Todd Tiahrt

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Regular order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I object.

Mr. TIAHRT. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, am I to understand that this resolution which we have not seen is going to be printed in the Record as if it were condoned by the Chair?

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, today marks a dramatic change in the way Washington sets policy, and the way Congress does business. We have begun discussing a truly revolutionary tax bill. I would like to share with you why this bill, H.R. 1215 the tax relief bill is so important to me. I want to be clear from the very beginning that this tax relief bill is not about rich versus poor. It's about rewarding behavior which grows our economy, pays off our debt, and keeps the torch of our system of self-governance burning bright. You know, I was just elected to Congress last November. My wife, my three children, and I have enjoyed a nice life. But, we've worked hard, have been careful with our money, and have planned for the future. I can still remember growing up on our family farm. As a family we woke up early and worked just as hard then. Like most farm families, our life was tough. But the love and good times we shared around the kitchen table, made all the tough times worth it. When I hear people talking in this well about the Republicans trying to line the pockets of their rich friends, I think back to my days on that farm with my brother and sisters. I think back to the high-water pants I wore, and tried to cover up with lace-up boots, so no one could see. President Dwight Eisenhower, a proud Kansan, used to talk about his humble childhood. He said he never realized he was poor when he was a kid, because he didn't know anything else. When I look back on my roots, President Eisenhower's description, I can identify with my fellow Kansan. It is not despite my humble roots that I strongly support this bill, but because of my roots. This tax cut bill we will be discussing tomorrow is about families, and it is also about rewarding behavior which leads to a better community and a stronger nation. This tax bill is about aiming at a goal, and trying to attain that goal. This tax bill is about Americans becoming their highest and best. Americans can do better than to encourage its oldest and wisest citizens to mothball their talents prematurely, just because they reach the age of 65. But, that is exactly what this country does when it discourages productive behavior on the parts of its senior citizen. Allowing seniors to earn more and pay less taxes is reason alone to support this bill. In fact the entire bill will help to keep this economy growing, and thus making it possible for us to balance our books by 2002. But the part of the bill which I support the strongest is the decrease in estate taxes. I shared with you my farm background. Family farms are like so many other small businesses. Like my grandparents who worked hard their whole life, and they never felt they had any money. When they died they left the farm. In a sense my grandfather was rich for a day. My parents inherited the family farm. But after they paid all the debts, the notes and the dreaded inheritance tax, it was like they bought the farm from a stranger, the Government. Is it right in America, a land where the right to own property is a fundamental right, that younger generations have to mortgage the family land to pay the Government's taxes. Is it fair to burden families with outrageous inheritance taxes, when that capital used to purchase the land has already been taxed once or twice already? I am proud to support this bill which will increase the estate and gift tax exemption from $600,000 to $750,000. I am also proud that the $750,000 amount will be indexed for inflation from 1998 on. Anyone who has worked in a family business or on a family farm knows that a value of $750,000 is not large as businesses or family farms go. And oftentimes families are forced to sell the businesses after a death just to pay the inheritance taxes. Mr. Speaker, families have to deal with enough hardship when a loved one dies. Let's not add to their grief. In fact let's give them a hand, but keeping the hand of government out of their pockets. Let's pass H.R. 1215. It's the right thing for farmers, it's the right thing for small businesses, and it's the right thing for families.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. I object, Mr. Speaker. Let us go to the 5 minutes and continue the business of the House.

Mr. TIAHRT. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, do we not have 5 minutes coming up now where everybody is going to get a turn to speak?

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I am here to speak in favor of H.R. 1215, the tax relief bill, because of an individual named Don Bulaski from my district. I think it is important we get money back into his hands, back in the hands of Americans and out of the hands of the bureaucrats here in Washington. Mr. Speaker, I think we need to restore the penalty on Social Security that was put on by the big government party last August in the world's largest tax increase. One way we can do that is raise the earning limits. Don Bulaski is a retired Boeing engineer and he wants to get back active in the community and participate, but he cannot take a paycheck over $940 without having his Social Security benefits penalized. Under the H.R. 1215, the tax relief bill, we would raise that earnings limit, allowing him to be more productive, to take the wisdom he has learned with 35 years of work and bring it into the community, helping other people get their job better. How many other Americans are out there that want to contribute to this society, that want to make America better by being better, by working, by restoring the reason and wisdom that we need? So I stand in support of H.R. 1215, the tax relief bill. Mr. Speaker,

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, this week we are going to see a clash of ideas once again as we have seen throughout the 100 days. This time it is going to be the big-government party that likes to take tax dollars and spend it at their whim versus the party of the people who give tax breaks to American families and others, like senior citizens. During the 1992 Presidential campaign, our current President campaigned on the middle-income tax cut. Instead, what has occurred, last August we had the world's largest tax increase, which took money out of the pockets of American families. H.R. 1215 is a bill that will return tax money to the families so they can spend it, because the party of the people believes that American families understand better how to spend their dollars than the Government. Each time we lose $1 to taxes, it is a loss of freedom. Many people across America, through higher taxes, have lost freedom, have lost the ability to spend money as they see fit. H.R. 1215 will also help America's senior citizens. Last August, the party of big government cut social security by $25 billion in the form of a tax increase. What this bill is going to do is restore that cut to Social Security. We are going to allow senior citizens to retain more of their income, allow them to meet their long-term health care needs, we are going to allow tax incentives to encourage individuals to purchase long-term health care insurance. We are also going to move, in H.R. 1215, to help Americans save. We are going to do this through the American Dream Savings Account. It is an IRA-type account that will allow families to contribute up to $4,000 per year in these IRA accounts. These contributions are going to earn interest, and after they have been there for a 5-year period, we are going to allow those individuals to withdraw that money without penalty for first-time home purchasers, for post-secondary education expense withdrawals, education expenses, medical expenses. This is going to help those who have put away money to use it for a rainy day-type situation. Plus, it allows them to save for their retirement. If you look at the free democracies across the world, you will find by comparison Americans save less than they should, percentagewise. In Japan, for example, their savings are around 20 percent for average income. Here it is about 5 percent. This is a method of getting people around America to save money, put money away, and also put money into the capital stream to help create jobs. Next thing we are going to do in H.R. 1215 is to help farmers and ranchers and those in the timber industry by allowing a 50 percent reduction in capital gains taxes, capital gains indexing, estate and gift taxes. I want to tell you about one farmer I was very close to, my grandfather, J.W. Steele, who had a farm in South Dakota, and spent most of his time working very hard. He used to tell me as a young boy that farmers were an interesting lot because they spent their whole life poor but they died rich. Sure enough, when he passed on to the next life, he died as a millionaire. His farm went through the estate tax, and my parents had to purchase that farm at the cost of approximately the price of a new farm because of the way land prices had gone up and down in thattime frame. This is going to help people who are trying to keep the farms in their families, so that they can continue the tradition. It is going to help people. It is going to help ranchers to pass on what they have invested their entire lifetimes on. Mr. Speaker, it will allow a situation where you are not just a millionaire for one day, but that you can go on, pass this on to your heirs. Also capital gains is very important when it comes to creating jobs. An uncle of mine who lives in Mecklenburg, NC, one time told me, ``How many who are poor hired you for a job,'' and I had to tell him, ``No, no one has,'' because it is those who have capital that hire people for jobs. So the capital gains tax reduction here is going to increase jobs here in America, and increasing jobs is what increases hope for America. We found out for giving people free money that their self-esteem is reduced. You cannot have self-esteem without accomplishment, and you cannot have accomplishment without work, and it is always helpful to have a job when you are going to work. So we are trying to restore hope in America by creating new jobs through capital gains reduction. Mr. Speaker, I spoke with the majority leader, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Armey]. He talked about the benefits of capital gains tax, and that 90 percent of the benefits go to the workers and only about 3.1 percent actually goes to people. So I encourage my fellow Members of the House to pass H.R. 1215 and give America hope for the future.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, we are in the process of restoring integrity to our system of self-governance, because we keep our promises. We are different now the way we are conducting business here in Washington. On the first day of Congress, as promised, we required Congress to live under the same laws as the rest of the country. We cut committee staffs by a third. We cut the congressional budget. Then we have continued over the first 100 days to process a balanced budget amendment to the floor and out. Unfunded mandates were passed. The line item veto was passed. A new crime package to stop violent criminals was passed. National security restoration to protect our freedom was passed. Government regulatory reform was passed. Commonsence legal reform was passed. Welfare reform was passed. Congressional term limits came up last night on the floor. Eighty-three percent of the Republicans voted for term limits with the American people. Eighty-two percent of the Democrats voted against term limits against the American people. We are proceeding next week with the Family Reinforcement Act, the tax cut for middle-income families, and the Senior Citizens' Equity Act. Mr. Speaker, we are keeping our promises. This is our Contract With America.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, today is a great day on the Potomac. it is a historic day. For a very long time the people of America have wanted open debate and a vote on term limits. As we say in Kansas, it is time to fish or cut bait. The American people think that Congress has cut enough bait. They want a vote on term limits. Term limits are extremely popular with the American people because they want a citizen legislature. They do not want the same excuse that they have heard about we already have term limits every 2 years, because they do understand the system. They know name recognition, the PAC's, franking all work for the incumbent. The term limit vote is important. The American people want a ``yes'' vote for term limits or your congressional seat next year. So what are you going to do? Are you going to fish or cut bait?

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, last week the bipartisan majority passed a welfare reform package that overhauls the current welfare system to offer hope for the future. Today, we are continuing to keep our promise with the American people by bringing to the floor an historic vote on a constitutional amendment on term limits to make Congress a true citizen legislature. Everyone here knows that a constitutional amendment needs 290 votes to pass the House. The Republicans cannot do it on their own. We will deliver at least 80 percent of our Members on the term limit vote, but we need at least 50 percent of the Democrats to vote yes, also. Today I challenge the Democrats to deliver the necessary votes to pass term limits. It's in the Democrat hands to pass this. So what is it going to be--yes, or no. Let's pass term limits and make Congress a true citizen legislature that's accountable to the people.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, this country has spent $5 trillion over the last 30 years on a system that has produced more people than ever in poverty. It is a broken system that teaches exactly the wrong things. It is antiwork, it is antiproperty, and it is antifamily. Because of this system, we have condemned second and third generations to the same life of poverty, not only financial poverty but poverty of spirit. People need to work. You cannot have self-esteem without accomplishment. You cannot have accomplishment without work. Let us give our people hope, dignity through work. Let us pass H.R. 4, the new welfare reform package.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. I thank the Speaker. I did not realize I would have such an impact on the audience today.

Mr. TIAHRT. I thank the Speaker.

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, for too long, this institution has lost faith because we have been unable to restore the integrity of this institution. But we are here now to restore the----

Mr. TIAHRT. For too long, Mr. Speaker, America has lost faith in this institution, because we were unable to focus on the integrity that is required on the floor of the House. We are here to restore faith in this institution, in America. Our Contract With America on the very first day of Congress changed the way business was done. We required Congress to live under the same laws as everyone else. We cut committee staffs by one-third. We cut the congressional budget. Then during the first 100 days we have gone on to keep our promises: a balanced budget amendment; unfunded mandate legislation; line-item veto; a new crime package to stop violent criminals; National Security Restoration Act to protect our freedoms; Government regulatory reform, and commonsense legal reform. We are now working on welfare reform so that we can encourage work, restore hope in people and not dependence on the Government. We are working on it now. We hope to have it passed by this week. We are cracking down on deadbeat dads. In the near future we are going to be dealing with tax cuts for middle-American families. There is going to be a Senior Citizens Equity Act, congressional term limits, all are going to be dealt with. We are here to restore faith in this institution for the American public. This is our Contract With America, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, this week we find ourselves in the midst of a great debate, not just about welfare but about the basics of government. This debate reveals two radically different points of view and two radically different value systems. One value system places an emphasis on Government policy and believes that it is the Government's duty and responsibility to give poor people free money. Proponents of this value system are convinced that free money will help poor people. The other value system places a greater emphasis on the inherent value of people, not government. To this value system, government is a stumbling block, something that restricts creativity and crushes the human spirit. To this value system, the answer to ending poverty is not a handout but a helping hand. Mr. Speaker, the difference in this debate is striking, but the American people have spoken and they demand big changes to the failed welfare system. They have seen for themselves the consequences of a liberal value system. They want to return to a system that believes in people and not big government.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, the Washington Post poll that my colleague just cited had other interesting numbers in it that he failed to mention: More people trust Republicans in Congress to cut taxes rather than President Clinton. More people trust Republicans in Congress to reform the welfare system than President Clinton. More people trust Republicans in Congress to reduce the deficit than President Clinton. More people trust Republicans in Congress to reduce crime than President Clinton. More people trust Republicans in Congress to handle the Nation's economy than President Clinton. And finally, more people trust Republicans in Congress to handle the main problems facing our Nation today, more so than the liberals and President Clinton. The poll is very clear, Mr. Speaker. They trust the Republicans. We are on track with welfare reform this week. We hope success will be here by the end of the week.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I remember during the 1992 Presidential campaign when Bill Clinton promised he would balance the budget in 5 years. As the campaign wore on, he said ``We will just cut it in half.'' Now, however, the President has decided to throw in the towel on deficit reduction, saying we should not even balance the budget by 2002. That is just not another line of long broken promises. It is a betrayal of our children's future. They will pay the the price for this fiscal irresponsibility. Unless we take steps now to balance the budget, our children will look forward to higher taxes, as much as 82 percent of their income; higher interest rates; fewer opportunities; a lower standard of living. Mr. Speaker, we will have to balance the budget soon. We will do it for our children; we will have to do it for our grandchildren. We will fight to see that they will not be the only generation that has a lower standard of living than their parents. Mr. Speaker, we should save our children by balancing the budget.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, today's headlines in Congress Daily read, ``Clinton Budget Hikes Deficit More Than Expected.'' That says it all. Of course, this article proves what we have believed about the Clinton budget and verifies why he campaigned against the balanced budget amendment truly mortgaging our children's future. Yet all of this comes to light while President Clinton and the Democrats shamelessly use children in his big lie scare tactics regarding our reforms. In fact, let me once again reiterate the facts to the President, to his lackeys, and to the American people. Not only are we not cutting nutrition programs for our children, but we are increasing funding 4.5 percent every year. How many working people out there, if they got a 4.5-percent increase in pay, would think it was a cut? Mr. Speaker, the American people did not believe the big Social Security lie during the last election used during the campaign and hopefully they will not believe this new big lie. Absent of good ideas and with budget numbers that increase the deficit more every year, what can be expected from the other side? Let us balance the budget. Let us save our children's future.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, today we are going to address H.R. 956, common sense product liability reform. In the last 40 years we have passed one product liability reform bill. What has it done? It was passed for single-engine aircraft. And in the Fourth District of Kansas it has created 7,000 jobs, thanks to the vision of Russ Meyers who heads up Cessna Aircraft. In 1977, we were building over 13,000 aircraft in the single-engine aircraft business. And Cessna was building over half of those. By 1986 they had to quit building aircraft because of lawsuits. By 1994 they were down to 600 single-engine aircraft and many of them were built overseas. Product liability reform works and the choice is clear. If you protect trial lawyers who are getting rich from lawsuits--they get over 50 cents of every dollar in the cost of a lawsuit--or you created jobs. It is lawsuits or lunch buckets. I support more lunch buckets and less lawsuits. Let us pass H.R. 956.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I want to carry on with what we talked about earlier this evening. It is natural for each of us to feel sorry for a person who suffers in an accident or mishap. One of our fundamental freedoms is the ability to bring suit in order to receive justice. When big corporations get sued, we often side with the individual against the companies. We think ``big bad corporation'' and ``poor individual.'' And when the big companies pay millions of dollars in settlements, we pretty much shrug and say, ``Well, they can afford it.'' But that is not really true, Mr. Speaker, because the people who pay the price for those big settlements are the working people of America, and they pay it at the cash register. When companies are forced to pay outrageously high settlements, they eventually have to cut jobs, raise prices, and pass the costs on to the American people. This does not affect the rich as much as it affects the hard-working families who have to pay this price. Mr. Speaker, in 1994 Congress passed the General Aviation Revitalization Act. This act implemented a statute of repose of 18 years on suits involving single engine airplanes, product liability for airplanes. That means that after 18 years, the legal liability of a manufacturer is greatly diminished. This act applies to planes with seating capacity of 20 or less. Cessna Aircraft Co. which is headquartered in Wichita, KS, was for years the world's leading producer of single engine aircraft. But because of aging airplanes and the litigation explosion that followed, America lost its aviation manufacturing advantage. In 1977, the single engine aircraft industry was producing over 13,000 airplanes per year. But with the onslaught of the legal tidal wave, Cessna completely stopped manufacturing these planes by 1986. By 1994, the entire industry produced less than 600 aircraft, less than 5 percent of what was previously produced, and many of them came from outside America. Mr. Speaker, this is just not about making fewer airplanes, it is about losing American jobs. When the company is forced to pay sky-high legal judgments in cases where their legal liability is at best suspect, the working families are taking the hit and we are lining pockets of rich lawyers. What has happened to Cessna and other companies was that judges were holding them accountable and liable for aircraft malfunctions that could be reasonably accounted for in pilot error, maintenance failure, or simply just an old airplane Mr. Speaker, there comes a time when a plane is just old. Those who are flying these old airplanes were simply taking a risk. How can you blame the manufacturer for a properly designed airplane and properly built airplane? For the last 2 days we have been debating legal reform on the floor, and some have stated that this reform is unnecessary, that the system works fine the way it is. As we talk about product liability, I would like to offer what is happening in Independence, KS, as an example of what could happen in other industries if we could just pass the much- needed product liability reform. Because we passed the statute of repose containing the General Aviation Revitalization Act in 1994, Cessna Aviation has announced it will build a new manufacturing plant in Independence, KS. Groundbreaking will be this April. Cessna intends to invest over $75 million in this community, and it is all the result of placing a reasonable limit on product liability. Cessna's production of single engine aircraft was destroyed in 1986, but because Congress took action in the next 2\1/2\ years, Cessna estimates they will produce 2,000 airplanes per year. Once again, this is not about more planes as much as about hope for southeast Kansas and for 7,000 people who are going to be employed over the next 5 years. The benefits of this plant will also be felt in Oklahoma and nationally. All told, it is predicted over 25,000 jobs will be created from product liability reform for airplanes. This is just one example that can happen when you rein in the lawyers and give manufacturers a chance to pass laws. This is clear Congress should pass commonsense product liability reform. Jobs and security for people across the Nation will be the result. People should have the right to sue. That is not the question here. The question is should there be reasonable limits on product liability, and the answer is yes.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. I thank the gentleman from Illinois for yielding me the time. I just want to speak in support of this, Mr. Chairman, because of the impact that has happened in my district, because of the statute of repose or the produce liability for airplanes. In Independence, KS, in April, we are going to break ground for a new plant. Cessna Aircraft is going to build a plant and bring 1,000 jobs into Independence, KS, the Montgomery County area. There will be another 1,000 jobs that are going to be started in Wichita. The spin-off is going to create 7,000 jobs because of product liability for aircraft. I heard earlier that we were concerned because there was no measurable impact from product liability, that there were no benefits that could be created from such limitations, that it was only going to hamper individuals, but I am here to tell you tonight that in my district of south central Kansas, we are going to see 7,000 jobs over the next 5 years. And we are excited about that. The industry tells us that there may be a possibility of 25,000 jobs nationwide from product liability on aircraft. Now, if we expand that beyond aircraft, if we go into other products, we are going to see that there will be jobs created. But there will be people working, and it is not the rich people or the corporations that are going to benefit. It is the guy that carries a lunch bucket to work. It is the guy that tries to create a safe environment for his kids, he tries to clothe them and to feed them. Those are the people we are benefiting by product liability. Mr. Chairman, I just want to consider this legislation, pass it out of here in a quick manner, because it is good for the working people of America.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, America's liability lawsuit system has imposed huge costs on the economy and our society. Even Little League baseball has not been exempt. Its liabilities insurance rates have climbed 1,000 percent in 5 years. So Americans are going to have to pay more for their children to play baseball. I feel safe in saying that if our current liability system had existed 100 years ago, we would not be flying airplanes. And being from the air capital of the world, Wichita, KS, that is a startling thought. Americans are brave and adventurous people. We like to take risks. We have historically been willing to pay the price for progress. But all we are paying today is the cost of frivolous and predatory lawsuits brought by lawyers who in many cases are only out to protect their fees. Mr. Speaker, $300 billion a year. That is what our system costs Americans each year in higher prices and lost wages and in lost jobs. While we need to ensure that people with legitimate grievances have access to the justice system, we also need to make commonsense reforms.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, our Contract With America states the following: On the first day of Congress, a Republican House will require Congress to live under the same laws as everyone else; cut committee staffs by one-third; and cut the congressional budget. We kept our promise. It continues that in the first 100 days, we will vote on the following items: A balanced budget amendment--we kept our promise; unfunded mandates legislation--we kept our promise; line-item veto--we kept our promise; a new crime package to stop violent criminals--we kept our promise; national security restoration to protect our freedoms--we kept our promise; Government regulatory reform--we are doing this now; welfare reform to encourage work, not dependence; family reinforcement to crack down on deadbeat dads and protect our children; tax cuts for middle-income families; Senior Citizens' Equity Act to allow our seniors to work without Government penalty; commonsense legal reform to end frivolous lawsuits; and congressional term limits to make Congress a citizen legislature. This is our Contract With America, Mr. Speaker, and I just cannot say it enough; it is good policy, it is good government, and it is about time.