Jobs that go unanswered and we should be using this to invest invocational education and internship programs and should be investing in Community Colleges. Part of this discussion should be based on the historic vote of longterm investment. We know that is unlikely to happen because when people have a chance to look at these distribution tables, they are going to be furious. I yield to the the gentleman from california, mr. Thompson and mr. Larson will be acknowledged after that. Mr. Thompson its not often i come down and participate in special orders but i was in my office watching the previous speakers, i started to get wheezey from the spin they were providing from the floor talking about what they say this bill will do. And i can tell you that there were a lot of inaccuracies in some of the things they were trying to convince the American People that would that they would benefit from this. As mr. Neal said, this bill, this vote, is an important vote. This is going to be around a long time. Numerous speakers today have mentioned the fact that the last time we did major tax reform, a major tax overhaul, was over 30 years ago. If thats any indication, were going to be living with the consequences of this bill for a long time. And i dont think those consequences are anything to be proud of. We heard repeatedly that this bill is not going to even touch the middle not going to help at all the wealthiest people in the country. And i you know, you cant help but laugh, the last speaker came out and stated that this does away with the alternative minimum tax. The alternative minimum tax was put in place to ensure that the wealthiest of taxpayers actually paid taxes. Because they were able to escape paying taxes, so thats why the alternative minimum tax came in to play. And theyre the ones that pay this tax. So if you do away with it, i dont see how you can with a straight face say this doesnt help wealthy americans. Inheritance tax was talked about a lot. As a matter of fact, it was a very dishonest discussion. They kept referring to it as the death tax. We have heard this add nauseam. We heard it in committee, we hear it on the floor, weve heard it the past few years. This is a Clever Campaign on the other sides part to discredit the inheritance tax. If you open the codes, the tax codes, there is nothing in those codes that says the death tax. It doesnt exist. Its not real. Its made up. Its fiction. We heard some very compelling arguments about how farmers will lose their farms if they dont do away with the death tax. Theres no such thing as the death tax. We heard repeatedly that, after somebody dies its unfair to make them pay taxes. Im here to tell you after you die, you will never have to pay taxes. He inheritance tax refers to inherited wealth. If i inherit money from my parents, then im taxed on that wealth that i hin that i inherit. And theres a provision in the law that says the first 11 million dont get touched. So its got to be a pretty huge estate before you even pay any taxes on it. And if there was all this concern about losing the family farm, then the republicans should have taken up my bill, a bill that ive had for a number of years, with absolutely no support from the republican side of the aisle, that says if you inherit the family farm or Family Business and you continue to farm it or you continue to run the business, you are defered from paying any inheritance tax. Now if you inherit it and tell it and and sell it and take the money and move to a beach in hawaii, you would pay a tax on that inherited wealth. This is subterfuge at best. Its dishonesty at worst. The last speaker said that the American Families are big winners in this bill. I dont know whose American Family he was talking about. Mr. Neal was right when he said the American Families had a chance to be big winners if we had used this opportunity invest in workers, invest in training, invest in Community Colleges, create jobs, create opportunities, build this tax reform from the middle class, the working class out. But instead, we didnt do that we didnt even talk about it. We didnt talk about it because we didnt have a single hearing on one of the most important bills that we will cast a vote on in our time in congress. Didnt hear from one Expert Witness. They dropped this bill written in secret, as a matter of fact, many of our republican colleagues were complaining that they didnt get a chance to see what was in the bill. They dropped this on us at the last minute. We could have worked with them. We could have addressed some of these issues. We could have figured out how to invest in the american worker. We could have figured out how to make investments that created jobs. But no, we didnt get to do that because we didnt have any hearings. It was written in the middle of the night in a darkroom someplace way out of our wheelhouse. They said they had to do this because the tax code was too big. And i agree with them, i think it is too big, i think it does need to be reformed. But the fact of the matter is, in the joint tax and the joint tax testified on this, if their bill is passed and signed into law, it wont do away with a single chapter of the tax code, but instead, it will add one more to it. So this is literally making the tax code bigger. And i want to know who those American Families are who some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle claim will be helped from this. Because this is what i see. In reading this and reading the analysis from different experts. If someone in your family has alzheimers, youll pay more when they because theyre going to take away the medical expense deduction that you now can take advantage of. Low income folks with kids, youre going to pay more when youre excluded from the child tax credit. If youre a teacher, dead cailted to your students, and to dedicated to your students and their well being and you take money out of your own pocket to buy pencils, supplies, things for your classroom, today you get a deduction for that. We know how important education is. Under this bill youll pay more because theyre taking that deduction away too. We just heard from a veteran on the other side who said how great this is for veterans. Let me tell you, if youre a veteran and you get your duty station reassigned and you have to go someplace else and the house you have to sell, your first duty station if you havent lived in it for eight years youre going to be taxed on any profit from that. If youre a veteran and you get transferred, youre not going to benefit from this. Youre going to lose. Do you have a student loan . We all know how expensive those are these days. If you do. Youre if you do, youre going to pay more because theyre taking away your ability to deduct the Interest Payment on your student loan. Do you own a home . If you do, youll pay more when they limit the mortgage deduction. Mortgage interest deduction. And by the way, as we heard in committee, during the markup on this bill, this could actually decrease the value of your home by 10 . Now, tell me how that helps working class, middle class families to say all that money that youve been saving by buying your home, were going to take and were going to take 10 away from the value of that. That certainly doesnt create a big win for American Families. Are you in the middle class, big win for American Families, those middle class families because the analysis says that 36 million middle class families are going to see a tax hike in this bill. Do you deduct your state and local taxes . If you do, youre going to pay more. Because youre going to lose that deduction too. Do you care about Infrastructure Investments in your community . I had a visit yesterday from the head of the San Francisco airport. He came in was because of this bill, i dont represent San Francisco but he came in to see me because im a member of this committee and he knew wed be taking this bill up and they have a tremendous amount of Infrastructure Investment pending. They do it with the bonds that will be disallowed under this bill. The same the similar type of action that theyre going to do in regard to low Income Housing. In my state, we need housing badly. And were able to build low income able to build low Income Housing by using the bonds made available in our tax code that goes away. That hurts homes, that hurts people who want to move into homes, and ill tell you, in my district, its a particularly raw subject right now because in one of my county, sonoma county, we had a 2 vacancy rate in Residential Housing. About a month ago. And about a month ago now, we had the worst fire in california history. In sonoma county, it wiped out 5 of the Residential Housing stock. There are about 9,000 homes total in the fire that were destroyed. Homes in sonoma, homes in napa, homes in lake, homes in mendocino, homes in butte, homes down in southern california. And that just further deteriorated the housing shortage problem that we face. D so to take away ability to construct new low Income Housing hurts. But you know, i think what hurt even more is in this bill, they took away the ability for individuals and families, those middle class families that theyre talking about help, they took away their ability to write off their losses due to a disaster. And thats i would be happy to yield. I dont know how they did that. I dont know why theyd do that. In the face of these fires, in the face of so many in california understanding that impact, why is it that they did this . I wish i could say thats the 64 million question but sadly its going to cost taxpayers a lot more than 64 million when theyre all said and done. Mr. Larson its a mystery to me and i ask the chairman who wrote the bill during the mr. Thompson i asked the chairman who wrote the bill during the Committee Markup why they wrote that. Mr. Alreadieson were there hearings . Mr. Thompson no hearings. And they didnt fix it. Mr. Larson yet here we are on the verge of voting on a bill at will impact 100 of the economy and 100 of the tax code. No hearings . Mr. Thompson no hearings. Mr. Larson mr. Neal you suggested in the process at the outset that this was a missed opportunity. And then you went back and gave a historic tutorial on how we got here. How sit that we got here and arrived here with no public hearings and no expert testimony . Mr. Neal the summary of this tax bill was published last thursday. We did a walk through on monday. We only had a chance to respond to the bill, the chairmans mark on friday. Then on monday we did a walk through, tuesday, wednesday, and thursday morning we did the markup. Not one hearing. Recall that in the last moments of the markup we were handed a managers amendment. We get 20 minutes to react to the managers amendment. So no hearings. And compare that with 1986 which everybody herleds now as a great moment of reagan and oneill and rostonkowski and gephrt gephardt and bradley, 450 witnesses. 30 public hearings. The secretary of the treasury at through the markup. Mr. Larson in your history of serving on this committee. Were joined by mr. Levin and mr. Kind and mr. Welsh, mr. Levin i have to ask you too, in your serving on this committee has there ever been a bill of this magnitude or proportion thats been brought out without a public hearing . Without Expert Witnesses . Mr. Thompson had a raging fire in his district that you heard him from his own lips what it did, how it devastated sonoma and napa valley and no hearings. Is there a precedent for this . Mr. Levin i dont think so. Mr. Neal has spelled out, and you have, the atrocious approach here, so i think we can sum it up, the process has been terrible. The proukt is worse. The product is worse. What happens when you have a terrible process. Mr. Larson mr. Kind stood up and talked about the fact the other side who claimed to be deficit hawks, all of a sudden, they are an endangered species. I dont know if the the gentleman from wisconsin wants to expand on that and further ask the gentleman from california and i yield to him. Mr. Thompson reclaiming my time. And thank you for drawing attention to the material fires that did so much damage in my home state and the fact they took the deduction for these types of disasters away from the American People. Its not just about fires or my state. They took away this provision in the tax code for anybody who has a disaster from now on. If its a mudslide, earthquake, a fire, any disaster, you will not be able to claim that deduction. And to add insult to injury, the chairman grandfathered in the hurricane victims in his own district. And ill just say one more thing and ill yield back my time. If this isnt all bad enough, everybody should know that all of these costs that we have talked about are bad enough. But theres one cost in here that is crippling and crippling to our children and grandchildren and thats the fact that this bill is not paid , and it adds 2. 3 trillion 2. 3 trillion, trillion with a t to our National Debt and will be passed to our children and grandchildren and thats going to hurt us in the years to come. Mr. Larson you said earlier that you came down here and you rarely come down here. This is a special order. The reason that youre hear here, the reason mr. Davis is here, mr. Welch, mr. Levin, mr. Neal, mr. Kind and myself are all here is because we havent had the opportunity to have a hearing and have Expert Witnesses. Have you had any Expert Witness snr mr. Thompson there has been no hearings on this bill and no Expert Witnesses. The only help that we have gotten are from the outside organizations and the universities that crunch these numbers to be able to give us some glimpse of what is going to happen and the benefit of some analysis from the joint tax staff. There have been no hearings, no experts, nobody from our district who lives and breathes this, no one from our districts who will be impacted by this. This was done from the top down nd crammed through in the most bass tarredized system that i have ever seen here. Its a point that all of us here on the ways and Means Committee under the leadership of mr. Neal. Mr. Kind doing tax reform right is tough. There are a lot of moving pieces to it and there are a lot of tended d unin consequences. Not taking the time to listen to people back home in our respective states and districts about the consequences of something that is going to affect every American Life in this country is legislative malpractice. And thats what we are on the verge of committing leading up to tomorrows vote. My friend from california ntioned 2. 3 trillion of Additional Debt by the time you add in Interest Payments and its happening at the wrong time. We may have gotten away with it in the 1981 tax cuts and from 2001 and 2003. We have run out of time as a nation with 70 million baby boomers beginning their massive retirement. But their entire theory is premised on the fact that over 2 3 of the tax cut will be going to large corporations and this growth that is going to come from it. And that is based on the tax holiday for these Multinational Companies that will bring dollars back into america at a much lower rate and reinvesting that is going to promote growth. Here was a survey of the 300 executives of some of the largest Multinational Companies asking them what they would do with this repay try ated money coming back to the country, they said paying down debt, investing in more jobs and good paying jobs, barely registered in that survey. This should not come as a surprise. It is arent like we havent been down this road before. We tried this back in 2000 where the companies brought back a ton of money and what they used it is stock buybacks and they are refusing to learn the lessons of the past. Nd going on this theory of growth that none of the economists see under this tax bill which is a huge fiscal gamble which is going to be in the place which is one of the worst decades in our country. Mr. Thompson the gentleman is absolutely correct. And i yield the balance of my time to our Ranking Member, mr. Neal. Mr. Neal i would like to at this point to yield to mr. Davis to talk about historic historic tax credits and mr. Lipinski will talk about new markets and the Retirement Crisis that is coming and yield back and forth to make sure that people understand the totality of what is being asked in this legislation. Mr. Davis thank you very much, mr. Neal. And i thank you for the tremendous leadership that you have provided throughout this process. There is no doubt in my mind that the vote we will take tomorrow is going to be one of the most important votes that i will ever take as a member of congress. And its important because i now that it will affect in one way or another, every citizen of this country. As i listen to the debate over the last two days, i know that america is at a great crossroads and we can either go forward or we could go backwards. Could go forward into a new era of jobs and keeping the greatest level of health care that this country has ever known. All or we could go backwards, ecome wards with Maria Antoinette tax policy and take e policy and then say let it take or go more forward with the equitable tax plan one that promotes development by keeping the provisions for state and local deduction which Everybody Knows will create jobs, jobs and jobs. We can go forward by making sure access we have to Quality Health care will continue. I hear many people talking about what we will get from h. R. 1, what i call the republican Maria Antoinette tax deal. Let me mention what we will not get that we already have. Teachers will not get the bility to write off the 250 that they spend out of their pockets for materials and supplies for their students. Students will lose 65 billion in federal funds to help make college more affordable. Senior citizens, as we have already heard with alzheimers will lose the ability to write off high medical costs. Student loan interests can no longer be used. Cities like mine, like philadelphia, like detroit, like gary, indiana, cities all over the country will not be able to make use of the new market tax credits to rebuild slum and brighted areas. Many of those areas have been ying squalor for 50 and 60 years, where they used to be thriving communities. Historical buildings will be left standing and the cost of tax credits to restore them will no longer be available. Losing the opportunity to create jobs and Work Opportunities for people who are unemployed. Under the bill, any way that you cut it, the middle class will lose and the special interests and the wealthy will again win. I know that were again being ld the idea of what i call trickledown economics. Feed those at the top and crumbs will trickle down to all the rest of society. Even though study after study has shown that this does not work. It is nothing more than a theory. Far from any basis of truth. And so, i think that we have no choice when i hear these kinds of discussions, i think of all kinds of things. But i guess what i think most of something that billy holiday wrote and sang and she said that momma may have, poppa may have, but god bless the child thats got his own. She said that rich relations may have crust of bread and such. You can take some, but dont take too much. And so if you are waiting for something to trickle down, you better remember what she said, that god bless the child thats got his own. And one thing that each one of us has is the ability to vote. And i will vote tomorrow. And i will make sure that when i vote, i will vote to represent the thousands and thousands of middleclass families who need to have hope and who need to have faith and need to believe at when we sing the song my we are tis of thee that singing about them, too. I appreciate the remarks of my friend from chicago. He represents a large urban district. I represent a large rural district. Mr. Kind one thing we agree on, this is a bill of goods for both of our constituency and im concerned about the Economic Economic in the large rural district that i represent where are production agriculture is a large part of the. Some of the changes they are making are going to be devastating to farmers taking away the 199 deduction. And if you want to grow things and invent things and create things and make things in america, the 199 has had a track record to make it easier for our farmers. Our their bill goes under away. In order to recoupe some of the losses, it goes away. Like kind exchangeses for heavy machinery goes away. My farmers are operating on the margin right now and im concerned about the impact on our family farmers with what they are proposing. You dont have to be from a city or rural district to understand that the work that wasnt put into this bill to understand the real consequences of what they are asking for. Figure till regroup and out a way to truly simplify and make us more competitive and make it fair for Small Businesses and family farmers rather than this rush to judgment so they can score a political win before the end of the year. Think the points are very valid and i hope we heed before we reach our final decision tomorrow morning. Mr. Davis one thing i like about the packers are the people. Mr. Kind amen. Kneel kneel i will leave that alone. I yield to mr. Larson. Mr. Larson i theaning gentleman for yielding and for the tutorial he gave us earlier today about how we got to this spot. I think its important because for most americans listening out there, what youre witnessing is the tyranny of the majority. What i mean by that is, when the minority doesnt get an opportunity to bring forth witnesses, to have hearings, and you heard mr. Neal talk about the more than 30 hearings in the committee, the more than 12 subcommittee hearings, the 450plus experts, that we never got to hear from, you understand the position that we find ourselves in. As i said earlier, this impacts 100 of our economy and 100 of our people. We all swear an oath of allegiance to the constitution. But apparently on the other side, they swear an oath of allegiance to grover norquist. Because thats more important than fulfilling our constitutional responsibility and going through regular order and having the experts. Its more important to take a ledge to mr. Norquist and pass something politically, in as pure a bare knuckle way as you possibly can, without any amendments being made in order, and rushing the bill to the floor in haste without any concern of the ramifications that it has other than fulfilling a pledge. To mr. Norquist. And also a pledge as weve heard from some of their members to their donor base. Thats whats frustrated us on this side of the aisle. We could, and i think mr. Neal said it very clearly, we had a missed opportunity here. Mr. Kind mentioned we still have that opportunity. If there are enough people on that side of the aisle and we know there are, we know regionally, as mr. King and mr. Zeldin have said, that this tax greatest ents the shift that weve seen in wealth in this country from the middle class of the northeast and west coasts, to the rest of the country. This is unconscionable that this would take place under the guise of trying to say that youre providing middle class tax relief. I went to the commissioner of Revenue Services in the state of connecticut and said, how will this impact our citizens . And it represents an increase in taxes for the middle class. Not this socalled tax cut that the other side has perpetrated. Will the gentleman yield . Mr. Larson i will in one second, i want to point out this claw that exists within here because even for those states, red state or blue where you think you might receive a de minimus tax cut today its clawed back within five years because they put something in the code commonly referred to as a chain c. P. I. And that has dire ramifications and i yield to the gentleman. Mr. Levin i wanted to ask you to yield just at this moment when you talked about a tax cut for the middle class. The problem with this terrible process is there isnt time enough to challenge those who Say Something is false. And i just want to read again what the speaker said relating to your point. He said this. The focus is on middle class tax relief. The focus is on directing that tax relief to the people in the middle and the people who are trying to get there. This bill is the opposite. This bill is the opposite. As we discussed to our Ranking Member, at the markup, and we challenged in the joint tax force, well, i think, well show this to you, there are going to be millions of people, middle class, who in subsequent years will have their taxes increased, not decreased. Millions. Millions. When we asked about the passthrough, picking up your point about the middle class, he pointed to tables which showed that the vast, vast majority of the moneys that are going to go through passthroughs that are going to get some tax help, the vast majority are for very wealthy people. And while we dont sthre final figures, its likely that 85 or 90 is going to go to the very wealthy. So i think so much of what they have said is so untrue. They say that necessity is the mother of invention. In this case, necessity, their political necessity, has been the mother of deception. Mr. Larson i thank the gentleman. Youre absolutely right. I want to point out, we did ask mr. Barthold, the chief of staff for the joint committee on taxation, about this tax and what its ramifications are. I asked him, will this fall unevenly as weve seen across the northeast and as weve seen across the west coast . The response was, it is not possible to say that in all cases, meaning all 50 states, that these taxpayers will have lower total income Tax Liability under h. R. 1 than under the present law. Why . Because theyre not going to be allowed to take the deductions they normally get. In the state of connecticut, 41 of our citizens utilize and itemize their deductions. Under the code that theyve been able to do since 1913. And its inception. Why is this important . We heard mr. Brady say after everyone gets up and speak he is talks about whats going on in their district in an overgeneralized manner. I asked joint tax, what would it be for a cup until West Hartford with a child in college they own a home, have a combined income of 125,000. Under the republican plan, they would see a 767 tax increase in 2018, and they would see more tax increase in 2023 when the Family Credit expires. A point mr. Neal has made repeatedly. Tax cuts are made permanent for corporations and the wealthy. The wealthy get the alternative minimum tax and think think tissue and they get the estate tax and theyre made permanent. For those of you who may think youre even going to get a tax cut, the norquist claw back provision under something we refer to as chain c. P. I. Takes it away after the fifth year. We find ourselves in this godawful position, without public hearings and without the ability to call Expert Witnesses and to only have a back and forth between democrats and republicans. You need a political win. Thats probably true. But what the what we really who really needs to win here are the American People. And the American People expect more of us. And thats why this is a loss possibility. And why we ought to be regrouping and taking this back up. Because as mr. Kind says, there still is time. How can you turn your backs on your fellow republicans in new york, in new jersey, in pennsylvania . How can you do this to these people without any kind of public hearing or public witnesses or experts to talk about what the calamity will be . How about their commissioners of Revenue Services be coming in and going over and examining just how these taxes will impact on them . Thats not going to happen, unfortunately. This is being jammed down our throats. I yield back to the gentleman from massachusetts. Mr. Neal i want to ask mr. Welsh, who made it to vermont via springfield, who has a longstanding interest in Higher Education, when he spoke earlier on the floor, maybe you could talk about parts of vermont that are very rural and also link it to that whole notion of Higher Education in the state of vermont. Mr. Welsh id be glad to. By way of introduction, thank you, mr. Ranking member, for your leadership. As you have said, the biggest challenge we face in this country, is not a democrat or republican issue, is that wages have been stagnant for americans for 20 years. They havent had a pay raise. And thats a huge challenge because the American Dream has always been promised premise on the fact that our parents have made a a made an economy that has provided more opportunity for their kids. Wages are flat. America hasnt had a pay raise in 0 years. So the fundamental question for me on a tax bill is whether that tax bill will increase opportunity for hard working americans. And it doesnt matter where theyre from, rural or urban. It doesnt matter what their race is. It doesnt matter what their gender is or the Sexual Orientation is. Most americans want to work. And they want to take care of the people they love and they want to have an opportunity. This tax bill comes up real short. By the way, i want to be somewhat selfcritical of the democrats, we havent been where we needed to be, oftentimes. Which is for hardworking americans. But i think were solidly where we need to be on this tax bill. Ill give you a couple of examples in explicit response to your question. I went out to a school that provided training for young vermont men and women who wanted to become welders. That is a great job. They got out of school and they get a job that pays them good wages. Theyve got to borrow money in order to do that. In some cases they have an employer who pays their tuition. Under this tax bill, that young woman or that young man who gets Tuition Assistance from his or her employer has to declare that as income and pay taxes on it. Thats an opportunity tax. And a lot of those folks have borrowed money. Weve got a wonderful Vermont Student Assistance Corporation program in vermont, doesnt matter whether youre a republican child or democratic child, you get low interest loans. Theyve lost their tax deduction. This is when theyre beginning their career. So their income is not great, theyre trying to pay their bills, maybe get a condominium, maybe if theyre really lucky, they get a house, they have to pay more taxes as a result of this bill. Then the other thing is private activity bonds, this is unbelievable, because what those bonds are, i didnt know much about this before i came to congress. But its a benefit where there can be an opportunity to borrow money from the private market, by the way, in order to provide low Interest Rates and the people who buy these bonds get the benefit of a tax deduction. In order to provide a continuing benefit to lower Interest Rates for kids who are trying to get a welding degree or Community College degree or Higher Education degree. And were taking that away. Were taking away opportunity. Were imposing a big tax on the opportunity for young women and men in vermont. And you know, theres not a single republican who would want to do that. But we dont have an opportunity in this bill to propose an amendment to say hey, wait a minute, we made a mistake on this provision, because we dont want the welders in alabama, wouldbe welders in texas, wouldbe welders in vermont, to have to pay more in order to develop a kill thats really essential to making those joints on our bridges and doing things that we need to rebuild our cities. And we are not allowed an opportunity to propose an amendment where every single american would know whether your representative wanted to impose an opportunity tax on that student who wants to become a welder. Where is the democracy in this . Where is the transparency in this . And thats what really is heartache for me. Mr. Chairman, as you know, we grew up in the same city. It was rough and tumble. Working class. Proud people. And ethnic. And we played hard in sports and we battled all the time. But we had a kind of common pride in the value of work. We saw how hard our parents worked and we didnt necessarily notice that when we should when we were younger but as we grew up, we really were stunned at the kind of commitment they had to rebuilding the city that we were in, and you became mayor of. We became so appreciative of the opportunity they gave us. I grew up in a family of six kids. I dont know how my parents did it in a small house with four bedrooms, sharing a bedroom, didnt know. It was only after we knew how wonderful this opportunity they gave us and the sacrifices they made. And isnt it our job in this house of representatives to give everybody the same opportunity to experience you had and mr. Lipinski had and i had. And that was on the shoulders of parents who sacrificed for our benefit. So the bottom line for me on this tax bill is whether it enhances the opportunity of every american striver, every american who wants to become better, more contributing, more of an active citizen, more of an accomplished adult, more of a contributor to our work force, does this bill help them achieve that, or does it impede them from doing that . And when i look at just one specific provision where we say students are going to have to pay taxes on the interest that they pay on their Student Loans or when a student who earns, in fact, a scholarship or fellowship to go advance their Higher Education and have to pay income tax on that, im truly horrified, because this country and this is not a republican or democratic deal, is all based on the optimism that if we give people opportunity, it will benefit all of us. It will benefit that individual who is there to seize that opportunity and make the best of what they can do and therefore build a country. So, mr. Ranking member, i really appreciate your efforts on this. Kneel kneel i thank the description. With that, i yield seven minutes to the gentleman from chicago, good friend to all of us here, mr. Lipinski. Mr. Lipinski tharpg you, mr. Neal and all of your work. I want to talk tonight from the perspective of blue dog democrats. Clearly, we all know and mr. Welch very eloquently talked about the needs of the middle class and people who are struggling and we all know it is past time to reform the tax code by making it simpler and closing loopholes and lowering rates. This bill we will be voting on tomorrow is not the answer for the middle class. It didnt have to be this way. Throughout the year, i heard from republican lawmakers and white house about the benefits of creating a bipartisan tax reform plan. As a policy cochair of the Blue Dog Coalition representing moderate democrats, i coordinated the coalition of key principles needed for permanent bipartisan tax reform bill. And our reform principle called for the following. First, tax reform must be passed in an open and bipartisan process after regular order. Tax reform must be revenue the cost d not offset of tax reform for tax relief. Companies need competitive tax rae and structure in order to maintain their competition globally and small busisses when it comes to setting business tax rates. Fourth, the middle class must be the priority ithis tax bill. And fifth, congress should use tax eform to address theer challenges. Taken together, i think most people woulsay tha this is a good sou set of principles. These fails to meet criteria. First, this bill is not bipartisan. The blue dogs met with the treasury secretary, the director of International Council as well as the chairman of the committee. We were told this would be bipartisan. But the bill was passed in committee less than a week after it was introduced and less than a day, even less than that after changes were made by the chairman. Three voted on every democratic amendment. One week later, this bill is being brought to the floor with no amendments allowed. This is clearly not bipartisan and its tough to argue that this is an open process of regular order where members get to participate in the process. But what about the contents of the bill . First, its not revenue neutral. Were told this bill will be used dynamic scoring and additional revenue will be raised from increased Economic Growth because of the tax cut. Some dismiss dynamic scoring out of hand but i believe it can be legitimate. But as we are about to vote on the bill, even the idea of having an official dynamic scorer of this bill before voting on it seems to have completely disappeared. What we do know is the joint committee on taxation says it will add threerl 1. 5 trillion plus interest to our debt which s currently 20 trillion and growing. The one rough din milk score that has been produced by the right wing Tax Foundation shows this bill as originally introduced would still add over 1 trillion to our debt. And this new debt isnt used to put the needs of the middleclass americans first. Go to of the benefits corporations. It estimated that families would get the benefit of onethird of the tax cuts offered by the bill with corporations and other businesses getting twice as much. This is because the unbalanced way which business tax rates are lowered with relatively few cuts to corporate deductions. But as we have heard the speakers talk about all the deductions, it will hurt middleclass americans in health care, education and child care. Of course, true tax reform can alter some provisions in order to simplify the tax code. But we must make sure that at the end of the day, middleclass pocketbooks are not harmed by the changes we make. While many tout that this doubles the standard deduction, its important to understand it eliminates personal exemptions. Families with children may be worse off. There are other examples of deductions lost that will impact midclass families. Families with very high expenses such as longterm care for extraordinary illnesses will pay a higher tax bills. Student loan borrowing will eliminate interest they pay and one particularly contentious part of the bill, it occur tails the deduction individual taxpayers take for state and ocal taxes paid. They claim this deduction is an unfair subsidy of the federal government. But my own state of illinois, where taxpayers will get hit hard by this, we only get 79 cents from the federal governments from every dollar we contribute in taxes. And this will only make this zrep answery worst. And while it adds some new incentive to raise children and support families, these incentives expire after five years even as provisions have primarily benefit corporations are made permanent. When analyzed as a whole, the National Tax Policy present difficulties any tax relief might receive from this bill will disappear over time, yet families in the top 1 , even the top 1 10 will see larger returns in the long run. Finally this bill does nothing to address the major tax issues, the fact that the Highway Trust Funds and taking more and more money every year out of general revenue. We need to fix the highway trust fund, and we could start doing some that infrastructure build those projects that the president keeps talking about. Once again in this bill, the house is pursuing a closed process for major legislation and enormous price tags. Really urge my colleagues, change course, pursue a bipartisan reform so we do well for American Families and businesses and need congress to act on this critical issue and i thank Ranking Member neal for all his work on this. Mr. Neal mr. Speaker, how much time do we have left . The speaker pro tempore the gentleman has 1 1 2 minutes. Mr. Neal let me thank the group. And i want to encourage the American People to Pay Attention beginning tomorrow morning at 9 00 when we are going to finish the debate on this legislation. And i hope that they Pay Attention to it they will consider what a missed opportunity this was, a reminder, one of the most complex pieces of legislation that i have been here had no public hearings, not one witness was summoned to give advice on a tax bill of this consequence. And been advertised as a middleclass tax cut. 36 million americans are going to pay more when this is done. And another reminder to pay close attention to and that is our friends down the hallway in the senate are going to include an end to the mandate, which is the glue that holds together the Affordable Care act in a further effort to take away Health Insurance from 13 Million People to pay for a tax cut. This could have been done together, democrats and republicans, we wanted to do it. We were shut out of this process from day one. Remember, this legislation was offered last thursday, a managers mark was published friday. We went to markup on monday and done on thursday. There was no opportunity for us to participate. And with that, mr. Speaker, thank you. And i yield back the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore under the speakers announced policy of january 3, 2017, the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. Schweikert, for 30 minutes. Mr. Schweikert thank you, mr. Speaker. I want to do two or three things specifically tonight. One is walk through a bunch of data on why the tax reform proposal is actually just sort of crucial to our society and where were going. And number two, actually walk through some impressions of being one of the new members on ways and means. I have been here in the u. S. House, im in my seventh here and only on the ways and means for one year and one of the most fascinating places, the diving into data and the ability to make things meb together and make the math work with the understanding of how serious this is. The problem is in somewhat toxic bipartisan environment we are in right now, i know there are some of my friends on the other side who are uncomfortable of the idea of republicans having a win. I know there are others who are constantly looking for what the partisan wedge is. And im going to ask for at least just a couple of moments we think through something altogether. We are going to walk through these boards and if you see this one right here, understand, now this is the borrowing from all the trust funds, but our country is already 105 of debt, if you add up the publiclyheld and thats from borrowing from the g. D. P. Und, 105 of. Lots of economists get nervous when you say, in just a few years the amount of debt issued by this government will be the entire size of the entire economy. And this is issued, not borrowing from trust funds. And understand the curve is steepening because the trust Fund Balances are falling. Were finally hitting that inflexion period where demographics are moving our numbers. Remember, the peak of the baby boom is 60 years old today. We have obligations we as a society have made to our brothers and sisters who are getting older. And we have a real problem. Youre going to see on a number of these slides, if we continue to stay as a society, as a country, that is only growing, and remember the projection over now is 1. 8 growth the next 20 years, you mathematically cannot meet your obligation. Called a debt crisis. Called an indictment crisis entitlement crisis. One of the Key Solutions to being able to meet our promises is we need a society, we need an economy thats growing. If you love people, if you care about them, if you want them to be able to save and have opportunities and have a future, you need a society thats economically expanding. I accept that this body is often about our next reelection. And this is that observation that i learned this year. There are some things that are in the tax code that are brilliant politics. They get you reelected. They give you something warm and fuzzy to go talk about back home and theyre really bad economics. But its hard to stand in front of a group and say, hey, state and local taxes, we get to deduct it, yeah. And then you look at the economic expansion modeling of it and theres almost no Economic Growth for a huge amount of spending. I know its a sensitive issue with a lot of my brothers and sisters here on both the right and the left who are from high tax jurisdictions. But understand one of the reasons its been looked at is its a tremendous amount of spending in the tax code and theres almost no economic expansion from that spending. Where if that same spending in the tax code isnt things that grow businesses, grow job opportunities, grow the ability to save, you can actually see the modeling where the economy gets bigger, where all of us have job opportunities, where over the coming years you get paid more because the economy is growing. This is great politics. This is good economics. And i dont think those of us on the republican side, and know so often we get behind these microphones and we all sound like accountants on steroids, but the math is important. Because how many times has this body made Public Policy that felt good, that was good politics, and really crappy economics . And thats how you wake up one day and your society is 20ds trillion in debt and the 20 trillion in debt and the curve is about to blow off the charts. Remember, a lot of outside groups on the right and the left have been doing molding saying, debt crisis, in about a decade and a half. Its coming and its coming very, very fast at us. So to have an understanding of just how difficult these numbers are, this chart i have up here, you see the red area . Now this is for 2027. You figure, we just finished the 2018 appropriations and budgets, so were already starting to plan on the 2019. Well, so eight functionally budget years from now, only 11 of this federal governments spending will be for things that people think of as government. Everything else, defense and entitlement. Mandatory spending. Both earned entitlements and unearned entitlements will be everything other than 11 of the spending. So public lands, the f. B. I. , the justice department, park service, health research, education, all the things you think of as government will be only 11 of our spending. Everything else will be eelingt either military, and military will also only be be about 11 , and effing else after that is mandatory and Everything Else after that is mandatory and it continues to grow that way. If you care about education, you care about health research, you care about the environment, you care about these things, understand if you do not start to get some dramatic Economic Growth, youre going to be squeezed out. The dollars spent on your priorities are disappearing and its math. We do not have the revenues. Its going to get crushed and its coming very, very fast. And this isnt republican math or democrat math. Its math. So if i came to you right now and said, whats one of the most powerful things we can do as a society to keep our promises . My brothers and sisters on the left often talk about, you know, our promises to retirees. Absolutely. Heyre absolutely right. Except the fact of the matter is that i believe someone who retires the next couple of years, medicare, they will have put in about 190,000. Theyre going to receive over 600,000. And thats in like dollars. Now multiply that times, what, 76 million baby boomers, in that 18year period, just that differential, understand just one of the root causes is demographics. But we still made a promise. And the way you are able to cover that promise is economic rowth. When you look at this chart, and this chart is fairly new. Its actually from a stanford economist. I found this in a book about two months ago. And its really interesting. Do you see that red line over on, well call it the lefthand side, you see where it lays fairly flat . Thats a line that says, entitlement spending to g. D. P. So the size of the economy, the entitlement spending, in those years, in those 1990s, late 1980s. Entitlement spending didnt go down. It was still going up. The difference was the economy ot bigger. So when you hear us talk about debt to g. D. P. Ratios, start thinking about that denominator. How do you grow the economy . So if we keep our promises, it doesnt crash the economy and functionally almost bring the world down. We have some charts that make it very clear, when weve been in times of economic expansion, weve even been able to spend more money on the social entitlement promises and yet weve bent the debt curve and the amount of that consumption f the size of the economy. And look, i know this gets a little geeky. But at some points the math are important. I know we just spent a couple of hours talking about peoples feelings on a 400page, 5page tax bill. But lets if 5page 500page tax bill. But lets get some of the math correct. On this chart is c. B. O. Projections. And the math is worse than the c. B. O. Projections. I know this is small, but the 2017 number, c. B. O. Missed it by over 100 billion. We ended up borrowing. The fiscal year we just finished, the 2017 fiscal year, re odom 666 billion borrowing we borrowed 666 billion. And this is a good year. You hear people talk about in a static score, over the next decade, 10 years, this will cost 1. 5 trillion. But we borrowed 666 billion last year. With no tax relief and a government policy that functionally gave us a 1. 8 g. D. P. And you take a look at this year, this year was supposed to get much better but now that we know we have the spending for the hurricanes and the disasters , we know were going to blow through that number, but if you can see it, and i know the numbers are small, in about four budget years the borrowing, because of that 1. 8 economic expansion, were going to start borrowing 1 trillion a year. So, yeah. Building a tax bill with 1. 5 trillion borrowing over 10 years is something you have to really think about. And you need to design it so we get the economic expansion, so the size of the economy gets bigger, so theres opportunities, so we take in new revenues. But do understand, if you are part of the side that you were just hearing, supporting the status quo, the status quo is already a disaster and its just on the cusp of time. The disaster is already here and disaster is status quo, doing more of the same. Because in four budget years youre borrowing 1 trillion a year. And it goes up from there. So, doing nothing, continuing the status quo, is the entitlement crisis. Is the fiscal cliff. Is the debt crisis. We dont have a choice. We must get together and do whats necessary to get this economy growing. And so we heard one of the previous speakers, who is one of the people i really like, hes a good guy, democrat from illinois, but he talked about the Tax Foundation. Sort of forgot this part. And this is a quote from the Tax Foundation study. 1 trillion in new revenues. So, our static score that were doing, and the Tax Foundation score is higher in spending, but our model says its 1. 5 trillion of spending in the tax code, static. That means no Economic Growth. Were going to talk about what Dynamic Growth is. They say, a new additional 1 trillion of revenue, thats what we call dynamic scoring, what is dynamic scoring, you may ask. Dynamic scoring is nothing more than saying, this policy, how does it affect the size of the economy . And then you loop it back and look for the feedback effects and feedback effects. And if youre a democrat and youre saying, i dont believe in dynamic scoring, you really need to think about that position. Because you believe in dynamic scoring when the left introduced an immigration bill. It was dynamically scored. Global warming, if you actually look at the models, is a dynamic scorer. It has feedback effect. If you go back to this stimulus, to we all use dynamic scoring around here. We just seem to only want to embrace it when it supports our own political views. Every march, congressional budget gives us an update that has economic feedback effects in it. Thats called dynamic scoring. So, look, for both my friends on the right and the left, you cant just pretend that Public Policy has no effect in the size of the economy, when its contrary to your certain political pitch that youre making right now. So, just understand, a Tax Foundation, 1 trillion in new revenues. But the other things that are really important, and this actually starts to give you an understanding of some of the effects close to 300 billion in new payroll taxes. Understanding that Social Security and medicare are pay as u go programs, todays taxpayers are functionally paying todays recipients. Ive been behind this microphone over the last year talking about things like demographics and birth rates and the really dangerous effects these low birth rates are having on this society. Ut thats other stuff. Almost 300 billion in new payroll taxes. So i have 1 trillion in new income taxes and close to 300 billion in new payroll taxes for what we model is 1. 5 trillion static score. You may not like the numbers, but Tax Foundations really Tax Foundations really good at this. They have some of the most advanced models that exist anywhere in this country. And its worth going on and reading, you know, their information. But right now, when you hear us talking, were giving you just static scores. But its important to know that the freaky smart people are out there modeling saying, what were doing is expanding the size of the economy. And as you go into the future. So why is this so critical . If you see this chart, this is what is being projected for our future. This is c. B. O. s estimates over the next, i believe it was three decades. Functionally a 1. 8 g. D. P. Growth. This is their this is their projection what they see our future looking like. If you go back to 1950s, 1973, we had a demographic that was young, moving into the work force. Look at the late 1970s, 1990s, we were ding an average of 3. 3 g. D. P. A year. If you actually are someone like i am where you just are fascinated, g. D. P. Now, the atlanta fed calculator, has our g. D. P. As of today at 3. 2 g. D. P. Thats amazing. The model weve been given says we should be at 1. 8 . We are substantially above that in anticipation of tax reform. Apparently a lot of the economy out there is already anticipating a better regular willer to market and a better tax regime. And with that, theyre spending their theyre spending, theyre investing, and were seeing it in the baseline numbers. This is something we cant screw up. Its incredibly important. So lets try to understand once again if you care and love people and want them to have an Economic Future why that growth is so incredibly important. If you actually sort of look at the difference, this is sort of a difficult chart to understand, but if were sitting here somewhere between this 1. 5 and 2 g. D. P. Growth and you wanted to double the size of the economy, youre looking at aving to wait over 35 years. What happens if we were in the very tail end, and look, from my own math i dont think we get there, we might have some years that touch it, but what would happen 23 you were if you were at 4 g. D. P. Growth . You go from 35 years to a little over 17 years to double the size of the economy. What about 3. 5 g. D. P. . From over 35 years to 22 years. Just understand the size of the economy has almost everything to do with what youre paid. Your ability to have a pay raise. Your ability to have enough cash flow in your life so you can save for your retirement. I know this seems like an academic lecture but its not. These things affect our lives. They also affect our ability to pay our promises. It also affects our ability to protect our nation. Its not a game. So another way to sort of look at the same numbers, i just happen to like this chart, thats one of the reasons were putting it up, you can see sort of the bubbles. What would it take to sort of double that g. D. P. Per person . You know. So instead of the entire economy, how about you as an american citizen, the size of the economy as you because as a participant in the economy this has something to do with what youre paid, your ability on your lifestyle, the things you can own, the things you can do for your family. The difference between a 2 and lets just jump up to 4 , and the number of years you start to realize the difference between 7 years or 35 years. This is about every one of us as an individual in this country that if we can adopt tax policy, thats good for families, good for the middle class but also makes us competitive in the world again. We start to grow, good things happen. Do you do a tax code thats great politics or really good economics . Some of the math is hard. We live in a society right now where if you can look at the far left side of this chart, the top 20 of our society, of our income earners, the top 20 of income earners, are paying 88 of the federal income taxes. So you start to understand, if i came to you right now as a simple math problem, hey, i got 20 of these very high income earners who are paying 88 of all federal income taxes but i really want to make sure that working middle income earners are getting a lot of benefit, you understand why there was such great math problems in making these things work because 88 of all your federal revenue is sitting out here with 20 of the population. So thats actually why weve had to do a lot of the things we have done and where certain deductions, certain things phase out. Ts just a math problem. Ut remember. You see that red line, you see writ crosses the blue line . Thats where publicly held debt will exceed the size of our economy. This government will have issued debt to foreign buyers to your retime account, to Pension Funds that will exceed the size of this economy. And its only a few years away. And thats what the status quo is. Thats where were going. , well make you the argument dont have a choice. We must make a simpler, a fairer, but a dramatically more progrowth tax system as part of this countrys culture. In being blessed now beyond the ways and Means Committee, which im incredibly appreciative, its some of the smartest people ive ever worked with, are realy smart calculators, people, theres something called joint tax. If you ever want to know where all the freaky smart people who were president of your High School Class were, theres 50 of them, i think more than half of them have ph. D. S in math, statistics, and accounting. They tell us, testimony to the committee is, 94 of the tax paying population will now do their taxes on this. Only 6 of taxpayers in the country will need to itemize. So theres some interesting math that also starts to happen when youve made a tax system fairer, simpler and progrowth but the simplicity of it makes compliance, makes the ability to pay, makes the ability to participate so much easier, so much more elegant. Ive been proud to be part of they have team that has helped build this tax plan. Its not perfect. And its still going to go through a couple more changes. Thats the way it works. Well get the senate product, well sit in conference committee, well work out the math. But understand the status quo is disastrous for every american and i believe its disastrous for the world. The tax reform gives us an opportunity to grow and have an incredibly Bright Future if we do it the right way. With that, mr. Speaker, i yield back. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman yields back. Does the gentleman from arizona have a motion . Mr. Schweikert mr. Speaker id like unanimous consent to adjourn. The speaker pro tempore the question is on the motion to adjourn. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it. The motion is adopted. Accordingly, the hou tomorrow with a final vote likely tomorrow, as well. More coverage when they return, here on cspan. As the house begins debate today on the republicans tax reform bill, weird joined by politico tax reporter. What are the key details we should know about the house at gop plan . One thing you should know going in, there is not a whole lot of drama expected on the house floor. Ishink Republican Leadership quite confident in the votes they need for passage. They are very much in favor of promoting this bill as an economic boost for the United States and a lot of the members believe that