[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 185 (Thursday, October 21, 2021)]
[House]
[Pages H5787-H5789]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BUILD BACK BETTER ACT WILL PERMANENTLY CHANGE AMERICA
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 4, 2021, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Grothman) for 30 minutes.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to spend some time addressing
the Chair and America on the American Rescue Plan or, actually, on the
Build Back Better Act, which is kind of a follow-up on the American
Rescue Plan.
We know the result of that original big-spending, government-printing
act was a big increase in inflation in the United States, apparent to
one and all. This is a follow-up bill to that, which will further
require the Federal Reserve to print more money, driving up the cost of
gas, of food, of housing everywhere we look.
But I am not going to address just the cost of this bill tonight. I
am going to address the way I believe it will permanently change
America and the vision the Democratic Party apparently has for America
in the future.
In this bill, we are adding 87,000 IRS agents. For quite a while,
when I would give talks about this bill, I would talk about 8,700
because when my staff told me it was 87,000, I felt I had to correct
them. Nobody would want to add 87,000 IRS agents. But I stand
corrected. I was wrong.
In this bill, we are adding 87,000 IRS agents, enough to fill up a
massive American football stadium. Being from Wisconsin, I think of
Camp Randall Stadium, where the University of Wisconsin plays. I think
of Lambeau Field, where the Packers play. Somebody wants to hire that
many IRS agents.
It is not in the bill, but it is in conjunction with a proposal I
think the Biden administration has, to monitor every $600 transfer of
funds. What type of country would have this many IRS agents and want to
know if you spend $600 on who knows what--giving to the politically
incorrect church; giving to a politically incorrect nonprofit; giving
money to a fringe, eccentric sibling; whatever.
It sounds like something more you would think of in East Germany when
East Germany was around rather than the United States. But that is
apparently the vision of the party that put together the Build Back
Better Act.
As was just mentioned in this bill, we are adding money for more low-
income apartments. Now, that sounds good. President Biden also recently
increased the food stamp allowance.
There is an author of mine that I suggest Americans read by the name
of Theodore Dalrymple, an English author who was a doctor dealing both
with English prisons and English slums.
He talked about the empty lives that people who live what I will
refer to as the welfare lifestyle that England had. He attributed that
empty life to the fact that in England--and maybe they backed off this
by now, but at least England 15 years ago, no matter how irresponsible
you were, you always got a free apartment; you always got free food;
and you always got free medical care. In other words, there was no
responsibility when you got up in the morning to really accomplish
anything because you would always be able to exist.
We are close to that right now, but I am afraid the majority party
wants to go all the way there when I look at this proposal. I hope the
majority party stops and thinks in addition to the cost, more
importantly, psychologically what will it do to the people of America
if, when you graduate from high school or don't graduate from high
school, if you want to, particularly if you have a child, you can live
a lifestyle in which you can be completely irresponsible. You will
always be able to eat and always be able to have a nice air-
conditioned, heated apartment, which will probably have more square
feet per person than the average housing in Europe, much less around
the world.
This will, again, change America for the worse. Psychologically, it
will give people nothing to live for. By the way, since it is usually
targeted at people with children, it also will create a sad situation
we have already created in this country in which men will have less
responsibility for taking care of their children.
When you have no other responsibilities in life, it can lead to,
first, an empty, depressed life; and, secondly, it can lead to--what?--
idle hands are the Devil's workshop.
There are other things in this bill that will also change America. We
are aiming for universal 3- or 4-year-old kindergarten, I guess you
would call it. As a sidelight, this bill says that the people in these
daycares, which is kind of what they are, need a college degree. That
is a little bit of snobbery that we should put an end to, the idea that
if I have a college degree, I am always better off than somebody who
doesn't have a college degree.
If you are applying for a job, we treat the hardworking, intelligent,
commonsense person without a college degree as being, for some reason,
less worthy of a higher paycheck than the lack of commonsense person
who may not have a strong work ethic who does get a college degree.
That is just a sidelight. A bad provision there.
But another provision about this that is bad is you are taking the
care of the 3- and 4-year-olds out of the parents and giving it
exclusively to the government. Now, a given number of parents may
prefer it, but I think throughout most of this country, the raising of
the children has been primarily the responsibility of the family.
I know the Marxist element in the other party does not want parents
and, in particular, fathers too involved in their children's
upbringing. But I feel this will again permanently change America.
I should point out, if you look at the studies, American schools
sometimes have bad test scores. But our test scores are pretty good in
the fourth grade. In other words, our problem in this country isn't
that the children are doing poorly when the parents take care of them.
Those test scores for children in American schools are falling in
middle school and high school. So the problem is later on. It is not
with the 3- and 4-year-olds when the parents have responsibility.
I should also point out that we are, in this bill, increasing Pell
grants. Now, there are two problems there. Pell grants are grants going
toward what we will refer to as low-income people, but they don't go to
middle-class people.
I am already getting complaints in my district from Pell grants in
the past as couples, married couples who thought they were being
responsible in raising their children, they find out their children
might be going $30,000 or
[[Page H5788]]
$40,000 in debt to get a college degree. But if the parents hadn't been
working or hadn't been working as hard, those parents' children are
eligible for free college.
I know I am sure it always feels good to give more away, but put
yourself in the place of the middle-class American family that is
working to raise their child, a married couple, and you see somebody
else next door not working very hard, and as a bonus, their children
get free college, where the responsible middle-class kid winds up
$30,000 or $40,000 in debt. Another example here of complete unfairness
and perverse incentives.
When I go back home, one of the major concerns of businesses is they
can't find anybody to work. Now, I would hope everybody sometimes tours
their businesses and is familiar with that. Obviously, hiring 87,000
new IRS agents is going to take 87,000 people away from the private
sector.
But another interesting proposal in this bill is we have a new
expanded civilian conservation corps. In other words, we are taking
more people away from the factories, the construction sites, the retail
outlets that they so desperately need to hire them for the government,
make them dependent on the government, but above all make sure they are
not available for the private sector. Another big mistake.
I mentioned the Pell grants and the fact that in a way they are a
little bit of an insult to the middle-class kids who have to go further
and further in debt. But another interesting provision about these Pell
grants and another way that they clearly want to change America in this
bill is you are eligible for the Pell grants if you are here illegally.
This is not a mistake. I am not making this up.
I am on both the Education and Labor Committee and the Budget
Committee, where we tried to take this provision out, and the Democrats
on those committees proudly defended the provision. They really believe
that if you come here, you are entitled to free college, whereas if you
are a member of a middle-class American working family, your children
should go $30,000 to $50,000 in debt to get a college degree. I mean,
it is almost beyond belief, but that is another one of the features of
this bill and one of the reasons why I really hope it fails.
Another feature of this bill, be it natural gas or methane, is
increasing taxes, driving up the cost of energy in the United States.
The environmentalists in this country may be interested to know that
already the high cost of energy in the United States, and even more
Europe, is causing more and more foundries, and I assume other
factories as well, to go up in India, which is a much, much, much
bigger pollution problem than the United States.
So when you drive up the cost of energy, which is so very important
for American factories in general and our foundries in particular, what
this bill would do is ship more American manufacturing jobs abroad and
increase the overall pollution in the United States as we have energy
production go from the new, clean power plants in America to the much
dirtier power plants in India, China, and from around the world.
Other things in this bill that are a little bit irritating: After
much effort, the Republicans, when they were in charge, required Social
Security numbers for the child tax credits. Why did we require Social
Security numbers? To make sure people are not filling out tax returns
and getting tax refunds they aren't entitled to. I don't know why
anybody would not want Social Security numbers so we can check to see
if somebody says they have five children, they really have five
children and get the money back.
For whatever motivation--I can't even imagine what the motivation
would be--in this bill the wonderful Democratic Party is saying, no,
you don't need Social Security numbers to get refunds for your child
tax credit, which will not just increase a form of welfare. This will
increase a form of welfare cheating. Why you would do this, again I
can't imagine.
{time} 1915
One other provision in this bill, not a fiscal provision, the
Democrat Party is trying to allow, I would say, 8 to 11 million people
currently here illegally to become legal.
First of all, you are rewarding people who broke the law to come into
this country. And secondly, when you make 8 to 11 million people legal
who were previously illegal it is like putting a sign on the United
States, which the drug cartels who are involved in all this illegal
immigration, will show around the world: Come to the United States. We
are not enforcing our immigration laws.
Perhaps the majority party is not aware that already the drug gangs
in both Central America and Brazil are taking out TV ads inviting
people to come into the United States.
Why do they do that? Because if you're in Central America, they may
charge you 5 to $7,000 to come here. In Brazil they may charge you
$10,000 to come here. And because there is money to be made for the
drug gangs, they advertise, encouraging people to come here.
Now, when we do something like, in essence, legalize people who are
already here illegally, don't you think the drug gangs are going to
educate the people in Central America as to what we are doing? Of
course they are.
So not only are you inviting people or creating people who are
illegal or who were previously illegal, but, worse, you are giving a
green light to anybody hanging out in other countries, now is the time
to come to America.
By the way, when I am down on the border, another thing I hear is the
cooperation from the Mexican Government has been less and less over the
6 or 8 months as we try to control our border, not only to keep illegal
people out but to keep the drugs out, as well.
Our Border Patrol notices a little less cooperation from the
Mexicans, and I can see why. They believe they are getting less
cooperation because if the United States itself doesn't care about its
own border, why should Mexican law enforcement risk their lives
protecting the border and protecting the integrity of the border if the
United States itself doesn't care?
So here we have another provision which advertises the United States
doesn't care about their immigration laws. I am sure the Mexican Border
Patrol, the Mexican military is aware of it, and what will they think
of it? Why should I risk my butt preventing people from coming here if
the United States itself doesn't care?
So, again, I encourage America to wake up. We are permanently
changing the type of country that this is if this bill passes as is.
So I encourage Americans to contact their legislators. Please don't
pass this bill.
Now, I will make two more brief comments for the press corps, if they
are even paying attention to this.
Like all Congressmen, I frequently get contacted on issues and asked
whether I can look into it. Of course, agencies don't like to respond
to requests from individual Congressmen, particularly Congressmen in
the minority, but I think the press corps, which is so incredibly
powerful, more powerful than they imagine, can get answers from
bureaucratic agencies the way perhaps Congressmen cannot. And I am
going to mention two requests here.
I had requests from people of both parties, both Republicans and
Democrats, as to what is in the videos when we had the attacks on this
building on January 6. For whatever reason, those videos have not been
made public. People would like to know what was going on. I would hope
the press corps would apply a little bit of pressure to the appropriate
authorities and make those videos public. Because from what I can tell,
in my district both the on-the-ball Republicans and the on-the-ball
Democrats wish we could see those videos. And I think if the press
applied a little bit of pressure, we would see those videos.
The other thing I am hearing from my constituents back home is they
wonder about the apparent use of ivermectin in India. If you look at
the popular Worldometer website, they will show a dramatic drop in
fatalities in India over the last few months, just a shocking drop.
People claim it is from ivermectin. I don't know if it is true or
not. But the American news media ought to wake up and cover the story
and find out if it is.
[[Page H5789]]
If it is not from ivermectin, the American public should know it
because then they have been sold a bill of goods.
If it is from ivermectin, the American public should know that
because maybe we have a way to greatly reduce the number of fatalities.
So those are two requests that I have of our sometimes slumbering
press corps.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________