[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 10]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 13392-13393]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES ON H.R. 2, JOBS AND GROWTH RECONCILIATION ACT 
                                OF 2003

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. CHARLES B. RANGEL

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                          Monday, June 2, 2003

  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, the President has said in numerous speeches 
that his policies are designed to ``leave no child behind.'' He has 
said recently that, ``My jobs and growth plan would reduce tax rates 
for everyone who pays income tax.'' White House Press Secretary Ari 
Fleischer stated on May 29 about the new tax-cut law (which includes 
all of the provisions of the President's plan in full or in part), 
``This certainly does deliver tax relief to people who pay income 
taxes.'' Now that the bill has been signed, all of these statements 
have been shown to be false.
  Back then, during the debate on this bill, the Republicans assured 
the press that the final conference bill retained a Senate provision 
that, while it did not extend any tax relief to millions of low-income 
working families with children, did at least accelerate the 15 percent 
partial refundability. The Republicans also claimed that the marriage 
penalty relief was accelerated for couples. These claims have been 
proven false as well.
  The American people were sold a false bill of goods by the 
Administration and the Congressional Republicans. In the middle of the 
night, the Republicans passed a bill that over and over again puts the 
interests of the wealthiest people in the country ahead of those of the 
ordinary American family.
  You will hear all sorts of excuses from the Republicans as to why 
this occurred. The spokeswoman for Chairman Bill Thomas of the House 
Committee on Ways and Means told The New York Times that the blame lay 
with the members of the other body of Congress''(W)hen we had to 
squeeze it all to $350 billion, they weren't talking about the child 
credits.'' She concluded, ``(W)hatever we do is not going to be enough 
for some segments of the population.''
  The ``segments'' of the population we are talking about are those 
people who the President and Congressional Republicans say that he 
wants to help. We are talking about 11.9 million children (in 6.5 
million families) who would benefit from accelerating the increase in 
the refundability of the child tax credit. These are parents who work 
hard at low wages and pay high payroll taxes to the Federal government. 
Another ``segment'' we are talking about is working couples who qualify 
for the Earned Income Tax Credit. These are working poor families who 
are often struggling to stay together given the financial pressures on 
them. A couple with two children where each parent earns about $10,000 
has about a $1,000 marriage penalty next year. And yet, the Republicans 
decided that marriage penalty relief should not include them.
  The Republicans also left out 8.1 million taxpayers who receive no 
benefits from the new tax law and yet pay income taxes. This group 
consists mainly of low-income single individuals and moderate-income 
single parents whose children are over 16.

[[Page 13393]]

  Not only are these ``segments'' made up of men and women who work and 
pay Federal taxes, many of the people that are left out of tax relief 
are the same men and women who just fought for this country in Iraq. 
The society they sacrificed for has decided to raid the Social Security 
and Medicare trust fund to give billions of dollars in tax relief to 
wealthy investors, but has not seen fit to give a tax cut to our 
soldiers.
  Make no mistake about it. Nobody forgot to put benefits in because 
they were sleepy in the middle of the night. This was not necessary 
because the bill had to cost only $350 billion and it was simply 
impossible to do anything for these working Americans in the bill. The 
Republicans in Congress, with the tacit approval of the White House, 
deliberately skimped and trimmed on the few provisions under 
consideration to help millions of middle- and low-income working 
families. Meanwhile, they enhanced provisions for the wealthy and for 
special interests. They made sure that the average millionaire would 
receive a $93,500 tax break. They made sure that luxury SUV owners 
would get a generous tax break if they can figure out a way to make 
their vehicle a ``business expense.'' They even made sure that the tax 
cuts for dividends, the so-called elimination of ``double taxation,'' 
applied to dividends from companies that use sham headquarters in tax 
havens to get out of paying any tax. These companies that put profits 
over patriotism get benefits from the tax bill the President signed, 
but the parents of 12 million children do not.
  The bill we introduce tonight is designed to serve those people with 
children that the Republicans talk about but somehow never do anything 
for. This includes many of our service men and women who are or have 
been stationed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Korea. These men and woman 
have risked their lives and done their duty at such low wages that the 
President's tax cut which he claims helps ``working families'' has left 
them out.
  The bill would include an expansion of the refundable child credit 
that was included in the Democratic economic stimulus proposal. It 
would expand the refundable child credit for the families of military 
serving in Iraq and other combat zones. It also would include the 
provision of the Democratic stimulus plan that accelerated the marriage 
penalty relief in the earned income tax credit that was provided in the 
2001 tax bill.
  The President's bill gave big tax cuts to the wealthiest citizens and 
funded these tax cuts through borrowing. While we want every child in 
America to benefit from tax cuts, we do not want to pass the cost of 
what we do to our children and grandchildren in the form of more 
national debt. The cost of the bill would be offset by a combination of 
the corporate tax shelter and Enron-specific provisions that passed the 
Senate and Mr. Neal's bill stopping corporate expatriation.
  The legislation we propose has two key sections:


               Liberalization of Refundable Family Credit

  Under current law, the per-child tax credit is partially refundable 
(i.e., paid even if the family has no income tax liability). The amount 
of partial refundability is 10 percent of taxable wages above $10,000. 
Under the 2001 tax act, the amount of refundability is increased to 15 
percent of taxable wages over $10,000 effective in 2005 and thereafter.
  This legislation accelerates the 15 percent partial refundability and 
lowers the threshold for partial refundability from $10,000 to $7,500. 
It would increase the number of families eligible for partial 
refundability.
  The military serving in combat zones receive an exclusion for their 
pay while serving in the zone. As a result, many in the military will 
not be eligible for the partial refundable family credit because they 
do not have taxable wages. The legislation solves this problem by 
disregarding the combat pay exclusion when computing the size of the 
partially refundable family credit.


            Marriage Penalty Relief in Earned Income Credit

  The 2001 tax act provided three types of marriage penalty relief, an 
increase in standard deduction, an expanded 15 percent rate bracket, 
and an increase in the dollar amount at which the earned income credit 
begins to be phased out. The recently enacted tax cut accelerates the 
first two types of marriage penalty relief, but does not accelerate the 
relief in the earned income tax credit.
  This legislation will accelerate the marriage penalty relief in the 
earned income tax credit.
  When the Republicans brought their final tax cut bill up in the House 
in the middle of the night, I argued on the House floor that the bill 
did almost nothing for working people while rewarding the wealthiest 
people in our society who have lots of unearned income. The Republicans 
accuse me of engaging in ``class warfare'' and expect me to back down. 
But I agree that it is class warfare. The Republicans have declared war 
against those who earn their living through work, even when those 
individuals are serving their nation in the armed service. This 
legislation shows that in this class warfare, we are on the side of 
working men and women.

                          ____________________