Paul Ryan

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Huelskamp).

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam), the chairman of the subcommittee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes. This one is the one that really takes the cake with us because we recognized a persistent pattern of targeting and harassment by the Internal Revenue Service over groups, and the only thing that grouped these groups together, the only thing that was similar, was their political persuasion, their political beliefs. So the question that I get asked a lot from hard-working taxpayers in Wisconsin is: Did the IRS really target people based on their political beliefs? And the answer is: Absolutely yes, they did. That is tyrannical; that is beyond the pale; and that, with the passage of this bill, will be illegal. It will make it extremely clear, no ifs, ands, or buts. And let me tell you one other thing, Mr. Speaker. There is still a long ways to go with the investigation that is still underway, but what we already know is that this targeting happened. People were targeted based on their political beliefs, and this law makes that a crime. With that, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Renacci) for the purpose of closing.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1104) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a deduction from the gift tax for gifts made to certain exempt organizations, as amended.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Are you getting a theme here, Mr. Speaker? So what has happened here is individuals were giving donations to tax-exempt organizations, nonprofit organizations. As they should have, they did not expect to have to pay taxes on those donations. The Internal Revenue Service sent these letters to these donors, to these particular organizations, obviously stirring up a lot of confusion and threatening them with a big tax bill. This makes it really clear. These organizations are tax-exempt organizations, and therefore you don't owe gift taxes for a donation to these organizations. It is crystal clear. It is made even more clear in this bill because, Mr. Speaker, it is very important for the operation of our society that that space that occurs between ourselves and our government is full, is vibrant, and is alive. We call that space civil society. It is where we live our lives. The deeply woven fabric of civil society are all these various groups, nonprofit groups, all kinds of groups, advocating for something-- advocating for the environment, advocating for the economy, advocating for the disabled, advocating for this cause, advocating for that cause, advocating for this person, and advocating for that person. It is how we lead our lives. It is how we integrate with one another. It is how we have a community. So, Mr. Speaker, the last thing we want to do is have the IRS parachute itself in and divide itself and make people think that they can't participate in civil society. Civil society is so core to who we are as Americans and so core to our ability to live our freedoms and to help others. That is what is so important about this. So when people are hit with an intimidating letter from the Internal Revenue Service and are being told that by participating in civil society, by participating in civil dialogue, and by exercising their free speech rights they are going to get hit with this huge, massive tax bill that they didn't expect, that is harassment. That is targeting. That is not going to happen once this bill passes. That is one other mistake that was made that is being rectified because of Mr. Roskam's diligence. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate all the members of the committee who on a bipartisan basis saw that this was wrong and on a bipartisan basis agreed with this solution. That is why I am just so pleased that we are bringing these bills to the floor. John Lewis, Sandy Levin, Peter Roskam, and Paul Ryan are arm in arm agreeing on this. We are standing up for citizens, we are standing up for taxpayers, we are putting the taxpayer in charge of the IRS, not the other way around, and we are standing up for our free speech rights for our civil society. That is why on this tax day, April 15, we are bringing these bills to the floor and passing these bills on a bipartisan, unanimous basis because this is the signal we want to send to Americans on tax day that we are not going to take this anymore, and we are going to reassert our rights. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam) for closing on his bill.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I can't top that, so I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, during the course of the week, I was absent for legislative business; had I been present, I would have cast the following votes: rollcall 145--H.R. 1259--On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass--``yes,'' rollcall 146--H.R. 1265--On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass--``yes,'' rollcall 147--H.R. 1480--On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass--``yes,'' rollcall 148--H. Res. 189--On Ordering the Previous Question--``yes,'' rollcall 149--H. Res. 189--On Agreeing to the Resolution--``yes.''

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, here's what it all comes down to: This is a step toward patient-centered health care. And what that means is, we're starting to focus on what's best for patients. Medicare is supposed to help seniors get the best health care possible. And the way to do that is to reward what works. Reward the doctors who help you recover faster and live longer. Reward the doctors who put seniors and their health first. That's what it means to have a patient-centered system. That's how you strengthen Medicare. And that's what this bill does. This bill changes how Medicare pays doctors. Right now, you get paid for every single treatment you perform--no matter how effective you are. So what we say to doctors is, ``From now on, we're going to reward quality work. Do a good job, make people better, keep them out of the hospital, and you'll get paid more.'' I think we all can agree that's better than just paying for the amount of care. And we can all agree that's better than one more year of a manufactured crisis. Now I want to add that we make a couple of other good reforms in this bill. These reforms will save money. And those savings will build up over time. We ask the wealthy to contribute more to their care. We discourage unnecessary doctor visits with some insurance reforms. And we tell Medicare to share data with experts to help providers figure out what works. You all know I think we have a long way to go to save Medicare. I think this is just a start. But this is a firm step in the right direction. It's a firm step toward a patient-centered system. And I ask all my colleagues to support it. Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, March 20, 2015. Hon. Fred Upton, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Upton: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 1021, Protecting the Integrity of Medicare Act of 2015, which was ordered reported by the Committee on Ways and Means on February 26, 2015. I appreciate your decision to facilitate prompt consideration of the bill by the full House. I understand that by foregoing a mark-up of the bill, the Committee on Energy and Commerce is not waiving its interest in the provisions within its jurisdiction. Per your request, I will include a copy of our exchange of letters with respect to H.R. 1021 in the Congressional Record during House consideration of this bill. We appreciate your cooperation and look forward to working with you as this bill moves through the Congress. Sincerely, Paul Ryan, Chairman.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1527) to accelerate the income tax benefits for charitable cash contributions for the relief of the families of New York Police Department Detectives Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos, and for other purposes.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1527, currently under consideration.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I am going to let Mr. Jeffries from New York explain what the bill does. This is something that I want to thank the gentleman from New York for bringing to our attention. This is the kind of thing we have done in the past under certain situations in emergencies such as this. I would simply like to thank the gentleman for bringing it to our attention, and I think Mr. Jeffries can explain the bill very well. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from New York said it very, very well. I think this is the right and appropriate thing to do, and I thank him for bringing it to our attention. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair, Section 804 of H. Con. Res. 27 contains the budget resolution's policy statement on tax reform. These policy goals are familiar, as we have been pursuing them for several years now. They include simplifying the tax code for families and businesses, reducing tax rates and consolidating the existing seven brackets into just two, repealing the burdensome Alternative Minimum Tax, reducing what is currently the highest corporate rate in the developed world, and transitioning to a more competitive system of international taxation. With respect to this last goal, the budget resolution includes language that did not appear in previous budget resolutions. Section 804(b)(5) specifies that our international tax system should be reformed ``in a manner that does not discriminate against any particular type of income or industry.'' Because this language is new, I would like to explain in more detail how it should be interpreted. Nondiscrimination is a key principle of tax reform. The tax code should not pick winners or losers. All businesses should be on a level playing field, so that the free market decides where to allocate capital based on the most promising economic opportunities, not based on where one can obtain the most tax breaks. At the same time, when some taxpayers use sophisticated tax planning to exploit loopholes in the tax code to achieve a result much more favorable than other taxpayers can achieve, the nondiscrimination principle is violated and capital flows to the least taxed investments rather than to the most economically productive investments, leading to economic distortions and lower growth. For this reason, the committee report on H. Con. Res. 27, House Report 114-47, clarifies that, ``This nondiscrimination principle, however, is not intended to prevent the adoption of reasonable anti-avoidance rules.'' As an example, under the current tax code a U.S. company that keeps its intellectual property (IP) in the United States and licenses it to foreign customers must pay a corporate tax rate of 35 percent on royalties related to that IP. But a competitor that moves its IP from the United States to a foreign subsidiary in Bermuda and then licenses it to foreign customers pays zero on its royalties. That means our tax code discriminates against U.S.-owned IP and in favor of foreign-owned IP, which is why so much of our valuable intellectual property has left the country. On the other hand, a tax reform proposal that says both companies pay the same low tax rate on those royalties--for instance, a rate similar to Ireland's rate, which is where so many U.S. companies are moving to lower their tax burden--would end this discrimination and therefore would be consistent with section 804(b)(5). And by ending this discrimination with the same low tax rate for both companies, the proposal would encourage not only intellectual property to return to the United States, but also the R&D and manufacturing jobs associated with it. I hope this clarifies how section 804(b)(5) should be interpreted, and I look forward to working with Chairman Price and the rest of my colleagues on the Committee on Ways and Means, as we continue working to enact tax reform legislation in the 114th Congress.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I just want to, first of all, tip my hat to the new Budget chairman. It is a very difficult job putting a budget together. I did it for the last 4 years and served in the capacity of the gentleman from Maryland as the ranking member of the Budget Committee for the prior 4 years before that, so I want to thank the gentleman for bringing an outstanding budget to the floor. First of all, this is a budget to be proud of. This is a budget that makes our country stronger. This is a budget that balances. It is pretty important to note that hard-working taxpayers, the people that elected us here to represent them, they have to live within their means. Well, so should government. That is the basic decision here. When you take a look at the budgets that are being considered here today, we are basically trying to get the government to get back into the business of being honest with people about our finances. Here is the problem, Mr. Chairman. Our government is making promises to people in this country that it knows it can't keep. That is dishonesty. What this budget does is it puts our budget back on track so that the government can keep these promises, the promises that people are organizing their lives around. What the gentleman from Maryland and the President's budget says is just keep raising taxes; tax more. Oh, by the way, that is not enough. Then we need to borrow more and spend more. That seems to be the path to prosperity, according to them, and look at where we are, highest poverty rates in a generation. Our economy is growing below 2 percent in most cases, below 3, which is what we were supposed to be growing at. The gentleman, I just listened to his rhetoric. He says this slices, this slashes; we are chopping away at opportunity. Here is what this budget does. Instead of increasing spending, on average, like the President's budget does at 5.1 percent, it does it at 3.4 percent. We are saying let's get the government to live within its means. Government spending will still increase, on average, 3.4 percent a year, instead of 5.1 percent a year. I guess that is the difference between whether people can live the American Dream or not, whether we are slashing or chopping or doing all these horrible, awful things to people. Mr. Chairman, just don't buy all this overheated rhetoric. The problem is we have got to balance the budget. We have got to get this debt under control. We see the storm clouds on the horizon, and what this budget does is it gets government to be honest with the taxpayers that give us this money in the first place so that we can meet these priorities honestly and balance the budget and get this debt on the right track. We invest it the right way by giving people more of their own money so that they can make decisions on what is right for their family, instead of having Washington run it all. Now, there is one last thing I would like to say as I get carried away on the rhetoric. The CBO is an agency we use quite a bit here, and the Congressional Budget Office is a very important government agency that gives us all of our cost estimates. This budget is written on their estimates. For the last 6 years, we have had a Director at the Congressional Budget Office by the name of Doug Elmendorf, who has done an outstanding job as Director of the CBO. I have worked very closely with Dr. Elmendorf and with CBO in my prior capacity. He was a Democratic appointee, but the CBO Director is supposed to call the balls and the strikes and play it fair. Doug Elmendorf has done that. I just simply want to say, for the record, Mr. Chairman, that we wish him well. He is leaving at the end of the month. We wish him well. We thank him for his service. We thank the Congressional Budget Office for all the hard work that they put in so that we can be here on the floor with these budgets, and we wish him great success in the future in whatever it is he chooses and thank him for his service to this House, to this Congress, and to our country. Mr. Chairman, I simply want to say this is an outstanding budget that deserves our support. Don't buy all the hype you are hearing from the other side, and pass this fantastic Price budget.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 127 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.'' Stated against:

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 876) to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to require hospitals to provide certain notifications to individuals classified by such hospitals under observation status rather than admitted as inpatients of such hospitals, as amended.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 876, currently under consideration.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, this is commonsense legislation dealing with the Medicare program that is bipartisan that the Committee on Ways and Means marked up a couple of weeks ago. I want to just commend my colleagues Congressman Young from Indiana and Congressman Doggett from Texas for their work on this. This is common sense. This tells patients what the rules are so that they know what is going to happen when they are in the hospital, so they know what kind of billing they are going to have. I yield whatever time he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Young), the coauthor of this legislation, for the purpose of describing this legislation.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 284) to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to require State licensure and bid surety bonds for entities submitting bids under the Medicare durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and supplies (DMEPOS) competitive acquisition program, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 284, currently under consideration.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I simply want to, again, commend our committee, Republicans and Democrats, for working on a bipartisan basis to fix a problem in the Medicare Program that needs fixing. I want to specifically highlight Mr. Tiberi, a senior member of our committee from Ohio, along with Mr. Larson, a senior member of the committee from the Democratic side of the aisle, for working together to fix a very deep flaw in a competitive bidding system which needs a lot of work to be improved. At this time, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Tiberi) for the purpose of describing and explaining the need for this legislation.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I want to thank Mr. Barletta for bringing this to our attention. This is a problem with the law and, therefore, the law needs to change. It is insufficient that we have some regulatory forbearance from the administrative branch because the law has to be changed, and that is why this legislation is necessary. Again, I just wanted to thank Mr. Barletta for his leadership on this issue. We need to do right by our volunteer firefighters, and this does that. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.