affirmative, the rules is suspended, the resolution is agreed to and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to remove ms. anna eshoo from california as a co-sponsor from h.r. 877.

>> all this month, see the winners of c-span student cam documentary competition. middle and high school students from 45 states submitted videos on the country's greatest strengths. watch the top-winning on c-span at 6:50 and 8:30 during the program meet the students who made them. visit student cam.org. >> this year student cam competition asked middle and high school students to create a video dealing with our country's greatest strengths or ar challenge that the country

is facing. here is one of the third-place winners. >> vote no! >> identifying with a particular set of creeds or beliefs about how we govern ourselves and live together. >> it's a challenge many times because in my view, people don't understand the strength of partisanship. if you belong to a party, they have a platform, and that platform will pretty well lay out their basic beliefs, so it's a good starting point for the voter to know do you believe in the platform presented by the republican party or the democrat party and then you get to know the

candidates and more than likely those candidates are going to be sable to say why they support the platform. so the challenge is, in my view making people understand that just because you take the party out of it, you don't necessarily help the voter. it gives them a starting point as to what the belief system is. >> today, we are having the prescription for america rally and the purpose of the rally is to demonstrate that there is widespread support among the people of oklahoma to pass health care reform, including a robust public option. it's really important for us to rally today, because quite obviously, our state representatives have no interest in passing health care reform, so we're trying to generate public support for the

option and possibly influence our representatives in washington. >> health care for all -- even republicans. health care for all. even republicans. >> i think partisanship is a strength for america. it just has happened in a democracy where we have two parties. and the partisanship keeps the party that's not in power questioning, challenging the decisions of those that are in power. >> partisanship probably is affected by where you live. oklahoma is a very red state, a very conservative state. i think probably new york, california would be considered very liberal states. so i believe regions affect it. and i think it's probably historical in some places. >> tv has become the megaphone

for politics as far as credibility is concerned. it's obvious that fox is just a publicity arm of the republican national committee. >> i believe the only even remotely nonpartisan channel is fox and they aren't completely nonpartisan. i think the rest of them are completely partisan and very much liberal, slanted toward the democrat party. anybody who watches the news will see that. you don't get the other side most of the time. >> c-span is neutral. if it's on c-span, there is no, in mies timation, there is no political bias there. they are saying it like it is. if they are tell advising and this representative during the

joint session of congress shouts out you lie, it shows up on c-span and don't comment about that. there it is. >> i believe the internet has only aided in the division in america because you have groups fragmented on the right. you have groups fragmented on the left. and the very fact that they are on the internet is not very conducive to get a dialogue going between the two sides. moveon is a partisan group just as the project 912 group is a partisan group, just as the tea bag crowd is a partisan group. we have our own issues that we support and are against and obviously, we're going to support those issues and be against those that we don't agree with. >> i believe because of the divisive nature of what's going on today, that partisanship

will get stronger. i think the parties will get stronger. i think the parties will stand more firmly on what they say they believe. i believe there is also a possibility that if the republican party strays much further from its base, you will see the emergens of a third party and that will be a third party constitutionalist party. i hope that doesn't happen. >> the concept of the two-party system and people with different ideas about how to govern ourselves go all the way back past our founding fathers and our nation would not be what it is without it. salt salt nick nick >> to see all of the winning entries in the competition visit studentcam.org. >> in a few minutes, the senate is expected to vote on final passage of a short-term

extension of unemployment benefits. the house is in recess waiting for that bill. there were changes to the legislation, so it has to come back to the house and house democratic leaders hope to vote on it tonight. speaker nancy pelosi held her briefing today and talks about tax breaks and response to the anti-tax protests happening on capitol hill. >> good afternoon. i just had a wonderful swearing-in of a wonderful member, ted deutch. following a very moving ceremony. today is the day of remembrance of those who died in the holocaust. and every year, it's very poignant and every year it's very moving, this year, 65th anniversary of the freeing -- of the end of the war and our troops, our divisions going

into the camps. and every year the flags come in, identified as a division which freed a camp. this year, the salute was to also the soldiers. there are over 100 soldiers who were there who were part of those divisions. general petraeus gave the key note address. it was moving also for another reason. steven johns son, security guard at the holocaust memorial who was shot last june, 2009, he was there to assist in the lighting of the candles of remembrance. as i say, just when you think you have been to the depths of grief, there are other inspirations that spring from it. so it was very important for us. quite another note today, april 15 as you know is tax day.

have you done your civic duty? have you done that already? it is important to note on this day that 36% of the recovery act, 36% of the recovery act went to tax cuts, tax cuts for the middle class, tax cuts for small businesses, tax cuts for green energy jobs for the future. refunds are up 10%, averaging about $3,000 a taxpayer and 98% of americans will receive a tax cut for 2009. former reagan policy adviser bruce bartlett has said, and this is his quote, federal taxes are considerbly lower by every measure since obama became president. bruce bartlett, former reagan policy adviser. it is important to note that in the health care bill, we have the largest health care tax cut in history. on that subject, we were all

here when the president signed the senate bill. we were already in recess when he signed the reconciliation bill which had the changes to the senate bill. one of the important changes in that was the education piece that came in the reconciliation bill. i don't know if you have seen eight great ways reform works for you. if you are a student, but it is eight ways student aid reform works for you to lower the cost of higher education. more investments in pell grants, more funding for our community colleges, lowering the costs of student loans by having direct loans, support for our minority-serving institutions, to name a few. and then also i want to note that this bill allowed the extended coverage until age 26. if you graduate from school or if you are working after high school, you can stay on your parents' insurance through age

26. so young people have many reasons. i just named a few of them, to celebrate the passage of that legislation. yesterday, we had a meeting at the white house. it began and ended with jobs as a priority. the president giving us a report, third-quarter report on the recovery bill -- now over 2 ,500,000 created through the legislation. still many people do not have -- do not have jobs and hopefully the legislation is coming, hopefully imminent for further job creation. in between, i said the meeting began and ended on jobs. in between, we talked about

wall street reform. and democrats are working on behalf of the middle class, want to rein in wall street. never again should those who are reckless on wall street cause people to be jobless on main street. and this is going to be our fight. hopefully, we can have bipartisan legislation that does rein in the banks, rein in the financial institutions not to paint everyone on wall street with the same brush, to be sure that those who are reckless do not have the same opportunity they had in the past, to privatize the gain for themselves and nationalize the risk when they were not. in that spirit, we go forward hoping to have bipartisanship. and we have passed the bill in the house. you have heard me say that before. passage in the senate will come soon.

we'll go to conference and another debate on the floor. with that, i would be pleased to take any questions. >> on the employment discrimination act. a number of urging the bill to the floor for a vote. what is preventing this bill for a vote? >> the committee of jurisdiction, education and labor committee is working very hard to have as strong as possible a bill when it comes to the floor. i hope it will be soon as soon as they are ready. leader hoyer and i have agreed it will come to the floor. i think it will be pretty soon. we had a big breakthrough on the hate crimes bill that this congress declared itself against discrimination and we believe that should be declared again in terms of discrimination in employment. >> the tea party protests that

are going on today, how concerned are you about the impact this movement will have on the democrats in november? >> i think it will have an impact on republicans. we keep our eye on the ball on our races and keep going forward. we are proud of our members and proud of the new candidates that we have in some open seats. there are some seats that we are challenging that are now held by republicans. and our message about health care, about job creation, about fiscal responsibility, about lowering taxes, about stabilizing the economy, we believe will hold us in good sted. we are massing -- we have our message and mobilizing at the grassroots level -- around that message and we believe we will have the money to put that message forward. >> what about the republicans?

>> you have to ask them. but some of the competition we see is in their primaries. >> are you encouraging or would you encourage some liberals or democrats to have them join the tea party movement and these rallies outside? is that important? >> first time i'm hearing this. we're busy trying to get the job done for the american people to create jobs, lower the cost of education, expand opportunity for prosperity in our country. the first amendment is alive and well well outside my window and i'm sure you know that as well and we welcome all voices of the american people. i don't think anyone needs my encouragement. people want to speak out on an issue. i don't think it has anything to do with what the tea party is doing. >> how popular are the programs

that democrats have spass passed? >> i think our members going to their districts, talking to their constituents about what this means to you, if you are a senior, health reform legislation makes medicare solvent for almost a decade longer, closes the doe nult hole. preventative care. if you are a young care, in terms of affordability for higher education and access to health care, right from the start. if you are a child, right from the start, starting this year, no longer will you be denied coverage because you have a pre-existing medical condition. if you are a woman, -- being a woman is no longer a pre-existing medical condition. we don't have gender or health discrimination in this legislation. if you are a small business, you benefit greatly from this.

so across-the-board, veterans, seniors, children, young adults, seniors, small and large businesses, the present system was unsustainable from individuals to businesses, large and small, to our economy in general as well as to our federal budget and we are very proud of that. and when members go forth to talk to people in their districts because that's who we are serving, our own constituents and our communication with them is what is important, not really what goes on outside my window. >> some talk in the senate about pursuing the president's tax is a way to find revenue? >> the finance committee and the ways and means committee are exploring ways to help pay-fors for that legislation. i'm not familiar with what

priority the particular proposal you suggest has. but we are pay-as-you-go, we must pay for it and they are going to make proposals to us as to where the offsets would come from. are you talking about -- >> the president proposed to fulfill the tarp by a lending fee to large banks. >> compared to what. i have to see what is on the table. i thought you were talking about something that happened in the last 24, 48 hours. but again, compared to what and the purpose we might use something like that. this isn't the last bill that will have to be passed that will ever be paid for. >> given the enormity of the mine explosion in west virginia

and the company's record of delaying enforcement, citations it has received, do you think congress needs to act to strengthen the bill to force mine safety standards? >> well, let me first say that right now, our thoughts and prayers are with the families who lost their loved ones. funerals are still going on in west virginia. today or tomorrow when the governor has declared a day of mourning to remember our miners, go to the mines not for work, but to take stock of what the safety precautions are there. certainly we have to subject regulations and the enforcement through scrutiny to make sure that the miners are safe. that has not happened in the previous administration. the mine safety people were people out of the industry. and that has not done well. right now, under the obama

administration, there has been a change. and it's much more worker and safety oriented and we must again subject the regulations, the laws to scrutiny, but also the behavior of the mine owners and their regard or disregard of the laws and regulations to protect the miners. >> madam speaker, a number of polls suggest that americans really revile the current tax system and deplore paying taxes and think they are too high. what can democrats to put aside those fears that they actually have the best interests of the american people at heart? >> i think there are some conflicting views right now. no one likes to pay taxes, but everyone knows we have the responsibility to do it. and a survey i saw yesterday that 40 some percent said they are paying the right amount of

tax, a smaller percentage thought they were paying too much and a very small percent said not enough. but it was the highest -- the plurality was that they were paying just enough. and as i said at the beginning of my remarks and economic adviser to president reagan, bruce bartlett, has said federal taxes are considerbly lower by every measure -- he doesn't say president, but since obama became president. bruce bartlett, question quote, federal taxes are considerbly lower by every measure since obama became president. having said that, i have taublingd talked to my ways and means committee about tax fairness and simplification as we go forward. we should be suck because what we do has -- we should be

subjecting because what we do has impacts in the course of activities. >> in december, you are going to get a report from the fiscal reform commission discharged with looking how to close the entitlement gap. how long do you think you're going to be able to keep taxes at the low level that they are right now? >> well, we think we have gone in the right direction. we want to grow the economy so that the revenue stream increases. let's go back to where we are today. we came into the bush administration on a trajectory, $5.6 trillion in surplus. if we kept going forward with the clinton administration, last four budgets were surplus or in balance. because of the tax cuts for the

wealthy that the bush administration implemented, wars without any pay-fors, et cetera, the bush administration turned that all around. now we are in a trajectory of going further into deficit rather than in surplus. big swing, $12 trillion in a swing. so that's part of the shambles that president obama inherited when he became president of the united states. when he accepted the nomination in colorado, the administration had kept from the public the idea that in a matter of weeks, the financial community would be in crisis and we would need to make -- pass the tarp legislation, which, by the way, we did in a bipartisan way with president bush, with very little cooperation from the republicans. if you want to talk about

bipartisanship when it mattered and when it hurt, we were there to pull us back from ar financial crisis. the economy was in deep recession and we passed the recovery act, which has been responsible for creating or saving over 2.5 million jobs. i understand that's the latest figure. the point being we must grow the economy to bring revenue in and isn't just about raising taxes to bring revenue in, it's about growing the economy, stabilizing the economy. the president's budget does that around three pillars. it lowers taxes for the middle class, stabilizes the economy geared to reducing the deficit by investing in education and innovation, health care first among equals and energy and climate change, green jobs for the future. all of these to create jobs for the american people, to keep us

competitive internationally and again to bring revenue stream. nothing brings more money to the treasury than investments in education. nothing does. but that's over a little bit of time. so we have near-term and near near-term. so it isn't just a question of raising taxes to reduce the deficit, it's about reducing spending. and we have the commission set up to put everything on the table and look at the upward spiral of the cost of entitlements for one. the president has said and it is true, that health care reform is entitlement reform. we must curb that upward spiral of medical costs -- of health care in our country and that health care bill does just that. there are many ways of coming at it. lowering the cost of health care and that is a big cost to

our budget, growing the economy to increase the revenue stream coming in and tax fairness and simplification may be we can lower taxes even for corporate america if we close the loopholes that are there. the point is, you put everything on the table, starting with where i started, deficit reduction, which is a moral responsibility that we have. that's why we have pay-as-you-go and now it's the law of the land. that's why we have this fiscal commission that will have to report back. that's why we support the president's call for freeze or cuts in discretionary spending as well. the president has said so effectively as he says everything, everybody in america is tightening their belts, we have to do so in washington. >> do you have the votes? >> the plan is to work to bring a budget resolution to the floor.

salt salt nick nick >> the senate is voting now on final passage on a bill on extending unemployment benefits such as cobra as well as unemployment benefits. congressional quarterly reports that all of those programs will be extended to the end of may. that bill the senate is voting on would come to the house. the house is in recess right now waiting for the legislation. members need to vote on it again before it can go to the president. today is tax day and the senate finance committee heard from the internal revenue service officials about issues facing the agency, customer complaints and how provisions of the new health care law will affect the agency. this is a little over an hour.

>> time of year when the days grow longer and i don't know if you listened to npr and heard the poem about daffodils. it is time for this committee to call in the i.r.s. and ask for an update on the recent filing season and it is time to discuss other matters affecting the tax administration. the finance committee holds the i.r.s. to a high standard. it is appropriate to do so. not only because of the committee's responsibility to oversee the i.r.s. but also on behalf of the american people. taxpayers have a right to expect that the government applies the tax laws fairly and correctly. they have a right to expect

that the i.r.s. operates efficiently and right to know that the i.r.s. is protecting personal tax information. we will have the opportunity to consider all these matters with our witnesses today. i am pleased that we have with us today first steve miller, i.r.s. deputy commissioner for services and enforcement and ms. olsen, welcome to you both. we want to know what actions the i.r.s. is taking to encourage and facilitate the use of the many new tax incentives to jump-start the economy and create jobs. the i.r.s. has reported on average 10% increase in refunds this year following the enactment of these incentives. for individuals, these incentives include the make and work tax credit, american education tax credit, new home buyers tax credit, the military

homeowner assistance program and the adoption tax credit, just to name a few. and for businesses, these incentives include extension of bonus depreciation, small business expensing, five-year carry-back of net operating losses, build america bonds, payroll tax exemption and advanced energy investment credit, to name just a few. theps incentives are effective only if taxpayers use them. the i.r.s. plays an important role especially during filing season in helping taxpayers understand the availability of these tax breaks and how to claim them. if the i.r.s. can make these incentives work effectively, the country can grow more rapidly and create more jobs. and more generally, i look forward to learning how the 010 filing season has unfolded and look forward to updates on

electronic filing rates and the modernization era and generate faster refunds, how is it improving its taxpayer services, including level of service on cell phones and those who contact the i.r.s. are able to get through and have their questions answered timely and accurately. i'm interested to hear more about the strategy to pay to prepare for accountability and transparency. paid preparers doing 60% of individual tax returns, the quality of paid preparers has a significant effect on the tax cap. and the committee will take this opportunity to catch up on other matters of tax administration. one is this. i'm interested to receive an update on the tax cap, how are we doing. i would like to know when the

demrrs 345 billion figure will be updated and what specific actions that the i.r.s. is closing the tax gap. of particular interest to me is i.r.s.'s progress on the planning and implementation of several of my tax proposals that have recently been enacted, the credit card information reporting, securities in basis reporting, offshore loophole close shurs. these provisions are estimated to raise over $40 billion in revenues over the next 10 years. each of them will improve voluntary compliance to reduce the tax gap without raising one single tax on anyone, making timely i.r.s. implementation especially critical to their effectiveness. and i want the i.r.s. to address the rumors and rhetoric that have been circulating about the role in administrating health care reform.

we heard the rumors that the i.r.s. will hire 17,000 armed agents, rumors that fly in the face of specific prescriptions in the law against penalties for failure to buy health insurance. what extent is there a need to increase staffing and resources to conduct its role in health care reform as well as what functions any increased staffing will perform. and i would like to extend my sincere condolences of the airplane crash in the i.r.s. building in austin. our thoughts are with the family of the long time i.r.s. employee who was killed in that accident. .

i first issued -- or first raised the issue, i should say, in a letter to secretary gutter and the commissioner.

the response back to me was the treasury would not have estimates until legislation was enacted. the house passed their bill last fall, and the senate passed its bill on christmas eve. the final bill was not signed into law until last month. the provisions did not change month -- much. it is not clear why we did not have estimates on the dollar's the people needed by the irs to implement health reform. meanwhile, irs will need up to $10 billion over the next few years to implement health care reform alone, so it does not take into account any other legislation congress may pass. what is troubling about this anticipated growth of irs is it is -- it is not related to the irs mission, and that is the collection of revenue. what is more, we in this body,

in the landmark legislation of 1998, directed the irs to revise its mission statement to "provide greater emphasis on serving the public and meeting the needs of the taxpayers." health care provisions require the irs to make sure that the individuals have health insurance. employees will have to be experts on those who will be purchasing health insurance. the will also have to verify subsidy eligibility by sharing income information with entities, including the new exchanges. it is likely that irs will not have the necessary information cents subsidy of chill busy -- subsidy of eligibility. these are some of the provisions impacting and

individual's interaction with the irs. there are many more that interact with businesses, which i will not get into at this time. beyond income tax credit, there is a large program administered by the program -- by the irs, this program has one of the highest abuse rates of any tax provisions, while irs has steadily reduced the fraud in its program. knowledge of an outreach to the eligible populations have been huge challenges for the irs. a former irs assistant commissioner said it best, and i would like to quote, "these kinds of programs or for which require social welfare expertise. ages are not trained to do it that well. the record is mixed, and sometimes an abysmal with regard to effectively administering these kinds of programs."

miss olson also indicates that the irs is not keeping up with low income taxpayers. experience with the itc teaches us that a social worker should be a job description at the department of health and human services, not at the agency before us today. the irs already struggles to stay on top of its core mission. the irs should be treating its employees to combat complex tax evasion schemes and to improve customer service instead of administering social programs at which the irs has historically failed. tax payers try to doing the right thing regarding their responsibilities should not have to be put on hold for callback because the irs is answering questions about health insurance. i thank you for hearing this --

for holding this hearing so we can discuss these particular issues. >> thank you, senator. the first witness is mr. miller. mr. miller is the deputy commissioner for services enforcement. the next witness is ms. nina olson, national tax advocate at the irs. i think you know the drill. i urge you to summarize your prepared statements. >> i will be in and out because of the judiciary downhaul what, so i will be back for questions. >> i thank you mr. chairman. i thank you for the opportunity to testify on the efforts to ensure a successful tax filing season and provide you with an overview. the filing season has proceeded

smoothly. telephone asseses service has improved considerably over the same period last year, and the accuracy remains high. with respect to returns, efile is up to 80%, continuing a positive trend. it is good news that the average refund is over $2,900 at this point, up by 9.4%, as compared to last year. the irs has taken other steps this season to help people with financial problems. when of the most recent and significant is new flexibility for offers and compromise. for those taxpayers facing troubles, irs employees can consider current and future income when negotiating an offer. where holding special saturday meeting is to give opportunities for taxpayers to resolve issues.

at an event in march, more than 8000 tax payers for help, and more than a curve -- 80% of the result that they. these defense will continue, and one saturday we will focus on small business issues. the irs has begun its implementation of an act and are working on revised programming 4 antlers will employ years to get the word out. we have put out a revised form for the use of the incentive, and an affidavit for newly hired employees. we are spreading the word to small employers about the new health care tax credit, sending out information on post cards we have under way and initiative to regulate paid tax return preparers, including registration, competency testing, and continuing education. the goal of the strategy is to leverage the committee to include compliance.

the recognition of the critical role that the irs has played in the economy, the budget includes a judicious investment in the core service and enforcement programs. it provides the resources for the irs to implement a strategic and balanced agenda. the investment includes improved services to taxpayers and providing enhanced products and tools. the budget helps us carry out a robust enforcement program, including adding staff to address offshore tax evasion and improving compliance for corporate tax payers. additional resources are given to our global high wealth growth -- group to further expertise on how well individuals and their complex webs of entities. the budget will help us implement the new taxpayer account database for the 2012 filing season.

achieving the milestone will allow the migration of 140 million individual taxpayers to modernize the database that will support faster processing and result in faster refunds for individual taxpayers. in the wake of recent events, i would like it and with the word about the employees and our commitment. this february, an individual who a plane into a building in austin, texas, killing one of our employees. we have no reason to believe this tax -- this attack could have been prevented. we continue to be concerned that the irs and our people not be demonized. the irs is still -- is filled with service reflective of the overall general public. the vast majority of americans experienced an irs does try to help them by answering questions, processing returns, and issuing refunds. this concludes my or a custody

-- might or old testament a. -- - my oral testimony. >> thank you for inviting me today to discuss the filing season. i would like to begin by commending the irs response to one problem identified in 2002 and again this year -- the need to improve oversight of the return preparation industry. since 2002 there has been congressional support for preparer regulation, and in legislation passed by this committee and the full senate. in january 2010, the irs issued a report setting out a blueprint to do the job itself. while the devil is in the detail, when fully implemented i believe this initiative will improve tax administration significantly by helping taxpayers allocate all by preparers, establishing requirements and ethics for paris, and is planning and shutting down unqualified and

unethical preparer spirit with respect to the 2010 filing season, this year i designate the inability of the irs to answer phone calls as the number one most serious problem for taxpayers. they are -- the irs target is to insert only 71% of the calls for taxpayers seeking to reach telephone assistance. among calls the get answered, the irs projects the average wait time will be 12 minutes, up from over four minutes in 2007. i encourage the committee to support sufficient additional funding for the irs toll-free line said the irs can achieve an 85% level of service and a wait time of 5 minutes. much of the impact of the service and program delivery of the last few years is directly after the ball to the passage of special initiatives, including the economic stimulus payment, the first-time homebuyer credit. because of the documentation requirements for the first-time

homebuyer credit, tax payers are unable to efile, so processing of these returns can take up to 11 weeks in the best of circumstances and about five months if audited. at as of the end of february, the irs received 1.8 returns -- 1.8 million returns including this credit. of the correspondence exams close to march of this fiscal year, over 139,000 in all the homebuyer credit. homebuyer credit audits account for almost 21% of irs correspondence exams this fiscal year. this means the irs has had to scale back its audits of other issues to concentrate on preventing improper homebuyer credit claims. my point is not to say that the irs should not be administering

a chisel -- social programs. rather, i believe that social programs placed in the tax code should be designed in such a way and the irs should be funded sufficiently so that we can administer them effectively in addition to doing its core functions. in my written testimony i makes several recommendations for improvement to the existing programs. if congress extends the making work pay credit, i recommend it require the agencies like socialists occurred a report on their statements the amount of credit taxpayers received. had this been in place for this season, the irs would not have rejected over 1.8 million returns as of the end of february, which generated additional work for the irs and confusion and delay for taxpayers needing their refunds. i recommend that congress and the irs explicitly recognize that the irs have a dual mission of collecting federal revenue

and develop delivering benefits to both individuals and businesses. this is a trend that is common in tax administrations around war. this recognition will enable us to identify the resources before but irs core functions and to better designed and administered these programs. hosuch an approach would enable the irs to substantially reduce fraudulent refunds, largely eliminate post filing season document matching exams, and assist taxpayers by making information available through a return or downloading it to existing software programs. this is important for the effective administration of the new tax gap closures enacted by congress.

i recommend that congress required treasury to report back on the steps necessary to make this happen. i note that my report designated the irs filing policies as the second most serious problem for tax. . the more lins do not necessary translate into that more revenue. as discussed, when long-term damage to the taxpayer's bennett liability and that cost of filings are taking into account, automated approach may result in less revenue cases. >> thank you. i would like to begin by asking a question about the degree to which the irs is informing tax payers of recent provisions we passed in the congress, to help

reduce individual's income taxes and also increase refunds, and those include making work pay tax credit, the new home buyer tax credit, increase in small business expensing. if he could tell us the degree to which services making tax paris a way of this incentive and -- tax payers a way of knowing about these incentives. >> we continue to be aggressive in terms of our outreach, calling out to various partners and out into the taxpayer domain and talking about these things. we have a very good relationship with a partners that also, as people are working on their returns, will be informed of this. we have a web-based information

out there, and as i mentioned, we have gone one step further, and we will be issuing post cards to indicate -- i apologize -- the small business health at credit. we will be sending out postcards to those we think are eligible so they can plan accordingly, because that is pertinent right now. >> could you can dress that tax credit and the health -- could you address that tax credit in the health legislation was passed. the ira else will have 17,000 armed agents that will force business compliance? as you know, better than most, small businesses with 50 or fewer employees are under no obligation to buy health insurance for their employees.

in my state, 97% of the businesses are small businesses. they do not have any obligation. at the same time, as you know, there are credits available for small businesses to find insurance for their employees should they choose to do so. could you explain to the degree to which the irs has a armed agents and forcing small business provisions of the health care legislation. >> i will do theat. the way we would approach -- >> you have armed agents going out there? >> we have no armed agents. we had investigators, about 2000 of those, who do criminal

investigations, generally, in total. >> you have no new agents targeted to the small business taxpayer permission? >> no. in point of fact, the bill was signed recently, and until the bill was signed, we were not prepared to dig in and decide and determine how we will be proceeding in terms of the entire health bill, which will include, and this is an example of this, the small employer health credit. it starts with making people aware of what they may be entitled to and what their responsibilities are, such as the postcard, such as the web, and moving to make sure people have the ability to reach into us and get the information they need, whether it is call systems

and the web or filing systems. >> are you trying to make taxpayers aware of other provisions i named? >> we're working to get the work out by various news releases, and we have worked on making work pay at home buyers, it is hard to get the word out. >> are there ways of getting taxpayers to getake advantage of these provisions? >> i do not have in hand in the way to say that x percentage could have taken it or ex-why did. we had -- nina has raised a first-time home buyer, in 2009, 1.7 million turks the credit. this year, another 100,000.

we have those kinds of numbers we can make available to the committee. >> thank you for holding this hearing. i was struck this morning, many of america's restaurants and retail establishments are letting people eat for free today. you can get free coffee at starbucks and get free tax pibites at cinnabons. my favorite was morton's was giving discounts to the cpa's, and it dawned on me that these people are the one population that regularly get that tax cuts that they can afford it. >> one of the services is the lay of the day on which

brokerage firms need to file their 1099. that has put a huge burden on preparers get their returns done by the 15th. i am sorry. >> that was a fair point. let me ask about one idea that i was interested. the irs already get a substantial amount of information on an individual's wages and interest and investment income, the value of the mortgage deduction. one idea that has become popular that i am interested in is the idea of letting the taxpayer on a voluntary basis, in other words, this is the taxpayer's joyce, if the taxpayer chose to do so, the taxpayer could ask the internal revenue service to take the information they already have

and in effect send them what amounts to their judgment about what is owed, and that taxpayer could then vet it and modify it and file it and do these various things that ensure that it actually reflects what they believe is owed. it seemed to me like an attractive option and something that could substantially short circuit the more than 6 billion hours that people go in to preparing these returns, $180 billion is spent preparing these returns. my question to start with is, if the irs had enough time for a transition, because they obviously cannot do this overnight, and the chairman is right about the hassles already. if you have enough time to make a transition, what do you think about the idea of letting the taxpayer voluntarily request

something like this? >> this is something that we recovered -- we covered in this year plus annual report, where we look at how you could get that information available, because we think it would minimize errors. certainly it would be a burden reduction for the taxpayer, and it is also key that the irs had this information before returns are filed, as we have more and more programs that are relying on information recording, -- reporting, such as the credit card reporting, the health care provisions. the problem is that the irs right now does not start getting the data until sometime in mid february, and we do not start pulling -- and we do not get started pulling it together until may. we have pushed the filing dates back for the payors until the end of march.

we recommended that congress require treasury to study what it would take to get the information as quickly, a usable form, to run against returns, but also make available to taxpayers as they want it, and report back in a year, and some of our suggestions have then you push forward the date in which payors have to get us the intermission, you figure out whether we could get the debt-to information, doesn't need to this user security force, or can we clean it up as easily as social security does, and then you might want to think about taxpayers there w-2's on january 31, could you push that date up to january 15, and could you get us that information at the same time? we could have that data available to taxpayers. >> it looks to me like there are

a fair number of abuses with these refund anticipation loans. these are the ones were the person gets the short term cash advance from the preparer. how serious the problem you think this is, and if so, what are you doing about it? >> i think it is a very serious problem. we have been in discussions with various treasury and banking regulator officials about what they can do. our recommendation has been that you do not give it that indicator on the refund anticipation loan until you have run the entire return to all the fraud checks and eligibility rules, and that in itself will show up the costs will slow up the process and increase the risk for the lender so that they will home look elsewhere to get their money. that is my approach. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

>> thank you very much, mr. baucus, for having this hearing. this is obviously the right thing to be talking about filing of tax returns, and problems that need to be addressed here. today we are also going to introduce the taxpayer bill of rights, which is legislation that various others are going to co-sponsor. this contains provisions to improve services and put in law some of the protections that we think are important. it supports representation clinics, tax preparation programs, such as one we had a new mexico that has been extremely successful called tax help mexico. it enhances oversight of paid tax return preparers, which ms.

olsen just responded to a question about. enhanced low income tax care access to financial institutions. i hope very much we can consider the legislation this year. it is difficult to get anything considered this year, but this ought to be good government legislation that could be acted upon. much of the bill, many provisions of the bill were passed out of this committee in the 108th congress, but were not acted upon by the full senate. i hope very much that we can act on them this year. let me ask ms. olsen, one of the issues that you and i spoke about when you were kind enough to come by my office a few weeks ago was this whole issue of liens and the concern you expressed about the irs liens

filing policy causing harm to taxpayers without increasing irs revenue collections in the process. i guess i would just ask if you can briefly describe the concern you have got there and the solution using we should consider. >> what we identified was that irs over the last few years has been instituting policies where liens are filed automatically without looking at specific circumstances. we look further into what is the effect of that lien filing on the taxpayer, and it caused the credit score to pot one of the points in the lead, and even when the taxpayer paid off the linen, it sat on the report for

years and years. it had a huge effect on their ability to pay future taxes. we did a study that showed from the payments that we could track, very few payments and very few dollars actually came from liens and the payment actually came from collection activity that did not need a lien. we felt that it was doing harm to taxpayers rather than being helpful. >> i think that is a good suggestion. if we could act on that, it would be good. that me ask also on this issue of return preparer standards. i know that the irs is beginning

to move on that issue and trying to put in place initiatives to require certain competence by preparers and certification by preparers. mr. miller, could you explain that. perhaps you did in your comments before when i was not here, but if he could explain the status of that, that would be helpful. >> we did a six-month study on this issue. we came out with some propose recommendations, basically, that would require preparers to get a preparer identifier so we would know and be able to track through the system what a particular preparer was doing in terms of returns. we were going to require testing for those other than attorneys and cpa's and those

enrolled in other testing. we would require a continuing education would occur for other individuals who do not have a requirement. we hope to get a registration in place for the 2010 filing season, and that is our effort at this point. over the next three years we will be testing people in and we will be fully up and running. >> you are going to exempt attorneys from the testing requirement? what is the underlying assumption that justifies doing that? >> the assumption around cpa's and attorneys is that they are otherwise bound by some other standards and testing procedures. there are also limited legal impacts that limit us in that regard. >> as one attorney who went along school a long time ago, i do not know that it said the lawyers from the testing requirements is a wise course. i will defer. thank you, mr. chairman.

>> senator grassley. >> ms. old sosoon, in your 2009 annual report, you report that he issued 16 taxpayer assistance orders. the examples listed in your report seemed to indicate that they are good examples of the irs's aggressive uses of levees. i understand you have issued 341 taxpayers including one to the commissioner to request that a lien be withdrawn. the taxpayer lost the job because the lien affected their background report. >> the taxpayer has given me permission discuss the facts of this case, so the normal

confidentiality provisions do not apply. this taxpayer had lost his job. he had actually had his first employment reduced because he was in a particular industry that did the diligence and found a lien. this taxpayer was working with the irs to pay in full, and while he was talking to the irs over a period of three months and had about seven or eight phone calls telling he was rhee financing his phone, his partner was barring bunning from his partners, it was money the irs could not get its hands on. the irs was informed because the dollar amount was over a certain threshold, and they were going to file a lien anyway. it would of made me angry. ultimately, the taxpayer paid the face amount of the

lien. the taxpayer refused to withdraw the lien, and the taxpayers lost their job. this led to the three assistance orders in the case. ultimately, we should the irs that there reading of the law was incorrect. we believed that they could only with all them if the irs meter mistake. we should and that congress had passed in 1996 a different provision, and that it made economic sense said that they could pay their debt. >> so the bottom line of it is, if you're working and paying your debt, you're paying your taxes, too, and continue to be productive. >> yes. >> the testimony about the use of liens adds to what i know about it from conversations i

had with commissioner last fall. we discussed the decision to file liens subject to the taxpayer penalty, even though the irs agreed to not pursue collective action against such tax payers until the congress had a chance to change law. i am disappointed with the lack of judgment exercised by irs employees and appeals officers in certain of these cases. in some cases, it was a regulation that prohibited the irs from abating the penalty. in another case, the irs did not consider the impact to the taxpayer's credit line, which was critical to the operation of the business. mr. miller, everyone including the president and then treasury secretary believe that small businesses are economic engines of our recovery.

the health reform bill imposes new business -- new burdens on these businesses. while i appreciate the statements regarding the kind of policy of restraint for individual mandate, i would like to understand what the irs will be doing to help businesses comply with a multitude of new regulations, specifically, will the irs give up an outreach plan and develop a similar plan of restraint for the employer mandate when appropriate? if you think i'm too much concerned about small business, before you answer that question, and that will be my last question, i will give the background that when we set up a commission prior to 1998, and i think it was a couple years before that we reported 1998 hophea-- that is where i am comg

from. >> with respect to whether we will have an outreach plan for small businesses, other important components of the economy, yes, we will do that, and we are working on that as we speak. as we approach the health care, we will do what we do as with any other piece of legislation, approaching it with a holistic basis, communicating with what people are entitled to under the bill and what their responsibilities are, making available folks to answer questions, putting in place systems that will allow the processing of returns, and we will have an enforcement component as well. on the second piece as to whether we will utilize a similar restraint with respect to small business, i do not have

an answer to that. i do know that when you talk about the individual mandate, congress acted there to limit the number of tools in our toolbox. they did not act with respect to small businesses, but it is my assumption we work together to get to a place where we are comfortable. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. let me ask you, mr. miller, i think this is also true in the state of montana, there is no permanent appeals officer in the state of montana. i think it is also true in iowa. there are 18 states without one- tenth are states -- there are 18 states without one. why can we have a permanent appeals officer in montana it

seems to me -- in montana? it seems to me, if somebody wants to appeal and a half to drive to salt lake city or denver, that is a long drive. >> i would agree. it is a long drive. i do not know why the appeals officers are where they are. i can say two things. one, it is about resources. secondly, we are looking to try to get to the point where not all appeals work is done face- to-face. as to whether it makes sense that somebody in montana, to have somebody in iowa, i do not have an answer to that today. i can come back to you on that. >> one of the things that struck tome of the years, some departments have a lot of people out in the field, and they did better and there is better

repoapport. this is compared to departments that do not have a lot of people out in the field. in my state, there is a lot of usda personnel. there is very few department of housing people in the state of montana. in the opinion of montana citizens, their opinion of the usda is quite high. we do have a lot of issues in those departments. i am just throwing an idea out, given the marvels of technology, i think it makes more sense to put people out in these states so that they can conduct face-to-face interviews, but also taken to appeals by correspondence. at least there are people there

in the state. it is that appeals officer and his or her people the sense of that state, too, and it gives them access to people in the state, in montana, or example. i think it is good that people out of washington, d.c. i feel that very strongly. get them out in the country so they can better understand what is going on. >> we do have appeals officers that are outside of washington, dc . >> i am sure, that you do. >> i will come back to you with a more detailed answer. i am not sure what the thought process is, but again, we have a limited amount of resources. >> you do not get my point.

you can get those resources and put them in different places. >> and we circuit right. -- ride. >> it is pretty frustrating for a lot of people. it is a failure of the executive branch, treasury, an irs, to address -- the tax gap. last time it was addressed was 2001. back then there were $300 billion. it is unconscionable, if the irs does not more aggressively address the tax code. it puts a burden on the rest of the tax payers who are paying their taxes. what is the plan?

i hear this point consulate, and i am getting nowhere. it is a stone wall. it sounds like you are protecting all these folks who are not paying their taxes. >> i do not think we are trying to do that. >> it appears that you are not so much about it. >> my understanding of when we will update the chart that we have is at the end of 2011. that is the current target. multifaceted, and we have talked about some of the things this morning. what we are doing currently and what we will be doing, and what i will ask you to do to help us with. >> we cannot help if we do not have a plan. >> we have talked about offshore compliance, which is work that we are doing. and we have in fact increase the

number of examinations. we have increased our nonfiler work. with respect to where we're headed, congress and you particularly helped us in terms of the streams of information we will be receiving, and we will be doing that matching, and that will target the under reported portion of the program. these are things that are going to help in the next few years. when i would ask finally, the 2011 budget support, which provides staffing for some of those, which provides a couple of ideas as to how we can move forward, including an employer independent contractor provision that will help us get this classified employees, another keep employment -- a component of the tax gap. >> i asked secretary paulson,

when he was secretary, to set a goal for voluntary compliance rates of 90% by the year 2017. this is compared with a rate that is 84% in 2007. that is a six percentage points increase in compliance over 10 years. that was the bowl. i asked treasury and irs to develop the plan. tax day, it could not be more appropriate. the next tax day, when we began, next year, i would like to know the degree to which you have progressed. by what percentage, what is the percentage of progress that you -- i want numbers. i do not want just goals. i want numbers.

i want data, metrics, benchmarks. i am fed up with treasury and the irs to fail to deal with this problem. fed up. there's one way to change that, and that is to produce. we want to help, we will help, but i do not get any sense that the irs is significantly addressing this in any way. they are just brushing it off. that is how it appears. >> i share your view with respect to the tax gap and look forward to getting that information as well. i think it is absolutely pivotal. a couple of points, one, ms. olson, it is an ally -- if you said the fight the tax system, it will be easier to get taxes, yes? >> yes.

>> the overwhelming majority of people are honest, they work hard, and play by the rules. no question about that. it seems to me that the taxpayers that i am talking about, the majority who are honest, often make inadvertent errors, they end up over paying their taxes, they underpay their taxes because the system is so complicated, it is not possible to get an accurate assessment of what is owed. how prevalent is that? i am struck, when i listen to folks at home in oregon, that this is a very, very substantial problem, and could you put some numbers around it? how many people honestly trying to comply with taxes, they get snared in this bureaucratic water torture and either overpaid or underpaid? >> the only numbers i have seen are from the 2001 national

research program audits of individuals, where we asked auditors to identify whether an error was he essentially intentional or in radford. the auditors on the classified 3% of the returns that the audit, and this is a random sample, as intentional. the caveat here, the irs says that we did not get good guidance from the auditors, but that is the only number i have seen. >> i recognize with your caveat, that these are not scientific in every particular in which you have told us, but what you have told us is that the bast, vast overwhelming majority of instances involve people who are anxious to comply with a rule, want to be honest, and just get

ensnared in this net of bureaucratic torture, and that is he essentially what i think has to change. my view is, and i think you would recommend, that we should have a one-page 1040. they should be 20 or 30 lines, and what is striking is this has been recommended over the years by democrats, republicans, all board kur. absent legislation, we will not get this. do you agree? >> i think that is correct. there have been versions that the irs has worked on, because we have run out of room on the 1040 to add anything new, and so we have had a draft version where we have got a schedule where we move all sorts of provisions off the 1040. that makes it simpler to look at, but does not get rid of those additional provisions.

>> that is another area that i would like to work with you on, mr. chairman, and i cannot figure out after republicans and democrats for years have been calling for a one-page 1044 that we cannot get one. i am anxious to work with you in that one as well. one last question, ms. olson, another great frustration is, that they get different answers from the irs on a particular problem. you hear this from preparers, businesses, from individuals. you hear about differences between irs regional offices where you call what the regional officer and tell you one thing, you call another and you get another. this destroys the prospect of certainty and predictability. the same is true for individuals and preparers. they feel very frustrated as well. how serious is this problem of

getting consistent answers from the irs and what ought to be done with it? >> this is the result of the complexity of all, and the response when there actressy went them several years ago was limit the questions that they would answer. have gone a very high accuracy rate in the 1990's -- in a 9the0 %'s on their onw. the problem is that the law is very complex and difficult for employees to enter a particular taxpayer's question accurately, consistently. >> they are trying to solve the problem by pretending it does not exist. >> yes. >> thank you very much, senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and

i want to delve into this and little more, too. this is a question for mr. miller. is the i r s -- an appeals officer is regularly available within each state. yet wyoming and eight other states did not have such personnel located within their borders. the appeals process is the last step the taxpayers get to argue the merits of their returns becausfore collection processes begin. it is critical that role taxpayers have unfettered access to the appeals officers. one understands their area spirit wyoming is a state of high altitudes and low malteds. -- multitudes.

the act also permits the irs the use of videoconferencing. i do not think that the founders guaranteed our rights to prices on the constitution. they did not mean that they should be able to phone it in. in some circumstances, that could be handy, but video conferencing does not give you all of the body language and capabilities that being there in person doesn't understand all the budgets are strained, and i am not asking you to hire new staff. it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that the irs we deploy existing resources to provide at least one full-time employees and agent in every state. -- won thone full-time appeals r and agent in every state.

would you agree to that? they can always drive into the other states or phone into the more populous states, but we would like for them to be in there. i would hope that you would agree to get this assessment to the committee in a timely fashion. i am sure my colleagues from arkansas and other states would be interested in this, since they are the ones that back the appeals officers. >> understood. we will be glad to take a look at that, senator. >> send a letter back to this committee. >> this is of critical importance almost a majority of this committee. we would like answers on that. i have had comments from our tax payer advocates in the state about what a difference that would make. it seems just as reasonable that

people come from wyoming to other citistates to videoconfere into wyoming. i thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, very much. now we will hear from the great senator from kansas. >> do not encourage him. >> i think that adjective is apropos. i apologize for being late. thank you for holding the hearing. thank you to the ranking member as well. it is a very busy time to come up and try to answer our questions. as you know, most of the questions have been about the mandate that individuals purchase health insurance and basically the bill imposes a penalty that be collected by you

folks for those who failed to obtain insurance. i think our role is going to be straightforward. it is going to be administering the tax provisions. i think that was a statement made by one of your folks. i'd like to know, how will people proved to the irs that they have health insurance? how will proof of insurance be reported to the irs? i have read several ports in the press, there have been a lot of confusion about this. is this going to be some form of a 1099? >> that is basically correct. the bill -- and we are in the beginning stages of working out the systems and all that, and we can get into that -- the bill itself indicates that insurance companies will be sending 1099's. our thought is that is how we

will match a yes/no answer as to whether you have eligibility and have taken up a plan that meets the requirements under law. poughkeepsiwe are basically goio receive a 1099 that will say yes or no. we will do that by correspondence. >> how will you cross check the information submitted by the taxpayer as with the information supported by the provider? in massachusetts, the call at the 1099-hc form? >> i do not know.

>> it would probably be six and 20 at least. what will happen if an individual has not purchased insurance, required to pay a penalty, initially as little as 95 bucs, but increasing up to 695 for the first year? >> congress has been very clear in terms of tools that we can use and tools that we cannot. we cannot use liens. we will be notified folks, letting them know that we have these questions. . .

they divided it up and keep coming to my office and the offices of the gentleman, asking these questions. if an individual does not have a tax liability, does not need to file a return, but does paypal take, how yo[unintelligible] >> if there is no filing requirement, i will have to come back as to what the health bill

requires in that situation, senator. >> i am down to 14 seconds. the health care reform bill provides a credit to help them manage the cost of providing mandated health insurance to their employees. there is a cliff where the credit expires. how will you provide health insurance -- what will be the cost of compliance for small business? that is a key question. can you comment just generally if you do not have a specific answer on the cost of compliance? >> i do not think i have any numbers in that regard from the irs. >> what do you think he might have? >> i am not sure the irs will be doing the analysis. >> who would? >> i would assume truss if w--

>> if we ask cbo. >> we have to make sure people know that it exists. >> what will be the cost to made the individual requirements? [unintelligible] it gets back to that individual and that individuals caused an --individual's costs. if you would like to comment on that. >> your time is more than expired. >> if there is no mandate for smaller businesses with 50 or fewer employees. >> i have one question. this is where mr. miller. in regard to the commissioner's comments, the national press club on april 5, in that speech

he indicated the individual mandate would be enforced through matching programs of some sort, based on insurance companies providing at 1099-like document to an individual who would attach it to the return. in a recent interview, he stated that the ira's would not be auditing individuals to -- irs would not be auditing individuals. this was reiterated in an op- ed. what incentives to individuals have to purchase insurance if they knew that the irs will not collect the penalty? >> we will be looking. we will have that matching program and we will be corresponding with people. whether that triggers an examination will depend on a given case. what my boss was saying, that is not the kind of case we send out an agent to pursue. it is the kind of case which

correspond with the taxpayer. congress is limited -- limiting tools we can use. we can talk to the taxpayer and we have a refund of said mechanism in order to enforce that provision. that is in our toolbox. >> let me give you this thing. some idea of if something could happen. if you have matching, which is one of the ways of checking, if an individual does not purchase health insurance, you would not be receiving anything from the insurance company and has no filing requirement, what with the irs be matched against? >> that is senator roberts' question as well. i am not sure of the income levels and when the requirement triggers. i have to get back to the committee on that. >> thank you. >> i would like to ask questions

about offshore and. >> the numbers are thrown all- around a lot. we do not have an estimate on that. but we do not know is the answer there. >> is there a way to find out? >> ultimately, yes. we obviously have done some i believe some good things in the last 12 months in this area. congress has as well. as you are very much aware and supported us on, the facta bill will give us a better sense of what is out there and as people come in or become subject to the 30% withholding alternative. that will give us a much better feel for what is out there. >> that is a provision we put in.

>> yes, sir. >> how much do you think you will -- the bill will clamp down on that loophole? >> i think i started with the statement, we do not know what we do not know. it will give us more information to know more. the uncertain part should be reduced considerably. with the next couple years. >> what questions should i ask you next year when we have this hearing? >> i think by this time next year, i think we will have a much better sense of our next target in the offshore area. i think it would be fair for this committee to be looking for a much more robust discussion on where we are on health care. and much farther along on credit card recording -- reporting.

the information tools you provided us, we should be prepared to discuss that in much more detail. >> when there is a long time. some of that could be addressed earlier. that you think? >> certainly. we're not waiting for the hearing to move. some of the information reporting requirements are not yet triggered. it will not be in effect yet. an offshore -- i am not sure we will have made significant progress. -- in off shore, we will have made significant progress. >> help us figure out a way to get that information. even now than you just said. -- more than you just now said. maybe a meeting in six months. >> i would be willing to do

that. >> that is enough to make a progress report that is meaningful? >> on offshore? we will be much further along in terms of the outcome in our voluntary disclosure program and follow-up investigations as we pursue other leads through the voluntary disclosure information and other information. >> when will you know how much is lost offshore? >> that probably has to wait until reporting comes in and that is not for a couple years of. >> what does that take so long? >> we do not know what we do not know. we do not know who was holding assets offshore. >> what does it take two years to figure that out? >> there is no reporting or they're not reporting accurately. leverage points are being created which will come into play in a couple years. >> what is facta?

>> requiring a new intermediary recorprogram with respect to bak accounts a might hold off shore and also, a new withholding a regime whereby we will -- >> it is 30% withholding requirement. >> leaving this to go to the house. the house has been in recess. the unemployment benefits will be extended till june 5 and would provide back pay on federally funded highway projects. the house must approve the bill before it can be sent to the president. live coverage of the house on c- span. consent that it be in order at any time to take from the speak ar's table h.r. 4851 with the senate amendment there to and to

consider in the house without intervention of any point of order or question of consideration a single motion offered by the chair of the committee on ways and means or his designee, that the house concur in the senate amendment. that the senate amendment be considered as read, that the motion be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on ways and means. and that the previous question be considered as ordered on the motion to final adoption without intervening motion. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. levin: mr. speaker, purr superintendent to the order of the house today -- pursuant to the order of the house today, i call up h.r. 4851 with the senate amendment there to and offer a motion. the speaker pro tempore: the

clerk will report the title of the bill, designate the senate amendment and report the motion. the clerk: h.r. 4851, an act to provide a temporary extension of certain programs and for other purposes. senate amendment, mr. levin moves that the house concur in the senate amendment. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house today, the motion shall be debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled by the ranking and minority member of the ways and means. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, and the gentleman from texas, mr. brady, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that members have five legislative days to revise and extends their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: mr. speaker, i now yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. levin: mr. speaker, actually this issue can be stated very

succinctly, very briefly. and i think very compellingly. we now have 6 1/2 million unemployed workers who have been looking for a new job for over six months. that's twice the number of long-term unemployed compared to any other time on record before this recession. i repeat, twice the number of long-term unemployed compared to any other time on record before this recession. furthermore, under both democrats and republicans we have routinely considered extended unemployment benefits emergency spending and we passed extensions before in this house by voice vote. and yet in the other body republicans blocked assistance to these jobless workers and to

their families. they claim their opposition was rooted in concern about the deficit. well, just briefly saying what that's all about, in the past those who now raise this issue have presided over increases in the deficit, paying for tax cuts, paying for the iraq war, paying for other programs without passing them -- passing them without paying for them at all. so in a word, we should now rise together and pass this bill. the unemployed people of this country are waiting. those looking for work when there are no jobs available are waiting for action by this house.

at long last the senate has acted. and i'm hopeful that we will be able to reach beyond partisan divide, beyond partisan rhetoric and pass this bill with a strong, strong bipartisan vote. the unemployed people of this country deserve it, they're looking to this house and those who talk about balancing budgets , who have not balanced them in the past, should not be now trying to do so on the backs of hundreds of thousands of unemployed in our beloved country. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. brady: mr. speaker, i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. brady: thank you, mr. speaker. i support american workers and families and that's why i must oppose the legislation before us that would heap another $18

billion onto the dangerous deficits this congress has already amassed. on this, tax day, an overburdened nation, staggering under dangerous deficit we need to send this bill back to the drawing board. in return -- and return with legislation that's paid for, that will not create more debt that will create jobs instead of economic uncertainty and ultimately more job lossdz. the legislation before us would extend for another two months special federal spending programs that today allow unemployed workers to collect up to 99 weeks of benefits in most states. that's nearly two years of unemployment checks, which are by far an all-time u.s. record that compares with 26 weeks of unemployment benefits payable in almost all states during normal times. we all want to help unemployed

workers. who are frustrated by the white house, who have taken their eye off the economic ball. they're frustrated by this congress that's sought an extreme agenda, rather than focusing on jobs. but it is impossible to ignore the fact that those extra 73 weeks of federal benefits paid today a full 17 months, courtesy of federal taxpayers, come at an enormous price. in all this bill would add $18 billion, that's -- more than the nasa budget. add that to this year's trillion-dollar deficit, including $15 trillion more for the unemployment benefits it would extend. that's on top of the approximately $100 billion spent so far on these programs and extended for the remainder of this year as we expect, another $50 billion more would be added to the national debt.

none of this has or will be paid for. in fact, a federal unemployment account has long since been bankrupted. yet we continue to spend. now we are being bailed out with general revenue. who will bail out general revenues when they run out? taxpayers. more taxes and more general revenues the government extracts from them. so far in the past year and one month, two months, since the president has been in office, taxpayers are paying $2,100 more per individual because of the $670 billion in new tax increases. if president obama's budget is approved by the democratic congress, we will heap almost $3 trillion more on american taxpayers. and what's said, again, is that we continue to heap debt without any opportunity, without any promise that is kept to pay for them. when our democrat friends took office they promised they would pay for the wars, pay for the

iraq and afghanistan war, but not a dime yet. they promised to balance the budget. today we see trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. they enacted pay-go and said we're going to pay for all new spending. but as this bill shows, they've done nothing of that. in fact, they've invented extravagant loopholes, desclaring anything an emergency as an excuse to continue spending. of course they promised to curb earmarks, in fact, eliminate eeringmarks nearly paid for this bill, yet they've not kept that promise either. mr. speaker, we can do better than this. what unemployed workers really want are jobs and paychecks, not almost two years of unemployment checks and more massive debt for the country. unfortunately, jobs are something democrats in this congress have been incapable of delivering. instead of creating 3.7 million jobs as promised, their stimulus bill was followed by

three million more job losses. instead of holding unemployment under 8% as promised, it soared to nearly 10% and remains close to that today. 16 million americans are unemployed, including record numbers for over a year. in fact, the white house promised if you pass the stimulus, 90% of the new jobs we create will be in the private sectors. the opposite is true. the private sector has lost 3.7 million jobs, but government jobs have been created almost 300,000. the people getting these unemployment benefits are the ones whose promises have not been kept by this white house and this democrat congress. we need to start over and actually start paying for new spending, starting with this bill. the only way to do that is to defeat this bill and bring it back in a paid for fashion. beyond that, mr. speaker, we need to do the things that help create jobs for unemployed workers. we can start by stopping frightening the job creators.

businesses who are delaying important rehiring decisions and investment decisions, frightened by all the new taxes proposed in congress, the new health care mandate the rising energy tax the talk of new regulations. we have to stop frightening consumers who know ultimately they'll be relied upon to pay this terrible debt. we need to reward innovation and small business job creation through lower taxes and support for innovation and we need to pursue free trade agreements that find new customers for american workers in american companies. that is why, mr. speaker, we must send this bill back. make it paid for. stop punishing american workers and families. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield myself 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. levin: once again, the party of no has spoken. every jobs bill before us, they

have voted no. when the president came to power, we were losing 779,000 jobs a month. the last month we gained 162,000 jobs. the people of this country deserve more than a no, another no from the party of no. i now yield three minutes to the distinguished gentleman from washington, the state of washington who is chairman of the subcommittee, mr. mcdermott. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, my good friend from texas, i couldn't have asked for a better setup man, or a straight man, because i dare say there are many members at one time or another with something to say hypocritical either on the floor or on the campaign trail. but i don't ever recall the blatant hypocrisy behind the cornerstone of an argument to deny benefits to hundreds of

thousands of people who lost their jobs through no fault of their own. that is, until the recent debate about extending unemployment benefits. the senate republicans, and now my house republican colleagues, have cut off unemployment benefits for hundreds of thousands of jobless americans for the last two weeks because they say they're upset about the budget deficit. isn't that something? they claim we can't afford to help the unemployed unless the cost of these benefits is justify set. even though congress has routinely considered such benefits to be emergency spending which doesn't require offsets. i don't remember, maybe my mind is failing, i don't know, but i don't remember these concerns coming up from our republican colleagues when there was discussion about the $1 trillion cost of the wars in afghanistan and iraq, not a

penny of which was offset. president bush never asked for any sacrifice from the american people he said we can go out and fight a war and it'll be paid for, sometime when i'm not here. i also don't recall any republicans expressing concern about the new nearly $2 billion spent on two successive tax cuts that went mainly to the wealthy. that's why you'll have to forgive me if i seem frustrated that republicans have miraculously discovered fiscal responsibility. they must have turned over a rock somewhere. when they're talking about unemployment benefit they suddenly worry about paying for it. a measly $18 billion. the president put us $3 trillion in debt, president bush did, and now they're worried about $18 billion. they were happy to help their

president turn the biggest surplus in our nation's history into the biggest deficit in our nation's history, but now, when it comes to helping unemployed workers and their family the senate republicans say, we just can't afford to do it. so they delayed and obstructed the bill for weeks until the senate finally cleared the republican filibuster earlier this evening. we're here tonight to pass this -- that bill to provide an ex-thrention through may for a number of programs that are expiring at the end of the month, including federal unemployment insurance. we're going to take another vote in june, about june 1, we'll be back at the same spot, talking about the same, i ask for an additional minute. mr. levin: i yield the gentleman an additional minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional one minute. mr. mcdermott: we'll be back here june 1, going through the same charade, we'll hear about the budget deficit but the people unemployed who are

unable to buy food, they aren't listening. this will be retroactive, so the workers cut off in the last two weeks will be compensated. that's the least we can do for those who lost a job through no fault of their own. six weeks from now, we'll be back to continue this again, we'll push for a longer extension of federal unemployment benefits to ensure that jobless americans are not continually held hostage every month to the republicans and their hypocrisy. i was recently reading an article about a man who was laid off. he had an m.b.a. he played by the rules, made a good living, but it was taking him many months to find work he said, for someone that's unemployed right now, you need to turn off the news. it will affect the positive attitude you need to have. you've got to be positive because it's not easy. mr. levin: i yield an

additional minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional minute. mr. mcdermott: americans can't stomach this republican hypocrisy anymore and i sincerely hope when the unemployed people vote in this election they remember the attitude of republicans to them when they were in need because maybe then the republicans will get the message. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington yields back, the gentleman from michigan reserves, the gentleman from texas. mr. brady: yielding myself 30 seconds, i would remind people that the congress handed president obama a $3 trillion deficit, larger than when the republicans were in charge in the congress and unfortunately only 6% of americans feel the stimulus has helped create jobs in america. what a terrible waste. with that, i yield three minutes to the distinguished gentleman from kansas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes.

mr. moran: today is april 15, tax day. across the country, citizens concerned with the direction of our nation are rallying together to send washington, d.c. a message. though i was unable to join people at these rallies, it is my duty to be here in the house of representatives today to share their message and to speak and vote against this bill. first this bill is shortsighted because it increases the deficit by $18 billion a cost to be paid for by future generations. this congress has spent and borrowed its way into record deficits. second, the so-called doc fix in this bill is an example of congress avoiding real solutions necessary to improve health care for americans. the short-term doc fix is hardly a fix when kansas hospitals and doctors have to endure this wait and see game every few months while still working to care for folks and keep their doors open. we need a permanent solution to this ongoing problem so that doctors can regain a sense of

stability and predictability in their practices. thirdly, despite its intention this bill does little to address our country's persistent high unemployment rate. rather than continuing to spend money we do not have, congress needs to pursue a strategy of job creation. this legislation is yet another unfortunate example of business as usual in our nation's capital. same old story from a congress that needs to learn its lessons from the american people. a story told one more time on this tax day, april 15. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kansas yield back the balance of miz time. the gentleman from texas reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. brady: i yield myself such time as i may consume for closing remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. brady: if the democrat stimulus plan had worked as promised, we wouldn't be here tonight.

if we'd really traded 3.7 new jobs as president obama promised, as this democrat congress promised, these programs would have phased out already. instead we witness another three million americans sitting home tonight without a job. if the unemployment rate for 7.4% and falling as democrats promised, these programs would be phased out, we would be celebrating job creations. instead, unemployment is near 10% and will remain at that level for more than a year. consider when the other side says we have to extend unemployment benefits to reduce unemployment. we have to extend unemployment to reduce unemployment. consider that when the other side claims that vice president biden once said we have to spend money from keeping from going bankrupt. we have to raise health care costs to reduce health care costs. oh, we've done this stimulus and spent and spent and spent and added $1 trillion to this

dangerous american debt. meanwhile we're six million jobs short of where democrats promised we would be. it hasn't worked. it's time to stop the madness. it's time to stop the spending. defeat this bill and bring back legislation that will actually create jobs, not add to our nation's horrible debt. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i close quoting a woman who spoke to my office today from east point, michigan. she was laid off from a large accounting firm and she says, i quote, i was there for 2 1/2 years. the firm let me go because they had some clients who closed shop because of the economy, the way it is. it was nothing i did. i received a raise every year i

was there. i've been unemployed ever since. that was the end of may of last year, 2009. without unemployment we'd be in a lot of trouble, end of quote. mr. speaker, holding unemployed americans, hundreds of thousands of them, like this woman, hostage to score what some think may be political points i think is reprehensible. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan yields back the balance of his time. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to the order of the house for today, the previous question is ordered. the question is on the motion by the gentleman from michigan, will levin. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. -- mr. levin. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it.

the motion is agreed to and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mr. levin: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote.