I thank my friend for yielding. Ninety-eight days ago, the President of the United States came to this Chamber and proposed to create jobs by cutting taxes for middle class families by about $1,500 per year. For 98 days, the majority refused to take up legislation that would enact that jobs plan. So finally today we have their version of it, which unfortunately does not cut taxes for middle class people the way we proposed but at least avoids a tax increase on those families which is looming on January 1. But I can't support this bill because of how it pays for that middle class tax relief. First let me say this: I agree as a general rule when we cut taxes here on anyone, we ought to pay for it, not increase the deficit. But the majority has never subscribed to that principle until today. So when the wealthiest people in America got an enormous tax reduction in their tax rates in 2001 and again in 2003, there was no requirement that we offset that in order to pay for it. But now that middle class families are getting some relief, all of a sudden, there has to be. Let's talk about what that offset is. One major portion of it essentially reduces unemployment benefits for Americans down the line. And as I understand this, there are some reforms that really ought to take place. When I hear about GEDs and drug testing, I think that is fairly sensible.…
Share
More from Rob Andrews
My understanding is my friend, the chairman's objection is based on the principle of germaneness. The underlying bill, by its very title, purports to protect Americans who have received a cancelation notice for a policy that they want to…
I think it is the worst-case scenario, in which our relations with the PRC would turn quite frigid.
I demand a recorded vote. A recorded vote was ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 261, noes 157, not voting 12, as follows: [Roll No. 587] AYES--261…
And colleagues, I think the best way to resolve this debate is to ask a simple factual question. There are two approaches here. The majority approach wants to pass this piecemeal bill. We want--``we,'' meaning the entire Democratic Caucus…





