Thomas Reynolds

Mr. REYNOLDS

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, a couple things. One, in the finger pointing of this 21st century of deficit and debt limit increases, again, I will put on the record, we had seven during the 1940s, six during the 1950s, 13 during the 1960s, 18 during the 1970s, 24 during the 1980s, 13 during the 1990s and two so far this decade. So we are not into a new venture, and we are not into a Republican venture. We are into a congressional decision of whether we keep the government moving or whether we do not, and there were 83 debt limit measures that have been enacted into law. I believe the gentleman from Texas will come up and talk about the PAYGO amendment that was offered before the Committee on Rules last night, and I think that it will be important for us to listen to him, and I believe that the issue of PAYGO will have bipartisan support if and when it comes to this floor. But I also want to caution my colleagues that this is a Senate bill that we are taking up, and further delay once again results in this body jeopardizing our trust funds such as Social Security, Medicare, highways, and we further jeopardize veterans' care and military retirement. So when we put our military at risk, at not having the necessary resources of food and clothing and ammunition, we also endanger unemployment benefits and disaster assistance, low-income home energy assistance programs. The debate on PAYGO I believe should happen and will happen. It is not necessarily that it has to happen when we are looking at debt limit for a number of reasons, including the quotes of Robert Rubin of 1995. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It is true that in 2004, as we consider whether we increase the debt limit, the government is controlled by Republicans, a Republican President, a Republican Congress in both the other body and in this one. But I am reminded of President Bill Clinton's State of the Union address in 1996, and I quote him: ``And on behalf of all Americans, especially those who need their Social Security payments at the beginning of March, I challenge Congress to preserve the full faith and credit of the United States, to honor the obligations of this great Nation as we have for 220 years, to rise above the partisanship and pass a straightforward extension of the debt limit. Show them that America keeps its word.'' That rang true when a Democratic President spoke to a Republican Congress; it rings true today as we consider the debt limit. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First of all, I want to correct my colleague from Oregon. I do not think I said I had a mandate on anything. I think I outlined the fact we had a great debate before an election and Republicans continue here. I also wonder if my colleague ever voted for a debt limit increase in his many terms of service, as we demagogue the issue today. As we come to a vote, it is going to get down to whatever excuse you find if you do not vote for it. But if you do not vote for it, you are actually putting the government in harm's way, which means the people are in harm's way. We have said that in repeated messages on the record today, and that still remains a fact as we look at consideration of the debate on the rule and then the underlying legislation following it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have listened to a number of my colleagues, and I have been on the record repeated times. First of all, what came before the Committee on Rules last night was a Senate bill. The Committee on Rules made a vote and decision without having any further delay to bring forward the Senate bill for consideration on the rule that we are now in debate on, and later we will have debate on the underlying legislation. We can demagogue it and put on the record all sorts of messages to feel good or draw political lines or switch from when might have been responsibility for voting for debt limit and now not, and now PAYGO. We have had debate on that. But I want to make sure that we listen to two things when we talk about bipartisanship. Bipartisanship is a two-way street of working together. I suspect, as I said before my colleague from California entered the Chamber, I expect to see Republican support again for PAYGO. Republicans are looking at it closely. There is certainly support for consideration of that. My colleague from California outlined some of the votes in a bipartisan vote that came for PAYGO, and I addressed that I think, with the gentleman from Texas, that there is support. The question is, under the terms of the debate, we want it altogether, right now, right here, and that is the position we are carrying. Some of that has been now a Blue Dog position that has been laid out by a number of members of that caucus. But the reality is if we keep screwing around with this thing, we are going to shut the government down. We cannot have it both ways. Each of us has voted for something that makes the government run and takes credit for it when it is the fall of the election year, making sure that voters knew they were working hard to bring some of that Federal money back home. Any further delay will result in this body's jeopardizing our trust funds, like Social Security, Medicare and highways. We further jeopardize military care and retirement. We put our military at risk. We endanger unemployment benefits and disaster assistance and low- income home energy assistance programs, programs many of us had in our messages back in our respective States and districts. We also talk about listening to presentations from 2000. At least twice I put on the record in this hour 83 different times over the last 64 years has the Congress taken upon itself to increase the debt limit. I also put on the record President Clinton's 1996 State of the Union address where he asked for bipartisan cooperation to ask the Congress to do the right thing and increase the debt limit. So it is not a new thing, it is not a Republican thing, it is not at Democrat thing, it is a government thing. There will be a consequence if we do not keep the government running because, for the history of our Nation, we have never not made sure that we honored what needed to be done with respect to debt limit. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, in 1996, we heard, as I put on the record, President Clinton's appeal to the Congress. I thought I might share a little bit of the appeal of our colleagues. The two I have come from the Democratic side of the aisle at that time who made the appeal for the debt limit to be rising. Barbara Kennelly of Connecticut stated, ``Lifting the debt limit should not be a matter of politics, but of governance. Ensuring that it is done should not be a question of partisan leverage, but of leadership.'' The gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), ``If the debt ceiling is not extended or is sent to the President in a form he cannot sign, the repercussions will be devastating. Already, the leaders of our European allies are warning of an international financial crisis should the United States default on its debt payments. Bond rating agencies are raising alarm that our Nation's triple A bond rating is in jeopardy. ``An actual default would cause interest rates on Treasury bonds to rise, making a balanced budget almost impossible to achieve. Home mortgage and business borrowing rates would increase, slowing economic growth. ``In the past, many clean debt limit extensions have been passed in a bipartisan manner by this House. It was the right thing to do then, and it is the right thing to do now.'' I do not always agree with my colleagues on some of their viewpoints of getting government solutions, and I am sure that many do not agree with me on government solutions, but we have certainly had a history of administrations, Democrat and Republican, and 83 times this Congress since 1940 has said let us do it. Now I understand showmanship. I understand consumption back home. I understand we are still in November, so we have a little election spirit in us. But the reality is if we do not increase this debt limit, we are putting America's people in jeopardy. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, this Congress must honor our commitments and America's priorities. We must stand up today in support of our seniors and veterans and military and all citizens who will be harmed by our inaction. I urge my colleagues to do the right thing and support the rule and the underlying bill. I also look at the 109th Congress as an opportunity for those who want to look at PAYGO, Republican and Democrat, from those from the left to those on the right to come together in a bipartisan fashion and continue working through the will of the House to see those types of considerations debated in committee and debated on the floor of this great House. Before I yield back, I would like to quickly thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Dreier) and all of the members of the Committee on Rules and staff as this is most likely the last time I will manage a rule for this industrious panel. I have been honored to serve on the Rules Committee for the past 6 years.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. REYNOLDS

Mr. REYNOLDS. By direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 828 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Madam Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern); pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for purposes of debate only. (Mr. REYNOLDS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. REYNOLDS. Madam Speaker, House Resolution 828 is a same-day rule that provides for consideration of the rule to accompany the conference report to H.R. 4520, the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. The rule waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII requiring a two-thirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from the Committee on Rules. Madam Speaker, this Congress has been debating the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 throughout this summer, all the while European Union sanctions on American exports have been quickly rising at a rate of 1 percent per month and now stand at a staggering 12 percent. They will continue their constant uptick at an additional 1 percent per month until the FSC-ETI is repealed or the rate reaches 17 percent. Madam Speaker, these sanctions are unnecessarily costing domestic manufacturers, small businesses, and farmers billions upon billions of dollars. They are raising the price of 1,600 categories of U.S. goods sold outside the United States, and they are hindering the exporting capability of multiple industries. Farm products, jewelry, steel, tools, glass, toys, and clothing are among the goods subject to the penalty tariff. We simply cannot delay in delivering the needed relief to the producers and manufacturers of these products who have been subjected to the true financial hardship of this situation. Without our swift action, many small businesses and other employers face financial devastation and we risk job losses. A conference report has been prepared that answers the call by repealing this export tax subsidy and providing tax incentives for domestic purposes. It simplifies complex international tax law, provides businesses with more resources to create new jobs, and is revenue neutral, so it will not add to the Federal deficit. This Congress must continue its commitment to provide strong economic policies that spur growth and encourage domestic manufacturing while generating jobs and protecting our small businesses and farmers. The answer is clear, Madam Speaker, passing the American Job Creation Act today is of the utmost importance to American workers and their families. I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying conference report as it later comes about. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I can see, just listening to the observations of the gentleman from Massachusetts that maybe he and I should go and observe the conferees, because what I just heard is not what I am hearing from some of the majority members of the conferees. I understand that all the provisions that were considered by the conferees either were in the House side or in the Senate side of the bill, so that both those versions were what they worked on. There are absolutely no new versions. My understanding is there was a motion to instruct which failed that called for an open session, and yet the conferees that wanted that, got what they wanted. We had an open session on Monday and Tuesday and Wednesday of this week. I also understand the Senate finance rules of the other body seemed to be what was happening, where members of the conference committee were able to submit amendments that they wanted in the Chair's markup of what they wanted to do, and there were just numerous expressions of what they were based on conferees doing that. I also understand that ranking members and other members of the Committee on Ways and Means, which has jurisdiction, participated as conferees in this. So there has certainly been an open process. Madam Speaker, this has been around a long time. We knew that FSC- ETI, based on the WTO sanctions would require us to move forward. We have had ample debate and passage of legislation here. It has occurred in the other body. As the conferees has met, we have seen them work through an open process that seems to be acceptable to the conferees in the submission of amendments, in the Chair's mark on those, and in the completing of our work. Madam Speaker, there are no new versions of anything. It is either in the other body's bill or it is in the House bill that they have worked on. So I think that as we look, at a sense, in a bipartisan fashion, to see if we can continue to work hard this week and, if we can, complete our work, that we would be able to return to our districts, that we are moving there. I understand, at least from the other body, that there is bipartisan support from the conferees on this legislation as it continues through the day. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my day.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I think it is important that while the debate may go wherever it is that is germane to debate, that what I have come to this floor to do as a member of the Committee on Rules is to bring forth consideration of a same-day rule of legislation as it is filed for consideration today. I outlined in my opening remarks that there is that opportunity that as we pass this rule, if it is passed today, which I believe it will be, that it affords us the opportunity to consider a rule later of a conference report on the American Jobs Creation Act conference report. As I understand it, the legislation has been circulated to the conferees in final stead and that in a bipartisan aspect, at least in the other body, we have a number of Democratic Senators who have already signed and a number of Republicans. I cannot speak for what they are in this body. But I know in regular order that as the legislation is filed, it will come up on the Ways and Means Web site, and it will again allow everyone to review it. And I know that before this legislation can come to the floor of this great body, it will require a Rules Committee meeting to also have a hearing which affords an ample opportunity for Rules members to listen and for those who choose to come up to the Rules Committee an opportunity to explain or answer questions on the legislation. And then we will have an hour debate on the rule, and then we will have whatever time the Rules Committee determines the debate will be on the conference report. And so we certainly are not looking at the discussion we are having today, while it brings healthy debate on the floor of the House of Representatives, that this is a final act of anything. It is an opportunity to engage in the same-day consideration of the American Jobs Creation Act conference report which has been out there. I understand that documents are now available on the Ways and Means Web site. That would mean not only all the Members in this body today but throughout our great institution can now see this legislation. To my knowledge, I do not have a time that Rules will convene, so I know we are not rushing it right after consideration of this legislation. I urge my colleagues to begin to once again look at some facts: that there has been an open process of the conferees, even though a motion was defeated to instruct relative to open session, there has been one, on Monday and Tuesday and Wednesday of this week, of conferees; that a model of the Senate Finance markup submitted amendments as conferees saw fit and the chairman's mark came from a result of that. We know that there has been a bipartisan signing of the conference report in the other body. We know that there has been certainly signing of at least majority Members in this body and that all this rule does is give us the opportunity to continue moving to get our work done and to level the playing field on the WTO sanctions which will mean jobs for Americans as that comes about. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am not so sure my colleague has read the whole bill, though I realize it has just been on the Web site a short time. But as I listened to some of his description, he did not really talk about the fact that small business, that this bill extends and enhances section 179 of expensing for 2 additional years so small businesses can write off the cost of their investments up to $100,000 annually. I have been a small businessman. I know how big debt is. Maybe some others that have not had that opportunity do not really know how important that is to small business. Partnerships and S corporations receive a deduction for domestic production activities. It offers S corporations 10 reforms providing $1.2 billion in tax relief. It provides for faster depreciation on leasehold and restaurant improvements. I come from some communities that they do not have chains in there. That is a small businessman on Main Street that is looking for a little expensing, an opportunity to have their building and a leasehold written off a little faster. Sometimes it gets lost in my great State of New York, the number one industry is agriculture like it is in many of my colleagues', but the deduction for domestic production activities is extended to farmers as well as to agricultural and horticultural cooperatives. The bill provides for AMT relief for farmers and fishermen who income average. It extends an ethanol subsidy under current law through 2010, thus improving farmers' incomes. It extends double tax and triple taxation on farmer cooperatives. It provides capital gains relief when livestock is sold and replaced on account of drought or other weather- related disasters. It extends capital gains treatment to outright sales of timber. When we look at our domestic manufacturers, the bill provides manufacturing companies, farms, and small businesses with $76.5 billion in stimulative tax relief through a deduction for income attributed for production activities in the United States. More tax relief is provided for business with proportionately more U.S. production operations. The deduction is available for domestic production activities only. The deduction is limited to 50 percent of wages paid to workers in America. The bill does not move jobs overseas. I want to also cite to my colleagues, particularly those from the States of Washington, Nevada, Wyoming, South Dakota, Texas, Alaska, and Florida that I know of, you can deduct your sales tax if you do not have income tax like the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and my great State has to pay. I look forward to the consideration of this body for a same-day rule which is all this is right now. It is an opportunity to continue the debate and the rule later today, if the Committee on Rules grants one, and for debate on the floor of all the Members as we look at this legislation. Again, I want to remind my colleagues that I have been informed, and they can verify as they go to the Committee on Ways and Means website themselves, nothing was considered in the conference report other than provisions that were in this body's legislation or the other body's legislation and that we have received bipartisan support on conferees' signing the conference report as it comes to this great body for its consideration. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just listened, and I realize that a couple things need to come about, and that is that, months and months ago; it reinforces my original statements that we have had ample time as we have been debating this throughout the summer; there was a Crane-Rangel piece of legislation. There was a Thomas piece of legislation, and now there is an American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. I just want to remind the gentleman from Ohio, the previous speaker, that my understanding is the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane), who is the number two in seniority man and an individual who had authored legislation previously, has signed this conference report. If the gentleman were still in the Chambers, he would know that my previous remarks talked about the fact that this is all about small business and small manufacturing and farmers as we look at expensing vital everyday assistance to our small businesses, our small manufacturers and our farmers. And that is what this bill has got in it. I want to remind my colleagues, as all the hysteria comes out here on the question of what it does to the federal deficit, again, I will put on the Record that the conference agreement is revenue-neutral. It does not increase the federal deficit. The manufacturing firms and the farms and the small businesses receive $76.5 billion in stimulative tax relief through a deduction, not a corporate rate cut, and tax relief is provided for all these businesses and farmers and small manufacturers and co-ops, subcorporations, and other unincorporated businesses. It is all about helping America's small businesses. It is all about helping businesses compete fair and globally across the globe. So, again, I want to remind my colleagues that this is a rule to consider a same-day legislation under the rules' permission for later today. I want to remind my colleagues that it is available on the Committee on Ways and Means' website, and I look forward to later in the day that we might have an opportunity to move forward on this legislation, that, again, I will remind them has bipartisan support and has had a fair and open process as conferees have moved forward with legislation, as I have repeatedly said. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), the chairman of the prestigious Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I took a look at that 12-inch set of legislation, and I just want to alert my colleagues, because it is on the Committee on Ways and Means Web site. If you go to waysandmeans.house.gov and take a look and see what is new and look for the conference documents, you are going to find that. So you do not have to carry that anywhere; it is going to be right on your computer, right in your office. For those who are looking for some specific things, I urge them to consider the Adobe Acrobat so they can word search anything they are interested in. But, as I said earlier, and I am sure the gentleman did not hear my predecessor speaking, I come from a small-business world. I took a look to see what small business said. Over 250 companies and organizations have supported this legislation as this body considered it. So you get the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturing or the Business Roundtable. But we get right down into main street and that village of USA when NFIB and the other small businesses talk about how important expensing and other opportunities that are in this legislation to be considered are. But I cannot let someone address the fact that the Republican majority is not interested in tax simplification. Quite frankly, it is the opposite. We have been resolute in our commitment to small business, to farmers, to manufacturers and just plain old tax simplification. Not only by action in the House, but in this election season across America, I have heard it time and time again by my Republican colleagues as they talk about the push and the resolute objective of having tax simplification here in the United States Tax Code. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, we certainly know that the legislative calendar for this year was set to complete our work on October 1. We are now here on October 7 and working to get our work done. And it is my hope that we continue on the 9/11 debate today and other important matters pending. It is also my hope that we are able to consider the legislation dealing with the American Jobs Act of 2004. We know that since this last hour, that we are asking the body to consider a same-day rule so that we can consider the legislation if and when the Committee on Rules meets and sends to this floor a rule for consideration of the underlying legislation. We know that the gentleman from California (Chairman Thomas) has personally come and filed the report for the conference report before this body, and we have seen in the last hour both what the bill looks like, with some 1,300 pages and 12, 13 inches thick, and we heard me previously say that the Committee on Ways and Means Web site address, waysandmeans.house.gov, if you go to ``What's New'' and you look for conference documents, you will find the conference report, which is bipartisanly signed, in its entirety. And, if you want, the Adobe Acrobat has the word search so that you can find anything you are interested in finding. This legislation has been around for a while. Again, I will repeat myself, as I have several times in this debate: It has nothing in it within the provisions that was not considered in this body or the other body by as the conferees came together. It was an open conference, even though the motion to instruct was defeated, and we followed the Senate rules whereby members of the conference could file numerous and countless amendments, which were considered, and we now have a final word product. I know the debate on the floor, as we get through this, either today or this early evening or if it ends up tomorrow, will have all sorts of interpretations. We will get down to the fact that it is going to help American business, and that includes small business, farmers, and small manufacturers. The Republican leadership and the Committee on Rules has met. They are not acting against the rules of this House. Quite frankly, we have asked for consideration of the body by majority vote to determine if we can have a same-day consideration, and that is what is going to happen as we have a vote here shortly. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the resolution, which is same-day consideration of the legislation before us, and I yield back the balance of time. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. REYNOLDS

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 830 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. (Mr. REYNOLDS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 830 is a standard rule that provides for consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 4520, the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. The rule waives all points of order against the conference report and against its consideration. The rule also provides that the conference report will be considered as read. Mr. Speaker, over the past several years, America's economy has experienced more than its fair share of setbacks. We have had a triple shock of terrorist attacks, corporate scandals and a recession, but each and every time, this administration and this Congress has responded with sound policies to move forward, to create jobs, to stimulate economic growth. After inheriting a slowing economy, President Bush and this Congress reacted quickly and enacted a series of tax cuts that resulted in the shortest and shallowest recession in this Nation's history. We have been resolute in our work towards recovery, and today, real GDP has grown at its fastest rate in 20 years. More than 1.7 million jobs have been created, and more Americans are working today than in any other time in our history. The unemployment rate is below the average levels in each of the past three decades. In the past 4 years, we have seen the fastest rate of growth in productivity in more than a half a century. Homeownership continues at an all-time high. In the particularly hard-hit manufacturing sector, we have seen 17 straight months of growth in activity, and the manufacturing employment index has been growing for 11 consecutive months. When President Bush took office, manufacturing employment had been on the decline for 3 years. In fact, more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs were lost in the last 6 months of the Clinton administration. So far this year, manufacturing employment is up by more than 107,000 jobs. We have seen the addition of 22,000 manufacturing jobs last month alone, and manufacturing output is at an all-time high. But our work is not done until every American who wants a job can find one, and that is why, Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be here today on behalf of the American Jobs Creation Act by supporting this rule and the underlying conference report. Now is the time to seize on the momentum that we have created and continue to enact policies that spur economic growth, generate jobs, bolster domestic manufacturing and protect small businesses and farmers. As my colleagues know, European Union sanctions on American exports are costing our manufacturers and farmers billions of dollars. Tariffs currently stand at 12 percent and will continue to increase 1 percent per month until the FSC/ETI is repealed. That, Mr. Speaker, threatens the ability of our domestic companies to create jobs right here at home. EU sanctions are increasing the price of 1,600 categories of U.S. goods sold outside of the United States. They are hindering the exporting capability of multiple industries. Today, we have the power to stop them. Without our action, many small businesses and other employers face financial ruin, while their employees face their own job losses. By repealing the FSC/ETI through the underlying conference report, this Congress will finally put an end to these staggering sanctions and help, once again, to put Americans to work. This conference report permanently reduces the corporate tax rate to 32 percent for domestic, and only domestic, manufacturers, producers, farmers and small corporations. This is yet another stimulant for job growth, encouraging production and manufacturing here at home, giving employers incentives to reinvest, expand and, more importantly, create new jobs in the United States. Mr. Speaker, the underlying report also addresses the primary obstacle in realizing even bigger job growth, the double taxation for U.S.-based manufacturers. Our global competitors enjoy a considerable advantage over the United States simply due to the burdensome U.S. tax code. In reducing this double taxation faced by U.S.-based companies, we greatly enhance their competitiveness in the global market and their ability to sell American-made goods, all the while making it easier for them to create more jobs here in the United States. Mr. Speaker, another important part of H.R. 4520 is its relief for millions of small businesses and farmers from the alternative minimum tax. Over the years, that tax has unintentionally ensnared more and more middle-income Americans. With the passage of the underlying report today, this House will deliver much-needed relief for millions of American farmers and small businessmen. We will end the double and triple taxation of farmer cooperatives, and we will provide capital gains tax relief when livestock is sold and replaced on account of drought and other weather-related disasters. The conference report also makes it cheaper for existing businesses to increase their investment and for entrepreneurs to expense new ventures. Provisions to promote investment in new equipment are extended for an additional 2 years. This increased investment opportunity provides significant stimulus to the economy, and further aids in boosting job growth. Partnerships and S corporations also receive a reduction for domestic production activities under the conference report. A whole host of reforms are included which provide S corporations with $1.2 billion in tax relief. In total, the conference report gives manufacturing companies, farms and small businesses $76.5 billion in stimulative tax relief through a reduction for income attributable to production activities here in the United States. This relief will help keep individuals from sending exorbitant amounts of their hard-earned money to Uncle Sam and use it instead to create new jobs and new opportunities. Mr. Speaker, our colleagues have worked tirelessly on behalf of the American people throughout this process. I would like to especially commend the Chairman and the conference committee members for their steadfast support of sound tax policy and job creation. We have the opportunity and the responsibility to not only continue but also accelerate the last year of economic growth and job creation. We can do that today by passing the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying conference report. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I was listening to the gentleman from Massachusetts. He said draw a line in the sand. I am willing to bet, by the time we complete our vote on the bill, the underlying legislation, it is going to be quicksand, because I think it will have bipartisan support not only in this body but the other body. I guess it is okay to come on the floor and see just a half or a quarter of what the legislation does, but you cannot write history over again. The fact is, earlier the gentleman from Massachusetts and I had the opportunity to bring back to the floor from the Committee on Rules a same-day resolution. It was passed by this honorable body and we are now having the underlying legislation brought down, the conference report, to be considered here. So the will of the House was done today by a vote which allowed the bringing of this bill to the floor. It seems that this is a similar situation to a discussion we had earlier on the rule on this same-day legislation, and that was in reference to the Crane-Rangel legislation. I just must remind us again for the record in the rules debate we are now having that while my colleagues continue to talk about Crane- Rangel, many of the provisions that were in the legislation offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) are incorporated in the parts of this bill in the conference report. I also note that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) has signed this conference report as a conferee. Mr. Speaker, I also want to remind my colleagues that it has bipartisan support, as the conferees deliberated on only those things that were in the House bill or in the other body's bill as a final product of the conference report. The minority leader of the other body has signed this as a conferee. And there is good reason why it has bipartisan support. But before we discuss that, we might look back at the reality of what the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means said earlier today in the previous rule which helped to bring this one to the floor. He said in order to have bipartisanship, it goes two ways. Sometimes we lose track of that, as it was extended by the chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance version, of having amendments offered from the conferees and then considered, as is done in the Senate Committee on Finance. Before we conclude on what is in the bill through the eyes of my colleague from Massachusetts, let us be reminded that this legislation addresses help for exporters, where the European Union has imposed a penalty tariff of 12 percent on more than 1,600 categories of U.S. exports. And unless the U.S. Congress acts, the European Union will continue to increase that penalty tariff by 1 percent every single month until it reaches 17 percent. Mr. Speaker, that affects Wisconsin's cheese, Florida's oranges, California's lemons and limes and other farm products which are subject to that penalty tariff; and U.S. manufacturers of jewelry and steel and tools, glass, toys, and clothing, and other products subject to the penalty tariff. I keep hearing, Mr. Speaker, we have a plan for the middle class. Well, when I look at small business, that is middle class, on Main Street USA. This bill extends and enhances section 179 expensing for 2 additional years, so small businesses can write off the costs of their investments up to $100,000 annually. Partnerships and S corporations receive a deduction for domestic production activities. It offers S corporations ten reforms providing $1.2 billion in tax relief, and it provides for faster depreciation of leasehold and restaurant improvements on those mom-and-pop shops all through USA Main Street. When we look at our farmers, Mr. Speaker, the impact of what has been done in this bill on the deduction for domestic production activities extended to farmers as well as to agriculture and horticulture cooperatives, it deals with AMT relief for farmers and fisherman who income average. It extends an ethanol subsidy for those under current law through 2010, thus improving farmers' incomes. It ends double and triple taxation of farmer cooperatives. It provides capital gains tax relief when livestock is sold and replaced on account of drought or other weather-related disasters. It extends capital gains treatment on outright sales of timber. Mr. Speaker, on domestic manufacturers, the bill provides companies, farms, and small business with $76.5 billion, that is with a ``B,'' $76.5 billion in stimulative tax relief through a deduction for income tax attributed to production activities in the United States. More tax relief is provided for businesses with proportionately more U.S. production operations. The deduction is available for domestic production activities only, and the deduction is limited to 50 percent of the wages paid to workers in America. The bill does not move jobs overseas. And for those who do not have income tax, something that I live with in New York, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4520 allows taxpayers, especially those in Nevada, Wyoming, the State of Washington, South Dakota, Texas, Alaska and Florida, to deduct their sales taxes because they do not pay income tax. And ending the tobacco quotas, I have seen tobacco States where it is clear that the message of opportunity of offering tobacco farmers, including those in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Kentucky, a fair buy-out to end the quota system. Mr. Speaker, this is a tremendous opportunity for middle America to get a tax break and to continue stimulating our economy. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Harris).

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I listened here, and I have just got to remind people that it is very clear this resolution is revenue-neutral, so it is not going to impact the deficit. Second, I listened to my colleague from New Jersey as he talked about jobs overseas and everybody getting a benefit, and I have just got to remind, again for the record, although we put it on in the previous rule, that nothing in this bill moves jobs overseas. More tax relief is provided for businesses with proportionately more U.S. operations. The deduction is available for domestic production activities only. The deduction is limited to 50 percent of the wages paid to workers in America. Income attributable to outsourcing does not benefit. Overseas operations of multinationals does not benefit. New taxes are imposed on expatriated entities. The international tax reforms in the bill would not lead to the movement of jobs overseas, as many Democrats claim. In fact, these provisions would reduce double taxation on companies, thus encouraging them to keep their headquarters in the United States. This conference report has bipartisan support, including the minority leader of the other body. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp), who is an expert on the Committee on Ways and Means.