Pat Toomey

Mr. TOOMEY

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I think the case has been made very clearly that it is long past time to repeal this really archaic Depression era law that no longer serves any useful purpose, if it ever did. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), chairman of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I would tell the gentlewoman, having supported this provision since we first considered this bill last year, I assure the gentlewoman that I agree with her. This provision rightfully preserves the current status of real estate escrow accounts held in connection with real estate closing transactions, and specifically in services and benefits that banks may provide instead of interest on such accounts.

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce).

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) for his leadership and support of this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1009) to repeal the prohibition on the payment of interest on demand deposits, as amended.

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous materials on the bill.

Mr. TOOMEY

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Sununu) for yielding me the time. We have before us today a wartime budget. The fact is that is a difficult task to put together. We have done the responsible thing of assembling just that. It fully funds our national priorities with significant increases in defense spending because we need that for the war that is underway. Huge increases in homeland security, we need that so people will be more secure in their homes. Increases in education, increases in veterans health care, fully funding a prescription drug benefit and, quite importantly, in my judgment, by limiting the growth in the rest of government, but for the extension of unemployment benefits that we all voted for a couple of weeks ago, this budget for fiscal year 2003 is balanced. We have done the hard work of putting together a wartime budget, and my Democratic friends who are throwing stones, feigning horror, have done so without a single substantive alternative. Are not my colleagues just a little bit embarrassed that they do not have the courage to propose a budget of their own? The only idea frankly that we have heard from the left, although without the courage to put it to a vote, is to repeal last year's tax cut, raise taxes and spend more money. What would that do for Social Security? Not much. Let me suggest that the idea of raising taxes, while the economy is as weak as it is now, is a terrible idea. We in Congress have a responsibility to be helping people get back to work, to help get this economy moving again, to help people get greater job security, increase the likelihood that people will get raises and improve their standard of living, and the best way to do this frankly is to tear down the barriers to economic growth, tear down the barriers that prevent job creation, and lower taxes do that. Look at this chart. In the year 2000, as my colleagues can see from this chart, taxes had reached a postwar record high. Not since 1944 had the Federal Government imposed such a huge tax burden on our economy and there is no doubt that many economists agree that that huge tax burden helped to contribute to the economic slowdown, and the fact is we passed tax relief just in time, and this budget accommodates the continued phase-in, gradual though it is, of the tax relief that we passed last year, and that has got to be part of the reason that this slowdown has been relatively mild and it is going to help us get out of this economic decline that we have been in, lessen the severity of it. The last thing we can do is go back and turn the clock back and go back to those record high taxes. For the sake of job security and economic security for our families, I urge my colleagues to vote for this budget.

Mr. TOOMEY

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to share my report from Pennsylvania for my colleagues and the American people. All across Pennsylvania's 15th Congressional District there are some amazing people who do good things to make our communities a better place. These are individuals of all ages who truly make a difference and help others. I like to call these individuals Lehigh Valley Heroes for their good deeds and efforts. Today, I would like to recognize the Boy Scouts of Troop 29 in Cetronia and their Scoutmaster Bob Sperling. These boys and their Scoutmaster have truly made a difference in their community. On Saturday, December 15, 2001, the Boy Scouts of Troop 29 went to the Cedarbrook nursing home in South Whitehall Township to sing Christmas carols to the residents. Hours later after the Scouts had left to go bowling, a fire broke out at the nursing home, forcing the residents out of the building. The Scouts and their Scoutmaster received a call a few hours after their visit alerting them that the same nursing home was on fire and the residents were being taken to a local school. Without hesitation, the Scouts headed to the school to offer assistance in any way needed. They used their Scout skills and worked hard unloading the ambulances of patients arriving from the nursing home, keeping their cool all the while. Thanks to the hard work of the Boy Scouts under the supervision of Scoutmaster Bob Sperling, the Cedarbrook residents were safe, sound and out of harm's way. Boy Scout Troop 29 made a huge difference that night, helping those in need and therefore they are Lehigh Valley Heroes in my book. Mr. Speaker, this concludes my report from Pennsylvania.

Mr. TOOMEY

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds) for yielding me the time, and I rise in strong support of this amendment, the reason being that this amendment would simply correct what is probably the most egregious, perhaps even the most cynical flaw in this badly flawed bill. And the flaw is simply this: the Shays-Meehan bill allows a party to go out and borrow money now, spend it in the upcoming election as though it were hard money, and then repay the loan with the soft money that the bill is supposed to ban. The fact is the Shays-Meehan bill has a money laundering provision, a provision that allows them to convert from soft to hard money. Soft money is supposed to be this egregious evil. The bill allows the parties to go out and raise it and then convert it and use it for a broader purpose, basically enhance its value, spend it as though it were hard money; and how convenient this is that the party that overwhelmingly supports this bill just happens to be the party that is relatively low on hard money these days, has an ample reserve of soft money. This is a very cynical feature of this bill, and I commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds) for offering the amendment that would correct it.

Mr. TOOMEY

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) for the time. I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 312 in support of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act we passed last year. It seems to me one of the most important questions that we can be asking ourselves and should be asking is what do we do to get this economy moving again. Unfortunately several of my colleagues, and we have heard them just recently, have suggested exactly what we should not do. They are openly advocating that we raise taxes during a recession. Some like to spin this proposal as not a tax hike really, but rather a repeal of future tax cuts. I am afraid that is a distinction without a difference. The fact is, current law establishes a specific declining series of tax rates that are known to all and on which people are planning and making their investment decisions. To replace that existing law with a new series of higher tax rates is simply a tax increase. There is no doubt about it. The fact is this is a reckless plan, and it will endanger our economy, and that is just Economics 101. I mean, economists of all political parties, all stripes, people everywhere understand when we raise taxes, we slow the economy down, and when we slow an economy down, it results in job losses. Federal taxes right now are still a near postwar record high level, and we are in the midst of a recession that has cost hundreds of thousands of jobs. If we were to adopt the irresponsible idea of repealing or delaying part of this tax plan that we adopted last year, it can only result in a slower economy and more job losses. Instead of proposing that we raise taxes, frankly I think we should be following the example of a certain very prominent Kennedy. In 1962, with a Federal tax burden lower than it is today, President John F. Kennedy observed, and I will quote, ``The largest single barrier to full employment and a higher rate of economic growth is the unrealistically heavy drag of Federal income taxes.'' He said that when the tax burden was lower than it is today. President Kennedy then went on to lower Federal taxes dramatically and sparked 7 years of robust economic growth and job creation. Despite the lower rates, the government took in more revenue than before the tax cut, and the budget deficits were significantly reduced. The fact is every time that the Federal Government has significantly cut taxes in the last century, the Mellon tax cuts of the 1920s, the Kennedy cuts of the 1960s, the Reagan tax cuts of the 1980s, the fact is the economy responded, jobs were created and tax revenue grew. And we just heard an allegation that the Reagan tax cuts of the 1980s caused deficits. When will we acknowledge the truth? The fact is after Ronald Reagan lowered taxes in the 1980s, Federal tax revenue nearly doubled. The problem was that spending tripled. Sure, we had deficits, but it was not because of the tax relief. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, support the American economy, support the people who are looking to get back to work.

Mr. TOOMEY

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, we all know we have got a weak economy right now. The slowdown that began in September of 2000 accelerated in September of 2001, and the result is that hundreds of thousands of Americans have lost their jobs as a result. What is our responsibility in Congress? I think it is to help to create an environment of growth and hope and opportunity to enable our neighbors to get back to work, and there are two vital ways we can do that. One is to pass an economic stimulus package that lowers the tax burdens that are keeping people out of work. We have done that in the House. The President supports that. I hope the rest of the necessary steps are taken soon. The second thing we can do is pass Trade Promotion Authority tomorrow. Give this President the authority to lower the barriers to open up foreign markets to American goods and services and help people get back to work producing those goods and services. The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that the American workforce is the most productive workforce in the world. If we are given a chance to compete, we win. Let us give this President the opportunity to open up those markets, give our workers the opportunity to compete and let people get back to work.

Mr. TOOMEY

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) for yielding me the time and also thank the gentleman for recognizing my efforts in the area of Medicare regulatory reform and for inviting me to join in with the Committee on Energy and Commerce in developing this terrific compromise legislation. Since my first term in Congress, I have been working on Medicare regulatory reform to help alleviate some of the burdens that the health care providers carry when dealing with Medicare's bureaucracy. We need to give health care providers due process rights so they are not treated like criminals when they make honest mistakes. We need to make billing procedures easier for providers to understand and comply with and reduce the huge volume of paperwork that staff have to contend with. This is important so health care providers can spend more time caring for their patients and less time dealing with bureaucracy. This bill addresses these problems. It is a step in the right direction, but it is a modest step. We need to do more. For instance, we need profound Medicare reform. As long as we have a Medicare bureaucracy that enumerates, regulates, and prices every conceivable medical procedure, we will continue to have enormous costs and inefficiencies in complying with these staggering regulations. But we cannot wait until we fully overhaul Medicare to provide the significant regulatory relief of this bill. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues who made this bill possible: the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley), the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark), the gentleman from California (Chairman Thomas), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown). I also thank some staff members, Gary Blank, formerly of my staff, Kelly Weiss, currently with my staff, and Pat Morrisey of the commerce staff, in particular. Mr. Speaker, we take a big step forward today. I hope the same combination of the bipartisan group that worked on this bill can come back next year and do more work for health care providers and for their patients; but in the meantime, I urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 3391 and give the health care community some of the regulatory relief that they need and deserve.

Mr. TOOMEY

Mr. TOOMEY. In 1944 there was a good reason. At this point we are not at that level where the expenditures justify that, that level, and certainly the taxes cannot be justified at this level. You are exactly right. I would make one other observation before yielding back to the gentleman from Arizona about the Kennedy tax cut which is the fact that the Kennedy tax cut was much larger than the tax relief that we passed this summer. The Bush tax cut plan which was originally $1.6 trillion, we ended up at about $1.3 trillion, as you know, over 10 years which we should not even be talking about that number, we never talk about spending over 10 years but we sometimes talk about tax cuts over 10 years. The fact is as a percentage of the economy, the Kennedy tax cut was much bigger.

Mr. TOOMEY. Well, the gentleman is exactly right. I would just conclude with one other thought. You know, many of the fundamentals for our economy are actually quite hopeful. There is reason to believe that we could come out of this and we could have a return to some real prosperity relatively soon if you look at some of those fundamentals. Inflation is extremely low, our dollar is strong, and it is very clear that all around the world people have enormous confidence in the dollar. Our productivity levels are at an all time high. Never before have American workers been so enormously productive. Our national debt as a percentage of our GDP has declined dramatically, from 50 percent of our economic output around 1995 down to about a third today. It has also declined in absolute dollar terms. So these fundamentals are strong. If we lower this tax burden now, resist the urge for wasteful, excessive and inappropriate spending, and lower the tax burden that is acting as a barrier between people who could get this economy moving again, we will do that exactly, and the folks who are out of work today can get back to work. We have done our part in the House. We have taken an important and enormous step forward. I am urging my colleagues in the Senate to do likewise. It is long past time. It has been over 11 weeks since the terrible attack that accelerated the decline in our economy. It is overdue to have the kind of economic stimulus that we all need.

Mr. TOOMEY. I thank the gentleman from Michigan very much for participating in the discussion tonight and everything he added to that.

Mr. TOOMEY. Anybody who has any further points they would like to add, by all means, let me know. I think we have had a good discussion here about the fundamental flaws in the premise of the other side, the fundamental flaws in the belief that by government spending, we are going to get out of this problem. Now, we recognize there is spending we need to do right now, in intelligence gathering, in defense, in homeland security. It is critical. It is increases. We all voted for it and we are going to keep voting for it. But that is all the more reason to be cautious on the other areas that have nothing to do with the threat to our Nation, with the attack that we suffered. We need to be cautious there and rein in the excessive tendencies, so we can at some point in the near future get back to balancing this budget, get back to retiring some debt. But, most of all, in the meantime, we have got to get this economy going. We have too many people out of work, and that is our obligation. Our responsibility is to create an environment where folks can get back to work, where our economy can flourish, where businesses can hire new workers. We started that process. In the House we passed a bill that will move us in that direction. The President supports our bill. The President, in fact, called for doing more than we did in the House. I wish we had. But at least we moved in that direction, significantly. And, yet, in the other chamber, we have not a bill on the Senate floor, we have no meaningful progress. It is really a disgrace. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. TOOMEY. Well, I thank the gentleman. At this point we are running low on time and I will probably wrap up with a few concluding thoughts if I could.

Mr. TOOMEY. No, it has been a staggering massive increase. And I think most of us feel it was necessary. These are areas that it was appropriate. But has it gotten the economy out of this recession? No.

Mr. TOOMEY. Reclaiming my time, I would also observe that we have already engaged in a massive spending program very, very recently. By some accounts, we have spent over $105 billion of additional moneys just since the September 11 attack, emergency supplementals, victims' compensation, airline assistance, additional discretionary spending.

Mr. TOOMEY. I thank the gentleman. I think it makes perfect sense. We have already demonstrated in the House that we fully recognize, our society wants to be there for people who lose their job and who are making every effort to find another one. Unemployment benefits occasionally need to be extended. If that has to happen, that is fine. I do not think any of us object to that. I think we all voted for the bill that would do that. But how much better if you never need to use them? Sure they can be there.

Mr. TOOMEY. Even at that, they refuse to put even a proposal such as that on the Senate floor for debate. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Michigan for his comments on this.

Mr. TOOMEY. Reclaiming my time, I want to thank the gentleman from Arizona and just to point out, as we all know, I think all of our colleagues need to be reminded, here in the House, we have passed a bill that does those two things. It lowers the capital gains rate. Okay, not as much as I would like to see, but it is a movement in the right direction, and it accelerates the reduction in personal income tax rates that we already passed last summer. It makes some of it go into effect immediately. Okay, I would like to see more of it go into effect immediately, but still this is progress. This can only help the economy. But yet our colleagues in the other Chamber continue to do nothing. This is just not acceptable.