Tom Price

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank my friend from Tennessee for his eloquent comments and for really bringing perspective to the issue. It really befuddles me as to how our friends on the other side of the aisle can say that they need to raise taxes to raise revenue, because if you look at this chart, Madam Speaker, what you appreciate is that as revenues were going down in the early part of this decade, what the solution was, as it is always a solution, is to lower taxes and you allow people to keep more of their hard-earned money. You put more money back in the pockets of American people and what happens? The economy flourishes, and lo and behold we have a record $2.4 trillion of revenue to the Federal Government because of decreased taxes. I am so proud to be joined by my good friends tonight to talk about this issue. And we are pleased to welcome once again Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn from Tennessee, an individual who also knows and appreciates the importance of fiscal responsibility and the importance that allowing individuals to keep more of their hard-earned money means to their own freedom and their own liberty. I welcome you and look forward to your comments this evening.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I brought along a number of charts. And we are not getting to a lot of them, but some of them we will. This chart is an important one because this shows the mandatory spending growth, something I like to coin actually ``automatic spending growth'' because it is not mandatory. The Federal Government has determined that that is where we are going to spend money. And it automatically increases. These are the automatic programs, which are basically Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid; and unless they see reforms, what we will have seen from 1995 to 2017 is an increase from 48.7 percent to 62.2 percent of our economy.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I would be happy to yield.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Will the gentlelady yield?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. This chart really points that out, ``Ignoring Entitlement Reform,'' which is exactly what occurred 2\1/2\ weeks ago when our friends passed our budget. When the Republicans were in charge, with the Balanced Budget Act we passed in 1987 we saved nearly $130 billion. With the Deficit Reduction Act just a few short years ago in 2005, about $40 billion. With the budget that was adopted 2\1/2\ weeks ago, none, zero. No entitlement reform. No automatic spending reform. And consequently, what you know and what I know is that we are on track to spend that 62.2 percent in a few very short years.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the gentlewoman for her perspective and for her passion for appropriate policies here out of Washington on behalf of the American people. And you've heard a lot about what our friends on the other side of the aisle have proposed. And it is important to the look at the numbers, Madam Speaker, the numbers on what has been proposed by our good friends on the other side of the aisle when the clock strikes midnight on December 21, 2010. They have proposed and they have enacted a budget that will result in increasing the ordinary income rates from 35 percent to 39.6 percent; increasing capital gains from 15 percent to 20 percent; increasing dividends from 15 percent to 39.6 percent; increasing estate taxes from zero percent to 55 percent; decreasing the child tax credit from $1,000 to $500; and, amazingly, increasing the lowest tax bracket from 10 percent to 15 percent. A remarkable $400 billion in new taxes, a remarkable display of, frankly, lack of appreciation and lack of respect for the American worker. Now what is the solution? A lot of things can be done. What we would propose and have proposed is something that respects American values and I believe results in increasing American vision, and that is a taxpayer bill of rights, a Federal taxpayer bill of rights. Many folks will recognize the sound of that because there are some States around this Nation that have indeed enacted a taxpayer bill of rights. The problem at the State level, however, is that all they can address is State revenue, State money. But, Madam Speaker, because of the actions of our friends on the other side of the aisle and because they want to dig deeper, we believe strongly that a taxpayer bill of rights is appropriate for the Federal Government. We believe that taxpayers have a right to a Federal Government that does not grow beyond their ability to pay for it. That means that the Federal Government ought not grow more than the population grows or more than the cost of living increases, and that can be put into law and that is what part of the taxpayer bill of rights does. We also believe that Americans have a right to receive back every single dollar that they entrust to the American people for their retirement. That is the Social Security issue, Madam Speaker. Right now the Federal Government, right now Washington spends money that the American people send to Washington to cover for their Social Security compensation, and what does Washington do, oftentimes it spends it on other programs. That is not right and it is not fair. I hear about it when I am back home, and I suspect you do as well. We believe taxpayers have a right to a balanced budget without raising taxes. You can balance the budget in one of two ways. You can raise taxes to try to increase revenue, which doesn't actually work, but you can have it work on paper. You can increase taxes and say, well, we will balance the budget that way, which is what our friends on the other side of the aisle have done. They say we will increase taxes $400 billion, and that is the way we will balance the budget. Madam Speaker, there is another way you can balance the budget, and that is by decreasing spending, and that is what we would propose through a taxpayer bill of rights. Fourth, we would propose fundamental and fair tax reform. My good friend from Texas mentioned earlier the proposal for a flat tax. That is one way to do it. I support the fair tax, the national retail sales tax, something that would do away with the IRS, do away with that organization that so many Americans dread and results in so much pain and heartache on the part of the American people. Finally, a taxpayer bill of rights that would require a supermajority for any increase in taxes for our Nation, something that was in effect until the very first day of this Congress when this new majority said, ``no,'' we ought not have a supermajority to increase taxes, we ought to let a simple majority do it which results in a huge opportunity for an increase in taxation and has resulted in, by this new majority, policies which will significantly increase taxes. So, Madam Speaker, what we have done tonight is outlined the problem, outlined the history, talked about what kinds of solutions can be proposed and what we would propose in the way of an appropriate Federal taxpayer bill of rights. I would like to close with a quote from Thomas Jefferson who had a perspective on taxation. He said: ``To take from one because it is thought his own industry has acquired too much, in order to spare others who have not exercised equal industry and skill is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.'' That was Thomas Jefferson, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, each and every one of us is remarkably privileged to serve in this House of Representatives. It is an honor to represent my constituents, as I know each Member feels it is an honor to represent theirs. We live in a wondrous and glorious nation, the longest surviving democracy in the history of the world, a nation that has resulted in, because of its actions, more freedom and more prosperity for more individuals than any nation in the history of mankind. It is commonsense and responsibility on behalf of the Members who represent all of the constituents across this Nation that have resulted in those policies. I, as I know my colleagues who have been here this evening, look forward to working with Members on both sides of the aisle to bring about that accountability and responsibility, and to bring about the kind of credit and honor to our constituents that they so richly deserve by their labor. Madam Speaker, I look forward to making certain that we hold each other accountable to establish the kinds of policies that are appropriate and the kinds of policies that will result in the greatest amount of prosperity and freedom for future generations of Americans.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, would the gentlelady further clarify the unanimous consent request?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I object, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I object, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to warn all Americans of the looming taxation tidal wave that is coming under this new Democrat majority. Democrats have unveiled their tax-and-spend budget proposal which will bring upon the American people the largest tax increase in our Nation's history. Rather than allow Americans to make choices about how best to spend their own money, it is clear that Democrats feel they and Washington bureaucrats better understand what is good for American families. Our Democrat colleagues repeatedly claim that the Republican tax cuts only benefit the wealthy. Well, Madam Speaker, the lowest-income Americans are about to find out just how untrue that tired rhetoric is. The tax hikes will hit all Americans in every tax bracket, the middle class, low-income families and small businesses. But there is an alternative. House Republicans have vowed to not just extend but make permanent the pro-growth low-tax policies that have brought recovery to our economy. Madam Speaker, we can move away from this tired trend of big and bigger government. We can return money back to the rightful owner, the American taxpayer; and we should start right now.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I demand a re-vote on the Sestak- Kennedy amendment.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that, I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I demand a re-vote on the Thompson and the Cohen amendments.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, it is truly incomprehensible that there are those who believe that the best course of action in the face of a determined enemy is to tell them that we are less determined. Yet that is exactly what this Iraq supplemental financing bill does. What message do we send our brave military men and women when we won't guarantee them the resources and the equipment that they need without including a litany of restrictive and arbitrary timetables? What will our soldiers on the front lines of this war think when they hear they have been sold for salmon fisheries and spinach growers, money used to buy votes? This Iraq supplemental bill is just one more step in what has become a long list of unprecedented attempts by this majority to accept defeat at any cost. For those of us in Washington, we get to face this moment in the warmth and the comfort of our homes and offices. For so many Americans, they will face this moment in the harsh reality of a war zone. We must not forget what is at stake. Our military will not, and the American people will not.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, could the gentleman explain his request?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. If I may, Mr. Speaker, I am just not recalling that.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, it is an innocent question. And the clerical error was?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Would the gentleman be willing to withdraw the unanimous consent request?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on the bill that was just passed, H.R. 1591, which passed, as I understand it, by a vote of 218-212, was rule XXIII, clause 16, applicable?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, so it is my understanding the rule under which we operated on H.R. 1591 did not waive House rule XXIII, clause 16. Is that correct?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I would inquire as to whether or not those words are eligible to be taken down.