Dave Camp

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance).

Mr. CAMP. I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Nebraska.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes. Frankly, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and I agree that bypassing the committee is a dangerous way to legislate. That invites unnecessary errors, and I think the stimulus bill is proof positive, and that's why we are here today. But again we are faced today with a bill that has had no public scrutiny and has not come before the Ways and Means Committee. Mr. Speaker, let us do our jobs. When Congress acted to stave off an imminent financial and economic collapse, the results of which would have been Depression-era unemployment levels, we did so with faith that past and current administrations would carefully manage the people's money. That trust has been shattered. Lesson learned. What has been particularly troubling is the difficulty with which the truth has come out recently. After many varying and contradictory excuses, we now know that the Obama administration, working behind closed doors, secretly eliminated provisions that would have prevented the appalling abuse of taxpayer money. Adding insult to injury, they explicitly protected bonuses at companies that in many cases are operating only due to the generosity of the American people. It's a breach of the public trust that should have the Treasury Secretary, who repeatedly failed to pay his own taxes, looking for a new job. Several of my colleagues on this side of the aisle and even Chairman Rangel have noted good reasons to oppose the bill before us. It's an extreme use of the Tax Code to correct an extreme and excessive wrong done to the American people. I'm sure we'll hear today that two wrongs don't make a right. But neither does inaction. It is our duty to protect and defend hardworking tax-paying Americans. At the end of the day, this insult to taxpayers cannot, should not, and will not stand, and I urge my colleagues to vote for the measure.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 1262, the Water Quality Investment Act. I would like to first thank Chairman Oberstar and Ranking Member Mica for bringing to the floor this important legislation. I am also proud to have worked with Mr. Pascrell on Title Three of this bill--which we have introduced previously. Sewer maintenance is a serious problem in low-lying coastal areas such as Michigan. It is a sad fact that many of the sewer systems in Michigan and throughout the country date back to the Nineteenth Century. These outdated systems often overflow with untreated human and industrial waste--releasing toxins and disease-causing organisms. Inadequate maintenance, deteriorated pipes, rainfall and snow melts are too often cited as the cause of these overflows. It is indisputable that sewer overflows pose a significant threat to public health and safety because they put raw sewage into rivers, streets, basements, and other areas of human exposure. They are also responsible for many beach closures, shellfish restrictions, and violations of water quality standards. In Michigan alone there have been over 1,000 reported sewer overflows annually. These events have contributed over 20 billion gallons of sewage and wastewater onto the ground and into Michigan rivers, lakes and streams. Even more staggering, the EPA has estimated that nearly 900 billion-- let me repeat, 900 billion--gallons of untreated wastewater and storm water are released through combined sewer overflows and separate sewer overflows annually in the United States. The Water Quality Investment Act goes a long way toward ending the public health and environmental crisis associated with sewer overflows by providing federal funds to repair and replace outdated systems. Local governments cannot simply fix this mess and meet their obligations under the Clean Water Act alone. Also of critical importance in this bill are provisions to reauthorize the Great Lakes Legacy Act to tackle the problem of contamination in the Great Lakes Basin. It would provide the necessary funding to help clean up contaminated sediment in over 30 concerning areas. My gratitude must also be extended to my esteemed colleague from Michigan, Mr. Ehlers, for his steadfast commitment to the Great Lakes and the passage of the Great Lakes Legacy Reauthorization Act. I urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 1262 today.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, every Member of this House believes we should and must act to get this economy moving again to help struggling families and employers through this global economic crisis. But action for the sake of acting will mean little to families if it is not accompanied with positive results. This morning we awake to a spate of headlines that the deal made behind closed doors, and what we've still not been able to fully review, given its $1.1 million price tag will do more harm than good. From the McClatchy News Service: ``Will the stimulus actually stimulate? Economists say no.'' From the Associated Press: ``Analysis: Stimulus won't jump-start the economy.'' From the Congressional Budget Office--and there's a chart behind me that shows it--``This partisan stimulus package ends up harming our economy.'' And, again, while it's clear we must act, we must ensure the action we take actually stimulates the economy and lays the foundation for real sustained job creation in the private sector. There's a smarter, simpler way to stimulate the economy. It's not by running up the deficit by funding pet projects that are often wasteful. As you well know, we produced an alternative to both the Senate and House versions that would create twice the jobs at half the cost. Let me repeat that. Republicans developed a plan that would create twice the jobs at half the cost. And that isn't my analysis or some conservative think tank. That fact is based on the data and methodology of Dr. Christina Romer, the Chair of the President's Council on Economic Advisers. Now, I'd be remiss if I didn't point out to my Republican and Democrat colleagues exactly how they were treated in this process. As one of five Members of this House who was appointed to the conference committee, I think it's my obligation to tell you this story. As I walked from the House to the Senate for our first meeting of the conferees, I passed a press conference being held by the Senate majority leader announcing a final deal that had been struck by Senators and only by Senators. This is the first conference I've ever been on where the press conference announcing the results happened before the actual meeting. So I can understand why Speaker Pelosi was reportedly incensed. The people's House should not be trampled on. We were frozen out. And as Chairman Rangel noted, many Democrats were frozen out. But most importantly, the American people were frozen out. This is what happens when a few select people negotiate behind closed doors. You end up with flawed legislation that better reflects the priorities of a few, rather than those of the entire country. And under this deal we're bring presented with this morning, the so- called middle class tax cut, the signature tax cut has been reduced to 20 cents an hour for a full-time worker. One of the few provisions to help struggling businesses was more than cut in half by shortening the length of the relief and making thousands of employers ineligible for help. The work requirements within the historic 1996 Welfare Reform Law-- the hallmark legislation of President Clinton and the Republican Congress--has been eroded. And the stealth health provisions will drive up costs and have the government making more health care decisions instead of doctors and patients. Given the severity of the crisis American families are facing, to conduct the people's business in this fashion may be the grossest violation of our constitutional duties and the oath of office we swore to uphold that I have seen in my 18 years in the House. Record me as a ``no'' on this legislation.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam).

Mr. CAMP. I thank the Chair for that admonition. I would yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. CAMP. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. I would just say that we offered 19 amendments in the committee. None of them were accepted. I think we did get a GAO study accepted. But none of our substantive amendments were. And I would just say to my good friend from Michigan, who asked how I could go home, I would ask him how he can go home and provide half the jobs at twice the cost. With that, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).

Mr. CAMP. At this time I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence). (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CAMP. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).

Mr. CAMP. I yield myself 15 seconds. We hold harmless in our legislation on the AMT, and we reduce taxes on 100 million American families, every American family that pays taxes. With that, I would yield 1 minute to the distinguished minority leader, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).

Mr. CAMP. I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. McCotter).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).

Mr. CAMP. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished minority whip, a leader on developing the substitute, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Mr. CAMP. At this time, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida.

Mr. CAMP. At this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. CAMP. I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I would commend Mr. Neal for his work on the AMT. I just wish you had included it in your underlying bill. But let me just say, look, the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, is nonpartisan. It has said that, and economists alike have said that tax cuts impact the economy more quickly than government spending. And what we need to do is act quickly and effectively. We even have an analysis by the senior adviser to the new President who says that tax cuts will actually have more immediate growth, more job creation and a bigger bang for the buck than we'll see with government spending. And when we use the same methods and economic models that they have used to analyze our legislation, we get twice as many jobs for half the cost because of the great generative power of tax relief. It is something that certainly both President Kennedy and President Reagan recognized to create economic growth. Let's be clear about what tax relief actually does. The U.S. economy had significant job growth after the tax cuts in the early part of this decade. Between 2003 and 2008, the economy added almost 8 million jobs. As this chart shows, it's according to the Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. economy added these jobs even after dealing with the impact of 9/11, two wars, rising energy prices and government spending. Now everyone knows that over the last year, the U.S. economy has lost a significant number of jobs, but it took an unprecedented crisis in the housing and financial markets and a world economic slowdown to really knock the economy and the jobs that the economy creates off its feet. So our estimate of the number of jobs that could be created by these tax relief measures, as we readily acknowledge, cannot fully account for all of the potential impacts on the economy, just as the President's senior advisers note in their analysis the same thing. But we do know the U.S. economy was in recession when Congress enacted the 2001 and 2003 tax relief measures. The U.S. economy responded by growing rapidly and adding almost 8 million jobs. And the families and the prosperity that was created from those 8 million jobs followed. So the tax relief, the approach we have taken in our bill to emphasize more tax relief minimizes the wasteful government spending that we see in the Democrat, or the present majority's approach, and really shows that it's a proven formula for stimulating the economy, creating jobs and lifting this economy out of a recession.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chair, I would ask that the remarks be addressed to the Chair.

Mr. CAMP. I would yield myself an additional 30 seconds. I just want to repeat, the analysis and estimates I am giving you are taken directly from public analysis of the President's senior economic advisers. Republicans didn't develop these ourselves. We are applying their methodology and their analysis to our legislation. So with the results of the peer-reviewed research, we find that our plan would create 6.2 million jobs. Our bill will create more at a substantially lower cost. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.