It's a Democrat, excuse me demagogue approach, which is I think designed to say hey, we want to get people to vote for us because we're going to promise them they can cheat in their taxes because there won't be any audits.

Instead of throwing billions of dollars at the IRS enforcement, our constituents would much better be served by a customer service focus.

My Democrat colleagues don't seem to care about the cost to small business.

I would also strongly believe that putting in place systems makes a lot of sense.

It's a disingenuous claim that's used as justification for pursuing historic expansion of federal spending.

By all means we should debate whether some of these tax expenditures, such as the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction ought to exist.

When we're talking about some social issues, they can become highly divisive, and we end up not doing as well as we could have.

I think it's nuts to somehow think that getting rid of auditors is going to save us money.

I come away feeling that there ought to be a pox in both our houses, both Republican and Democrat houses.

It's a Democrat, excuse me demagogue approach, which is I think designed to say hey, we want to get people to vote for us because we're going to promise them they can cheat in their taxes because there won't be any audits.

The idea that somehow we should reduce the number of audits, and the number of IRS agents, and that's going to make us more money is simple, clear, and wrong.

Taking taxes to zero is not going to get us more revenue.

The IRS doesn't deserve the presumption it's going to do the right thing all the time.

If this isn't evidence of an overwhelmingly progressive federal tax system currently in place, I don't know what would be.

Those I would add, are almost certainly unconstitutional themselves.

That's simply hogwash from my point of view.

These bills reflect our collective commitment to safeguarding our natural heritage.

I urge the House Natural Resources Committee to swiftly pass H.R. 5831.