Specifically in response to the amendment at hand, nothing, and i mean nothing, based on what i can gather from the folks i speak with especially in the Business Community will stifle growth more than uncertainty. And if we are going to move forward with a bill to reform our tax code, which is more than just tax cuts, but a reform that provides relief over a given period of time, a window in which businesses and families can find some relief, businesses have the certainty to invest, not just in their business, but into the people that work for them, to grow their businesses, we as members of congress have got to be responsible to ensure that we give them that certainty. And thats exactly what this does. If you look at the end of the diaz here, and see the size f our code, over 70,000 plus pages of regulations, its in sane that weve come this far. Weve waited 31 years to reform our tax policy. We live in a Global Economy now. The rest of the world is passing us by. And now instead of having a tax policy thats forward leaning and forward thinking, we are talking about setting up yet another two year window to decide whether or not what we are doing is correct. And its exactly whats gotten us into this jam in the first place. We have the tail wagging the dog in this country where unelected unaccountable breuer crates are making decisions for us in our agencies and departments that have added to the regulation that make laws to sup plant current law. Outside the guidance and the instruction of the constitution, which gives that responsibility to congress h and thats what we are doing right now. And since weve been in majority this term, and our president has been helpful in guiding us down this path, we have scaled back the size and scope of government. We have taken back control from those regulators who are accountable to no one. And we have seized control of the legislative process. This reform process we have going right now is a great example of our philosophy and our Founding Fathers philosophy of what is the responsibility of congress. And that is to legislate. And to guide this country down a path, a financial path of success. And to allow our families to it be able to provide for themselves and our businesses to grow and prosper. I believe that the plan that we have in place does that. It gives us a window of opportunity. A period of certainty for our businesses to invest. I support it. And i oppose any amendment that would limit the time within which businesses have that certainty. And i would ask that members oppose this amendment. You may yield back. Do you recognize to speak on the amendment . Thank you, mr. Chairman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, i want to yield time to mr. Bloom. I think this amendment is a good and necessary amendment. Thank you, mr. Lewis. I was getting excited and losing my voice. Lucky for you it will be softer and shorter. I listened to mr. Bishop talking about how we got to this point after 31 years. You know, and i think its unfortunate that we got to this point the way that we did. Tim griffith, our friend from alaska who w arkansas who was from the committee, gave everyone a copy a book of wilbur mills, and he was kind enough to give me one as well, because he knows how much i care about the ways and means committee, and its history. And ive been reading, refreshing my memory of what happened for landmark achievements of this committee. You can go back in history, and youll never find anything where this massive transfer of wealth, and rolling the dyes on future deficits and some theories that may work, may not. And brushing into the final stages with as little clarity about what weve actually done. I mentioned the Wind Energy Tax credit. I cant imagine ripping out agreement like this, putting at jeopardy 50,000 jobs and investment and not having the industry come in and talk about it. Or have the farmers and ranchers who are relying on those payments. And what you are doing to them. Or the workers, not maybe workers, these are real live workers, more of them that in oil and gas and coal who are not going to have jobs because you are breaking a commitment that this committee made on a bipartisan basis several years ago. Thats not how this committee operates. I cant imagine in the tradition of this committee if we were really going to reallocate a trillion and a half or 2 trillion, that we would not have concentrated effort focusing on the lower third of the income strata who are going to get the trickleist down. Wouldnt we have expanded refundable earned income tax credit like republicans are talking about in the senate . I think we would have. Would we have opened . We dont know. There is a difference between mr. Bartle in the committee about actual application. But one tling is clear the benefits would be flowing to some that are by no stretch of the imagination Small Businesses taking the 25 rate for people that are large professional organizations or basketball players or hedge fund managers. Wouldnt we have started to take the pass through rate and be able to do something really with Small Business . Because most Small Businesses dont pay 25 now. Those are the people that are creating the jobs l and they are left out. And we wouldnt have had to have left them out if we could have had the conversation. If we could look at how many billion dollars of revenue we are going to give up and then focus on people that we want to help first. Not a few thousand billionaires who are going to be able to pass on money tax free, most of which was never taxed once. You dont get to be a billionaire on w 2 income. Its an appreciated capital. So thats why i wanted to just push the reset button for a moment. And im not trying to be unrealistic. If it takes three years to prove whether or not this works or four years, so be it. But have the confidence in what you are doing that you are not going drive us over the cliff with a mountain of debt, particularly if Interest Rates go up. Thats the first dollar we have to pay regardless of the president thinking we can renegotiate the national debt. I think you are playing fast and lose with my grand kmirn future and it doesnt have to be this way. If you dont like two years, make five years, but have a Circuit Breaker to be able to make sure the american taxpayer is protected. Thank you. And i yield back. Thank you, mr. Bloom. Anyone else wish to speak on the amendment . Now the questions on agree go to amendment. All those in favor signify by saying a . A. Those opposed nay. Then opinion on the chair have. Will be postponed. Are there additional amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute . Yes. What purposes, gentleman, from new jersey seek this . How wonderful our state is, mr. Chairman, to bring an amendment to the floor of this distinguished body. Thank you. Mr. Br chairman i Reserve Point of order. Ill ask the gentleman to suspend while the clerk distributes. Mr. Reicher is recognized. I withdraw my reservations. Gentlemen with draws his reservation. Gentlemen from new jersey is recognized to become member. Mr. Chairman, we know this billy eliminates deductions for middle class families giving massive tax breaks to wealthiest americans at the tune of about 1 trillion 100 billion. One of those deductions on the chopping block is state and local Tax Deduction commonly referred to as salt. My amendment would restore the state and local Tax Deduction in full. Including property taxes, state and local incomes taxes, and sales tax paid. After an out cry from members in their own caucus about the initial effort to eliminate the salt entirely, Republican Leadership amended the plan. They still removed the deduction for state and local income, and sales taxes, but allowed for property Tax Deduction with a cap. Now, some of the majority will tell you this is a compromise. Some have tried to claim this is a big win. But middle class families, particularly those from new jersey, and other high tax states will tell you thats baloney. And today the first republican congressman in california agreed with that when he said ill not vote for this bill. And i salute the congressman from the 9th Congressional District in california, which is not one of the most hard hit in the state of california in this particular deduction. I hate to break it to my colleagues, but you got rolled on this deal. Its a raw deal. You shouldnt be surprised when chairman hatch, prepare yourselves, drops a bill later this week repealing salt deduction out right. Then what are you going to do . What are you going to say . Despite claims that this bill being pro growth, tax reform plan, the only thing homeowners in my district will see grow is their tax bill. In erosion of salt as a tax increase, plain and simple. That is why i have been fighting to retain this deduction for years. Long before this bill. Bipartisan letter with 68 of my colleagues in june asking this administration to preserve the deduction. Data shows average middle class family of four with incomes between 50,000 and 200,000 who own a home will see an increase in every state in the country, california, new york, utah, marry land, new jersey, virginia, et cetera, are among the hardest hit. In new jersey, middle class homeowners can expect to see a tax increase of 19. 3 or 1, 140 on average. The changes to salt paired with changes to the mortgage Interest Deduction mean housing prices will fall. I wouldnt be surprised if my area of the country actually fell into a recession. Earlier this year treasury secretary Steve Mnuchin suggested that we need to repeal salt to stop subsidizing states. Mr. Chairman, i have never heard anything as stupid from any treasury secretary in my life. How much jersey pays and sends to the federal government which is our obligations and responsibility, and how much we get back, pales to what mr. Chairman, i move that we take down mr. Pascrells words about our treasury secretary. Mr. Pascrell, could i just remind you this is. This is not off my time, rig right . Right. Just color close to the lines but dont cross the lines. Thank you, gentlemen. Im not crossing the lines. Anything like that is a harmful to my state, that statement, that state of West Virginia or any state, god bless West Virginia, i love West Virginia, subsidizing the state of new jersey or connecticut or new york is absurd, mr. Chairman. And he said that on the record, and i want to correct the record. Thats the first time i ever heard anybody in the federal government, democrat, republican, independent, ever say that. And im annoyed. And the people of new jersey are annoyed. We are donor state. And that means something in the specific numbers. May i continue . Of course. Its your time. As a mayor, as a former mayor, i know municipalities across the country rely on state and local property taxes. And sales tax and revenue. In fact, this piece of legislation was existing during the civil war came into existence. Not in the tax code. It was finally put in the tax code in 1913. Thats how old this is. This is how sacred this is for local communities. And why did we do it during the civil war . So the resources would not be dried up for states. So we are going to jump away from this hearing. Well continue the live coverage over on cspan 2 as as soon as they come back. President trump continues asia trip. The New York Times writing the president whose long dnc