Mr. Speaker, it seems every now and then we have to stop and just remind ourselves what the debate is about here. It seems to me there is too much confusion with respect to whether or not this debate is about cutting taxes, leaving money in the coffers of the Federal Government as opposed to the hands of the American people who earned it in the first place, and whether or not it is fair and correct to deny this poor, beleaguered, suffering government more of our tax revenues. Mr. Speaker, that is not what this debate is about. This debate is about whether or not this Government of the United States will exercise its responsibility to do everything it can to help unemployed American workers get back to work. It is about jobs. It is about opportunity. It is about a chance to stay on the job, get a promotion on the job, get a job in a thriving, growing economy; a thriving, growing economy that has been serving the American people well, and one that got locked into a bit of a cock hat first by the misguided, ill-advised case against the Microsoft company earlier last year that compressed the equity markets to the point of economic downturn, and then secondly by the attack on America on September 11.
Richard K. Armey: “Mr. Speaker, it seems every now and then we have to stop and just remind ourselves what the debate is about here. It…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the importance of job creation and economic recovery in the wake of the September 11 attacks.
Share
More from Richard K. Armey
Mr. Speaker, I believe we could probably find a pretty unanimous consensus in America that there is probably no grief that comes to a parent that is greater than the grief of losing a child. In fact, this Nation has on many, many occasions…
I, for one, am not ready to concede that a lame duck will be necessary or in fact will be part of our experience. I believe that at some point between now and, say, the middle of October, we will come to a point where we will be able to…
Mr. Chairman, we need to move forward, and we need to move forward to provide the President with the tools that he needs to secure our homeland. Our current structure simply cannot meet the demands of an age in which the primary threats to…
Mr. Chairman, let me say to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush) I do not intend to oppose his amendment, but I did want to point out that we have addressed this very same question in page 13 of the bill. The difference between the…





