Richard Neal

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, last week the Democrats helped secure a strong bipartisan budget agreement that includes suspending the debt limit until July 31, 2021. The measure ensures that we will avoid a default on the full faith and credit of the United States and can follow through on our financial obligations. All of us were elected to help America's working-class families. This agreement is another tool to help them. In particular, it sets the stage for responsible budgeting and ends sequestration. It also includes funding for an accurate census, veterans, Child Care Development Block Grants, tools to address the opioid epidemic, and increases in NIH funding. Extending the debt limit keeps our nation's finances on stable ground--unlike what the Republicans did in 2011, 2013 and 2015. I applaud the Speaker and all our colleagues involved in crafting this measure, and I encourage everyone to support it. A `yes' vote is responsible, provides certainty to our nation's markets, and delivers stability to Americans' retirement savings as well as our nation's economy.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the 100th anniversary of Wahconah Park in Pittsfield, Massachusetts. Wahconah Park has been a loyal, magical home for America's favorite pastime since the 19th century, when the game of baseball was first played on its grounds in 1892. Most of the ballpark's facilities, however, including its wooden grandstand, were officially built in 1919--and they have filled with lovers of the game ever since. Over the course of more than a century, Wahconah Park has hosted numerous Minor League Baseball teams, other professional clubs and affiliates, as well as summer collegiate teams--like the Pittsfield Suns, who currently call Wahconah home. As the Pittsfield Suns' team owner Jeff Goldklang has said, baseball is about history, and it's about memories. Wahconah Park is certainly steeped in both. It is a testament to the game Americans have loved for decades and continues to be a destination for generations of families who come to the Berkshires to watch it come to life. And beyond baseball, Wahconah Park has also played host to various high school sporting events, and alternated into a concert venue at times as well. Once again, Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate Wahconah Park on the occasion of its 100th anniversary. The ballpark is city-owned and has been integral to the fabric of Pittsfield's community. It represents the longevity, history, and character of not only the Berkshires, but all of western Massachusetts.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, that was carefully tailored, yes.

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his friendly inquiry.

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Judy Chu) for the really extraordinary job and leadership that she offered on this legislation. For far too long, LGBTQ Americans have been denied equal treatment under the Tax Code. Six years after the Supreme Court found it unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples the full rights and privileges of marriage, Congress has yet to rectify the consequences of the Tax Code's discrimination against LGBTQ couples. We must live up to our duty to govern in a manner such that everyone is treated equally under the law, which is why I stand in support today of this legislation. Last month marked the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall riots. Recognizing the deep historical importance of this event in a decades- long fight for equality, the PRIDE Act--which, by the way, passed the Ways and Means Committee unanimously--seeks to end and correct discriminatory practices in our tax system affecting LGBTQ community members. The PRIDE Act essentially clarifies that all Federal tax provisions respecting marriage will apply to legally married same-sex couples by removing gender language related to married couples from the Tax Code. Additionally, this bill will reconcile discriminatory Federal policies by ensuring fair tax treatment for those couples for every year of their marriage. This is the way anybody is treated in the Tax Code if they choose to take advantage of that deduction. I take pride in hailing from Massachusetts, which was the first State to legalize same-sex marriage. While Massachusetts has issued marriage licenses to all couples since 2004, 15 years now, the Federal Government has failed to recognize the full tenure of legal married status for those couples who have been married since 2010. The PRIDE Act extends to same-sex couples the opportunity to amend their returns to reflect their marital status and claim the ensuing tax benefits wrongfully denied to them before 2010. So part of this is legislative, but part of this is also clarification. The changes in the bill state loudly and clearly that the Federal Government respects the dignity and equality of all married couples, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. For this reason, Madam Speaker, it is my sincere wish that all of our colleagues once again will join in supporting this legislation. America's opinions have changed, and we would like the Tax Code to reflect the changes that the American people have clearly led the way on. Madam Speaker, I thank Ms. Chu. This was really complicated work that she began undertaking, but she also made it clear that this legislation moves us closer to ensuring that our laws respect the dignity of all Americans.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself an additional 1 minute. The idea that we are hearing that this has no chance in the Senate, I disagree with that. I disagree with that profoundly. There is an opportunity, once this moves to the Senate, to at least have something to negotiate with, the Butch Lewis Act. And I think that there are men and women, again, in the Senate who are prepared to act on this problem, largely because the contagion from this plan will eventually make its way and leach into the PBGC. The head of the PBGC, while not endorsing this specific plan, said to me: Mr. Chairman, I am glad you are doing what you are doing because you are going to invite further opportunities to address this problem, short of, in the end, having to bail out the PBGC, which will happen if we don't formally address the measure that is in front of us today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, might I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Suozzi).

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Chicago, Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Higgins).

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), the always erudite Congressman.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from New Jersey an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Judy Chu).

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I stand in support of H.R. 397, the Rehabilitation for Multiemployer Pensions Act, commonly referred to as the Butch Lewis Act. Contrary to what you have heard, Mr. Speaker, this is a bipartisan bill. It has Republican sponsors. Peter King is about to speak next. At different intervals, there have been up to 20 Republicans who have signed on to this legislation. This addresses a real problem that, for 2 years, Congress has talked about and not moved on. For 2 years, we have worked on this. I sat on the special commission for 2 years. It became a debating society rather than an opportunity to act on a measured response to a crisis that is now pending that could be averted by the work that we undertake today. There are 200 bipartisan sponsors of this legislation in this House. Ten million Americans participate in multiemployer plans, and about 1.3 million of them are in plans that are quickly running out of money. And, yes, we have a plan. These are American workers who planned for their retirement. Now, after working for 30-plus years, they are facing financial uncertainty at a time when they are often unable to return to the workforce. It is worth noting that we have not arrived here because of malfeasance or corruption. These are forces of the marketplace that have caused this distortion. When I heard the gentleman from South Dakota say earlier that this is a bailout, this is not a bailout. This is a backstop. Do you know what a bailout is? It is the savings and loan crisis. That is a bailout. Do you know what a bailout is? Wall Street. That is a bailout. Do you know what a bailout is? When Enron made sure that the people at the top of the corporation kept their money and that the people at the bottom lost their pensions. That is a bailout. We are talking about a sensible plan. As I have noted, I have worked for almost 2 years to build within the Department of the Treasury an opportunity for a super-administrator to help to nurse these plans back to good health. Rita Lewis is in this gallery today, and she is a beneficiary of the Central States Pension Plan, which is the largest of the underfunded multiemployer pension plans. She and Butch Lewis did nothing wrong. They played by the rules, precisely as we would ask people to do. So then we hear that this is about union bosses. Then we hear that this is about malfeasance. This is entirely about people who have been circumspect in the manner in which they have treated their pension plans. She is looking at a significant cut in her pension after years of hard work and when retirement is finally in sight. Many workers and retirees have stories very similar to Mrs. Lewis'. These are real people with a very real problem if Congress doesn't act. The American people sent us here to address problems like multiemployer pension plans, and the legislation before us today, despite what anybody and everybody says, accomplishes that. It would give millions of workers and retirees like those who have joined Mrs. Lewis in the gallery today the security and the retirement that they have worked and planned for in their golden years. The Butch Lewis Act would allow pension plans to borrow money they need to remain solvent--borrow, emphasis on ``borrow''--and continue to provide retirement security for retirees and workers for decades to come while the plan is nursed back to health. Let me remind my colleagues: Plans that receive loans under this bill are subject to numerous requirements and ample oversight. They are not permitted to increase benefits or to reduce contributions, and loan proceeds must be invested in conservative investments, grade-A instruments. This is not a bailout. This is a loan program. It is a commonsense solution. It is the private sector coming together with public-sector opportunities to address this crisis. Mr. Speaker, I will have more to say about it when I close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, this has been edifying. There has been an opportunity here for a full discussion about this impending problem that threatens the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. This is an acknowledgment of the threat that is before us. There is one thing that we have in common today. Nobody doubts the gravity of the situation that is in front of us. Nobody doubts just how serious this is for financial markets going forward if we don't address this issue, given the contagion that I referenced earlier that is likely to occur in other pension plans across the country if we don't address this issue forthwith. When I hear people say we want to do this in a spirit of bipartisanship, when? For 2 years, we talked about this, and finally, there is a plan that the House is about to vote on in the next few minutes. I am ever so hopeful and optimistic that we, in fact, are going to be able to see the opportunity to pass this legislation and get it over to the Senate. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), and I believe he is a Republican demonstrating that this is a bipartisan piece of legislation.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Murphy).

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Speaker, we have heard repeatedly during the course of this conversation and debate that somehow this is a bailout. I even heard one speaker reference public pension plans. What has that got to do with this? The subject in front of us today is the multiemployer pension plan system that is under duress through no fault of the individuals who were supposed to receive the derived benefit on a date certain based upon the contribution that they made. Instead, we find ourselves in a position where the argument has become that somehow this is a bailout of special interests. This is a backstop of hardworking men and women who have set aside prescribed numbers of dollars for the purpose of enjoying a period of time in their lives that they have carefully planned for. Now, let me draw attention to the following. For 2 years we have worked on this legislation, and I know there are men and women of goodwill on both sides who would like to find a solution. But the truth is, this is the only plan in town. This is the only plan that has been submitted, formally or informally, after 2 years of planning and work and an exhaustive 1 year of a special commission that came up with no solution to the multiemployer pension plan problem. So, instead, we constructed, through a careful process, an opportunity where everybody on the Ways and Means Committee was heard. I have been around long enough to have a special regard for the minority in a legislative institution. They get to be heard. They get to offer amendments. They offered those amendments. Now, I was prepared to accept a couple of those amendments that I thought were actually pretty good, the provision being that I attached to that, to accept the amendment, they would have to vote for the legislation. So I hope--and despite what we are hearing, by the way, that this doesn't have a chance in the Senate----

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize my good friend Mr. Joe Leahy as he nears the end of his term as the 114th chairman of the nation's largest insurance association-- the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America, also known as the Big ``I''. He was appointed chairman of the Big ``I'' in August 2018, in my hometown of Springfield, MA, and over the past year has done a remarkable job of piloting the association. He has proven himself to be a strong and thoughtful leader for independent insurance agents across the country. Joe graduated from Western New England College and is cunently the President of Leahy & Brown Insurance & Realty, Inc., which he founded with his wife Frances in 1989. Joe has a fine record of public service as he previously served as Chief of Staff to Massachusetts State Senator Martin T. Reilly (D-Springfield). At the state association level, Leahy was elected to the Executive Committee of the Massachusetts Association of Insurance Agents (MAIA) in 2001, served as chairman in 2005, and was Massachusetts director on the Big ``I'' national board from 2008 to 2013. In 2013, Leahy received the MAIA Henry F. Barry, Jr. Memorial Pacesetter Award, which is awarded to an agent who has contributed his or her talent, time and energy for the betterment of the agency system and is the highest honor that the MAIA bestows. On the national association level, Joe has served on numerous Big ``I'' committees and task forces including the Big ``I'' Executive Committee, Government Affairs Committee, Tax Task Force, and the InsurPac Board of Trustees. I would also like to recognize the aforementioned Frances Leahy, Joe's esteemed wife. Joe has been married to Frances for more than 30 years. Together they reside in Northampton, Massachusetts and have six children and eight grandchildren. Once again, Madam Speaker, I am proud of Joe Leahy and all he has accomplished for Massachusetts and beyond. I wish him and Frances well in all their future endeavors, following his successful year as Chairman of the Big ``I.''

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 748) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the excise tax on high cost employer-sponsored health coverage, as amended.

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 748, the Middle Class Health Benefits Tax Repeal Act of 2019. After a decade of fiercely debating the merits of the Affordable Care Act, I hope we have turned a corner today and can now focus on strengthening the parts of the law that work in the manner we had intended and changing the parts of the law, which is not unusual, that we believe could be improved. This legislation, tirelessly championed by Representative Joe Courtney of Connecticut, with 367 bipartisan cosponsors, addresses the so-called ``Cadillac tax,'' a part of the law that had the unintended consequences of reducing healthcare benefits that were provided to certain American workers. More than 181 million Americans currently depend upon employer- sponsored health insurance. That is the majority of the American people, including retirees, low-and moderate-income families, public- sector employees, small business owners, and nonprofit workers. While the name ``Cadillac tax'' implies this excise tax only applies to luxury health coverage, the truth is it will eventually apply to almost every American with employer-sponsored health insurance. At a time when American families are already worried about the healthcare costs that apply to them, the Cadillac tax has had the effect of increasing deductibles and out-of-pocket costs as employers make changes in their plans designed to avoid the tax. We have also found that the Cadillac tax affects health plans that have higher numbers of workers with chronic diseases or serious illnesses, that cover more than a million women or families, or that offer coverage to part-time workers because premiums for those plans are often higher. This was not the goal of this tax when it was originally included in the ACA. I know because I helped to negotiate and to write the Affordable Care Act. Congress wanted to encourage employers and insurance companies to find ways to offer better coverage at lower costs. And, while many actions in the ACA did bend the cost curve, leading to better care and slower cost growth, this excise tax, indeed, did not. We want employers to cover their workers with robust, meaningful benefits. A good American job with a strong health benefit is part of security. Employers want this for their employees, labor wants this for their members, and American workers and their families want to know they can get the care they need when they need it. This legislation, as I noted earlier, has strong bipartisan support with a diverse group of stakeholder organizations endorsing the legislation, from labor to chamber of commerce to patient organizations. If we fail to repeal the Cadillac tax, we will leave working families with less healthcare coverage, higher out-of-pocket healthcare costs, and little to no resultant wage increases. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. 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 this bill under consideration.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Patrick and Denise Goggins on the occasion of their 50th wedding anniversary. This July 4th marks a special milestone for this couple and their family, and it is my pleasure to recognize it as such. Pat and Denise were married on July 4, 1969, but their story begins even four years earlier when they met as high school sweethearts. Their life of love, marriage and family is truly heartwarming and worthy of recognition. From the purchase of their first home through President Johnson's Housing and Urban Development program for first-time homebuyers, to the births of their three daughters (Bridget, Erin, and Molly), and then the gifts of grandchildren, the Goggins exemplify the spirit of hardworking American families across the country. Marriage is an institution undeniably linked to the fabric of our society. It is a union celebrated not only by the two partners, but by their friends and family alike. The nuptial celebrations of Patrick and Denise were no exception and are certainly still not today. Their marriage will be celebrated by close to 200 people in Cape Cod, Massachusetts this July 4th and will certainly be filled with the same warmth of the original, humble wedding reception of five decades prior. I extend my personal greetings to all those that will gather together that day in celebration of Pat and Denise. Madam Speaker, once again, it is my pleasure to recognize the milestone of Patrick and Denise Goggins' 50th wedding anniversary. Their commitment to each other and their family is truly uplifting. I wish them all the best in their future endeavors as they continue their wonderful life together for years to come.