On the recordFebruary 2, 2012
The amendment that I've offered does substitute the existing bill, and that's because, in fact, it is a terrible bill. And that's why I proposed this amendment--to substitute it--to avoid what the bill that is on the floor does. It avoids the partisanship, the controversial economic policy for which there is so much disagreement and which we've heard about for the last hour. There is no hidden agenda as to high tax cuts while trying to use as a baseline the Bush tax cuts. It puts aside all of the disagreements about which we've just heard for 1 hour, and it uses common sense. I certainly suggest to my friend, the gentleman from Georgia, that, in fact, the single most important analysis we should be doing on every single bill that the CBO does an analysis of is jobs. Will this bill create jobs if we pass it? Will it cause the loss of jobs? That is the most urgent responsibility we have in Congress right now. This bill simply says that the analysis that should be done on every bill that the CBO does is to ask: Will it create jobs? Will it cause the loss of jobs? We would do that statewide and regionally. Why is that information valuable? Because we should be singularly focused on job creation. We should avoid the kind of partisanship in disputes about trickle-down economics, voodoo economics; about the tax policy and about using the Bush tax cuts as the baseline.…





