Kim Reynolds: “Mr. Speaker, only a week ago I do not think the gentleman was advocating any tax cuts. But I just want to remind our…”

“Mr. Speaker, only a week ago I do not think the gentleman was advocating any tax cuts. But I just want to remind our colleagues that are both here and throughout the offices that in fiscal year 2004, in the adopted budget resolution, language was included for the first time limiting the amount of revenue reductions in the Senate to a deficit impact of $350 billion. The House articulated its clear reservations to this maneuver because all revenue measures must originate in the House; we retained our right to develop more measures to reduce the tax burden on the American people. So the options for the Committee on Rules, they could, one, accept the Senate proposals as a whole imposing offset requirements; two, call up an entirely new House bill, starting the process anew, with likely substitutes, in essence dragging out the process that would take the ability to move, and I am not sure whether the gentleman knows for sure we have a quorum tomorrow; and, three, we could stipulate the House prerogative to provide tax relief with a comprehensive proposal that has broad policy support. Why should the House impose offsets when our own budget made room for a proposal just like this, the one I have outlined that does so much for working families across the country?”