Blake Moore

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Zinke).

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Owens).

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Palmer).

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson).

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Sergeant First Class Eric Reyes's exemplary and distinguished record of service to our country during his twenty years on active duty. A native of the Bronx, New York, he enlisted in the Army as an infantryman after graduating from high school in January 2005. During his 20-year career, Eric has served at every level of leadership within the Army, leading our Nation's greatest resource, our sons and daughters. He has led teams through the platoon level on multiple combat tours and spent most of his career at the tactical level, specializing in combined arms maneuver and large-scale combat operations. He has deployed twice in support of the Global War on Terror and distinguished himself within the infantry community, earning his Master Combat Infantryman's Badge. Eric led at every step within a platoon and below and had an outsized impact on the training and readiness of future generations. He has been an observer-controller certifying and participating in 16 combat training center rotations, ensuring 16 platoons achieved the highest levels of readiness to deploy and win in combat. He was also a drill sergeant for nearly three years, training all recruits that came through Fort Jackson, South Carolina, during his time. Most recently, he has served as the Senior Military Science Instructor at the University of Utah ROTC program within my district. He has spent the last three years as the senior military instructor for all tactics, overseeing over 400 officers within the ROTC program at the University of Utah. Eric Reyes has had a lasting impact on our Nation, deploying to fight in her wars, leading our fine men and women in uniform, and training the next generation of warriors in our great Army, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Sergeant First Class Eric Reyes for his selfless dedication, unwavering leadership, and steadfast commitment to our country. He is retiring this December after 20 years of stalwart service to our great Nation. I want to extend my deepest gratitude to him, his wife, Sarah, and their children, Xavier, Maliena, Olivia, and Sophia, for their sacrifices and contributions to the strength and security of our country.

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this Special Order.

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Madam Speaker, I am glad to be joined by several of my colleagues for this last Conference Special Order of the year to talk about ways we have delivered for all Americans through our legislative action, committee work, and more. I understand some of my colleagues have commitments, and I am going to be respectful of their time, so I will have them start us off before I provide some of my own comments. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Kennedy), a good friend.

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Utah, a physician and attorney, for bringing up all of these issues. It is so important to call up the reality of it. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Loudermilk).

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's remarks. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Guest).

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin and the issue that he brings up. It is something that some of my State legislators are working on, namely Ms. Melissa Garff Ballard. She is an excellent policymaker and lawmaker back home. This is something she cares deeply about and is doing quite a lot of good work on at the State level. I applaud her for that. Madam Speaker, I thank you and all my colleagues for your comments this evening. It is very much appreciated. As we move into the next couple of weeks when we get to celebrate the holidays, it is excellent to look back and think about the amazing work that has taken place over the last year. As it is dominating the headlines, we recognize there is a lot to talk about with healthcare, particularly this week. I want to touch on a few aspects. To be abundantly clear, Republicans are currently dealing with the aftermath of what has been a decade or so of failure. The Democrats put in place an unaffordable and fraudulent healthcare system. For years, Democrats promised ObamaCare would lower costs. In reality, premiums have increased nearly 80 percent since the so-called Affordable Care Act was enacted. The average premium for family coverage is nearly $27,000 per year. A report from the Government Accountability Office confirms what Republicans have said for years. There is significant fraud associated with COVID-era enhanced premium tax credits established by the trifecta of President Joe Biden and majorities in the House and Senate led by Democrats. Again, in 2021, Democrats put in place what is called the enhanced premium tax credits. They did this during their COVID-era bills: The American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act. These were two bills that were massive expansions for several programs. In particular, they were able to pass this legislation on party-line votes and set it for 4 years. Democrats set this policy during COVID to last for 4 years and expire at the end of this year. In this study, GAO found that 58,000 enrollees matched Social Security death records, with 7,000 of them being deceased before enrollment began. One Social Security number was even associated with 125 different ObamaCare policies in one year. That is the first level of potential fraud. The second item is that a zero-dollar premium obviously leads to more fraud, and that is what we have seen happen. Enrollment went up without people using or even knowing that they had coverage. This is something we need checks and balances on. When they moved the original Obama subsidies--and those aren't going anywhere. They are still in place. They are not expiring at the end of this year. They have existed from the start. It is only the Democrat Party's 2021 enhanced version that is expiring. The worst aspect of those, in my opinion, is the fact that a person used to be required to pay just 2 percent of their annual income toward health insurance premiums. The taxpayer dollars paid the insurance company the remainder of that. A person was only required to pay 2 percent. That moved to zero percent in 2021. Since 2021, there was a massive expansion of people being on these premiums and this insurance coverage but never using it. They never used it year over year, but the insurance company continued to get taxpayer-funded subsidies directly to them to cover nothing because they never used it. The percentage of people who weren't using their health insurance went up significantly. It wasn't like people were getting hurt or sick at a similar rate. What was happening was they didn't know they were in the system. As part of the GAO study will explain, they were getting signed up. The last final piece that I will highlight here are the income caps. People could still be making 400 percent above the Federal poverty level the insurance companies that they were getting signed up for were still receiving these subsidies. Originally, when we talk about ObamaCare, it was just for folks who were very low-income and were uninsured and didn't have the ability to make any payments toward covering their own insurance. What ObamaCare does is it says if a person is 100 percent or 150 percent of poverty level, all that is required is that the person pay 2 percent of their income, the Federal taxpayers will cover the rest, it will be sent it to the insurance company, and the subsidy will be covered. In most cases that is $300 a year a person would have to cover of their own. When that moved to zero dollars, that is when a lot of fraud happened. Even if a person is paying $5, $10, or $20 a month toward insurance, at least you know it is an actual policy and going somewhere. When it becomes zero dollars, all sorts of shenanigans can happen. That is something we have to move away from. With this enhanced version of these COVID-era subsidies expiring on the Democrats' timeline, then that zero-dollar aspect will go away. It will be $200 a year for some folks, as opposed to zero dollars. That alone will create an opportunity to cut away a lot of fraud. Democrats created a program that Americans can't afford. The unaffordable care act works for insurance companies, but it does not work for patients. Like I mentioned, it is filled with waste and fraud. Insurance revenues have increased from $245 billion, when ObamaCare was originally passed, to $1.4 trillion in 2023. I love it when private-sector company growth happens. I am a big supporter of it. I have supported tax policy to ensure that can happen. That type of increase, when ObamaCare gets established, to see that rampant amount of growth, there is a problem there. We can celebrate economic growth across the board, shareholder value, and all that stuff. When we look at the massive increase year over year, aside from revenue and profits, there is something wrong with this entire situation. We can directly correlate it to when ObamaCare came into play. We can't have insurance companies seeing such record profits and at the same time taxpayers are forced to sort of subsidize these plans. That is not a healthy way to grow a market. The Affordable Care Act--ObamaCare, ACA--broke the American healthcare system. It created numerous problems over the last decade. Since its inception, these premium costs have skyrocketed. Networks have shrunk, and the system has become bloated and inefficient. It is important to remember that the enhanced premium tax credit expiration at the end of the year, again, was set by Democrats. When they are complaining that Republicans are going to let this expire, that was their timeline. This zero-dollar issue and then not capping it, so it is only targeted towards lower-income individuals, had to go away. Even in compromise and bipartisan approaches to deal with this expiration, those aspects had to go away. Those are things that were on the chopping block. Again, I think when folks understand, the subsidies aren't going away entirely. If a person is a low-income individual and making 100 percent of the Federal poverty line--and for a single person, that is maybe $15,000 or $20,000 a year--that plan will only require that person to pay a few hundred dollars a year. Just by moving it so it doesn't go to zero dollars creates it so there is not so much fraud in the system. Then, hopefully, over time we don't see this rapid, rapid increase in premiums because that is bad for all Americans. Americans simply deserve better, and we have not been giving the healthcare system with the exception of ObamaCare. This is why House Republicans have proposed legislation that delivers real relief. The Lower Healthcare Premiums for All Americans Act focuses on lasting policies that provide predictability and transparency. As the name suggests, this is focused on the entirety of the individuals on healthcare. This isn't just targeted toward a small 7 percent of the total population that is that narrow margin in ObamaCare. This is touching every single person, and that is the only way to actually lower health premium costs over time. This bill lowers premiums through pharmacy transparency and cost- sharing reductions. This legislation improves options for workers by expanding access to associated health plans. It also ensures that small and midsize employers can offer more tailored, affordable care, and it codifies and strengthens CHOICE arrangements, permitting employees to pay their premiums pretax. All of those things are targeted toward a broad group of people and not just this tiny little subset that we are hearing a lot of complaining about right now. We are actually focused on the entirety of the world that is out there paying more and more for their health insurance. It is time to implement policies that work for all Americans and that provide predictability and affordability. I am grateful to be a voice from Utah on the Committee on Ways and Means Health Subcommittee during this critical moment, and I am excited to see this legislation move forward and delivering real results, savings, and peace of mind for Utahns and Americans across the country. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, to my colleague and friend from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber), it is worth actually noting that the area focus of this bill, the location, is a stone's throw from the very cauldron that the Miracle on Ice team lit during the 2002 Winter Olympics. I congratulate the gentleman for getting that bill signed into law, the Congressional Gold Medal Act for those amazing patriots. I actually watched that movie with my kids over the weekend and saw the patriotism start to brew, really an amazing feat. I thank my friend for that. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, the University of Utah Research Park Act, which passed unanimously out of the Natural Resources Committee in September. This legislation addresses legal uncertainties surrounding the University of Utah's use of land initially conveyed to the school by the Bureau of Land Management back in 1968. At that time, the university requested land on the Fort Douglas Military Reservation for academic and research use, a request approved and granted by the BLM. Since then, the university has built a nationally recognized research park housing over 50 companies and employing nearly 14,000 Utahns. Research Park has been instrumental in establishing Utah as a leader in innovation. Last year, I was proud to welcome my colleagues to the Ways and Means Committee to Research Park for a field hearing to show them first-hand how Utah continues to lead the way in biotech innovation. Unfortunately, after decades of cooperative engagement between the University of Utah and the Federal Government, there have been questions as to whether the longstanding activities at Research Park are consistent with the original land patent under the Recreation and Public Purposes Act. The University of Utah Research Park Act addresses these concerns and makes it clear that the school is operating within the parameters of the law. With the assurance that the university can continue to operate the park, they will have increased ability to invest institutional resources and improve the park without the worry of additional red tape and regulatory restrictions or, worse, the area reverting back to Federal control. My bill will provide the university with needed stability and confirm the original intent and approval of the land transfer, allowing the university to plan strategically to meet the needs of its students, the community, and industry. I thank Chairman Westerman and my colleagues of the Utah House and Senate delegation for joining me in this effort to ensure that the University of Utah's Research Park can continue to serve as a premier research incubator. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2876. Go Utes.

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 333.

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this Special Order.

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I will use my time to take a brief moment and reflect on the horrific assassination of Charlie Kirk and the importance of free speech in America. It is not lost on me that I am standing here on the House floor, as my colleagues and I do every session day, sharing my opinions and thoughts about the state of our country and what Congress is doing about it. It is a special place where we get to link arms with our fellow delegation or caucus members and talk about causes that matter to us, debate back and forth with our friends on the other side of the aisle, welcome the President and foreign dignitaries to speak, and so much more. This place represents open debate and discussion, and Charlie did, too. As we all process the tragedy that took place just a week ago, I hope we remember the ways he engaged with those who didn't agree with him. That is what makes the American experiment work, from classrooms to workplaces to kitchen tables to the Halls of Congress. Charlie modeled fearlessness in having the conversation and opening the door to debate, and I hope we all can, as well. My sincerest condolences go out to the Kirk family as they navigate this unimaginable grief. As a society, I hope we can carry forward Charlie's legacy of free speech and commitment to faith. I also will share my heartfelt gratitude to Utah Governor Spencer Cox for leading with integrity during this difficult time for our State and our country. There is no better person to be in a position of leadership and navigate this than him, and he surely has made Utah proud on the national stage. He encouraged all of us to disagree better, and while the suspect chose not to heed that counsel, the rest of us can. Lastly, I will also thank Utah law enforcement, The Federal Bureau of Investigation, and all of our State and Federal partners who worked around the clock to identify the suspect. Your sacrifice is always appreciated. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Madam Speaker, I thank Chairwoman McClain for the opportunity to speak in this Special Order hour. When I was back home for a big portion of August, Madam Speaker, I had a great opportunity to spend time with small business owners and individuals trying to understand the difference between an invest America Trump account versus a 529 and going through a lot of these details. I kept hearing something from a lot of folks. I get that this seems like a good thing to always have lower taxes, but it is going to create a whole bunch of debt, right? I love getting that question because I am able to talk them through some of the specifics. While I may not be great talking about tax policy in a rah-rah situation, when you get to actually explain a few basic concepts to people, you see that folks actually get what we are talking about. Not the bill of goods they are being sold, but when you look at what happens with the concept of inversion. When a U.S. multinational company can choose to co-op with a foreign entity to be able to find a lower tax domicile, lowering their overall tax liability, they can do that. That happens, and they end up paying tax revenue to foreign countries. Let's just say what you saw prior to 2017 when Republicans did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, you had a tax rate of foreign drive and tangible income at approximately 16 percent effective rate, but let's say in Ireland, it was 13 percent. A company could easily set up their entire tax base for that portion of their business in Ireland and pay 13 percent where the U.S. sees no revenue. If we lower that tax rate to 13 percent just to become competitive, we don't even have to beat other nations' tax rates. When we lowered that to 13 percent just to be competitive, those companies started to flee back to America, and we got more revenue. I will talk to folks and say, when you make taxes competitive, we will actually grow our U.S. tax revenue. That is not adding deficit. When you see people actually grasp that concept, it is fascinating to be able to say, of course, I would rather people be paying taxes in the U.S. as opposed to a foreign nation. Now, the foreign country doesn't love that when we do it. If we put things on par, companies will almost, in every circumstance, choose to do business in the U.S. and we get more revenue. It is a win-win, and it is not what you are being lied to about. This is good, sound, competitive tax policy that will strengthen our Nation, grow our revenue, and make it easier for business to compete.

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, today I honor the courageous and selfless lives of two Tremonton-Garland police officers, Sergeant Lee Sorensen and Officer Eric Estrada, who were tragically killed in the line of duty on Sunday, August 17, 2025. These brave men put on their uniform each day aware of the risks involved, and today we honor the depth of their sacrifice. Sergeant Lee Sorensen dedicated 17 years of his life to serving his community on the police force. His tireless commitment to the people around him has been recognized throughout the community, earning him and his wife Garland City's Wheelon Award for significantly impacting the city. He also received the Distinguished Service Award from the Tremonton Fire Department in February for his dedication, support, professionalism, and commitment to excellence in assisting fire and EMS units during incidents. When he wasn't providing critical support for fellow first responders, he was assisting the middle school resource officer and checking on the teenagers who loved to chat with him. Sergeant Sorensen was recently promoted to Sergeant and would have been sworn in today. Friday, August 22, 2025. He is remembered by his neighbors as humorous, kind, and a true hero. He is survived by his wife Lanette and their children. Officer Eric Estrada devoted 8 of his 31 years of life to the police force serving the Logan, Box Elder, and North Park police departments before joining the Tremonton police force earlier this year. Although he was only with Tremonton for less than a year, he quickly formed a reputation and legacy of warmth and dedication. His favorite part of working in law enforcement was being on patrol, where he loved interacting directly with the people he served and engaging with the community. Officer Estrada is remembered as a dedicated father and husband, deeply loving and cherishing his family. He is survived by his wife Brittney and their two children. Both Utah heroes were honored by thousands of people in a procession across Northern Utah earlier this week. It is through the service and sacrifice of honorable public servants such as Sergeant Sorensen and Officer Estrada that our communities, cities, and Nation can live safely. I extend my deepest condolences to the loved ones, fellow officers, and entire community that feels this loss so profoundly. I am thankful to both Sergeant Lee Sorensen and Officer Eric Estrada, well as their families, for their sacrifice and the many years dedicated to the betterment and safety of their communities.

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 217.

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this Special Order.

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address the floor this evening and to give that opportunity to some of my colleagues also, if their schedule permits. We don't get enough opportunities to speak to the American people, and I don't get enough chances to speak to my constituents back home, particularly from the House floor. I think it is a unique opportunity that I will get to address a few things this evening. I want to take a minute just to walk through, big picture, what we are accomplishing with this reconciliation bill titled the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and walk through some of the provisions. I actually tried my hardest back in my district to let facts rule the day and not be governed and manipulated by a lot of rhetoric about this particular type of work. I am going to take you back, Mr. Speaker, to my first election when I first decided to run for Congress. It was the end of January 2020. We had never heard of the term ``COVID'' before. We had seen a tax reform bill take place at the end of 2017 that people couldn't really wrap their heads around. I was working for a consulting firm, and I remember talking to some of the partners at the firm. I was a principal at the time--actually, I was probably an engagement manager at the time. I remember them saying: We are going to see a significant tax decrease. If this bill goes through, we are going to have a substantial amount of extra discretionary money. What are we going to do with it? This is going to be significant. More so, many of our clients that we served were going to all of a sudden see some discretionary income that they would now be able to use and had to figure out what they were going to do. This wasn't a client of ours, but in the aftermath of that bill, this is what I understand took place. When they had a corporate tax rate decrease, they have shown me their books, and the areas that they prioritized were to increase wages for their frontline workers. They said every single person at the firm got a pay increase. They grew real wage growth without massive inflation that takes place sometimes under a reconciliation bill. I will point to the American Rescue Plan that took place when Democrats took control of the White House, House, and Senate. We saw the worst inflation we have seen in my lifetime under the guise of a COVID relief package. That company, which had some tax pressure removed from their books, went straight to their employees. They created wage growth opportunities. The other thing was that they had extra discretionary income to take to their immediate community in which they worked and bought ambulances for the emergency response in the community. This is the type of stuff that happened across the country post-2017 when you saw a significant economic boon in the U.S. Years prior to 2017, you saw a lot of companies decide there were favorable tax rates elsewhere. Oftentimes, in countries in Europe-- there was a tax provision that was done in 2017 that is called FDII, an intangible income piece. You can establish intellectual property overseas at a lower tax rate than what we were doing here in the U.S. We decided to make our rates in the U.S. competitive. That provision alone immediately stopped the term ``corporate inversion,'' where U.S. companies were taking their revenue to other countries. Instead, they decided that they have a more favorable rate here, so they will bring it back. Most multinational companies, most U.S.-based companies, a lot of times foreign companies, want to be based here. All we did with that rate was to say that we are going to make that rate competitive. With that, they repatriated their money back to the U.S. When I talk to townhall participants, regular constituent meetings, I highlight that when you make taxes competitive, you get companies to reinvest back in the United States, and we then can grow our revenue. Companies have told us since 2017, even though they got more favorable, more fair, and competitive tax rates, they actually spend more money on their tax revenues to the U.S. Government. The whole concept behind Republican tax policy is to make taxes competitive against the OECD, against our allies or our adversaries, to make sure we repatriate and keep that money in the U.S. and grow our revenues. That is why, even with tax cuts, we don't see a dip in what we have gained from revenue. We can argue all day long, and you can even draw the graph: Should we be spending a higher percentage of our GDP? Should we be collecting a higher percentage of our GDP in tax revenues? Twenty-five years ago, approximately 17 percent of GDP was what we collected in tax revenues, and at that same time, 17 percent of GDP was spending. In those 25 years, our spending has gone from 17 percent of GDP to approximately 26 percent of GDP. That is what our spending has done. Our revenue has actually stayed at approximately 17 percent through Republican and Democratic administrations. That means our revenue has continued to grow, but it actually stays consistent as a percentage of our entire GDP. Our spending has grown, up to 26 percent. That is why you see in a Republican reconciliation bill like we passed a couple of weeks ago that a significant portion of that bill is spending cuts, offsets to spending, and revenue increases. Yes, there are actually tax increases in a Republican bill, but overall, we are creating a very competitive tax rate that exists. Companies from 2017 on have reinvested in the U.S. and, at the same time, have reinvested in their communities, reinvested in their employees, and have grown their presence. Most of that is set to expire at the end of this year. If we don't get a tax bill done, then you are just going to see a significant tax increase across everything. Mr. Speaker, I will also talk briefly about some of the individual provisions because it is important to talk about the small business corporation, S corps, LLCs, all the various different types of businesses that we run here in the U.S., they all get a competitive tax rate, keeping them wanting to invest here in America and reinvesting in their business. If they can reinvest in their business, they can actually grow overall tax receipts because of the concept of economic growth. Mr. Speaker, on the individual side, this is something that my Democrat colleagues oftentimes overlook. They oftentimes talk about, oh, this is just some tax giveaway to the billionaires. I have never seen anybody actually pinpoint and show me where this is targeted toward giving the billionaires some type of tax relief. Probably the largest portion of this tax reconciliation bill is what is called the standard deduction. The standard deduction is taken advantage of by over 90 percent of Americans. This is what simplifies our tax code. When you show up to do your taxes for that year, you are automatically given a dollar figure that you can deduct from your taxable income. In 2017, that number was doubled. We said to middle-income filers, lower-income filers that we want to give you a significant deduction and we are going to double that standard deduction. It hasn't been done for a while. We need to increase this to a really healthy amount. That simply means that individual and married filing jointly can look at their tax bill and say, we are going to offset our taxable income by $30,000. In a lot of cases that is a significant benefit to them because that helps lower their overall tax liability and puts money directly back in their pocket. Guess what? It doesn't help the wealthy. The wealthy itemize their taxes. They will probably have more mortgage interest to write off than they will that $30,000 standard deduction, if you will. Then all of a sudden, we see that that makes sense. We can see how the standard deduction actually affects middle- and lower-income Americans. Okay. Why in the world do my Democrat colleagues keep repeating this constant--I think it might have just been something they saw in some polling that said: It works well if you say this is just tax cuts for the wealthy. Let's look at the child tax credit. If you have a child under the age of 17--prior to 2017, it was $1,000 that you were able to deduct from your taxable income. Republicans in 2017 doubled it and they set that amount for 8 years. That is what expires at the end of this year. If Republicans don't act, that number goes back to $1,000. Anybody that votes against this bill is saying: I am okay with that number going back to $1,000. We actually, in this bill, repeat that $2,000 amount per child, but we did something unique. We are going to index it to inflation. It is something we should always be thinking about doing in any type of tax policy. We are indexing it to inflation. We actually added an enhancement to it, so you are able to, for the next 4 years, take a $2,500 deduction. If you are building a family, if you have young kids, this is a big expense. We are giving that tax relief to families so we can continue to grow our next generation. The unique part is, in 4 years or so when that extra $500 enhancement is up for renewal, we will have already grown the $2,000 to be at approximately that level. What we are doing is, we are really doing right by individuals that are doing the right thing by investing in our future and raising kids. Those two things are the biggest items of this entire bill. Then to go and say it is just some tax giveaway to the wealthy, it just flies in the face of reality. It might poll well, I guess, but it is disheartening to see something that I actually believe most, if not all, Members of Congress believe in a simplified, higher standard deduction, increased child tax credit, which covers the vast majority of the cost of this bill. Then you get to things that actually help individuals that we are doing with our research and development, helping small businesses be able to grow and have that discretionary income. There is just so much here, and I would love to be able to, in long form, talk a little bit about the specifics because too often these become one-liners or a tweet here or there that says this or that. We are being as responsible as you possibly can be by making this bill deficit neutral. We will see growth in our economy because of it. We will see historic decreases in our overall expenditure and spending, and at the same time have policies that will drive economic growth. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington), my good friend and also the chairman of the Budget Committee, who tirelessly works on all of these issues, to share a few words with us this evening. I thank him for his dedication and time investing in me as a member of his committee, to help bring me up in the ways of doing the right thing for the right cause in all these things related to tax, spending, and such. Mr. Speaker, I yield to Mr. Arrington from the Permian Basin, the food, fuel, and fiber capital of the world.

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from the Permian Basin. Just to quickly recap, I love the concept that he juxtaposes to opportunities. It is interesting that in our political environment, from 2017 to 2021 and 2025, we have seen the White House, House, and Senate flip completely three times. I think that is a little bit unprecedented. We mentioned there were times with Reagan where there was a sustained period of Democratic control of Congress but there were Republicans in the White House and vice versa. To flip the White House, House, and Senate three times in the last 8 years is unprecedented. It gives us a unique opportunity, though. Look at TCJA and ARPA. Look at the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and then go look at the American Rescue Plan Act. Created wage growth, no inflation. Those are consistent things that took place from TCJA when tax reform took place with Republicans. The American Rescue Plan was stimulus spending masquerading as COVID relief spending. It was massive amounts of monetary policy added to the system. There is only one equation, and that is inflation. Look at the difference between an inflationist and real wage growth. Those are the two things we have to compare. This bill basically takes 2017 and says we have seen this work. Democrats looked at the tax policy in 2017, when they had the White House, House, and Senate. They said: We like the standard deduction. We like the increased child tax credit. We like the approach to getting U.S. companies to reinvest in America. We are not going to touch it. They had an opportunity to change all the things that they say are so bad in this bill. They didn't touch any of the core tax policies from 2017 to today. They expire at the end of this year. Republicans are going to go at it alone. We are going to make sure we extend this out. We are going to give companies and families some consistency. All we have to do is juxtapose those two bills--the TCJA and the American Rescue Plan--and make the decision based on that. That is as simple as it needs to be. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington) likes to say a lot of things. He talks a lot. He is very verbose. When he mentions my leadership, I very much appreciate the sentiment. I have been watching and following him. He is my committee chair and has an extremely strong leadership in the conference. I express my appreciation and downplay the fact that he is just blowing smoke there sometimes when he says it about me. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from North Dakota (Mrs. Fedorchak). I would like to get to some real substantive remarks now with my colleague.

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from North Dakota for her remarks. I appreciate my colleagues for participating this evening. This is something historic, and it is something monumental. As I was talking about at the beginning of my remarks, when I first ran for Congress in January 2020, the entire conversation of every single candidate was: How do we go about extending and making permanent the tax reform that just took place in our country a few years prior and the juice that it created for our economy and the growth that it had that was raising the tide of all income levels? That was the concept, and 4\1/2\ years later, I am sitting here on the committee particularly regarding the tax policy to be able to bring it up. This is a unique and really special time. We are already engaging with the Senate to make sure this can adhere to and go through the Byrd rule, all the specifics of making this a reality. This is an exciting moment. It will be monumental, and it will do so much good. I have always said, as I have been involved in congressional policymaking, that we live in 2-year increments, but every CEO across the country has to live in 15-year increments. They have to see what is around the corner, and we are constantly putting people at an impasse because we just keep dealing with 2-year increments of what their policies are going to be. We have to signal what the future holds with respect to tax policy, and there is nothing that would do more for sustained economic growth than this bill. Again, Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the time this evening and for my colleagues being here to share the message. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. MOORE of Utah

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this Special Order.

Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, again, it has been quite a week for the House Republicans with the long and late committee hearings as we move forward on our reconciliation package and deliver substantial wins for the American people. Like I mentioned, they were overnight, so anybody that might have got caught snoozing for a few seconds here or there, we don't want to be too hard on them since it was an all- nighter, and we are not in college anymore. It is significant what we have accomplished. The Energy and Commerce Committee just finished up, and the House Ways and Means Committee earlier. We have got 11 or so committees that have contributed to the one big, beautiful bill, the reconciliation package. We want to see this thing get advanced as we continue to make it into law as the process plays out. We are going to move this conservative and effective agenda. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to be a part of this process and for the work my colleagues here are putting into this, as well. In addition to the reconciliation work, House Republicans are honored to recognize Police Week and highlight the important work of our law enforcement officers that they do each day. I just was walking through the Capitol rotunda, and I saw a few police officers here taking a tour of this special place. It is such a great opportunity for us to be able to celebrate the work that they do. They put their lives on the line to keep our communities safe. They support local programs, mentor our youth, and respond to crisis. They are our trusted partners and neighbors, and House Republicans are continuing to pass legislation to support and equip our law enforcement officers to best serve our families and communities. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for joining me tonight to talk about these important topics. To do that, I will kick it off right by yielding to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Owens), my good colleague and close friend from the great State of Utah.