[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 15]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 21169]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                           SHAME ON THE HOUSE

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, October 30, 2001

  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed, but not surprised, by 
what took place in the House of Representatives last week. By the 
narrowest of margins, the tired old agenda of tax cuts for the rich and 
giveaways to the corporate interests and big business scored another 
victory in the Republican-controlled House.
  Bob Herbert described it best when he wrote in The New York Times, on 
Monday, October 29, 2001: ``The Republicans who control the House 
thumbed their noses at the ordinary Americans who will absorb the brunt 
of the economic downturn and shamelessly gift-wrapped yet another 
bundle of tax cuts for the very well-to-do.''
  He added: ``With Americans fighting and dying both at home and 
abroad, we are understandably in a season of patriotism. That 
patriotism should not be soiled by wartime profiteering.''
  The Republican so-called economic stimulus package is described by 
Mr. Herbert as having ``. . .  very little to do with economic 
recovery. It's about using the shield of war and economic hard times as 
a cover for the perpetual task of funneling government largesse to the 
very rich.''
  It should come as no surprise that there are some in Congress who 
will push their one-track agenda no matter what. If our nation is 
experiencing an economic downturn, then the answer is tax cuts for the 
top. If our nation is recovering from a terrorist attack, then the 
solution is more Treasury money to the big corporations. And if our 
Armed Forces are engaged in battle half way across the world, then a 
tax cut for the wealthy and well connected is the patriotic thing to 
do.
  Since 9/11, the American people are holding their government to a 
higher standard, and are placing extraordinary trust in their elected 
officials. Shame on those public servants who abuse that trust.
  I hope my colleagues will carefully read Mr. Herbert's op-ed and 
consider his arguments.

                [From the New York Times, Oct. 29, 2001]

                           Shame in the House

                            (By Bob Herbert)

       ``Ask not what your country can do for you. . .''
       It has been 40 years since John F. Kennedy, standing 
     hatless and coatless in the bitter cold of a snow-covered 
     capital, delivered the lines that turned out to be the most 
     stirring and most famous of his presidency.
       If you listened closely last week, you could hear an echo 
     of that moment on the Senate floor. On Wednesday morning, in 
     an address to his colleagues, Senator Edward M. Kennedy said: 
     ``Now we have seen, perhaps more clearly than ever before in 
     our lives, how we are all in this together--how if even one 
     of us is hurting, all of us hurt. Our first thoughts on 
     September 11 were about others, not ourselves.''
       Senator Kennedy, now 69 years old, spoke movingly of the 
     acts of extraordinary bravery and selflessness exhibited by 
     Americans both at home and abroad in this sudden war against 
     terrorism. And he called on the nation as a whole to adopt 
     that spirit of selflessness as the new standard ``by which we 
     measure everything we do.''
       ``The standard is clear,'' he said. ``To seek what is right 
     for our country, and not just for ourselves.'' He said it is 
     essential that Americans not ``strive for private advantage 
     in a time of national need.''
       Not everyone is listening.
       Senator Kennedy's speech was, specifically, a call for 
     fairness and common decency as Congress moves ahead with its 
     effort to help revive an economy that was faltering before 
     Sept. 11, and has since been thrown into very serious trouble 
     by terrorism and war.
       But last week, as the House narrowly passed its version of 
     an economic stimulus package, the dominant motive at work 
     appeared once again to be greed. The Republicans who control 
     the House thumbed their noses at the ordinary Americans who 
     will absorb the brunt of the economic downturn and 
     shamelessly gift-wrapped yet another bundle of tax cuts for 
     the very well-to-do.
       In Senator Kennedy's words, the House proposal, which 
     contains more than $100 billion in tax cuts for corporations 
     and individuals, ``merely repackages'' old, partisan, unfair, 
     permanent tax breaks--which were rejected by Congress last 
     spring--under the new label of economic stimulus. The 
     American people deserve better.''
       With Americans fighting and dying both at home and abroad, 
     we are understandably in a season of patriotism. That 
     patriotism should not be soiled by wartime profiteering.
       The House package is a breathtaking example of cynicism and 
     chutzpah. The bill's primary author, Representative Bill 
     Thomas, a Republican from California, piously proclaimed that 
     there is an urgent need to help businesses because they are 
     the nation's employers. ``They're the hardware store,'' he 
     said, ``the diner down the street, the gas station on the 
     corner.''
       And then you look closely at the legislation and find that 
     it overwhelmingly favors the giant corporations, with tax 
     breaks approaching $1.4 billion for I.B.M., more than $800 
     million for General Motors and $670 million for General 
     Electric.
       It's a stimulus package in name only because the Americans 
     who are the most strapped--the consumers who would take any 
     relief that they received and immediately pump it right back 
     into the economy--get the least. The package has very little 
     to do with economic recovery. It's about using the shield of 
     war and economic hard times as a cover for the perpetual task 
     of funneling government largesse to the very rich.
       Nearly $2 trillion in tax cuts were passed just a few 
     months ago, but that was not enough. True greed knows no 
     bounds.
       The political analyst Kevin Phillips, in a commentary on 
     National Public Radio, said: ``Neither house of Congress has 
     ever passed this kind of major tax bill in wartime, and no 
     one in the House assumes that the Senate will accept it in 
     whole. But the more extreme the House bill, the further that 
     will drag the eventual compromise in that same inexcusable 
     direction. The only real solution is a public outcry, tens of 
     millions of pointing fingers and voices saying, `Shame.' ''
       Forty years after the inauguration of President Kennedy, 
     the most favored and least needy among us are proving 
     themselves to be masterful at finding what their country can 
     do for them.

     

                          ____________________