Wally Herger

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5173) to provide for reconciliation pursuant to sections 103(b)(2) and 213(b)(2)(C) of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2001 to reduce the public debt and to decrease the statutory limit on the public debt, as amended.

Mr. HERGER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, we have a historic opportunity before us today. We can make debt reduction the priority instead of the afterthought. This Congress can throw away the old ways of paying debt only after the spending is done. We are also reaffirming our commitment to saving every penny of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. Ending the raid on these trust funds is the right thing to do. All in all this bill will pay down an unprecedented $240 billion in public debt in just 1 year. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for this measure for our children, for our grandchildren, for our seniors, and for the best interests of our Nation. Madam Speaker, and just responding quickly to my friend on the other side of the aisle on the gospel of debt reduction, I would like to refer to the board, a graph up here which shows that for 40 years under Democrat control, we deficit-spent every year; and I think what is important is that for the last year, for the last 4 years, we have not only not deficit-spend, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. And I say to my good friend, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), in 1998 we paid down $51 billion. In 1999, we paid down $87 billion. In fiscal year 2000, $224 billion; and this year, we are asking to pay down $240 billion. Again the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We have done it before, and let us do it now and let us commit to it.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, 150 years ago this past Saturday the state of California entered into the Union. I rise today to commemorate this anniversary, and to celebrate the resources and treasures of the 2nd congressional district. Historically, the great state of California is most often associated with the Gold Rush. Northern California was the main destination of those in search of quick wealth. The banks of the Feather River yielded great riches to those who were in the right place at the right time, but the precious metal that caused a rush to the West was not the only treasure that California possessed. Young settlers whose dreams had not materialized in the gold fields soon turned to the fertile Central Valley and envisioned golden acres of grain. Today those acres are covered with fruit trees, rice fields, and almond and walnut orchards, as the valley continues to yield its agricultural treasure, making California the leading agricultural economy in the world. Others looked at the golden promise in the vast forests. Their labor provided the lumber for the growing towns and cities of Northern California. A tremendous renewable resource to the American people, our forests provide materials for homes and businesses, as well as endless recreational opportunities and habitat for unique plant and animal species. Some entrepreneurs recognized that there were other ways to gather gold than simply panning in a streambed. They opened dry goods stores, banks and hotels. Women found that they could earn a living utilizing their household skills cooking and cleaning for miners who couldn't. California was born a land of golden opportunities and to this day she continues to call to those willing to take a risk in order to improve their own lives. Many came to California for only a visit, but stayed a lifetime. The specious skies, majestic mountains, and rushing rivers of Northern California stirred their souls, while her fertile valleys, gentle climate, and endless opportunities captured their imagination. Yes, gold fever may have lured early settlers here, but even though the stores of that precious metal have mostly given out, people still flock to California today. As a third generation Northern Californian, I am very proud of the beauty and resources of my native land. I am proud to celebrate the 150 years that this jewel has been an important part of our great nation.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this legislation.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, Americans are being taxed at the highest rate since World War II. The worst example of this is the death tax, a provision that punishes Americans trying to leave a family farm or small business to their loved ones. Instead of being left a legacy built on hard work and dedication, grieving families are subjected to taxes so high, many are forced to sell their inheritance just to pay the IRS. That is completely unfair. In my northern California district, some of the leading employers are family farms and small businesses. These hard-working Americans deserve tax fairness and the opportunity to pursue the American dream without being punished by the IRS. Let us do the right thing by voting to override the President's veto of the death tax.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Farmer Tax Fairness Act, along with my Ways and Means Committee colleagues, Representatives Thurman, Hayworth, Dunn, Tanner, Camp, McCrery, English, and Foley. This legislation will help ensure that farmers have access to tax benefits rightfully owed them. As those of us from agricultural areas understand, farmers' income often fluctuates from year to year based on unforeseen weather or market conditions. Income averaging allows farmers to ride out these unpredictable circumstances by spreading out their income over a period of years. Last year, we acted in a bipartisan manner to make income averaging a permanent provision of the tax code. Unfortunately, since that time, we have learned that, due to interaction with another tax code provision, the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), many of our nation's farmers have been unfairly denied the benefits of this important accounting tool. Our legislation directly addresses the concerns being raised by farmers using income averaging. Under the Farmer Tax Fairness Act, if a farmer's AMT liability is greater than taxes due under the income averaging calculation, that fanner would disregard the AMT and pay taxes according to the averaging calculation. As such, farmers will be able to take full advantage of income averaging as intended by Congress. This provision is a reasonable measure designed to ensure farmers are treated fairly when it comes time to file their taxes. I urge my colleague to join me in promoting greater tax fairness for our nation's farmers.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, it is projected that the Federal Government will take in more than $2 trillion in taxpayer overpayments over the next decade, excluding Social Security dollars. Should we not use a small part of this surplus to correct one of the most onerous provisions of the U.S. Tax Code, the totally unfair marriage penalty? The bill we are considering today will provide real tax relief for 25 million married couples, 47,000 of which are in my district in northern California. This legislation will save taxpayers almost $90 billion over the next 5 years. It is important to remember that these are dollars that married taxpayers currently pay to the government for no other reason except that they are married. The Clinton-Gore administration claims that we cannot afford to give back to the taxpayers a small portion of their tax overpayment. Mr. Speaker, if we cannot afford to give the taxpayers back some of their own money when we have record budget surpluses, when will we be able to? When a couple stands at an altar and says, ``I do,'' they are not agreeing to higher taxes. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I hope that the President and the Vice President, Al Gore, would drop their opposition and sign this much-needed measure into law.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Debt Reduction Reconciliation Act of 2001. Recently we learned from the Congressional Budget Office that non- Social Security budget surpluses will be nearly $1.3 trillion more than previously anticipated over the next decade. Make no mistake, if we do not protect the people's surplus, politicians will find a way to spend it on more government. This legislation protects all the Social Security and Medicare surpluses for fiscal year 2001 while setting aside $25 billion in additional surplus to pay down the public debt. We must seize this unique opportunity and not just spend it on bigger government. Simply put, paying down the public debt lessens the burden facing the next generation of Americans. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 326 I inadvertently voted ``present.'' I intended to vote ``no.''

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, why do we not pass this first, and then we will do it next year.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this is not a complicated bill. It is very simple. It is basically saying that, for the first time in more than 40 years, that we are not going to spend the surplus, whatever that surplus is. That is, in Medicare and Social Security, we are not going to spend it. Very simply, whatever it is, we are not going to spend. It brings about a point of order to ensure that we do not. Look how far we have come. It was only a few years ago that we were looking at deficits of $200 billion and $300 billion, and that did not even include the surplus of Social Security or Medicare. Then a few years ago, we were reporting $80 billion, $90 billion, $100 billion surpluses; but that did include, I am afraid, Medicare and Social Security. But guess what, those surpluses were only half true. Every penny of those surplus dollars were really Social Security dollars. So what did we do? We passed a Social Security lock box last year that said that we would not spend any of the surplus of Social Security, and that passed. Now Congress and the President speak of budget surpluses without Social Security being included in it. This amount is estimated to be $40 billion this year. Now we are raising the bar one notch higher. We are saying that we are now going to stop raiding Medicare, just as we stopped raiding Social Security last year. What we are doing is ensuring that Social Security recipients deserve to know that their Medicare dollars are not being spent on anything else except Medicare. This bill is a win-win. It is a win for fiscal discipline. It is a win for Medicare. Most importantly, it is a win for our seniors. I urge all my colleagues to support this Medicare and Social Security lock box.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank all the colleagues that have come to the floor today to support this incredibly important first step toward protecting Medicare surpluses. Over the next 5 years, an estimated $126 billion more will be paid into the Medicare trust fund by taxpayers than is currently being taken out for Medicare expenses. Our seniors deserve to know that these Medicare surplus dollars are not being spent on unrelated programs. The Medicare lock box prohibits legislation that spends the Medicare surplus from being considered and separates Medicare funds from future budget projections. Last year, we locked away the Social Security surplus. Today we have the opportunity to take it one step further and protect our seniors' Medicare surpluses. I urge my colleagues to support this. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time to close.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just to quickly respond to the gentleman, again, this legislation was authored last March 6. I am pleased that the Vice President came out 2 weeks ago and does not want to spend social security-Medicare trust funds now. Really, that is what it is all about, are we going to continue, as the last Congresses have for over 30 years, spending social security and Medicare trust funds, or are we going to save it just for that? Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan), who serves on the Committee on the Budget and has worked on this issue very diligently.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. What our goal is, since 1935, we have been spending both Social Security and the Medicare part of Social Security on ongoing programs. I am very grateful that we have a bipartisan bill here, we have Members of the other party; and I am very grateful for the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), who has been working with us on our last bill last year and this one this year; and the goal is that we not spend it, and that is what we are attempting to do. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith), who has spent many, many hours working on Social Security; and I appreciate the gentleman's efforts. (Mr. SMITH of Michigan asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield further to me, again, looking back since 1935, almost all of those years were controlled by the Democrats. These were, number one, being spent and were included as part of the budget. My ultimate goal is to do as we did last year with Social Security and take it completely off budget. My concern is, because of opposition on the gentleman's side and the fact that the Vice President evidently, and Senator Daschle, a Democrat from South Dakota, are not allowing us to vote on it over there, we thought we would take it one step at a time. The first step would be that at least we were not going to count it, that it would be secluded, that we would see the number and it would have to be reported as a separate number, taking that as a half a loaf, and then come back next year, which I can assure the gentleman I am going to do, and go with the rest of the loaf to make sure it is completely off budget.

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

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, for over 30 years, surplus dollars in the Social Security Trust Fund were raided and spent on unrelated programs. Last year, this Congress took the first step towards stopping the raid on Social Security bypassing legislation I introduced, the Social Security lock box, by an overwhelming 416 to 12 vote. Our efforts paid off, and last year, not one penny of the $124 billion Social Security surplus was spent. But Social Security is not the only trust fund to be raided over the years. Over the next 5 years, taxpayers will pay an estimated $126 billion more into the Medicare trust fund part A which pays for in- patient hospital care than will be taken out for Medicare expenses. Without a Medicare lock box, those surpluses will be spent. Mr. Speaker, it is time to raise the bar and protect Medicare. The 40 million seniors and disabled in this Nation that depend on Medicare deserve to know that their Medicare money is not being spent on anything else. In March, I introduced the Medicare lock Box we are debating today. Through a point of order, this Medicare lock box prohibits the consideration of any legislation that spends any of the Medicare part A surplus. The Medicare lock box also prevents Medicare surpluses from being intermingled with the rest of the budget. Additionally, under this measure the protected Medicare surpluses will go towards paying down public debt, accelerating our efforts to pay off the public debt by 2013. Mr. Speaker, this bill is a win-win. It is a win for fiscal discipline, it is a win for fairness in budgeting and, most importantly, it is a win-win for our seniors. I urge my colleagues to stand up for our seniors and vote for the Medicare lock box. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3859) to amend the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to protect Social Security and Medicare surpluses through strengthened budgetary enforcement mechanisms, as amended.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3859.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, my original bill actually did take it off budget. That is what I would like to see done eventually. However, as the gentleman knows, I did pass legislation last year, which I believe the gentleman supported, on taking Social Security off budget which we cannot even get out of the Senate, which the Vice President seems to be opposing his President on over there. So what we are doing is taking it one step at a time. I might mention that even though it passed here overwhelmingly, and even though the Vice President, who brought this out 2 weeks ago, and I congratulated him, I authored it last March, it is better to come late than not come at all, and I am glad he is joining us.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will again yield, I believe we need to do that, because as the gentleman knows, during the years that the Democrats controlled this House for over 40 years that these surpluses were spent, they were counted as part of the ongoing budget. So the intention is to separate them, to actually determine what is being spent and what is not being spent, so that we can hold each of our Members, 435 here in the House and 100 in the Senate, responsible if they vote for spending that goes into that. That is why we want it separate.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Again, I thank my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), for his longtime support and work on walling off both social security and Medicare. Let me just point out again that this does take Medicare off the table. It would require a special vote in order to spend anything above that. It does not go quite as far as the gentleman from Texas and I want to go. Hopefully next year in further Congresses we will do that, but I do thank the gentleman for his help. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Dakota (Mr. Thune), and I want to again thank him for his tireless support in working in this area.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, just briefly responding to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), who mentioned this is at least a small step, I really believe this is a major step. It is the first step, because it is saying that, for the first time in more than 40 years, we are not going to do as previous Congresses have done, the party of the gentleman from South Carolina did, for all the years it controlled this House, in that they spent it all. They counted it, included it as part of the ongoing budget and spent it. What we are saying is that this money is being removed from the table. We are not going to spend it. We are dedicating it as the first step to be used to saving and preserving and improving Medicare. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Kentucky (Mrs. Northup).

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of giving American farmers, producers, and exporters a level playing field in China bypassing permanent normal trade relations. While there have been compelling arguments made on both sides of this difficult issue, I believe that approving PNTR is clearly in America's best interests. This opportunity is especially important to our Nation's farmers. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that farm exports to China could grow by $2 billion annually as a result of PNTR. But normalizing trade with China would do far more than just increase American exports. It will also expand democratic influence in China as American businesses bring our democratic ideals directly to the Chinese people. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support PNTR.