On the recordMay 9, 2018
I am delighted, if I might say, to be with Professor Raskin today, and I would like to use that terminology, or Congressman Raskin, but it means that he gets into both the theory, the practice, and the passion of an idea. That is what teachers do. They try to instruct their students to look at the holistic concept of a theory. Mr. Speaker, the loss of food stamps is not a theory, but it has passion in the loss of such. It has a broad landscape of impact. It certainly has a theory of which I don't adhere to, and that is that Americans who have asked for a hand up are the ones deserving of the brunt of an enormous tax cut that has created an enormous deficit that was not asked for by the top 1 percent, who are getting the major aspect, or major benefit, of this tax cut. As a member of the Budget Committee, we took pains, the Democrats, to parse through the ultimate negative impact of the $1.4 trillion-plus tax cut. During the Obama administration, we discussed a corporate rate reduction. Many of us would have considered that on the idea of job creation, coming from the early thirties, if you will, down to about the mid-twenties. We did more than--when I say ``we,'' this bill did 21, unasked for by any corporate entity, which added, again, insult to injury as it relates to those families, disabled, and seniors, children who are dependent upon these programs. We have many Americans who are dependent upon means-tested programs, 70 percent.…
