Good afternoon. Thank you for being here. Im very honored to be here with two leaders in the house, our Ranking Member on the ways and Means Committee, richard neil of massachusetts, who will discuss what we know of the republican tax proposal. And then well hear from congressman John Yarmouth of kentucky our Ranking Member on the budget committee. The relationship to these tax cuts and the opportunity costs in the budget is something that the American People should be aware of because they pay the price for tax cuts for the wealthy. This week, as you know, the House Republicans hope to run through a devastating, and in my view im moral budget to hand trillions to the wealthy and raising taxes on the middle class. Taxes will be raised on middle class families across america, especially by eliminating the state and local Tax Deduction claimed by almost 40 million familiar husband. In california alone, there are six million households that use the deduction with an average of more than 18,000. I will talk more about that in the q a. This proposal, it raises taxes on the middle class. It borrows trillions from the future to give tax cuts to the womeny wealthiest. 80 of the tax cuts go to the wealthiest 1 . On the floor this week, the republicans have revealed the true cruelty of their plan. It ransacks medicare and medicaid after adding trillions in debt, and tax breaks for corporations and the wealthiest. The g. O. P. Will use the deficit to try to justify devastating medicare and medicaid. The g. O. P. Budget is the first taste of the brutal cuts to children, seniors and working families that republicans will demand after adding trillions to the deficit and tax breaks to the wealthy. Its hard to understand how the hawks, how that can ignore trillions added to the debt and for what purpose tax cuts for the rich. Democrats are fighting for a better deal. Democrats want a real bipartisan tax reform with better jobs, better pay, better future. The deficit is exploding, multitrillion dollar giveaway given on the backs of children and seniors and hardworking families. The dangerous plan is clear as day. Well begin with the budget. To explain more about that and with gratitude for his great leadership and the hard work, as youve heard me say, budgets should be a statement of our national values. What is important to us as a country should be allocated. Who better to make those judgments than our distinguished Ranking Member from kentucky, mr. Yarmouth. Thank you thank you, leader pelosi. Great to be here with you and with Ranking Member neil to talk about what is truly a disheartening attempt by republicans to raise taxes on middle class america. Give huge tax cuts to the wealthiest americans and pay for them with cuts to people who desperately need government assistance. Yesterday we met with the rules committee, chairman diane blank and i and testified there and offered some amendments. It was clear from that episode that republicans are really unable and inwilling to defend third own process here. The process is obvious. Theyre trying to do the same thing that they did with healthcare reform. Rush something through that nobody has seen. Get it to the floor as quickly as possible. And then have it voted on before anybody in the United States understands how it will affect them. Ranking member neil will talk more about the tax implications, but the budget is truly the thing thats alarming. When you look at the Senate Budget, Senate Republican budget it cuts 4 trillion out of spending over the next 10 years, mandatory spending. Almost 2 trillion out of medicaid and medicare alone. And then it adds more than 600 billion worth of cuts to nondiscretionary spending, which is everything that guarantees the Economic Security of this country. So while theyre protective, as they should be, of our Defense Department spending, theyve totally ignored a portion of the budget, which helps americans get a leg up and helps them achieve success economically. As far as were concerned, thats every bit as important in terms of our National Security as making sure we have a strong military. As i said, 4 trillion in mandatory spending, 2 trillion medicare medicaid. And heres the most alarming thing the strategy, we know, weve seen this act before. Its pass huge tax cuts with the faithbased belief that they will pay for themselves, which no legitimate economists believe they will. And once their projections fail to materialize and result in blowing a hole in the federal deficit and debt, they will come back for more cuts. They will come back for cuts to that fall heavily on programs that serve lowincome families, students struggling to afford college, seniors and persons with disabilities, and you dont have to take my word for it. Yesterday in the budget in the rules Committee Budget committee members, republicans and republican members of rules, said they intended to bring reconciliation cut back into the budget next year. Their plan is fairly obvious. Tax cuts for the wealthiest americans and corporations, pay for them to a certain extent, but not totally, with cuts to Vital Services to the American People lower and middle income levels in this country and then when their pipe dream of tax cuts that pay for themselves doesnt materialize to ask for more cuts to incredibly vital programs. Were committed to stopping this reckless, harmful budget, because the American People deserve a budget that improves their life and makes it more secure and doesnt put them further in the hole. With that, its a great honor to introduce the Ranking Member of the ways and Means Committee rich neil. Thank you, john. Thank you, nancy pelosi. To do tax reform, you need money. Right now, even as we speak, they appear to be going wobbly on some of the issues theyve raised with great certainty in previous weeks in the runup to the budget debate that will take place tomorrow. Theyre saying that they can clip the top rate, taking it from 39. 6 to 35. And theyres and theyres efrjdge essentially saying that they can take that away. That means they have to go elsewhere to find the revenue to pay for some of the things that they want to do. So on our side theres been a bedrock guarantee that keeping the tax preferences for Retirement Savings iss efrm essential. The best way to jumpstart this economy is infrastructure and broadband. The argument that you can get to 3 growth at best is speculative and not based on any hard numbers that any of us have had a chance to see. We genuinely believe that the tax system in America Needs to be reformed. Their argument is to use the subterfuge of using tax reform when they mean tax cuts. The tax cuts are concentrated, again, with people at the top that consistently will make the argument argument. This is something that the media should pay more attention to. Theyre saying that you can go to three brackets. Thats after they take the 39. 6 rate down to 35 and then say, we may have to go to a fourth bracket, back to 39. 6 . I dont understand what theyre saying. Taking it away on one hand and offering it up as a solution on the other. They have a revenue problem. And you have to make dramatic changes. There is nothing you can wrap your arms around. Were going to go on budget debate tomorrow to a rollout on tax reform in five days . You can see the quotes of republicans coming out of conference meetings they dont know. How big is the child credit going to be . Dont know. What are you going do on the top rate . We dont know. The public deserves a month of hearings on these proposals, plenty of time to go through and then the distribution tables for what they will add on at the top. We have a fundamental disagreement as to how to best get there, but our position is clear infrastructure broadband, expand the earned income tax credit, expand the Child Tax Credit. Were specific open those. And we think thats where you ought to head in this argument. Tax reform took two years in 86. Started in 85 with gephardt and bill bradley filing their first bill. Were going to go from a budget to a markup in about seven days . That doesnt square. As our distinguished Ranking Member on ways and means tells us regularly, that to have real tax reform, you have to have bipartisanship for it to be sustainable. And thats what happened when we did it when it was done before we were here in 86. Before we go into questions, i wanted to just call to your attention the impact of this on my great state of california. As you probably have seen leader Chuck Schumer has been traveling with Governor Cuomo to point out what the impact is on new york. New jersey all the members, my understanding, have come out against real nating the state and local Tax Deduction. Republicans have not said if they will vote against a budget that had that elimination of the deduction in it. I was in illinois the other day and people are very concerned about what it means to the economy, not just because of the Tax Deduction and what it means to people in their lives. And what it means in terms of it Public Education system and the rest that depend on people being able to deduct. Therefore, they will have something to deduct from. So in california, we have 14 republicans who are very who have exposure on this subject, and im going to name them. Congressman lamalfa, 30 of his constituents take the deduction to the tune of 10,000 each. In mcclintocks district 44 of his constituents take the deduction at an average of almost 12,000. In representative cookes district 28. 7 , to the tune of nearly 9,000 each. In valdayo, 17 of his people take the deduction, to nearly 10,000 each. Nunez, 29. 8 take it. Almost 10,000 each. Mccarthy, 34 take the deduction, average of over 14,000 each. Knight, 41. 5 take it. Tune of almost 17,000 each. Im going to give you this. I will take the deduction, average of over text it to you. You have to people have to know what their members of congress are doing to them personally as well as to their state. Congressman moises district, over 40 take the deduction at an average of 15,000. Calvert, 41 take it, around 10,000 each. Walters, nearly 50 of her constituents take the deduction. Average of 18,000 each. Shes going to vote for a budget that does that to her constituents and what it does to the economy of california . Backer 42 take it, 18,000 each. Issa, 42 take it. 16,000 each. Hunter, 37 take it. Over 12,000 each. And those are the 14 members of congress from california. I could read you the same list from new jersey new york, illinois from across the country. People are members are being asked to vote to raise the taxes in a substantial way of their constituents in their states. Why . To give tax breaks to the highend, and also at the same time ransack medicare and medicaid. Its not a good vote for them. And as they make this vote on the budget, we want everybody to know what that vote means to households you in california, for one, and all the figures are available to you for all the members and we can make them available for members across the country. Any questions . None . Okay. [laughter] congressman neal, you sounded skeptical that this will come together for the republicans. Can you talk more about what will be going on if they lose some of the revenue theyre getting and rushing along without educating their members. When they go through the tax system and touch one part of the system its like squeezing toothpaste with the cap on. There are revenues that have to be made up if you cut into the area and have to make the adjustments for. The alternative is that you borrow more money. Right now the Senate Budget says that you can borrow up to 1. 5 trillion for the purpose of providing a tax cut. When you consider the interest on that over 10 years, thats 2. 2 trillion. So i think that theyre having trouble right now because many of the things that we discussed earlier are popular with the American People, including the state and local deduction and Retirement Savings. The Retirement Savings works on the growth of the stock market in the preferences built into the tax code. It encourages the employer to set aside tax toll arrests and the employee. The employers that in the midst of the recession that were forced to stop making their match means that making their match well have catchup provisions for people that missed out on the match. The idea that well leap from a budget, which is not a house budget. Its a Senate Budget. That well lead to a mockup of house perform, takes us down the path to where they made mistakes on the Affordable Care act. I had Dick Gephardt in to talk to the committee members. Filed a bill in early 85. He and bill bradley. And then Ronald Reagan took an interest in it. 200 meetings and markups and this will be slammed through without an opportunitiedy to reflect on state and local deductions, Retirement Savings competitive Economic Growth and opportunities to get our Companies Competitive in a Global Economy . It needs to be digested fully and discussed. Theyre proposing to address our finance system in terms of gathering revenue. And to do this in four, five days, it doesnt make sense. And the leaders described it perfectly. We accept the idea on our side that the tax code is broken. The best way to address it is in a bipartisan fashion. Leader, i want to ask you about the russia docier. I will take questions on another subject but while we have this leadership here, on the subject at hand. On the Child Tax Credit ivanka trump was on the hill pushing the extension of the Child Tax Credit. What is your reaction to what she and senator rubio proposed . We had quite a presentation. We talked about those who will not derive the benefit. If they want to look at who is not being left out. But i think they can show who is not in. Many people not in are people making minimum wage and people in the military. Again, it neglects those that need it most. If theres an interesting of going to a better place, it does the job for the American People were receptive to that. This budget sets the opening for a spending type. Do you have any other red lines on the spending site, issues that would prevent you for wanting to vote for the spending bills . Mr. Yarmuth can speak to the parity issue. We had this debate in 2017 and we negotiated in good faith. We came to a resolution that didnt make either side ecstatic, but left both sides satisfied. And it was a model that increased defense spending and nondefense spending. In spite of the fact that the administration had started from a position in which they wanted a 50 billion increase in defense well, thats for next year. 30 billion increase in defense and 18 billion cut nondefense and we negotiated that. I think its a good model for going forward. Were going to insist that if you increase spending for defense, you increase spending for nondefense and we seriously consider raising the caps because the caps are creating amazing problems for us budgetwise. Outside of the spending limits issues like daca, all sorts of other issues that are part of this. Are any of those redline issues . Heres the thing we hope we can get some of that done before we get to the debate. Its reported that the speaker said he thought that daca would be part of that. The republicans have the man report majority and the signatures. This is the first year theyve had the ability to pass a spending bill and keep government open. Its in their hands. If they need our votes, though, we will need some as mr. Yarmuth said, well have to have some influence on what that is. My hope is that daca will be done before then. Let me say another issue floating now thats of great concern, c. H. I. P. , Children Health insurance program. So tested for what is in the water and stuff like that. What they want to give tax breaks to the wealthiest people in america but they dont have to be offset. Why do children have to offset children . If we agree, okay, well offset, but lets do it in a way that doesnt harm children. This sis frank colone has done a wonderful job presenting options, and they seem set on undermining the Affordable Care act. Thats where this program is. They should not be spiteful. 1. 5 trillion in tax cuts and interest on the debt. So this will be an immediate fight. And this is where we are now in the next week while this is going on. Can i say one thing . I hope im not speaking out of turn. For many members on our caucus there will be red lines and one of them probably will be daca. If they need our votes and if were going to be able to provide enough votes, then they need to be very cooperative in negotiating with us. I know it sounds like drilldown, inside stuff, the tax debate is an argument over tax expenditures. So its part of the spending argument. Remember, the tax cuts are an expense. Theyre a tax expediture, that theyre saying that they dont have to offset, but paying for Childrens Health they do. Okay. We accept that. But dont take it out of the good health of children to do so. Congressman neal, you released some tax reform principles yourself earlier today. I wondered if you had any reaction to republican ways and means members to that. And, b on the idea of a markup, have you had any sense of if you will get a revenue rest mat from the distribution tables prior to seeing the chairmans draft . We have not seen anything yet. I thought distribution tables would kick off everything. And weve drawn attention to middle class values and items that the middle class in America Needs attention drawn to. We intend to propose, for example, making building america bonds permanent. Well go heavy on the investment side for american families. We think that, as i noted earlier, single filers ought to be eligible for the tax credit. Some of the items that we intend to message, it will give people a chance to see what we would do in a majority as to opposed what theyre doing in the majority. Well focus this, as we said from day one on the middle class out. Thats what the president campaigned on, the middle class. The architecture weve seen from at least reports of with the they intend to do its inconsistent with what was said about it being about the middle class. We intend to hold them to their word. You have heard nothing from republicans about your proposals from this morning . No. Think i think theyre busy trying to decide what theirs are. We havent seen a bill yet, but it is important to note as the proposal that you referenced that mr. Neal put forth is consistent with our better deal better jobs, better bay, better future. Build, build, build. Build the infrastructure of our country and education and entrepeneurship and health and i would add a third bill, which is to get to your question to build and strengthen our democracy in how we have confidence in our elections. Any other questions on this . Brady said that there may be a deal on state and local taxes that would allow people to write off their property taxes but not sales and income is that something that you would be open to . No. Its a middle class benefit. If they intend to move away from that, it would mean its a tax in crease. So i think that keeping that its one of the few benefits that is almost universal in america. Shaving it back in the end increases deficits and you have to borrow more money. Thats the other thing im glad you raised it. We need to focus on these proposals to shave back that benefit and shave back that benefit. Only because it demonstrates how complicated this is. Where do you build the corridors if you make it up to only 100,000. And then you will trade off the mortgage Interest Deduction for state and local tax. And im in favor of keeping the mortgage Interest Deduction. Those are the things that we need to stick with. If we give hearings a month well have a fullthrottle debate. Republicans say we should not pick winners or losers and we always do in taxes, but if you accepted that proposal, its great for people in florida. Not great for people in other states. And states choose to tax their residents for whatever way they think is best to provide the same services. So you are saying, property tax is a different category than state income tax even though theyre funding the same basic services that the state offers. I dont understand why the distinction make sense. If you are proposing on the mortgage Interest Deduction, if you are saying that you will curtail those to give people at the top a tax cut . And in addition to which if they did trim it, theyre still taxing the middle class and that holds true. But in addition to which they will have a bigger debt and well see where that takes their socalled budget hawks, because apparently they have some unease about the size of the debt. I guess in one of the speeches he made today, made an adjustment the state and local taxes, the s. A. L. T. Mr. Speaker, do the math of your budget. There aint no reduction. You are only increasing the national debt. And, again the idea that some say the growth that will be cut it will create growth to cover the action of all of this debt increase, never happens. Its never happens. Trickledown economics has never produced that result. Its not true. Dont take it from me. Take it from bruce bartlett, who was part of the supply side economics. If anyone tells you the tax cuts will cover the increase in debt its not true. Its nonsense and b. S. , except he said the word, which i will not go into here, but you know what i mean. In any event, it is again, the budget they creep created is not a statement of our values. Its not a statement of values. I commend our colleagues for their great leadership and members of the committees that worked so hard on all of this. We want to go to the table, put ropes in the table. What creates growth creates good paying jobs, to reduce the deficit. That aint here. But it could be in a bipartisan way. Thank you, all very much. Now to you. Sorry. I wasnt fully listening because it wasnt on subject. Reality to the stories that the d. N. C. Had a role in funding this dossier. Did you have any personal knowledge . No. Does it give ammunition to the president s claims that this is all somehow politically motivated . First of all, no, i had no knowledge of it, except i saw it on tv and that wasnt much it was late last night. I dont think the president needs any fuel. I think he does what he feels like. No. Im not concerned about that. What i am concerned about is the fact that republicans are going into all of these investigations they just dont want to get the of the real story of russian intrusion and story of our election. Lets have an independent commission outside not inside the justice commission, but what is needed is an outside commission to study all of this. As you see this is just one of another thing. Now they will look into i forget what else. They had other things. What is it . Hillarys emails. Again. Anything to divert attention from the fact that 80 of their tax cuts good to the top 1 . Any distraction, and the president is the deflector in chief. He will talk about anything. He will talk about my colleague, congresswoman wilson, her hat. He will talk about football he will talk about any subject not to face the facts. And the numbers. You know, its a funny thing. I love to tell the story of a little boy in school. He was being asked by the teacher, what is 1 and 1. He said 2. What is 2 and 2. 4. She said, good. He said, not good. Perfect. Theres something beautiful about numbers. They add up or they dont. We want to establish the facts. Thank you. Today in the house, debate and a final passage vote on the 2018 budget. We have live coverage on cspan at 9 00 a. M. Eastern. We talked to a capitol hill reporter. Anna eggerton, why is the house taking up the 2017 budget. What are some of the key differences between what house and senate want to do . By picking up the senate version, they can skip the conference step. They can vote on what the Senate Passed and it doesnt have to go back to the senate or to a Conference Committee where they would reconcile the differents between house and senate version