[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 7]
[House]
[Page 10201]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 10201]]

   LAWMAKERS SHOULD CORRECT POVERTY AND LACK OF MEDICAL CARE BEFORE 
                       ENACTING RECKLESS TAX CUTS

  (Mr. GEJDENSON asked and was given permission to address the House 
for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Speaker, I love my friend's compassion. This is a 
Chamber that ought to have compassion. We ought to have compassion for 
45 million Americans that do not have health care, for the hundreds of 
thousands of working families that cannot afford to send their kids to 
college, for senior citizens who do not have a drug benefit.
  If we take the Democratic proposal here, I do not know how many 
family farms are worth more than $4 million, but I would say that when 
we add the cut in the percentage and the $4 million exemption, that is 
about as much compassion as we need until we have taken care of the 
poorest of the poor.
  To listen to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, if you 
have two children, one lives in Beverly Hills and the other one lives 
on the edge of poverty. What we need to do today is rush and give some 
more help to the folks in Beverly Hills.
  The difference between the two proposals is that the Democratic 
proposal helps small business, helps farmers, helps people with $4 
million worth of assets, but leaves a little in the Treasury to make 
sure that senior citizens have social security and Medicare, that maybe 
we can help more kids get a college education, and maybe some day 
people in this country can expect health care coverage.

                          ____________________