David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Youngstown, OH [Mr. Traficant] for telling it like it is. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss], distinguished chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and chairman of the Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget Process. (Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Ganske], an able member of the Committee on Commerce.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, my friend referred to Republican reign over these deficits. I recommend that he look at the U.S. Constitution. Article I, section 7 makes it very clear, the responsibility for all taxing and spending lies right here in the House of Representatives. This is the first tax cut that we have had in 16 years. For 13 of those 16 years, this place was controlled by the Democrats. When President Clinton ran for office in 1992, he promised a tax cut for middle income Americans. The last Democratic Congress worked with him to bring about the largest tax increase in history. Many Members like to claim that that tax increase is somehow responsible for the economic growth we are enjoying today. Why is it then that with the measure that we will be voting on within the next 3 hours we are repealing large parts of that tax increase? The best thing that ever happened to Bill Clinton was the election of a Republican Congress. If Members look at the fact that in 1993 and 1994 we saw an increase in interest rates, we saw a stock market that was not taking off, November 1994 saw the election of the first Republican Congress in 40 years and in 1996, the reelection of the first Republican Congress in 68 years; if we look at election day 1994, we can draw a line. We have seen interest rates on a downward slope since we began to focus on balancing the budget, reducing the size and scope of Government and cutting the tax burden on working Americans. In November 1994, the Dow Jones industrial average was at 3,900. Now it is right around 8,000. The fact is, we as Republicans have helped to improve this economy and it would not have happened had we not been in the majority. I am very pleased that we are working in a bipartisan way to address this issue of the tax burden on working Americans. I look forward to seeing this Archer bill pass today and to have it signed by the President of the United States. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution, as amended. The previous question was ordered. The resolution, as amended, was agreed to. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, the author of the Archer bill, which it is now very appropriately called, for yielding me this time. I rise, Mr. Speaker, to simply talk about what I think is one of the single most important provisions in this measure, and that is the reduction of the top rate on capital gains. Back in 1993, several of our colleagues came together and worked on this issue of capital gains. We established what we called the Zero Capital Gains Tax Caucus. We recognized that capital gains tax rates, in fact, are some of the most confiscatory that we have of all. Why? Because people already pay a tax on that income that they are investing. So what is it that we need to look at? We need to look at what it is that the capital gains tax rate reduction is going to do for this economy. Clearly, we are going to stimulate a dramatic increase in economic growth. Every shred of evidence that we have throughout this century has proven that, going all the way back to Andrew Mellon's stint as Treasury Secretary under President Warren G. Harding, to the Kennedy tax cuts of the 1960's and, yes, the much-maligned Reagan tax cuts of 1981, which I was telling the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Archer] earlier today, I am very proud that that is the one tax bill that I voted for, the Economic Recovery Tax Act of Ronald Reagan back in 1981. As we look at decreasing the capital gains tax rate, I am convinced that we will do more to help working class Americans than virtually anything else we could do. There was a lot of talk about family tax cuts, but the studies we have conducted found that by reducing that top rate on capital gains, we will, in fact, Mr. Speaker, increase the take-home pay for the average working American family by $1,500 per year. Now, if we look at those facts, it is going to improve the opportunity for many. We also, Mr. Speaker, are going to be able to increase the flow of revenues to the Federal Treasury. When the Steiger capital gains tax cut went into place in 1978, we saw a revenue flow of about $9 billion. During the next several years, before the 1986 Tax Reform Act, we saw the flow of revenues to the Treasury increase by 500 percent, from $9 billion to $50 billion. We had H.R. 14. I wanted it to go first to 14 percent then to zero. Democrats and Republicans joined me on that. We have ended up with a decent compromise, and I am very proud to support it.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Columbus, OH [Ms. Pryce], the hardworking Secretary of the Republican Conference and a member of the Committee on Rules. Ms. PRYCE OF Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the hardworking gentleman from California [Mr. Dreier], who has fought so hard over the last several years for tax fairness, for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule for the Taxpayer Relief Act. Just as history shows tax increases hamper economic growth, it will also show that the proper path to creating new jobs in growth is by lowering taxes. That is what we are about to do today with this historic conference report. We are going to put America back on track to growth and prosperity. For years Republicans have wanted individuals and families to control their own economic destinies. We fought for changes in the Tax Code to allow them to keep more of their hard-earned dollars, and we have pushed for commonsense changes to encourage savings and investment. Today, Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely elated that we are taking another historic step, indeed, a giant leap in fact, toward a new era of growth and opportunity that will touch the lives of all of those who still believe in the American dream. This conference agreement is a balanced plan to unite our country behind a new economic strategy that will expand opportunities for so many Americans. I implore my colleagues who might oppose this bipartisan effort to put away the tired refrains of class warfare. As my Democratic colleague, the gentleman from Youngstown, OH [Mr. Traficant], earlier so rightly stated, this is not good for America, it is not right for America, and it is actually very, very dangerous for America. It is time to recognize that an economic system that allows individuals and families to create opportunities for themselves and their communities is infinitely more preferable than government barriers to entrepreneurship and innovation. Mr. Speaker, it is hard to find someone this Taxpayer Relief Act does not help. To ease the financial burden on families with children, this plan includes a $500-per-child tax credit. There is capital gains relief. There is estate tax or death tax relief, as it should be called. There is an equally important provision to make higher education more affordable, to expands IRA's and to increase tax deductions for the self-employed. Mr. Speaker, these are just a few of the items in this package that I believe will change this Nation's economic destiny for the better. When all is said and done, I am confident that we will look back at what we began here this week and say that we curbed the size of government, we lowered taxes, and we revived the economic potential of the American people. Better than that, there will be more to come next year. Most important, Mr. Speaker, we will be able to say that we gave the taxpayers the tools they needed and they completed the job. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to restore the economic hope across the country. Vote for this fair rule. Support the Taxpayer Relief Act.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 206 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Frost]. All time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks and to include extraneous material.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, if I were to address the American people, I would say, Today, you can finally believe that you will get a tax cut. We will pass it. The President will sign it. You can take this tax cut to the bank. This rule provides for consideration of the conference report on H.R. 2014, the long-awaited Archer tax cut bill. The rule waives all points of order against the conference report to accompany H.R. 2014 and against its consideration. The rule provides that the conference report be considered as read. The rule also provides for 2\1/2\ hours of debate equally divided and controlled between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means. Mr. Speaker, I want to point out at the beginning that a balanced budget, even with this tax relief, will not solve all of our Nation's problems. However, the Archer bill is a major victory for American workers who pay the taxation that run the Government. The American family has not seen tax relief from their excessive Federal tax burden since 1981. Taxes eat up too much of the average family budget. I am honored to represent many working families who, unfortunately, pay more in taxes then they spend on food, clothing, and housing combined. Hard working people who save for retirement or struggle to build a small business or family farm see Federal taxes eat up far too much of their savings and investments. The Archer bill will help to address those problems. Last November, the American people gave Congress and the President a mandate to balance the Federal budget, provide tax relief for working families, create incentives for private sector job creation, preserve the Medicare program, and promote quality educational opportunities for all children. Let us face it, Mr. Speaker, many Americans did not believe that we would deliver. Commitments from elected officials mean little or nothing to those disillusioned by broken promises of big government and high taxes. A Washington Post columnist, David Broder, once described the President's trust deficit with the American people as even more damaging than the budget deficit. Congress is helping to eliminate both. In November of 1994, American voters made Republicans the majority in Congress for the first time in four decades. They wanted a change, and the new Congress vowed to succeed where previous Congresses had failed. That change in leadership sent us down the path that we are on today. Mr. Speaker, the Republican majority believed that keeping promises was as important a goal as balancing the budget, cutting taxes and reducing the size and scope of the overly intrusive Federal Government. Now, there is no doubt that this zeal did not always adapt well to the political realities of divided government. The American people have watched Washington's rocky moments with some understandable frustration, but they have also witnessed some momentous accomplishments, and from my perspective, the Archer tax relief legislation is at the top of that list. As the sponsor of the bipartisan, job creating and investment encouraging capital gains tax relief bill, which I join with my colleague, the gentlewoman from Kansas City, MO [Ms. McCarthy] and other Democrats and Republicans, we put together the largest number of cosponsors, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Archer], the chairman, for the tremendous work that he did in the face of the outdated class warfare rhetoric that came from some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Reducing the job killing, investment stifling capital gains tax is the single best way to promote wage growth, spur real economic growth, and ensure that we will balance the budget by the year 2002. I applaud the effort of our negotiators because they share the commitment to raise the wages of American workers and ensure that strong growth balances the budget. At the end of the day, when the dust clears, we must look back over the past 3 years with some amazement and pride. We have enacted a balanced budget, cut taxes on families and job creators, reformed welfare, controlled illegal immigration, saved Medicare, and made private sector health insurance more available and affordable. Combine the achievement of those bedrock Republican Party goals with the expansion of free trade through the North American Free Trade Agreement and the GATT Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in the 103d Congress and the election and historic reelection of the Republican Congress, and we can make the case that President Clinton has compiled one of the most impressive Republican legacies of any President in this century. Mr. Speaker, the Republican-led Congress has put policy ahead of blind partisanship. I congratulate the President for working with us to make Government a more cost-effective vehicle, for improving the standard of living of the American people. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I was very privileged to come to the Congress in 1981 and vote for the Economic Recovery Tax Act of Ronald Reagan. I did so along with my very dear friend from Glens Falls, NY, the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon].

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. What a fascinating debate. The American people know that the words ``tax cutting'' and ``Democrat'' heretofore would clearly be an oxymoron. It is wonderful now to hear the great statements emerging from the other side of the aisle. I have to say that one of the fighters for meaningful tax reduction is my very good friend from Guilford County, NC. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Greensboro, NC [Mr. Coble].

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It is obvious from the debate on the other side of the aisle that the Democrats continue to be the tax-and-spend party.

Mr. DREIER. I yield to my friend, the gentleman from Rhode Island.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It is fascinating to listen to the attack by my friend from Vermont on Bill Gates. I do not stand here as a defender of any particular individual. But I would say that Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, has made it very clear, the reason the United States of America is so productive today and we have the highest standard of living is there are more Americans with computers on their desks who are working hard to make sure that the level of productivity increases more than any country on the face of the Earth. Amendment Offered by Mr. Dreier

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment to the resolution I have placed at the desk be considered as adopted.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would say in response to the gentleman that socialism is a failed economic system and one single individual has been on the cutting edge of ensuring that the level of productivity in the United States of America has enhanced to the level that it is, increasing the take-home pay for many, many people. Computers have played a role in doing that. Chairman Greenspan has pointed that out. I happen to believe that it is great. I just want to see more people in a position where they can enjoy the kind of success that Bill Gates has enjoyed. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, what an incredible difference the Republican Congress makes. Just a few short years ago, we saw the largest tax increase in history proposed by President Clinton. We are going to be repealing large parts of that today, and we saw a plan for nationalized health insurance, much of which is going to be addressed successfully with our private sector approach that is included in this bill. Today we celebrate the first balanced budget in nearly three decades, we celebrate the first tax cut in 16 years, and we mark the transformation of Bill Clinton from a tax-and-spend liberal to custodian of the Republican legacy of lower taxes and less government. It is a great day for every American.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DREIER. I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would simply like to respond to my good friend and neighbor, the gentleman from Rhode Island, that if we look at this debate that we are going to be having on this issue, it is really the culmination of what for many of us has been a decade or a decade and a half of debate on these issues. My friend is relatively new to this body, and I think that he clearly should spend a lot of time discussing and looking at these questions. But the fact of the matter is, 90 minutes is not going to be the full debate time for this question. In fact, we just had testimony upstairs, and let me just say that if we look at the fact that we 12 years ago introduced a resolution calling for the establishment of medical savings accounts, which my friend just raised, we have been debating that issue for well over 10 years. So this really is the culmination of a very great, great accomplishment that has been done in a bipartisan way, and that is why I am strongly supportive of this rule.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, because I had not stood here yet to announce it: Speakernews.House.gov. That is maybe why the Clerk did not know it yet. The fact is, it is there. It can be found. At 3:14 this morning my very dear friend from Glens Falls pulled another all-nighter. He went right to the office of the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Moakley] and delivered this thing. It was delivered at 3:14 this morning. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon] wanted to take it to the house of the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Moakley], but his better judgment told him to simply take it to the office at 3:14 in the morning. This is in fact a very good package. We should move ahead with it as quickly as possible.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me the time. I would like to give this to my colleagues: Speakernews..House.gov. The World Wide Web has it. It is there. It has been there since early this morning. Obviously my friend did not move to the appropriate site.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon] for yielding me this time. It is very clear Bill Clinton will, by virtue of supporting this measure, be leaving one of the greatest Republican legacies in recent history, and we are very proud to be able to play a strong role in bringing that opportunity about. This debate that has been going on has to do with whether or not Members have utilized Speakernews.House.Gov. When I last stood here, I said that it was on line. Obviously, I was a real visionary. It was about to be on line, and it now is there and available. I did speak a little too soon, but the fact of the matter is virtually everyone has been following this debate. The Democratic Caucus and the Republican Conference have been discussing this measure for a long period of time. We have had hearings, we have had debates on these issues for years in some cases. I am particularly proud of several of the provisions that are included in this balanced budget agreement. One of them includes 390,000 demonstration cases for medical savings accounts. As we were discussing this up in the Committee on Rules earlier this morning, I mentioned the fact our former colleague French Slaughter and I, 12 years ago, introduced legislation called the health care savings account. It was modeled after a package put together by the Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas, TX, and it actually was designed to be a successor to Medicare, because even more than a decade ago we were looking at the problems of Medicare and pursuing the idea of health care savings accounts. So I am hoping that these 390,000 demonstration cases will be a real plus and a benefit as we look at baby boomers moving toward retirement and the health care costs for retirees. One of the other provisions that I think is very important is what is called the Disproportionate Share Hospital funding formula, known as DSH. It is not perfect from the perspective of a Californian, but I believe it goes a long way toward addressing a number of the very important concerns. Mr. Speaker, I also want to point to this issue, which a number of us have been very sensitive to, specifically on our side of the aisle the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Diaz-Balart], the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen], and a number of us from California, and that has to do with legal immigrants who could conceivably be thrown off of SSI. I believe as we look at the fact that a legal immigrant clearly is to have a sponsor, we did not want to see those who were elderly or infirm in any way jeopardized. This agreement addresses that. Most important, it gets us right on to that glidepath toward a balanced budget, and I believe we have a very, very good opportunity to do that. That is why this is a great day for both the Republican and the Democratic Parties and all of the American people, and I urge strong support of the rule and then support for this package, and tomorrow the greatest tax cut that we have had in 16 years. I anxiously look forward to supporting that.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to get back onto the issue here if I could. I rise in very strong support of this rule. The gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer] was talking a few minutes ago about the number of people here who have a great deal of pride and reverence for this institution. I clearly consider myself to be among them. I am very proud of the work that the gentleman from California [Mr. Thomas] has done to try and deal with reform of an institution which spent most of its time on legislative branch work simply trying to ensure the reelection of its Members. I am very proud of the work of the gentleman from New York [Mr. Walsh] and of so many others who have focused on ensuring that this institution expands the deliberative nature and that we are in fact accountable to the people who sent us here. I am very saddened to see this debate deteriorate to, as the gentleman from New York [Mr. Walsh] has said, a case of waving the bloody shirt of racism. I happen to like the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Sanchez]. She agrees with me on a number of issues like cutting the capital gains tax rate. I think she is a very decent, hardworking person. And I am very concerned about the prospect of seeing us in any way discriminate against Hispanic-Americans. I come from Los Angeles, CA. I am very sensitive to this issue. But the fact of the matter is there are many Hispanic Americans in my State who have said to me, we have to ensure that that very precious franchise, the right to vote, is not in any way jeopardized. And so, Mr. Speaker, I think that the work that is being done to ensure that every single vote counts is correct work, and I believe that this rule is a very fair and balanced rule. As the gentleman from New York [Mr. Walsh] has said, it ensures that the consideration of both Democrats and Republicans is brought into the mix here. Let us support the previous question, let us support the rule, and let us support what I am convinced will be a very, very good legislative branch appropriations product that will emerge from this House.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise to join this stimulating debate that is taking place at 11:20 here on electrometallurgical treatment. I know that my colleagues are fascinated by it, but the fact of the matter is, it is a very serious and important matter. Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose, as I have in the past, the amendment being offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey], my very good friend, and I would like to associate myself with the words of my colleagues who have spoken in opposition. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Knollenberg], my friend from Bloomfield Hills, has just raised the issue of corporate welfare. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Rush] also raised that issue. The fact of the matter is this is not corporate welfare. We are not talking about the disposal of fuels that are in any way related with anything other than direct government programs. We have the Department of Energy faced with this very serious question of how to deal with this spent fuel, and we have a very creative, positive solution which is being researched and developed at Argonne. It seems to me that as we look at this problem which is looming and continues to grow, we have a responsibility to face it. So Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to join in strong opposition to the Markey amendment. I strongly encourage them to support the position that has been moved forward by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. McDade], chairman of the subcommittee, and the work of this subcommittee. It seems to me that when we look at the challenges that loom ahead, we have a responsibility to look at every creative way that we can to deal with this pressing issue, because it is not going to be an issue that will in any way go away. It is one that is going to become greater and greater. That is why the work at Argonne must continue. We have got to have once again a very strong vote in opposition to the Markey amendment, and I urge my colleagues to join with us when we cast that vote tomorrow.