David Thomas: “I want my colleagues and those paying attention to what is going on to appreciate what has occurred on the other side of…”

“I want my colleagues and those paying attention to what is going on to appreciate what has occurred on the other side of the aisle. The gentleman who is managing the bill for the rule for the minority took some time to discuss the Crane-Rangel bill. Had that been offered, that would have been a substitute. That would have been, under the rules, appropriate; but they did not offer the Crane-Rangel substitute, notwithstanding the fact that what was offered was an amendment; but I want my colleagues to understand this. In the Committee on Ways and Means on Monday, the gentleman from New York had every opportunity to offer the Crane-Rangel substitute. It was his choice. He did not offer a substitute. He offered an amendment. Last night, with the option of offering a substitute, he did not offer a substitute. He offered an amendment. Under the rules, it has to be a substitute. Now why is the Crane-Rangel substitute not before us? Because it did not offer a tax cut to small business, because it did not include the appropriate and necessary elimination of the tobacco subsidy program; because it did not include the assistance to small business, called section 179, expensing; and it did not include the provisions for small S corporations to continue to reform. Those are in the underlying bill, and what the gentleman from New York and his staff did was simply cut and paste various provisions of the underlying bill, and they wanted that to be accepted.”