Eric Cantor

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. One remaining question, Mr. Speaker. Can the gentleman inform us as to whether the public lands bill will be brought back up under a rule in this House.

Mr. CANTOR. Not yet, Mr. Speaker. I would say again that our economy is not just built on consumerism, our economy is built on investments and, frankly, the rebuilding of this economy will take place with job creation. And if we know that card check is a job-killer, folks across this country have got to be scratching their heads right now, wondering what in the world is Washington doing passing a piece of legislation that has been proven to kill jobs, not promote jobs.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. For the record, any democracy has also in it the elections that afford one the right to a private or secret ballot, which this bill completely takes away from the workers of this country.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I know that the gentleman is aware, as all of us are, about the tremendous job losses that we have experienced in America of late, 650,000 plus jobs just last month. There is an announcement yesterday that we all read about, that the card check bill was introduced. Along with that introduction, there was a new nonpartisan study that was published that predicts that passage of card check legislation will result in the immediate loss of 600,000 jobs. So I would ask the gentleman, number one, when he expects to bring that card check bill to the floor, and if, in the interim, if he is considering that if the Senate is to act, and we are to act in these economic times, why would we be doing that if we know, through nonpartisan studies issued, that it's a job killer? Why would we be bringing that to the floor? I yield further to the gentleman.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the gentleman's attention to several news reports lately that have alluded to Chairman Obey and others in the majority caucus preparing a second stimulus bill. I know the chairman was quoted in CongressDaily this morning as saying that it is spectacularly unreasonable to expect to see the stimulus package that we passed produce any action any time soon. Further, we see that the economist, Paul Krugman, thought and has written that the first stimulus bill that passed has failed because it didn't spend enough. Now we know that the economist, Mark Zandi, has met with the Majority Caucus this week and said that the stimulus that passed would fall short of the goals that were originally put out there to create 3.5 million jobs. So I have asked the gentleman, should we expect in the House for there to be another stimulus bill and, if so, would you include some of the Republican proposals that were in our plan that were focused on job creators, focused on small businesses, entrepreneurs and the self- employed? I yield further to the gentleman.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. I would ask the gentleman, given this budget that he intends to bring to the floor, and the fact that, frankly, we feel that budget has an Achilles' heel, which is it increases taxes on the primary job creators in the country, which is small business. Can the gentleman tell us if there are other bills that are specifically focused on helping small business people get back into the game, so that instead of just raising taxes, redistributing wealth, we can actually focus on job creation, wealth creation, and get back on the road to prosperity?

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman knows, there are 3 weeks remaining prior to the 2-week Easter recess. Since the last recess, this House and Congress have sent a $410 billion spending bill to the President. We have passed a bill imposing housing cramdown, and we just voted on a water quality bill, as well as one celebrating Pi Day. I would ask the gentleman if he intends to use the next 3 weeks to try and focus on the fear that exists out there on the part of so many Americans about their jobs, and whether we can commit to focusing on preserving, protecting and creating jobs over the next 3 weeks? I yield further to the gentleman.

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland, the majority leader, for the purpose of announcing next week's schedule.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman for that answer and just would like to underscore our concern that as he knows and we have discussed as late as today at the President's summit on health care at the White House, these are extraordinary times. We have tough choices to make. Families are out there struggling to make ends meet. And the President has continued to say that we will provide tax relief for working Americans. We will provide tax relief to 95 percent of the American people. The trouble, Mr. Speaker, that we're having is when we hear members of the President's administration talk about the President's desire to see cap-and-trade legislation pass through this House, and the admission on the part of officials in the administration that that legislation would produce $1,300 worth of additional tax to every household in this country, if we do the math, with the Make Work Pay Program, and even if one was able to get the maximum relief under that program, that's an $800 relief for a household. You do the math, we still are at a point where you have a $500 deficit in each household, if every one of those were to be able to receive the maximum relief. So I would ask the gentleman, as far as the overall sense of the budget that he will bring to the floor, are we really going to deliver on this tax relief? Or are we going to try and address this cap-and- trade program, which has now been admitted to be an extra tax that will outweigh any tax relief under the Make Work Pay Program? I yield.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman on that. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the gentleman just in the context of the budget discussion that is ongoing obviously here on Capitol Hill in Congress and at the White House, there are some unanswered questions as far as the Republican Conference is concerned as to the direction of this budget that the leader sees coming through the House. Obviously there have been some discussions about charitable giving that the gentleman himself has raised concerns regarding and that I have extraordinary concerns about taking away incentives to help support our charities in such a tough economic period, and was wondering if the gentleman could comment on whether he felt that the House budget that he will bring to the floor would reflect our concern that perhaps we shouldn't be throttling back on people's giving to charities.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I would also point out to the gentleman from Maryland, there has been a lot of discussion lately, certainly on the part of the White House, the President, about his plans for making sure of the security of our troops in Iraq and his announcement of the withdrawal timeline. I know that the Speaker has also spoken out on this issue, seeming to have somewhat of a different position than the White House on this. I know the gentleman himself, I believe, has said that he is in agreement with the President. We support the President, Mr. Speaker, in his decision to listen to the commanders on the ground. I would note that in Congresses past we certainly have had a number of resolutions based on a timeline for withdrawal of our troops, and would ask the gentleman, is he anticipating any type of resolution of disapproval of the President's announcement?

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to ask the gentleman for the anticipated timing on the public lands bill and when the gentleman thinks that he will bring that to the floor.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman that we have in this House passed in prior Congresses that bill. As the gentleman knows, there are plenty of new Members here that have not had a chance to vote on that bill. So if I hear the gentleman correctly, we will await Senate action prior to any House action.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the gentleman regarding the schedule going forward if he could tell the House what the timing would be on bringing the so-called card-check bill to the floor.

Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I yield back my time.

Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman again, and would say that, again, our priority must be on, as he has said in the past as well, must be on this economy. It must be on maintaining, protecting and creating jobs. And we believe, as the gentleman knows, on this side of the aisle, that the way to do that is to focus on small businesses, to ensure that we're not adding burdens to the real job generators, which are our small businesses. So if we're talking about bringing this budget forward and talking about PAYGO, as the gentleman has referred to, I know last year we passed the stimulus bill, and the gentleman indicated that we waived PAYGO back then for tax relief. I know that Members on our side of the aisle would certainly be supportive of any bit of relief we could give to those small businesses. But, Mr. Speaker, I'd ask the gentleman again, in the context of where we're operating now, and the fact that the Dow Jones dropped another 280 points today, and the fact we've not gotten from the White House and the administration a plan for the bank fix. We don't know the direction that the TARP funding is going. We have a sense from some of the statements made in the Budget Committee and others this last several days, that the TARP money has been all committed. And if so, is there any indication, do we know how much more money will be impacting this budget? Because, Mr. Speaker, I'd ask the gentleman how he expects this House to produce an honest budget if we do not know the plans of this administration, which will occur, I'm sure, imminently in their request for more assistance and more money towards the banking problem. And I yield.

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, outside the walls of Congress, America is paralyzed by a suffocating crisis of confidence. A virus that began in the credit and housing markets has spread to infect the broader economy. Small businesses are hunkered down. The promise of retaining or of finding a solid job slips further out of reach for America's workers. With this stimulus package, Congress has a responsibility to re- instill lost confidence, and it has an obligation to focus our efforts like a laser on the creation, preservation and protection of sustainable jobs. That is why the bill we are voting on today represents a fundamental dereliction of duty on the part of this majority. This legislation will not put people to work right away, nor does it contain the time-honored incentives for work, investment, innovation, and job creation that are proven to stimulate growth. This week, I spoke with a struggling business owner in my district. How could I tell him I am voting for a bill that gives more money to projects like Federal Government cars than it gives to businesses like his. This bill is loaded with wasteful deficit spending on the majority's favorite government programs. We need jobs, not mountains of debt to be paid by our children. We can do better. We proposed a plan on our side that did do better. It created twice as many jobs at half the cost. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Michigan.

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, today I have the distinct honor of inviting for the opening prayer a man for whom I have tremendous respect, Pastor Al Lynch. Pastor Lynch, who is here with his wife Susan and his son Matthew, serves as the St. Andrew's United Methodist Church in Henrico County, Virginia. He has a passion for public service, in particular in the public safety arena, where he has been appointed chaplain of the Henrico County Sheriff's Office. His years of contributions to the greater Richmond region have left a profound imprint on our community, and we are all grateful for his service.

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman. And let me respond to the last statement from my colleague on the other side of the aisle, Mr. Obey, that that is not the way things happen. We were invited to the White House because the President felt it appropriate to reach out to us to take into consideration our proposals. We submitted to him in person a Republican economic recovery plan. Yes, it was more weighted for tax relief. Yes, it was, in a reduced way, a spending formula, because at the end of the day what any stimulus bill should be about is preserving, protecting and creating jobs, period. And as the President said last night, there is a lot in this bill that people may like. But do you know what? He also said the plan is not perfect because it was produced in Washington. This President came to this town and was elected because he said he was going to deliver on change. Madam Speaker, I would say if we are serious about a true stimulus bill, let's get down to business. Let's provide small business tax relief because they create 70 percent of the jobs in this country. Let's not embark on a spending spree that is the biggest spending spree in the history of this country.

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, I know that the subject of this particular piece of legislation has to do with campus safety, and I know we are all concerned about campus safety. In fact, this is a separate bill relating to campus safety, which makes the point, Madam Speaker: If you look at the current proposal dealing with our economy and the economic ruin that families are facing, there is $6 billion allocated in that bill to colleges and to universities. That gives me great cause for concern. What in the world does that have to do with stimulating our economy and with allowing families and small businesses in this country to get back on their feet? Again, I would say to my colleague and friend from Virginia, as well as to the gentleman from Texas, that the bill on the floor does have to do with college campus safety. That is where a $6 billion allocation appropriation to colleges and universities should belong, not in a stimulus bill. Listen, the people of this country are expecting Washington to finally clean up its act and to respond accordingly so that we can get our economy back on track. In fact, the latest Gallup poll that was taken this weekend shows that only 38 percent of Americans support the congressional Democrats' spending bill. Speaker Pelosi's bill in this House contains billions of dollars of continued Washington spending in the same old fashion. It has got plenty of pork in it. It has got $137 billion while creating 32 new Federal programs. I would say that some of these programs have laudable goals. There is no question that we need to address so many things going on in this country. Right now, though, the priority is this economy, and when we are talking about a stimulus plan, a stimulus plan should be focused like a laser on the preservation, on the protection and on the creation of jobs. Again, it may not be bad that we are looking to spend more money in terms of helping safety on our college campuses, but that belongs in a separate bill, not in a spending bill aimed at stimulating this economy. I would say that the Members on our side of the aisle continue to want to work with the majority to try and craft a bill that delivers results. President Obama was elected partly due to the hope that he instilled in so many Americans that he would change the way that Washington works, that we finally in this town would be accountable to the people who pay the taxes so that we could deliver the results and so that we could deliver on job creation and on opportunities for our children and for the next generation. Madam Speaker, the bill that passed this House last week does not rise to that standard, and I implore the Speaker and her colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work with us. We have put forward a plan that involves real stimulus, that is very focused on the folks--on the entrepreneurs, on the small businesspeople and on the self-employed-- who actually do create the jobs in this economy. We need to provide them with relief. We need to provide relief to the working families--to the taxpayers who are suffering under this heavy burden for which they have got to pay every single day that they are at work. Madam Speaker, again, I urge our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work with us so that we can arrive at a bill that provides true stimulus and that delivers results.

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Virginia Society of Certified Public Accountants as they celebrate 100 years of service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. The Virginia Society of Certified Public Accountants (VSCPA) was established on October 6, 1909. It now represents more than 8,300 CPAs working in private businesses, government agencies, nonprofit organizations, and educational institutions, to name just a few. The VSCPA has 10 chapters across the Commonwealth of Virginia that offer networking, education and other opportunities to get involved in local communities. They created an Educational Foundation in 1984 to attract future CPAs and promote accounting careers to Virginia students through undergraduate and graduate scholarships, financial literacy grants and other awards and recognition programs. CPAs play a unique and vital role in the success and growth of business, the soundness of government operations, the excellence of higher education and the protection and confidence of investors in the Commonwealth of Virginia, as well as the rest of the United States. Because of their contribution to the accounting profession, we are honored to recognize the VSCPA as they commemorate their centennial year.

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan. As the economy sinks further into recession, all of us understand that this House needs to take concrete action to lift us and help lift America's families out of this crisis. We Republicans support this alternative because we believe it is a true stimulus bill. It does not take us headlong into soaring debt and lead to future tax increases. This alternative is based on the premise that if we're going to pass a stimulus bill, it has to be focused like a razor's edge on the protection, preservation and creation of jobs. Mr. Chairman, we cannot support the majority's alternative, although we do understand that this is a work in progress, although we do understand, and we've spoken with the President, who says he has no pride of authorship. He wants us to continue to be part of the process. He wants this to be a stimulus bill. Mr. Chairman, this bill is not that. With the amount of spending in this bill, we could dedicate it solely to job creation. Much of what the other side has continued to say and continues to promote perhaps may be laudable goals and good programs. But when you have $136 billion of additional new programs in this bill, you have got to ask, how stimulative are these new programs? What about the small businesses, the entrepreneurs and the self-employed that are out there who don't want more government programs? They just need a break. They need to know their government will not keep borrowing money and laying debt onto our children to the tune of trillions of dollars a year. They want meaningful incentives so they can get back off the sidelines, put capital to work and create jobs. Mr. Chairman, the Congressional Budget Office has already opined several times on the lack of stimulus in the majority's bill. In fact, some estimates say only 12 cents on the dollar could arguably be stimulative. Mr. Chairman, there are additional voices who have spoken out, Democrats and Republicans, Christine Romer, the incoming head of the Council of Economic Advisers for the Obama White House, says in her analysis, if it is applied, as we have applied it, as some of the folks who have used her analysis in her formula on to your bill, that our alternative creates twice as many jobs at half the cost. And that is what we ought to be about in this House is trying to figure out how we can do things that work at less cost to the taxpayer. I also say, Mr. Chairman, Alice Rivlin, the economic expert from the Clinton administration, she also opined and said, You know what--the majority's bill has terrific amounts of spending in it. And they may be laudable. But they're long-term investment programs. So she says we need to separate out these long-term investment programs from what is stimulative. We have regular order in this Congress so that the American people can participate, we can be deliberative and we can get it right on the long-term programs. Right now, Mr. Chairman, we ought to be about protecting the jobs that are out there and creating new ones, again, focused like a laser. The Republican plan does this without all the spending and waste. And we can create the jobs at half the cost.

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I'd just like to say in closing that I would hope that the standard of transparency and openness that should be applied to the expenditure of the TARP moneys can be applied to the conduct of the proceedings of this House over the next 2 years during the 111th Congress. I think we owe it to the American people. We owe it to the American people to know what the Members that they elect are doing, what they're voting on, which is why I again say to the gentleman I hope that the proceedings next week on this unprecedented amount of money in the bill that is currently being marked up, this unprecedented amount can come to this floor in the most open, transparent way possible, giving the minority, the Republicans on this side of the aisle, the ability to make their proposals known, to have votes on those ideas because, after all, that is the spirit in which we would like to work not only with the gentleman and his party but certainly with the new President.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the House passed a bill to provide further restrictions on this next $350 billion that, as the gentleman points out, the Senate has approved. Yet it is my understanding that the Senate has no intention of taking the House bill that was passed out yesterday. So I would like to ask the gentleman, do you expect the bailout restrictions as passed by the House yesterday to become law?

Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his response. I appreciate the spirit in which he responds to the inquiry and will set aside the supposition that perhaps we have to rush because of some policies that were in place over the last 8 years and would point out to the gentleman that, again, it is his party that has served in the majority over the last 2 years building up to the current situation that we are in. But I would ask the gentleman, specifically does he know what day the actual stimulus bill will be considered on the floor of this House?