep them on the payroll to try to survive and ride 
this out. We don't know yet what the vaccinations will do to consumer 
confidence or to the lockdowns.
  Again, I expect a number of Republicans to support this bill. In my 
view, we would be wiser to assess the impact of the vaccinations in the 
recovery going forward so that we can target relief to Main Street, to 
helping get people back to work, and to truly stimulating our local 
economy. That is where we address the harm that has been done by COVID.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I am glad the ranking member reminded us of 
what we were able to accomplish together in the CARES Act, and I think 
that is what we are asking here again this evening.
  Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker of the House.
  Ms. PELOSI. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I 
thank him for his masterful work in not only bringing this legislation 
to the floor but working in a bipartisan

[[Page H9159]]

way to have so many important initiatives in the COVID and the omnibus 
bill that the President happily, for us, signed last evening. I thank 
him for his initiatives that are job-creating, that stimulate the 
economy and help meet the needs of the American people.
  Madam Speaker, I am interested in the comments made by Mr. Brady 
because he said we could be putting more money into small business, and 
we do indeed in the COVID package, around $300 billion. I think it is 
important to note, Madam Speaker, that that brings it to almost about a 
trillion dollars since March 27 or 28, when the President signed the 
CARES Act, about $950 billion for small business, nearly a trillion 
dollars. Very important.
  Small business is the heart of our economy. What could be more 
optimistic for anyone to do but to follow their dreams, start a small 
business, create jobs, create wealth, create capital. It is so 
important. We see the importance of that to the tune of about a 
trillion dollars, just under a trillion dollars, in these past several 
months.
  Madam Speaker, if you want to talk about job creation, I hope the 
gentleman will join us when we go forward to do State and local, our 
healthcare workers, honoring our heroes. They are at risk of losing 
their jobs. While they risk their lives to save lives, they may lose 
their jobs, and over a million of them have.
  We are talking about healthcare workers. We are talking about police 
and fire, our first responders. We are talking about transportation, 
sanitation, food workers. We are talking about our teachers, our 
teachers, our teachers, the custodians of our children for a large part 
of their day.
  They are at risk of losing their jobs because of the failure of the 
Republican side of the aisle to support funds for State and local 
government to honor our heroes. We want to honor them. While we cheer 
them, we applaud them, let's give them pay, and let's let them have job 
security. Let's give them PPE, the equipment that they need to do their 
job.
  If we want to talk about saving jobs or growing jobs for the purpose 
that the distinguished gentleman from Texas mentioned, how are we going 
to focus on the distribution and the administration of the vaccine? 
Where do you think that happens but in city, county, and State 
hospitals, in large measure, by healthcare workers in those places, 
wherever it is distributed on an individual basis? They are the heart 
of the matter.
  That is why we need to go forward with another bill that invests in 
our State and local governments, not to talk about government, but to 
talk about services, healthcare services, education, transportation, 
making our lives possible, making our very existence possible by what 
they do. Without them, how do we function?
  Again, let's create jobs, let's save jobs, let's grow jobs by 
administering this vaccine as fairly and as equitably as possible, and 
free to everyone in our country, because unless all of us are 
protected, none of us are protected.
  This $2,000, which I thank you for bringing it to the floor on 
Christmas Eve, was roundly rejected by Republicans. We asked for 
unanimous consent. This could already exist as a law if that had 
happened, but it didn't. So, now, today, we have another chance.

  Some of the Republicans said: Oh, if they really wanted that, they 
would have called for a vote that day.
  That wasn't true. It is important to note that was a pro forma 
session, and you had to have the consent of the Republicans to bring 
the bill to the floor. They withheld their consent.
  So, here we are today, in a legislative day where we just act with 
the majority to bring the legislation to the floor.
  Madam Speaker, I hope it will enjoy strong bipartisan support. The 
President of the United States has put this forth as something that he 
wants to see, in part of his signing the legislation yesterday. I hope 
that that view will be shared by the Republicans in the Senate because 
we will pass this bill today, either under suspension or under a rule, 
where it just requires a majority vote.
  Under suspension, a two-thirds vote requires a large number of 
Republican votes, which I hope we will have because I do think that the 
American people would love to see that unity on their behalf.
  We are a consumer economy. Putting money into the hands of the 
American people is a boost to our economy. This isn't a big stimulus 
package. The COVID bill is an emergency supplemental. But this piece 
will make it something very important to growing and sustaining our 
economy.
  Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for the work that your committee 
did, Brandon and the others, for putting in the dependent clause. 
Otherwise, 16 years and under would get the direct payment. But, I 
mean, as a mother of five and grandmother of nine, I know that children 
are dependent after 16 years of age, especially if they are still in 
school. There are others who are dependent because of one thing or 
another, some physical challenges that they may have in life. Who knows 
what goes on in a family?
  Nonetheless, if they are dependent, they will be receiving a direct 
payment, another important boost for American working families, another 
important boost for our economy as we go forward.
  So I, again, thank the chairman for his work. It is a simple vote. 
Our goals have been to crush the virus, honor our heroes who help us 
crush the virus, and put money in the pockets of the American people. 
Today, we will be doing that right now.
  Legislation will be a lifeline for millions of Americans. It improves 
on the previously passed relief bill by including dependents, ensuring 
that families with children in college, adults living with 
disabilities, or elderly family members can also receive relief.
  The Republicans have a choice. The Republicans have a choice: vote 
for this legislation or vote to deny the American people the bigger 
paychecks they need. To reject this would be a denial of the economic 
challenges that people are facing, and it would deny them, again, the 
relief they need.
  Madam Speaker, I urge a strong bipartisan vote for the aptly named 
CASH Act.
  Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Jackson Lee). The gentleman from Texas 
has 9 minutes remaining. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 3\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, first, let me congratulate the chairman of the Ways 
and Means Committee, Mr. Neal, for working so closely together on our 
bipartisan priorities.
  Ending surprise medical bills when you go to the ER or you have a 
scheduled medical procedure, ensuring, starting at the end of the next 
year, for the first time, when you go to that doctor's procedure, you 
will have a true and honest bill in advance of that. It will be so 
crucial for so many patients.
  Madam Speaker, I also thank the chairman for working so closely in a 
bipartisan way on the COVID tax relief provisions in the first reforms 
of our temporary tax provisions in 5 years. I applaud Chairman Neal for 
his work, and I have enjoyed working with him.
  The previous speaker talked about essential workers, our 
firefighters, our healthcare workers, others who have done such an 
amazing job. We had an opportunity earlier this year to help them. 
President Trump, in his executive order, proposed a payroll tax holiday 
for nearly 5 months for these workers. That would have meant, for those 
essential workers, that firefighter, that hospital worker, that nurse, 
that a family of four would have kept an extra $5,000 in their paycheck 
throughout the holidays.
  If we really wanted to help essential workers, our Democrat friends 
would not have blocked that payroll tax holiday and would have adopted 
our bill to make sure that those payroll taxes were forgiven.

                              {time}  1645

  As for State and local governments, they, too--even though I disagree 
with many of the decisions--deserve our thanks. And, thankfully, 
because this was the most rapid labor market recovery following a 
crisis in history and we recovered more than half the jobs we have 
lost, State and local revenues this year are almost even, down a mere 
less than 1 percent.
  Thank goodness Congress came together in the CARES Act to provide 
more than $150 billion to those State

[[Page H9160]]

and local governments to be able to address these needs and continue to 
function.
  I will tell you, too, that--again, I speak only for myself--the best 
way to help struggling families is to get them back to work. The best 
way to save our Main Street is to give our small and medium-sized 
businesses more help than we have. This bill does neither.
  I don't believe--I think it is correct when the earlier speaker said 
this is not a stimulus; it is not. And it does nothing to help get 
people back to work.
  I worry that, as we spend another nearly half a trillion dollars so 
hastily, we are not targeting this help to the very Americans who are 
struggling the most and need that help.
  I will also point out that, as I said earlier, Congress has come 
together to provide a family of four with one unemployed parent, now, 
just a little short of $40,000 of Federal money in their traditional 
State unemployment because we knew they were struggling. Now is the 
time to get them back to work. That is my personal objection to this 
bill.
  I urge Congress to pause for a moment to assess the vaccinations over 
the next few months or year to determine where next we need to weigh 
in, if at all, on this recovery as we continue to work together to 
defeat this virus.
  Madam Speaker, I am honored to be here today, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself 
the balance of my time.
  I acknowledge the good efforts of Ranking Member Brady on the energy 
front in the tax package, as well. It is a series of compromised 
measures. He did a terrific job, I think it is fair to say, on surprise 
billing, and not to mention USMCA. Those were very substantial 
accomplishments that the Ways and Means Committee led on in the 116th 
Congress.
  Mr. Brady, as he was closing, mentioned that this measure he did not 
want to see treated as stimulus, and he is right; this is not about 
stimulus.
  This is about stability.
  This is about building a bridge for those people who are really 
hurting as we turn the page on this year.
  This is about those who are wondering how they are going to make the 
next rental payment, sustenance for the American family, how they might 
repair that automobile that sits in the garage idle because they 
couldn't afford it.
  That is what this is really about this evening.
  I started with Charles Dickens and ``A Christmas Carol'' and the 
lessons of Jacob Marley, but let me conclude with a very simple 
description in ``The Epic of America.''
  When asked what it was that set America apart from the rest of the 
world, it was suggested it was a habit of the heart, a kindness and a 
decency and a goodness. And let me close the debate on that basis and 
urge passage of the CASH Act and $2,000 for the American people.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 9051.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 
965, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this motion 
will be postponed.

                          ____________________