Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. That is absolutely right. I just say that there is a Los Angeles Times article this morning: Take from the poor give to the rich. The current Republican tax and entitlement package denies help to 28 million working families.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for yielding the time. I also want to say that I do not think that the American people do believe it is baloney if we stay here and do the work they sent us to do here. House rules say that we cannot go on vacation until it is finished with appropriations work, and we know that the work has not been finished, otherwise we would not be here asking for a waiver. And the reason why the work is not finished is because what we have seen here is that the Republican majority has spent their time crafting a tax bill that in fact benefits the rich at the expense of average American families. And in fact we have a historic opportunity and the American public has an opportunity to take a look at what is in a Republican tax cut proposal and what is in a Democratic tax cut proposal because the Democrats in fact have a very sound and solid tax cut proposal. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle accuse us of waging class warfare in this debate, but in fact it is the Republican tax bill that is a declaration of war on working middle-class families in America. Under the Republican bill, over half the tax benefits go to the top 5 percent of Americans, those making an average of $250,000 a year. And quite honestly what this bill does, it gives a $22 billion tax break to the largest businesses and corporations in the United States by scaling back the alternative minimum tax which was in fact proposed and supposed to ensure that large corporations pay at least some taxes the way that ordinary working families pay taxes in this country every year. But do not just take my word for it. Let us take a look at this morning's headlines. The Washington Post: No to a bad tax bill. And I quote: ``The tax bill will be the great atrocity'', is what the Washington Post says this morning. The New York Times, quote: ``Break for a few rich, for the rich few, sneaks into the tax cut bill''. We are going to see $9 million a year in lost revenue to the United States to give a bonanza worth thousands of dollars to 1,000 wealthy taxpayers. What about working middle-class families in this country?

Ms. DeLAURO. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Clay].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 25 seconds. This bill does not help working middle-class American families. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle accuse us of waging class warfare. It is they, in fact, who have declared war on the middle-class and those people who strive to make their way into the middle-class. This bill makes deep cuts in programs for working families who depend on us for what they need to get done. It provides tax breaks for the wealthiest people in this country. I urge my colleagues to vote against it. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the balance of my time be controlled by the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon [Ms. Furse].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 seconds. I would like to mention that with regard to health care for children, what we find out from the Congressional Budget Office is that the estimate of that $16 billion, is that only 520,000 kids of the 10 million will be covered. The rest are not covered, that 20 percent of the children who do not have access to health care today. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan [Ms. Stabenow].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Menendez]. (Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 seconds. Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that this spending bill takes away hospitals and nursing homes, reasonable and adequate reimbursement. Medicare solvency comes up 2 years short of the budget agreement. And there are deep cuts in the disproportionate share which adversely affect hospitals across this country. We are not improving the health of people in this country. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Velazquez]. (Ms. Velazquez asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 seconds. I think it bears merit to remember that it was the Republican majority in this House that wanted to cut the Medicare Program by $270 billion to pay for a tax break, $245 billion for the richest people in this country. It was the President and the people of this country that said no. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Levin].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains of my time? The SPEAKER pro tempore [Mr. Dreier]. The gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro] has 29 minutes remaining, the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spratt] has 36 minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays] has 68 minutes remaining.

Ms. DeLAURO. I might just add, Mr. Speaker, that the agreement clearly states $16 billion would be spent to cover half the kids. It has been estimated by the Congressional Budget Office that the bill would cover only 520,000 of those 10 million kids. That is coverage of less than 20 percent of the children who do not have access to health care today. I might add that the children who do not have access to health care today are the sons and the daughters of working families. These are people whose fathers and mothers are working every single day in order to protect their kids, and they are without health insurance. This bill offers no assurance that even one additional child will receive health care insurance. But what my Republican colleagues have done is instead they are going to send this money to the States with no requirement at all that the funds be used to give kids the health care that they need. There is nothing that says that this money needs to be used to pay for health insurance for kids today. The Republicans in fact are turning their back on working middle class families today. They are going to not allow our youngsters to grow up healthy and strong.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for yielding to me, and want to pick up a couple of points he has laid out here. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill, because in fact it does violate the bipartisan budget we passed earlier this month. In particular one of the areas where it is an outrage is what they have done in the whole issue of health care for children in this country. It denies working families the help they need to provide health care for their children. They have violated that very basic tenet of this agreement. There is no assurance of coverage for at least half of the 10 million children in the Nation today who do not have access to health insurance. Children living without health care coverage are hurt in so many ways in this country. They are less likely to have a family doctor, to receive preventive care, and they are less likely to have treatment for serious illnesses. They are less likely to grow up healthy and productive. The problem is not going away because every day in this country another 3,300 kids lose their health insurance.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 16 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior].

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote against this rule. This bill breaks the balanced budget agreement and it hurts average middle-class families in this country. I voted for the balanced budget agreement. This is not the bill that I voted for. I did not vote for a bill that hurts the middle class by denying working families help in providing health coverage for their kids. I did not vote for a bill that refuses to provide important basic worker protections in this country, protections like family and medical leave and protection against sexual harassment. I did not vote for a bill that hurts children's hospitals in my State. I did not vote for a bill that infringes on a woman's right to choose and I did not vote for a bill that does not promise to protect legal immigrants in this country. Today's Republican bill violates the budget agreement that was so carefully put together and so hard that we worked on. And it shortchanges middle-class American families so that tomorrow's Republican tax cut bill will be able to provide the richest 5 percent of Americans in this country with the biggest tax cuts in the bill. It is wrong. Working families are scrambling every single day, every day to pay their bills, to be able to send their kids to school, to protect themselves for a secure retirement and be able to have affordable health care coverage. The bill that we will vote for today will deny those protections to people. We should vote against this rule and tomorrow we should vote against the Republican tax cut bill. I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, just to add about the importance of the debate and the critical nature of it and why we ought to be spending a lot of time talking about this and debating it is because those tax cuts that are going to be provided to the wealthiest 5 percent, people making over $250,000, or to the largest corporations in this country, some of the capital gains taxes that are talked about, not targeted to a small businesses and small farmers, small farmers that the Democratic alternative talks about, these are irreversible. So that the gains for these folks at the top end will keep exploding, as the leader pointed out a little while ago, and they cannot be changed midstream. So that it would then continue and follow that those folks who are not at that level, who are making $25,000 or under, they are going to be frozen in ways in which we can never help them to move from, because we have, from this tax cut proposal that the Republicans have offered, locked in these enormous profits for people at the other end of the scale. It is indeed a very critical debate that is going to occur here in the next several days.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, if I could make one more comment, because my colleague is right, the press is beginning to report these stories and to show this Republican tax proposal for what it is. Just so that people do not think that it is just from a Democratic perspective that this tax proposal is being described, I just would like to quote a conservative political commentator, Kevin Phillips. This is what he has said, and he said this just last week on June 19: Republicans are determined to slash the capital gains tax, the estate tax, the corporate alternative minimum tax and some other provisions important to the people who write the campaign checks. I thank my colleague for letting me get that in.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from New Jersey, Mr. Pallone, and I am proud to be here before the House of Representatives with you tonight and the minority leader of the House, Mr. Gephardt and my colleague from Texas, Ms. Jackson-Lee, and we also have the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Olver here, and there may be several others joining. I think it is important to keep repeating over and over again that in fact there are two tax cut proposals that are on the table that are up for discussion. There is a Democratic proposal and a Republican proposal, and it is important for the country, and I was happy to hear my colleague from New Jersey say, because I, too, believe that the word is beginning to get through of, in fact, who benefits from these two tax cut proposals, working middle class families, which are the center and the core of what the Democratic tax cut proposal is all about, or the wealthiest 5 percent of the people in this country, which is where the Republican proposal focuses its time, its attention and the bulk of its resources. And I am delighted that the minority leader focused on the issue of education. It is my firm belief that any budget proposal that is passed by this body should help working middle class families, families who are striving or those families who are striving to make the leap into the middle class. These are families who are working hard, they do play by the rules, they scramble every week to pay their bills. They want what every family wants in this country, that shot at the American dream. That is what all our parents looked at and worked so hard for, a chance to make their kids' life a little bit better than their own, and the center of all of that, and I know in so many families, was the ability to be able to get your child an education, a decent education. It was the great equalizer. It could make a difference in what your child's future would be all about because it is education that opens doors to people in this country. It is the key to the opportunity. And it is more probably, particularly more important now in this global economy which requires up-to-date skills and lifelong learning so that when American families are looking for tax relief, they are hoping for a few more dollars to help send their kids to school and give them the shot at that American dream. The Democratic Members of this body are in favor of tax relief, and I am going to repeat that over and over and over again. We support tax cuts that would mainly benefit the folks who need them, working American families, and that is why the bulk of benefits under the Democratic tax proposal go to families making under $75,000 a year and why we are committed to giving average families the tools that they need to be able to afford to send their kids to school. We have talked a lot on this floor in the last several months, in the last couple of years in fact, that government cannot do everything for people. But in fact what government can do is to help to provide the tools to working families in this country to help them to meet the challenges that they face in their lives. And education of their kids is one of those challenges. Republicans talk the talk on education tax cuts, but they simply do not walk the walk. In the balanced budget agreement the Republicans agreed to $35 billion for the President's education initiatives. Instead, they have provided $22 billion to education proposals to help middle class families. The remaining funds are reserved for families who can already afford to set money aside for their kids' education. Let me just tell my colleagues about one of these American families who needs help in sending their kids to school. This picture here is of a young woman who lives in my district, Angela Salay. Angela comes from a middle class family in a small town in my district, Durham, CT. Angela graduated from high school just last week, and she is looking forward to attending Middlesex Community College in the fall, and she plans to transfer to a four-year college after her first year. Angela and her family are looking forward to the help that she might be able to get from a HOPE scholarship, $1,500 to help pay for the cost of college. Angela's mom has already paid to send Angela's two older sisters to college. The family estimates that the cost of her tuition will be approximately $1,800. Under the Democratic bill, when the law is fully phased in, Angela would get a HOPE scholarship for $1,500. Even next year, when the bill is partially phased in, Angela would receive an $1,100 HOPE scholarship. Under the Republican bill, Angela's scholarship would only be $900, $600 less than what she could receive under the Democratic proposal. Let me also show my colleagues another photograph. How about these young people celebrating that they graduated from high school. From left to right they are Gill Hissan, Sara Hansen, Darcey Knoll, Stephanie Morris, Eiador Ciatta, and Tony Capiello, and they graduated last week from high school. They are now beginning to plan, and their families are trying to plan, for how to get them to college. The average tuition for a 2-year public college in Connecticut is $1,646. Ninety-one percent of the cost of this tuition, $1,500, would be covered under the Democrat's plan and the HOPE scholarship. Under the Republican bill, the average student in Connecticut would only be eligible for an $824 tax credit, which is only 50 percent of the cost of tuition. Mr. Speaker, these differences might not seem that big to my friends on the other side of the aisle or their wealthy friends, but a few hundred dollars is a lot of money to their parents, to Angela Salay's parents, especially teenagers who are spending their summers working, trying to make some money for college. These are the kids who are flipping burgers, bagging groceries, and probably only making the minimum wage. These are the people that we need to be helping. When we take a look at why our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are only willing to pay half the cost on the HOPE scholarship, on an education tax cut, it is because what they want to do is to be able to phase out an alternative minimum tax, the alternate minimum tax, which allows the richest corporations in this country to come out with a zero tax obligation, the richest corporations. That is what they have proposed, and the bulk of their tax breaks are focused on the 5 percent of the richest people in this country, people who make over $250,000 a year. That is why the tax cuts for working middle-class families have been cut back or restricted in order to be able to make it easy for the people at the higher end of the scale. That is wrong. It is simply wrong to do that. We need to be providing working middle-class families with those tools that they need to help their kids and themselves meet the challenges in their lives. These folks, quite honestly, they are not asking to wipe out their tax obligation. That is not what they want. Some of the richest corporations in this country would like to have a zero tax obligation. They want to pay their fair share of taxes. They want the opportunity to get some help, to make sure their kids can compete and succeed. Like my parents and the parents of my colleagues who are here tonight, someday they might see Gill or Sara or Angela have the opportunity to serve in the House of Representatives and be able to represent people and be able to pass on and give some help to others. That is what they want for their kids. We owe them no less, to pass the Democratic alternative on a tax cut plan. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone], for this special order tonight.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, we are considering the important matter of whether the United States should extend China's most-favored-nation trading status. I want to build a strong relationship between the United States and China--a relationship under which American businesses and workers can prosper, a relationship which will encourage China to embrace international norms and human rights. But the MFN status China enjoys has done little to build a strong mutually beneficial relationship between our two nations. Under MFN, China has engaged in unfair trade practices, pirated intellectual property, spread weapons and dangerous technology to rogue nations, suppressed democracy, encroached on democratic reforms in Hong Kong, and engaged in human rights abuses. Many sing the praises of MFN, but as we consider this issue, we must focus on the facts. China has gladly profited from MFN while continually flaunting international agreements and standards of conduct. China sends one- third of its exports to the United States while only 1.7 percent of American exports can crack the Chinese market. The result: We now have a $40 billion trade deficit with China which is expected to reach a staggering $50 billion by the end of this year. And this trade deficit will not go away as long as China rigs its laws to block goods from the United States. Chinese goods enter our country at an average tariff rate of 2 percent while our exports face an average tariff of 35 percent. Worse, China extorts technology and expertise from American firms as the price of doing business in China. Congress has limited means to address our many and serious concerns regarding China. But China's exports to the United States of more than $50 billion per year give us leverage that we must use to further American interests--interests affecting trade, foreign policy, and American workers. The United States must not give China a pass on the tough issues. We need to use our trade laws to pressure China for greater access for American companies and goods. We need to take action when China knowingly aids in the proliferation of weapons and weapons technology. And we need to take steps to shield American workers from unfair and inhumane prison labor. I am voting against MFN for China because we need to let China and our trade leaders know that more of the same from China is not acceptable. If our Government wants support for free trade, then it must insist on fair and equal standards and compliance with our trade laws. When that happens there will be broader support for MFN.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I want to build a strong relationship between the United States and China, but the most-favored-nation status that China enjoys has done little to build a strong and mutually beneficial relationship between our two Nations. China has engaged in unfair trade practices, pirated intellectual property, spread weapons and dangerous technology to rogue nations, suppressed democracy, encroached on democratic reforms in Hong Kong, and engaged in human rights abuses. They have profited. They send one-third of their exports to the United States and allow only 1.7 percent of American exports to crack the Chinese market. The result? A $40 billion trade deficit which is expected to reach a staggering $50 billion by the end of this year. The United States should use our trade laws to pressure China for greater access for American companies and goods. I am voting against MFN for China because we need to let China and our trade leaders know that more of the same from China is not acceptable. If our Government wants support for free trade, then it must insist on fair and equal standards and compliance with our trade laws. When that happens, there will be broader support for MFN.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, the Democratic tax cut program says to families who work and who pay taxes, ``Yes, you are entitled to a tax cut, to a child tax cut.'' That is what we will provide for you. The Republican tax proposal says to the richest corporations of this country, ``We will lower your tax obligation and in fact many of you will have a zero tax obligation.'' That is what the Republican tax proposal says. Do not take my word for it. Listen to conservative political commentator Kevin Phillips: ``Republicans are determined to slash the capital gains tax, the estate tax, the corporate alternative minimum tax, and some other provisions important to the people who write the campaign checks.'' Mr. Speaker, those are not my words but a conservative Republican political pundit who says those. In addition to that, tonight my Republican colleagues have scheduled a million-dollar fund-raising dinner on the eve of the vote for their tax cut proposal. It makes perfect sense. Rich contributors will be able to thank the Republicans for crafting a program that helps them.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, this is an important week in the House of Representatives. There is going to be a discussion and a debate and a vote on a tax cut. Democrats and Republicans are supporting tax cuts. I will repeat that. Democrats and Republicans are supporting tax cuts. The issue and the discussion and the debate will be about, from these tax cuts, who benefits? Who are the people in this country who are going to be the beneficiaries of this tax relief or these tax cuts? In fact, Mr. Speaker, there is a difference between the Republican tax cut proposal and the Democratic tax cut proposal. The Republican tax proposal hurts working, middle-class families. That is the truth, plain and simple. While my colleague on the other side of the aisle will stand in the well of this House and say otherwise, it is not, in fact, the truth. Here are the facts about the Republican tax proposal. Let me just mention recent, within the last couple of days, newspaper articles that talk about these tax proposals. Quote: Before Congress votes on anything, however, it should get its facts right. The Republicans present bogus, false, bogus, wrong tables suggesting that their tax package is fair. The tables stop before the cuts that favor the wealthy on capital gains, inheritance taxes, and retirement accounts take hold. The tables suggest that the middle-class reaps most of the benefits, but independent analysts say that about 50 percent of the cuts will go to the richest 5 percent of taxpayers. Further newspaper account: The changes in Federal tax and benefit policies now working their way through Congress would eventually be worth thousands and thousands of dollars a year to the 5 million wealthiest families in America, while the 40 million families with the lowest incomes would actually lose money, a new study shows. The effect would be to widen the gap between the richest and the poorest families, a division that has been growing for the past 20 years. Mr. Speaker, working and middle-class families are going to be given the short end of the stick from the Republican tax cut proposal. Two- wage-earner families who now have a child care tax credit, these folks are going to be penalized. These are two people in the work force who take advantage of a child care tax credit because they have to send their children for child care. They are going to be penalized by the Republican tax cut proposal. The Republican bill hurts working families by denying minimum wage to those who are struggling to make the transition from welfare to work. Instead of being rewarded for work, people are going to be treated as second class citizens and not be paid the minimum wage. The Republican bill hurts students by providing $15 billion less for the education initiatives, for the HOPE scholarships, that were promised in the budget agreement. Middle-class working families are going to be hurt. Mr. Speaker, who is benefiting from these tax cuts? Big business and the wealthy under the Republican tax proposal. It helps big business by scaling back something called the alternative minimum tax by $22 billion. This was a tax that was supposed to ensure that the largest corporations in this country pay at least some tax. But now the Republicans want to scale it back and phase it out completely for some businesses. That means that some businesses would have a zero tax obligation. Further, over half of the benefits, as I have said, go to the top 5 percent of America. These are the facts. Again, Mr. Speaker, do not take my word. Republican pundit Kevin Phillips, a conservative political commentator, has said, ``Republicans are determined to slash the capital gains tax, the estate tax, the corporate alternative minimum tax and some other provisions important to the people who write the campaign checks.'' Mr. Speaker, it clearly identifies who they want to help. The Democratic package is focused on middle-class families. It provides the majority of its benefits to families who are making less than $100,000 a year. It also includes $37 billion for tax credits to help students to pay for college. It provides relief to small businesses, homeowners, and farmers in the form of targeted capital gains and estate tax cuts. Finally, the bill does not allow for the explosion of the deficit in later years. Mr. Speaker, in this budget debate, it is clear whose side the Republicans are on: big business and the wealthy. In fact, it is the Democrats who can say and stand with pride and talk about how we are trying to provide tax relief for those people, working middle-class American families, who every single day are getting up and going to work and paying taxes and therefore need to have tax relief so that they can afford to raise their kids, educate them, pay for their health care, and help to pay for their retirement security.