Richard Neal

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure today that I honor Ed Casey, an outstanding American who has dedicated himself to cultural exploration and community service, as the ``Heart O'Gold Award'' is bestowed upon him by the Quaboag Highlander Pipe Band of Monson, Massachusetts. Ed Casey is an icon in the Pioneer Valley and western Massachusetts and is well known throughout the community for his commitment to bagpipes and Celtic culture. As a resident of Springfield and Belchertown, MA, Ed has played his pipes at parades, inaugurations, celebrations, and internments. He is loved by so many in our area. Mr. Casey, who spent years as a public school teacher in Holyoke, MA, has taught the craft of playing the bagpipes to many others interested in learning to play. Yet, unlike most music teachers, Ed did not learn to play music through the traditional route of lessons and formal training. He learned to play the bagpipes, as he would say, ``by ear'' and ``by heart.'' Mr. Speaker, there are many families in western Massachusetts who have never met Ed Casey, but perhaps it is their lives that have been most directly impacted by his generosity. For years, in lieu of accepting any fee for performing at internments, Ed Casey has directed families to instead make donations to the Open Pantry, a food collection and distribution center in Springfield that feeds the hungry in western Massachusetts. In doing so, thousands of dollars have been collected to provide food for the poor and the needy. It is my pleasure to honor Ed Casey today in the Congressional Record as someone whose selflessness and talent should be recognized and emulated by those around him. Congratulations Ed upon receiving this honor. Your good work has not gone unnoticed.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, it is not always an easy task to agree with the Boston Globe. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark). Well, here we are again in the dark of night, whether it is doing Trade Promotion Authority or whether it is doing tax cuts, or whether it is doing the privatization of Medicare, we do it in the dark of night. Only could the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, talk about the crisis that confronts Medicare after they led the charge to rip $2 trillion out of the Federal budget over the next 10 years. Tonight we are children of Roosevelt on this side and Johnson, and let us not forget it. When you hear them talk about their newfound affinity for Medicare, recall that it was Dole and Michael and Rumsfeld and Ford who voted against the establishment of Medicare. And I want to say something to my colleagues on the democratic side tonight who are tempted by what is about to happen. You mark my words, we are going to be back here in a year, and the next step is Social Security. That is where they are headed. Medicare is an amendment to the Social Security Act. America is a more egalitarian society today because it was our party who stood against the forces of privilege. They are the ones that said no. Turn down this privatization of Medicare.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I have a question and perhaps an answer might clear it up for those who are still trying to sort through this legislation. H.R. 3108, as introduced, included a provision that would have replaced the 30-year Treasury rate with a flat rate of 5.5 percent for purposes of the so-called section 415 limit. This provision was dropped in the amendment being considered today. Will this provision be considered as H.R. 3108 moves forward?

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I want to lend my support to the initiative which has been so successful and to point out on the island of Ireland, the dispute represents the longest standing political divide in the history of the Western world. It is most extraordinary; and today in contrast to the turbulence that we witness in the rest of the world, the reach of the United States is so apparent in the successful diplomatic efforts which have occurred in Ireland over this past decade. I would remind Members it was not that long ago when this issue seemed to defy solution. Today the face of Ireland is changed. I do not know anybody on either side of the border or in either of the two communities that would argue that we ought to return to such a tragic history. Instead, Ireland is a vibrant international economy, the second largest producer of software in the world, a population that is educated as well as any and all of Europe, a people that are confident and in large measure they were willing to take that risk for peace because of the support that was generated in the Congress of the United States by both political parties, two successive administrations who said that this issue deserved the same sort of attention that other international events had reached. Today, we reap the reward of that success. It has been initiatives like this from the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), and it is a fact that Members on both sides of the aisle meet faithfully and regularly in an effort to demonstrate that America still cares. Is there a way to go? There certainly is. It is still a long road, but contrast what we have today with what we had just a few years ago, and I think members of the American community as well as other international partners can all take the necessary satisfaction from the success that the world is witnessing, and it is thanks to initiatives like this that have ensured that path forward.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. King) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) for the effort that they extended on the floor in getting the signatures to bring us to this moment. Mr. Speaker, our friend and colleague and hero, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), noted just a few months ago that before there was an integrated American military, there was Jackie Robinson. Before Brown v. Board of Education, there was Jackie Robinson. Before the trauma and turbulence of events at the Edmond Pettus Bridge, there was Jackie Robinson. Before there was a Civil Rights Act of 1964, there was Jackie Robinson. And before the Voting Rights Act of 1965, there was Jackie Robinson. I think that this House tries to honor those who break a barrier, and that is precisely what we are doing today in honoring Jackie Robinson. Jackie Robinson noted that the great thing about athletics is that you learn to act democracy, not just talk about it. I think he would in some small degree take satisfaction today knowing that this House of Representatives is not going to talk any longer about its legacy; we are going to act on it. For his many contributions to sports, to civil rights, and to our Nation, Jackie Robinson deserves this important recognition. His remarkable life transcended baseball and helped to transform a Nation in the process. As a baseball fan since my youth, I always admired his great talent. He was, and by all objective measurements, a true American hero. I am proud to be able to author this bipartisan legislation honoring a trailblazing legend. The leadership of Major League Baseball and in particular its Commissioner, Bud Selig, and its President, Bob DuPuy, they also deserve special recognition today as well as the many Members of this House who faithfully secured the signatures to bring this matter up in deserving recognition for Jackie Robinson. And I want to acknowledge the role of Major League Baseball in the passage of this legislation. And since I represent a portion of Massachusetts, let me recognize the Boston Red Sox today who held a symposium on the life of Jackie Robinson in January at Fenway Park, and it was the Red Sox who gave me the enthusiasm and presented themselves as a consistent partner in our efforts to pass this legislation. Also, I want to thank the family of Jackie Robinson for their unyielding support of this endeavor. Many of us had the opportunity just a few weeks ago to meet Jackie's daughter, Sharon, and we came away from that meeting knowing that she possessed the same qualities as her dad: strength, courage and conviction. I want to thank the members of that family and particularly Sharon for helping with this historic achievement. The Nation that we live in today, Mr. Speaker, is much more egalitarian. Our sense of justice which we talked about for decades is much closer to the truth today than it was when Jackie Robinson walked to home plate. America has a much better vision of fairness today than it did when Jackie Robinson stole home plate. He helped to transform that game, but in the midst of transforming that game, just as importantly, he helped to transform America. Think of the legions of people who successfully play baseball today who cannot imagine a nation where the premier player on the team could not eat in the same restaurant with his teammates, could not secure a reservation in the same hotel as his teammates, and yet on the next day be the star and central attraction of that team. He not only changed the game; he successfully changed the complexion of the game and thereby helped change the complexion of America. America, as I have indicated, has a much better sense of itself today because of the barriers that were broken. We serve in a Congress that is much more reflective today of this Nation than it would have been when Jackie Robinson broke the barrier. Congress takes this rightful moment, I think, to ensure that as we have deliberatively and time and again created a bit of an obstacle to getting these things done so that those who are undeserving might not secure this honor that we are going to bestow on Jackie Robinson, and rightly so. But I thank Members on both sides, the gentleman from New York (Mr. King) in particular, and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) as well; and on our side the people who went out and got these signatures day in and day out to bring us to this moment. This is a really nice thing for the Robinson family. It is a great thing for this Congress of the United States. But most importantly, it is a great thing for the country we all love, the United States of America.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues from Massachusetts this evening to remember Millie O'Neill, a great woman from our home State and the wife of the late Tip O'Neill, who passed away yesterday at her home. Millie O'Neill was a wonderful woman; a wife, a mother and an activist involved in many social organizations and causes. For the vast majority of her 89 years, she stood by Tip's side and was certainly his chief advisor on ``domestic'' matters. The two were married for 52 years, and during that time the navigated the political tides of Massachusetts and the Capitol. They were certainly a dynamic duo. Tip referred to Millie as ``The Speaker of My House. A loving wife, mother and my partner through so many triumphs and trials.'' She was a mentor, a leader and a friend, and she will be missed. Mr. Speaker, much is going to be said this evening in honor of Millie O'Neill. She is deserving of all of it and more. But perhaps the best testament to the quality of her life--to her legacy--is the quality of the lives she left behind. I'd like to extend my sympathies to Millie's daughters, Rosemary and Susan, and her sons, Tom and Kip, and to her eight grandchildren, who to Millie's credit, have undoubtedly been instilled with an indelible respect for family and a desire to improve the greater public good.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, as we debate a bill to ensure that our homeland is secure, while we struggle to reconcile another $87 billion of war expenses, this Congress has once again provided a special benefit to a handful of financial traitors who have literally skipped out on paying the bill. The House Committee on Appropriations unanimously passed an amendment to prohibit lucrative Federal contracts from being awarded to corporations who run offshore to avoid U.S. income taxes. Then the Committee on Rules struck it out. Then the Senate passed an amendment on the floor to prohibit these contracts with tax cheats. Then the conference committee struck it out. Sound familiar? I feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day. No matter how hard we try, we keep hitting it from every angle, but nothing seems to work to get these companies to come back to the United States and pay their fair share of taxes. It seems that there are some in this Congress who are intent on protecting the new Bermuda citizenship of these companies. We end up where we started at the beginning, with corporate expatriates avoiding $5 billion, listen to that, $5 billion in taxes, and yet they win $2 billion annually in lucrative Federal contracts with the United States Government, 70 percent of which are in defense and homeland security. By a whopping vote of 318 to 110, this House last year voted to prohibit these corporate expatriates from sharing in the increase of contracts with the new Homeland Security Department. Senator Wellstone added similar language during the Senate debate, but after Wellstone's death and after the election was over, the bill came back, and guess what, we got rid of the provision. Despite a promise from House and Senate leadership during a close vote to three Republican Senators that this contract ban, and two other controversial provisions, would be fixed in later legislation, no ban has been enacted. These corporations benefit from America's defense and homeland security, but they are not willing to help pay for it. With 150,000 soldiers in Iraq today willing to give their lives for this great Nation, Congress should ensure that the resources exist to support that effort. If the tide of corporations flowing offshore for tax avoidance continues, those resources are put at serious risk. It is shameful that this year we have nothing again to show for our efforts.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, my motion is indeed very simple. It adds two matters to this charity tax bill: tax benefits for our military families and an enhanced child tax credit. Both the Senate and House versions provide much-needed military tax relief, including the expansion of combat zone filing rules and clarification of dependent care benefits, as well as relief for families of as the Columbia Space Shuttle astronauts. But the Senate bill is better in several ways. It would not tax any increase in death benefits, whereas the House bill would; it provides a 10-year extension of tax relief from the gains on the sale of a residence by a military member, whereas the House bill only provides 5 years; and the Senate bill has no limit on the deduction for overnight travel expenses of the National Guard and Reserve members, whereas the House limits this deduction. Mr. Speaker, at a time when our Reservists are being told that 1-year deployments will quickly turn into 2, when our brave soldiers are facing even longer periods of absence from family and home, this Congress should, at a minimum, provide some relief for those families. The delay is inexcusable. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit will add the Senate- passed child tax credit bill. Since June we have debated whether 12 million children in low-income families are worthy of the same enhanced tax credit as children of wealthier families, and one, indeed, that they have already received. While President Bush said the child credit must be given to low-income Americans as well, there has been resistance from the majority in this institution. In fact, I might quote two: ``Ain't going to happen,'' said one of the leaders. ``All but dead,'' said another, in a quote last week. The conferees have never even met, and every vote to revive this legislation thus far has failed. But today we have a chance to pass the Senate version, which eliminates one terrible flaw. Under the House bill, 200,000 military families who were formerly ineligible for enhanced tax credit would receive it, even though they served honorably in Iraq and Afghanistan and other combat zones. Before we leave here today in anticipation of Isabel, let us resolve ourselves to do something good for these families. Let us encourage more charitable giving, let us provide much-needed tax relief to the families of our brave soldiers, and let us heed President Bush's call to help those struggling families at the bottom of the ladder with the same benefits that those at the top have already received. I hope there will be broad support for this motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards).

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. I am opposed to this bill in its current form.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, once again the Committee on Appropriations, in the light of day, has voted to prohibit corporate expatriates from enjoying more than $1 billion a year in Federal Government contracts, and, once again, Mr. Chairman, in the dark of night, the Committee on Rules, has cobbled together a rule which rewards those corporations who run off to Bermuda to avoid paying United States income taxes. The American taxpayer has said tax fairness and tax equity matter, but apparently not in this Congress. Corporate expatriates will drain $5 billion from our Federal Treasury, and yet, in return, corporate expatriates will win, time and again, lucrative Federal contracts to build our nuclear facilities, guard our government buildings, provide health care to our veterans, landscape the national parks, and even money appropriated in this bill today, believe it or not, a multimillion-dollar contract to help the IRS collect taxes. We stay here and we pay our taxes while these corporations run off to Bermuda to avoid them. They then turn around and get paid to help collect money from us. If it was not September, most of us would come to believe based upon this issue it was April Fool's Day. Try, as an individual taxpayer announcing that your address is in Bermuda and avoiding your share of personal income taxes, to find what the result will be. I am astounded that after months and months of discussing this issue, when we were promised a vote on the floor, we are no closer to doing that now than we were before. Instead, the Committee on Appropriations does what they are supposed to do, and the Committee on Rules decides not to let the issue come to the floor. If they are confident in their position, let the matter come to the floor for an up-or-down vote. I guarantee you if it came to the floor, there would be 300 votes to affirm what I have said in the last couple of minutes. I hope that during this debate there will be others who continue to bring this matter before us, and I hope that all of you on the other side will stop protecting many of these financial traitors.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I pay tribute today to a dedicated public servant who has served the city of Springfield and the greater community for over 20 years. His leadership and courage have touched many lives and it is my great honor to recognize and commemorate this extraordinary man. Captain Mark Kenney began his career in the Springfield Police Department in July of 1971. He was promoted to Sergeant in 1979, to Lieutenant in 1987 and to Captain in 1991. During his career his assignments and duties stretched far into the heart of the district. Mark was the first captain of the community police program and started the citizens police academy. This academy was created to teach the public the mechanics of the police department and then use this information to better the community. Mark was deeply involved with many youth organizations and was the first captain of the Joseph Budd Youth Assessment Center where he commanded the Youth Bureau. In addition, Mark was the first trained Drug Abuse Resistance Education instructor, more commonly known as D.A.R.E., in Western Massachusetts and headed the D.A.R.E. program for many years. Trained by the F.B.I. as the first hostage negotiator for the police department, Mark used his skills several times during hostage situations that were both dangerous and volatile. Mark's skill and courage did not go unnoticed. In 1979, after a fire broke out in the Kimball Towers, he assisted many people to safety and was awarded a commendation for bravery. After the tragedy at the World Trade Center on September 11th, Mark involved himself immediately and was assigned Captain of the newly implemented Central Intelligence Bureau working closely with the F.B.I. on all homeland security issues. As the events of September 11th attest, police officers serve and protect the nation often at great sacrifice to themselves and for this we are immensely grateful. Mark is not the only member of his family to dedicate his life to protect others. Mark's grandfather and father were police officers before him and his son is currently a police officer making four generations to serve the Springfield Police Department. I am proud and honored to represent such a praiseworthy individual and devoted family man. Mark's achievements and accomplishments speak to his tremendous love and respect for his fellow citizens. I wish him all the best in his upcoming retirement and I humbly offer my sincerest thanks and gratitude for the lifetime of service he has given.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) for yielding me time. Only in this Chamber over the last few months could we have written $2 trillion out of our tax system irresponsibly over the next decade and then say that the cost of Medicare is unsustainable. Only in this Chamber could we have this debate from a political party who says, let us not take a truncated quotation. Let us not take a scare tactic. But you know what? You cannot truncate history. When I came to this House 15 years ago, the Republican leader in the Senate, Bob Dole, had voted against the establishment of Medicare. The Republican leader in this House, Bob Michel, wonderful human being, had voted against the establishment of Medicare. And they say, do not use these quotes because they are not true. They are not for real. Speaker Gingrich said, in time we would let Medicare wither on the vine. The third ranking Republican in the United States in the other body down the hallway, said recently, I believe the standard benefit, the traditional Medicare program, has to be phased out. And they say, but trust us on Medicare. Do not be skeptical of our intentions. We have come to love Medicare. There is not anybody on that side of the aisle that believes that tonight and there certainly is not anybody on this side of the aisle that believes that tonight as well. And then they argue, well, we have improved Medicare. Think of what we might have done without those tax cuts over the last 2 years. A predictable, carefully defined benefit would have been in place for Medicare recipients. It is the closest thing, Medicare, that this Nation has ever had to universal health care. It is an extraordinary achievement for those who turn 65 years old, and they refer to it as old-fashioned Medicare and we are to trust them. But let us talk about Medicare+Choice where I live in Massachusetts, the private sector's answer to the problems of Medicare. Well, they are all gone and the ones that are not gone have jacked premiums through the roof. They do not want to take care of the most vulnerable and whether we have a debate about government tonight and its role or not, that in the end is what government does. It takes care of those who are outside the mainstream of this economic life. Not the top 1 percent of the wage earners in this country, not those who benefit from the repeal of an estate tax. It is government that does that. Medicare is a legacy and an amendment to the Social Security program, the greatest achievement domestically in this Nation's history. And that amendment in Medicare is a greatchild and a success of a determined Congress and an enlightened President, Lyndon Johnson. Tonight let us stand with history, stand with Roosevelt and stand with Lyndon Johnson on what Medicare has done to make us a much more equitable society. What a great achievement it is. Reject the notion tonight of where they are going to take us, and that is down the road to privatization of Medicare.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, for the better part of 2 years now we have been promised a vote on closing the Bermuda loophole, an effort to amend this process on the floor where the Republican leadership has accepted by a margin so lopsided that it rivals any vote that we will take in any given legislative year. I believe 318 members of this House voted to do something about these corporate expatriates who not only leave the United States to avoid paying taxes but then have the unmitigated gall to bid on defense work in homeland security legislation. Ingersoll Rand, TYCO, these companies are avoiding billions of dollars in taxes, joint taxes estimated that we would garner, an additional $5 billion if we would simply close the Bermuda tax loophole. Now, I know what the talking points of the Republican Party are on this. It is the corporate tax structure that is at fault. Well, if that is the case after 9 years why have not we done something about it? It is unbelievable where we had a chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means who used to say he was going to pull the Tax Code up by its roots. Well, America tonight knows that that tax system is more complicated and more unfair than ever. We were going to drive a stake through the heart of the Tax Code. We were going to have tax simplicity. You know what we have had? We have had the rewarding of rich friends by our failure to address this issue. For the Americans that are viewing this evening, I would ask you what would happen if you moved to Bermuda and declared that by renting a post office box you had taken citizenship on that island nation. The IRS would be after you the next day. There would be no avenue of retreat, no opportunity to do what these corporations are doing. We have got 150,000 troops in Iraq tonight; and we talk about patriotism, while these guys renounce their citizenship and everybody knows that they continue to do substantial business and have their real corporate addresses here in the United States? And yet we cannot get a vote in this House of Representatives on that matter. Two years ago, David Rogers in the Wall Street Journal was promised by the leadership of this House ``there would have to be a vote on the Bermuda tax loophole.'' We are no closer to doing that this evening than we were 2 years ago; and that argument, again it galls everybody. It is the corporate tax structure that is at fault, not these folks moving offshore to avoid their responsibilities to live in this great Nation. That is patriotic, to pay our taxes and the $82 billion that Iraq is costing and $42 billion for homeland security. We define patriotism by allowing these guys to move their corporate address to Bermuda for one exclusive purpose, to avoid taxes. What does that say about this great Nation and our principles? Yet the intransigence of the leadership on the majority side month after month after month is to do nothing about it. Put that question on the floor here about whether or not these folks should pay their taxes and I tell my colleagues what we would get, 350 votes for it and everybody knows it.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. The American people are hearing the phrase ``mission accomplished'' a lot these days. However, they are not hearing it much from this Republican Congress. Today we debate a bill which could have passed with more than 400 votes on taxpayer rights. And then we could have proclaimed, mission accomplished. However, for some unknown reason, this bill now says the consumers need to waive basic protections in order to get health insurance. That means that these employees who have lost their health insurance and lost their jobs must now accept insurance, but only if they waive coverage for preexisting conditions. Worsening basic health protections, for this Congress, once again: mission accomplished. There are many things in this underlying bill that I supported before this killer provision was added. One of my constituents has even been a victim of these nonsensical IRS problems. Her retirement account was wrongfully levied by the IRS, but now the IRS cannot return it. It defies logic, could and should be fixed today. However, now that this basic IRS bill has been hobbled by an anticonsumer provision, unfortunately, we cannot say ``mission accomplished.'' The substitute we are considering today would provide for all of these basic taxpayer rights without harming consumer health protections. Further, the substitute includes the Senate-passed child tax credit, which millions of lower-income families are counting on. The substitute also includes the Armed Forces Tax Fairness Act, yet another bill that this House leadership has been sitting on. If we pass this substitute today, then we can leave and honestly tell the American people, ``mission accomplished.'' Relief for working families: mission accomplished. We could tell those fighting soldiers and their families: mission accomplished. Support the substitute and vote down the short-sighted Republican bill.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to yet another budget-busting bill. The Republican estate tax repeal that we are considering today will cost $1 trillion over the next two decades, and will kick into high gear just at the time the baby boomers retire. The Democratic substitute, however, provides immediate and greater estate tax relief to more families this decade than the Republican bill. And, the Democratic substitute would have no effect on the Federal budget, had the Republican leadership not refused the revenue offsets in the substitute. Our Republican colleagues say this substitute doesn't do enough, but the substitute would provide that 99.65 percent of decedents would not have to pay estate taxes. Who is in this less-than-one-percent group that the Republican majority is so intent on protecting? Well, the Washington Post today reports about some of these wealthy patrons in the shadows: ``So some of the affluent families who have bankrolled the repeal movement,'' including the heirs of the Hallmark greeting card company and the candy-making Mars family, ``are exploring estate tax changes short of repeal that could be implemented sooner.'' In fact, the Post reports, the heirs of Hallmark spent $60,000 while the Mars' heirs spent $1 million on professional Washington lobbyists to push their views on estate tax relief. That may be money well spent, considering the reckless drive to repeal in the face of exploding deficits. But, as one of the lobbyists in Washington argues to the Post, don't let exploding deficits dissuade you. It is not certain to happen, she argues, so feel free voting for $1 trillion in estate tax relief to that half-of-one-percent group. While the heirs are ready to cut a deal, the lobbyists hold strong. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote down this irresponsible Republican bill.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I would remind the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds) here that I am a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, and we did not have any markup. We did not have any opportunity to debate this bill in committee. We call it the All-American Tax Relief Act. It is red, white and blue. And you say to yourself, who could possibly object? I object. And I object on behalf of those 200,000 military families who are ineligible for this enhanced child tax credit, even though they served honorably in Iraq and Afghanistan and other combat zones. They apparently are not all-American enough to qualify for this bill. That provision is missing from the House All-American Tax Relief Act. You might have noticed that the refundable tax credit has no revenue impact this year under the House bill but does so under the Senate bill. How could it be that the stars-and-stripes House bill provides no relief this year? That is because the all-American bill rejects the notion that low-income families deserve immediate relief as every other American family will get in the next 6 weeks. Low-income families must wait for their checks until next year, and, of course, those serving in a combat zone, they can wait forever. Reject this bill. It is unpatriotic.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to acknowledge the passing of Committee on Ways and Means' staff member Al Davis who died on May 30. Like so many of his staffers that I hope are watching today, the regard that we as Members of this House hold for you is unparalleled. You are the ones who genuinely make the trains run on time. In the case of Al Davis, the information he provided to members of the Committee on Ways and Means as our economist were not only quality statistics but they were always reliable, a fact that the media and our critics often missed. It is people like this who day in and day out provide us with legendary support, and I particularly will miss the volumes of data he provided to me on the issue of alternative minimum tax. He was a political warrior, like so many who staff this Congress; but he was also an individual who held great regard for this institution and was never disdainful of any of its Members. Even those who opposed his ideas respected him. If we were offering a sitcom on the life of Al Davis, we would have called it ``Humble Al.'' I never heard anybody who did not find a compliment for Al Davis, and those of us who would acknowledge what he did when he whispered in our ear vital statistics are forever grateful for the service he rendered. We all will miss Al Davis.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize Dr. Daniel W. Ivascyn, a constituent of the second district of Massachusetts, for his countless years of dedication to the town of Oxford and Oxford public school system. Dr. Ivascyn is retiring this year after 34 years of devoted employment. Dr. Ivascyn began his extraordinary career in September 1969 when he became Business Manager of Oxford. He was later on promoted in 1975 to become Assistant Superintendent for Business Affairs. He continued his steady climb up the chain of command in 1996 where he was appointed to the prestigious position of Superintendent of schools. Dr. Ivascyn used his leadership role as a way to further escalate the growth and success of the Oxford public school system. Some recent notable accomplishments include assisting in the construction of a new Oxford High School in 2002, and the newly renovation of Barton and Chaffee Elementary Schools. Dr. lvascyn's dedication and desire to better the Oxford community serves as an admirable example to all American citizens. I am delighted to honor Dr. lvascyn's accomplishments and service to the second district of Massachusetts. His hard work and dedication will be greatly missed.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, today, we have two million American families struggling with persistent unemployment, we have a Treasury which has asked to increase its debt by an amount bigger than the entire federal debt of 1980, and a central bank desiring yet another interest rate slash to ward off deflation. In the eye of this perfect storm, this fiscal catastrophe, we have the Republican answer to everything: cut more taxes. This $350 billion bill is rife with uncertainty, as the individual and family tax breaks are afflicted with two-year expirations. While the bill won't inspire much confidence in our economy, it will inspire confidence and certainty that our war on tax code complexity has officially been lost. Along with fiscal sanity, middle-income families have been tossed overboard in this Republican tax bill as relief from the alternative minimum tax was cut to less than the puny amount either chamber originally provided. Hard as it is to believe--the conference agreement before us today provides even less relief for middle-income taxpayers from the AMT than either the House or Senate bill provided, and for a shorter period of time! When this bill was originally before the House, the Republican Majority bragged about the 10 million American families saved from higher taxes by their temporary AMT fix. But under the deal we are voting on today, 2005 will bring a tax increase for those 10 million families. Let me repeat that, at the end of next year, 10 million more American families will actually see a tax increase under this bill. As the former Bush aide now heading the CBO stated, ``At the current pace, the AMT is on track to replace the ordinary income tax for many Americans. The sheer number of taxpayers who are or will be touched by the AMT speaks volumes about the pressure on lawmakers to address the problem.'' Apparently, that pressure was shrugged off by the Republican leaders, and AMT has been pushed off, yet again, to another day. Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me object to House Republican leaders insistence in refusing any reasonable revenue offsets. With corporate expatriates dodging $5 billion in US taxes by running offshore, it simply defies logic not to collect this money in order to avoid digging our deficit hole deeper. By refusing to accept the modest Senate language to close the Bermuda loophole, the House Republicans have sanctioned this corporate misbehavior of choosing profits over patriotism. I urge my colleagues to vote down this bill.

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, what was the unemployment rate there 5 years ago or 6 years ago?

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?