Bill Thomas

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds in case there are any students actually out there in the audience. I believe, if anyone wants to check an almanac, the election of 1960 resulted in the election of President Kennedy with less than 50 percent of the vote and there was some concern about whether or not a recount would reduce that. The argument that somehow there was a significant wave of votes simply is not accurate any more than most of the structures.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 seconds. Mr. Speaker, what I really heard in that quote, which I did not hear after it was said, was the Speaker said, And we are really going to have to fight for it because that is exactly what occurs. We want to help Americans by letting them keep their own money and we are going to have to fight you to do it, because you want to hang on to their money just as hard as you can. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), the chairman of the Committee on the Budget, a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the majority leader.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, might I inquire of the remaining time on either side?

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery).

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I believe the gentleman understands that when President Reagan became President, under the Constitution the purse strings are controlled by the House of Representatives, and the Democrats were in control of the House.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 253, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2) to provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 201 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2004, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. I do so try to explain to some folks here apparently that currently in the Tax Code, if we have two people in the 15-percent bracket, their combined tax obligation, and they are both single, is less than two people in the same tax bracket that are married. There is no requirement under current law that they both work. One cannot work and one can work. But when they are married, they are filing a joint return. In filing a joint return, they actually pay more in taxes than they do with two single returns. And I make this statement with some shock and awe that the ranking member of the tax writing committee apparently does not understand that.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker how much time remains?

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation that would authorize the creation of an additional bankruptcy court for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. The legislation would also express that it is the sense of Congress that bankruptcy proceedings should be conducted in Bakersfield in Kern County, California on a daily basis. Very simply, I am introducing this legislation because my constituents have informed me that neither they, nor justice, is well- served by the status quo, under which Bakersfield is designated as a location where court is conducted once a month, with other matters disposed of through the use of video/teleconferencing. According to constituent attorneys familiar with both the creditor and petitioner perspectives, one particularly significant problem is the distance that parties must travel in order to personally appear in the Fresno Division of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California. Kern County encompasses a vast area, and those persons involved in contested proceedings who wish to be heard in Fresno must travel 110 miles from Bakersfield. Moreover, 429,310 of Kern County's 676,367 residents live in outlying communities and areas, and must travel much further to be heard in Fresno. For example, those persons living in the communities of Boron, Frazier Park, or Rosamond with business before the Bankruptcy Court have to travel 172, 143, and 160 miles respectively to appear in Fresno. If those persons could appear in Bakersfield, they would only have to travel less than half as far--80, 37, and 57 miles respectively--and would be relieved of some of the hardships and costs inherent in traveling such distances. This travel is especially difficult for those parties who are sick, elderly, or have small children. While a video/teleconferencing system is in place, I am told the system works well only approximately 70 percent of the time and that on occasion the video goes out, leaving only teleconferencing. My constituent attorneys firmly believe that appearances through the use of the video/teleconferencing system, not only decrease the decorum of the proceedings, but also decrease the parties' ability to effectively communicate, resulting in proceedings that are less efficient and fair than proceedings conducted in person before a live court and witnesses. In addition, Kern County attorneys inform me that because practitioners cannot file documents in Bakersfield, Kern County parties incur increased costs in the form of overnight or courier charges and face de facto shortened deadlines. Finally, the status quo also results in the almost automatic conduct of short proceedings via video/ teleconferencing as well as the conduct of proceedings through a mixture of live and video/teleconferencing appearances, a practice which Kern County practitioners advise me places the parties they represent at a distinct disadvantage. A strong case exists for the daily conduct of bankruptcy proceedings in Bakersfield when one considers the number of filings submitted by Kern County parties and general demographic data. In 2002, Kern County parties made 4,168 total bankruptcy filings, and through March 31, 2003, have made 1,042 total filings. During those time periods, total filings in the entire four-county Modesto Division were 5,045 and 1,324 respectively. Moreover, Kern County's 4,168 total filings in 2002 were greater than the 3,696 total filings in Fresno County and constituted over one-third of the 11,912 total filings in the entire eight-county Fresno Division. Finally, nationwide there are approximately 700,000 people per bankruptcy court, and Kern County, one of the fastest growing areas in the nation, has a population in excess of 676,000. By comparison, Stanislaus County, where the Modesto Division is located, has a population of 468,566. I trust that my colleagues and the appropriate United States Judicial Conference officials will recognize the need to have bankruptcy proceedings conducted in Bakersfield on a daily basis and will work with me to ensure that our legal system is structured in a manner that allows for the effective and fair administration of our bankruptcy laws.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, on my time, to respond to the gentleman from New York, I asked that the measures be treated equally and fairly. That was my position. But apparently the Committee on Rules rejected my position, and, notwithstanding the fact that I was trying to support the gentleman from New York, in the opinion of the Committee on Rules, apparently the gentleman's bill was so far out of the normal procedure that they determined not to make it in order. I had asked that the Committee on Rules treat both bills the same way, and I was denied in my request to the Committee on Rules. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson), a member of the committee. (Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan), a member of the committee, for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), one of the most senior members of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. THOMAS. I will tell the gentleman he raises an important point, but it is also a part of a larger tax policy problem. Currently, as the gentleman may know, under the U.S. Tax Code we punish U.S. corporations for being U.S. corporations. Several provisions of our Tax Code put U.S. corporations at a disadvantage versus their international competitors. These flaws in the Tax Code force U.S. companies to move their headquarters overseas in order to compete. We must reform our Tax Code to improve our international competitiveness. The Committee on Ways and Means will be addressing this larger issue in this Congress. With regard to the specific issue of dividend payments to U.S. citizens by foreign corporations, it is my intent as the legislation process proceeds to craft a solution that treats all American shareholders of either domestic or foreign-owned corporations fairly and equally, while improving the competitiveness of the U.S. Tax Code.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, as is made imminently clear by the reading of the table of contents, the motion to recommit is not germane. It is in violation of clause 7 of rule XVI of the House because the motion to recommit relates to subject matter not contained in the underlying bill. The underlying bill only relates to reducing income taxation. Therefore, the amendment is not germane and, therefore, is out of order.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, here we go again. This motion does not recommit the bill. It kills tax relief, job creation, and economic growth, because the motion to recommit contains the word ``promptly'' instead of ``forthwith.'' Have you heard this before? Do you want me to stop? Vote no on the motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, the point of order is that the substitute was not made in order under the rule. Therefore, it is not germane.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the subject of H.R. 2, the bill just passed.