the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 181. the nays are 242. the motion is not adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. lucas, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3336 as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3336, a bill to ensure the exclusion of small from certain regulations of the dodd-frank act. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 312, the nays are 111, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: the unfinished business is vote on the motion of the the gentleman from utah, mr. bishop, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1038 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1038, a bill to authorize the conveyance of two small parcells of land within the boundaries of the coconino national forest containing private improvements that were developed based upon the reliance of the land owners in an aerroneous survey conducted in may of 1960. the speaker pro tempore: will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of

representatives.]

the yeas are 421 and the nays are 1. the bill is passed and without objection, the the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? mr. langevin: i ask unanimous consent to withdraw my name as a co-sponsor to h.r. 3674. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair appoints the following conferees on h.r. 4348. for the committee on transportation and infrastructure -- the clerk: from the committee on transportation and infrastructure for consideration of the house bill except section 141 and the senate amendment except sections 1801, 40102, 40201,

40202, 40204, 40205, 40305, 40307, 40309-40312, 112-100014 and 11016 and modifications committed to the conference. messrs. mica, young of alaska, duncan of tennessee, shuster, mrs. capito, ms. herrera butler, messrs. ribble, bucshon, rahall, defazio, costello, ms. norton, ms. brown of florida, messrs. cummings, boswell and bishop of new york. from the committee on energy and commerce for consideration of section 142 and title 2 and 5 of the house bill and sections 11131201, 1201,

subtitle b, c, d and section 32701 through 32705, 32710, 32713, 40101 and 40301 of the senate amendment and modifications committed to the conference, messrs. upton, whitfield and waxman. from the committee on natural resources for consideration of sections 122, 142, 204 and titles 3 and 6 of the house bill and section 1116, subtitle c, f and g of title 1 of division a, section 33009, title 6 and 7 of division c, section 40101, subtitles a and b of title 1 of division f and section 100301 of senate amendment, modifications committed to the conference, ms.ers hastings of washington, bishop of utah and markey.

from the committee on science, space and technology for consideration of sections 121, 123, 136 and 137 of the house bill and section 1534, subtitle f, title 1 of division a, sections 20013, 20014, 20029, 31010, 31103, 31111, 31204, 31504, 32705. 33009, 34008 and division e of the senate amendment, a modification committed to conference, messrs. hal, cravaack and ms. eddie bernice johnson of texas. from the committee of ways and means for consideration of sections 141 and 142 of the house bill and sections 1801,

40101, 4102, 40201, 40202, 40204, 40205, 40301 through 40307, 40309 through 40314, 10012 through 10014 and 100116 of the senate amendment. and modifications committed to the conference, messrs. camp, tiberi and blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches.

for what purpose does the gentleman from north dakota seek recognition? mr. berg: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. berg: thank you, mr. speaker. in north dakota we know jobs come from small business. not from big government. small business is the backbone of our economy and it's the engine to get america back to work. unfortunately all too often instead of helping small business, washington serves as a roadblock to its growth by piling on excessive regulations, imposing burdensome complex tax code on the job creators. the legislation i'm introducing today, it's known as the small business tax simplification act. it will simplify our tax code for small businesses. instead of being bogged down with complex tax reporting requirements, this bipartisan legislation will allow businesses to use a simplified

form of accounting that more closely matches the way small business owners run their businesses. this bill represents commonsense change that would ease the burden of tax complexity for many small businesses as they can spend more of their time and resources doing what they do best and that's growing jobs and helping our economy. thank you and i yield the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: are there further requests for one-minute speeches? under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentleman from new york, mr. reed, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise tonight to join here

this evening with six of my colleagues or more from the freshman class to talk about a very important issue that we face in this nation and that is the need for our country to engage in an open and honest debate about comprehensive tax reform as we come to the end of the year with the expiration of our individual tax rates, our corporate tax rates, the potential exposure of the estate tax being reinitiated at levels that would decimate family farmers, families all across america. and i am pleased to be joined by so many of my colleagues who understand the importance and the critical nature of this issue to put us on a path to make america competitive when it comes to the world economy and also to come up with a tax code that is simpler, easier for people to understand and we don't have to spend thousands of dollars, hundreds of dollars

paying advisors to fill out forms just to meet the obligation of the tax burden that is out of control because of spending that is completely causing this nation to create a national debt of $15.6 trillion , and as we impforward in this conversation, let us be open and honest and fair about the issues before us. with that i'd like to yield, mr. speaker, to a good friend of mine from georgia. >> thank you. i'll tell you the key to this is open and honest debate and we hear a lot from the president, from democrats today about america's millionaires not paying their fair share. and they quite honestly quote warren buffett and talk about the buffett rule and certainly i'm happy mr. buffett lives in a country like i do where he's able to achieve what he was but warren buffett is a billionaire, not a millionaire. now, let's talk about who america's millionaires are. in my part of the country,

farmland sales for about $3,500 an acre. so if you own 285 acres of land that you farm, you're a millionaire. mr. scott: in other parts of the country it may sell as much as $15,000 an acre. if you are a farm family with 66 acres, that's one of america's millionaires. these are hardworking middle-income americans who saved all their lives to pay for the farm. we need to work to protect these families' farms so that the next generation can carry on their legacy. we hear a lot about that, protecting the american farmer from the other side of the aisle yet they propose tax policies that do the exact opposite and very much would destroy our agricultural industry and the safety net that it provides in this country. in fact, if you follow their tax policy, america's farmers will simply be another statistic. what statistic? as it stands today, approximately 30% of family businesses will be passed on to the family second generation. only in america. 12% will make it to the third

generation and only 3% of all family businesses make it to the fourth generation or beyond. for a family farmer, for a small business owner, that's very disheartening. however, if the president has his way, those percentages will be even lower. on january 1, 2013, the death tax will rise from the dead again, reordained by president obama and return with a rate as much as 55%. again, in my part of the country, a middle-income family farmer in my part of the country who owns more than 285 acres of land could be assessed the death tax as much as 55% of what they try to leave to the next generation. that's what the president defines as the family farmers fair share. mr. speaker, family farms are significant, reliable food source for our country and for the world and they play a vital role, a vital role in our nation's national security.

however, under the perfect's death tax proposal, family farmers will be forced to downsize their operations, chunk by chunk, selling their assets to pay for what amounts to nothing other than the seizure of the family farm. many may shut down and have to sell everything just to cover the costs. i think of a song by crosby, steels and nash says tax the rich to feed the poor until there are no more. this is currently the attitude of the administration and the truth is you simply can't feed the hungry without the family farmer. they play a vital role in everything we are and do as americans. mr. speaker, you want more hungry people in america? you want decline family businesses and higher unemployment, follow the president's proposal on the death tax because that's exactly where it leads. it's the seizure of assets of the family farmers and the family businesses in america. and i promise you if that happens, there will be more

hungry people in america. i yield. mr. reed: i appreciate my colleague from georgia, the president of the freshman class, mr. scott, for standing up for family farmers all across america. you know, one thing that we're going to face at the end of the year with the expiration of these tax rates and a need for us to commit firmly to comprehensive tax reform, i hope we all adopt a policy, a policy i have heard from folks throughout my district, across my great state of new york and across this entire nation and that is a firm commitment that they're looking for from washington, d.c., to adopt tax policy that is going to be certain, that they -- that we adopt tax policy that is going to be permanent, because as we asked our local manufacturers, our job creators of the united states of america, they need to know that when they make these decisions on millions if not billions of dollars in local

plants to put people back to work that the rules of the road are going to be clear and they are going to be certain and they are going to be permanent so they can rely on that certainty so that they can make the investment necessary to get this economy going forward again and making sure that they can rely on those rules and that they won't change mid stream as we see with tax policy that extends on 10-year windows or tax extenders, the 101 tax extender policy that either expired last year at the end of 2011 or will expire at the end of 2012. things such as basic as the research and development tax credit for our manufacturers across america. those types of policies need to be done on a permanent nature so that when these investment decisions are made, the people that are making those choices know that there will be a form and platform on the american market that is secure, certain and will allow them to make

sure that there's a good thought process put in place if they make -- as they make those investment decisions. at this point in time i'd love to yield to my good friend from the great state of pennsylvania, one of our leaders in the freshman class. mike kelley. >> mr. kelly: let's talk about things certain in life. there are two things you can be certain of. one is death and the other is taxes. there's another one we are going to be certain of after january 1 and that is you are going to continue to pay taxes after death. and a government that spends -- borrows 42 cents of every $1 it spends, it comes to no surprise that we can't let the dead relax. they will be taxed beyond what they could possibly imagine in real life. so we look at a country that now has the highest corporate tax in the industrial world. we're going to have the highest -- the second highest death tax in the world. and why? because of a town that's never learned to do what it tells all of its citizens to do, live

within your means, play fair, pay your fair share. i would suggest to you in addition to that, in addition to that we're telling people, look, you don't have the certainty any more that you have planned your estate the right way because after january 1, this government is going to come up with heavier taxes on its citizens, not the ones that are on the grouvend that are living but the -- ground that are living but the ones that have already died, that have played their fair share, that they have done everything they should do as great citizens of this country and they are going to be told at the end of their life that you can't go to your final resting place in peace. no. everything that you have accumulated in your life and already paid taxes on is going to be taxed again. and who is it that's going to face that burden? all those people that we tried to work so hard for, that we tried to put things aside for, our children and our grandchildren, a hockey stick that goes off the charts.

again, a country that can't live within its own means and yet an administration that tells its citizenry, you have to pay your fair share. . the rich are not paying their fair share. the assets will be have to be lick which dated. small businesses are going to be harmed by this new tax and they will have to pay the estate taxes that are left over after somebody has worked their whole life, lived within their means. but that's not enough. that's not enough for this administration. they will continue to rip off from your pockets after death after you have worked so hard. there is -- a cactus in the desert has nt more pins in it than this law. if it's really about being fair and playing by the rules and stewardship that you take what

is given to you and you pass it onto the next generation in better shape, my goodness how have we strayed so far? how have we strayed so far as to tell those who have worked so hard that even in their death they cannot rest and be assured of that which they have worked so hard to pass onto the next generation. 55% tax on your estate. the liquidation of family farms and businesses, the liquidation of the dreams of our children and grandchildren go up in smoke as this tsunami of tax increases that this administration will be forcing on the american people after january 1. i thank my friend from new york for bringing this issue up. and i yield back the time. reed reed i thank -- mr. reed: i thank the gentleman for joining us. and in listening to your comments, i agree, that what we're seeing at the end of this year, if washington, d.c.,

doesn't get back to together and we are holding this city accountable and changing the culture of washington, d.c.,. we will continue to go forward on that mission, but what we have to commit ourselves to is if we do not act by the end of the year, the largest tax increase in the history of america will go into effect with the expiration of the individual tax rate, the reinstatement of the estate taxes at 55% and beyond and we need to act. mr. kelly: the other thing that is important to understand we talk about competing in a global economy. our friends to the north do not have a death tax. our friends to the south in mexico do not have a death tax. this administration is so out of touch with the real world and never had any skin in the game

and never understood that in order to produce a profit, you must first know how to create one. we are again taking ourselves out of the global economy and we are telling our people, you know what? you may be better off living in canada or mexico, because you aren't going to be able to pass it onto the next generation. and with that, i yield back. mr. reed: and with that, i would like to ask another colleague of ours, a great member of the freshman class from florida, colonel west. mr. westmoreland: mr. -- mr. west: we depend on choosing the correct artillery for a specific objective whether diminishing the stress of forces or completely destroying its capability. although he has never served our country in uniform, the right to

defend freedoms and liberty on these shores it seems president obama understands a thing or two about weaponry as well. the current weapon of choice is tax policy and the enemy of small businesses, investors, entrepreneurs and corporations who similarly are deemed undesirable, in short, these are the economic engines of our nation. the president's planned tax increases are demonizing the rich and using them to score political points. the collateral damage of these policies will spread far and wide into the heartland of america. after all, the 160% increase in federal cigarette taxes put in place by president obama and his administration certainly affects those earning far less than $250,000 despite his promise not

to raise their taxes. the fact is, mr. speaker, next year, unless changes are made in the tax code, americans will be bombarded with a heavy artillery of the largest tax increase, causing economic injury and destruction. to begin with, if the bush-obama tax rates are allowed to expire, the current tax brackets of 10% to 35% will rise to 15% to 39.6%. other tax provisions scheduled to disappear that will hit ordinary americans include the american opportunity tax credit, up to $2,000 500 per student for qualified college costs. tax exclusion for mortgage debt and tax credit for employer-provided child care, children of farmers as my colleague from georgia talked about, and small business owners who wish to continue the legacy of their parents will find it

increasingly difficult to do so as the death tax exemption will shrink from 5 million to 1 million. further, inherited assets exceeding that amount will be taxed at a maximum rate of 55%, up from 35% and 5% surcharge on a an estate over $10 million. investors will be facing 15% to a maximum of 25.8%. seniors who rely on dividend returns will also be hammered. stock dividends currently 15% will be taxed as ordinary income with a top rate of 4 .4%. as 39.6% income tax and 3.8% tax on investment income proposed in the president's health care law. in the last few months, we heard a lot about fairness from the president, mr. speaker, especially when it comes to

wealth year people and president obama's own message about his proposed budget for fiscal year 2013, he said everyone must shoulder their fair share. but how, mr. speaker, does he define fair when 47% of wage-earning households pay zero while the top 25% pay 87%. besides the spending proposed in the 2013 budget, it's far beyond what the revenue base can support. it will be impossible to increase taxes on the nation's highest earners to close the future trillion-dollar pliff plus deficit if spending continues. and from the joint committee on taxation, the highly touted buffett rule would raise $30 billion to $40 billion.

during that same time frame, president obama's budget would create $7 trillion in new debt which means the buffett tax would lower that debt by less than half a percent. this is not fiscal policy but misguided policy of economic fairness and and in anes a "the law," it is legal plunder. while the president has some understanding of the destructive capability of his tax policy, he demonstrates little understanding of battlefield strategy, because those who are on the receiving end of an artillery barage seldom stay in place. when individuals and businesses are being bombarded with higher tax rates, they will change their behavior. investors will shift from taxable to nontaxable investment. total economic activity slows as there is less incentive for

employees to work extra hours while smaller returns means venture capitalists are less able to shoulder the risk. all taxpayers have a greater shielding their income. president obama would know that revenues increase under presidents kennedy, reagan and yes george bush until the tax revenues were increased and does not appear to be the president's strategic objective. if it were, he would increase the revenue base by optimizing the tax environment to encourage businesses to growth and hire. the house of representatives has passed 26 bills to do just that. but they currently languished on the desk of senate majority leader harry reid who will not

bring them up for vote in the senate. instead, president obama seems determined to punish and wipe out economic success in this country, leveling tax reference of mass destruction on all taxpayers. this is a battle our nation can ill afford to lose. we must reform our tax code and must restore the conditions for economic success for all our citizens, because truly, they are taxed enough already. mr. speaker, unleashing the individual industrialism and entrepreneurial spirit of americans does not come from capital consolidation in washington, d.c. the american people do not want g.s.a. boondoggle. they want economic security that comes from this body becoming responsible stewards of their tax resources, not taking more from them based on socioeconomic rhetoric. the american people, mr.

speaker, want a constitutional republic, not a socialist welfare nanny state. the american people want an economic future so bright that they will have to wear sunglasses. thank you, and i yield back. mr. reed: i thank my colleague for his sentiment and the words that you expressed. and i'm reminded that we here in washington cannot be like my children when they used to sit in the tv room and watch their cartoons. we need to grow up. we need to deal with this issue once and for all. and one thing that i'm repeatedly reminded of when i hear the president's proposal about the top 2% need to pay their fair share, i try to deal with this issue in an open and honest way, and if you do the math on that proposal, you

raised $70 billion over 10 years. we have a $1.3 trillion national deficit every year. the math just does not add up. and so i always have to remind people in this debate about the need for comprehensive tax reform that the solution to our national debt problem is not going to be a revenue solution unless we grow this economy. raising revenue to through increasing taxes isn't going to bridge -- it is impossible to raise taxes enough to get to that $1.3 trillion number. i'm reminded that this is a spending problem at its root cause and that's why we need to continue to focus on that arena. and i will also like to echo my colleague from florida in his words essentially, this is going

to boil down in this november, 2012 election between two strategies of moving forward. and if i heard your statements and your words correctly, we essentially have one strategy that is going to be deployed by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that say it needs to be a revenue-based solution but that is code word in my district that we are going to raise taxes to deal with this situation. and this freshman class and the people that have joined us are firmly committed that the solution is on downsizing government, cutting spending, adhering to what our founding fathers believed in and put forth in the constitution, a limited federal government, not an all-encompassing federal government that has grown the debt to the level that we see today. and i am firmly also committed to not engaging in the debate as to who caused it from whatever

president from whatever party. that is not the solution moving forward, engaging in the blame game. it is about recognizing the problem is upon us, whoever caused it, democrat or republican, and let's solve it. and when we come to november, 2012, the american people will not be stupid, they are not stupid individuals. they will see that the math doesn't add up but the solutions from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to raise taxes but getting our fiscal house in order. and does my colleague from any additional comments? mr. west: i thank you for yielding another minute. it is a choice between two futures, future of economic freedom or future of economic dependency, future that talks about the entrepreneurial will

and spirit and american industrialism of the american people and i think the american people will make the right choice in november, 2012. and i thank you and i yield back. . mr. reed: at this time i yield to my friend. >> thank you. i appreciate the opportunity to visit here. it is a very timely topic. i come from western kansas, big skies and big dreams and big visions. mr. huelskamp: and i tell you, we can see an approaching storm brewing miles away. sometimes 100 mimes away. you can see it -- miles away, you can see. it you see the dark clouds, you can feel the gusting winds. the skies are wide open. sometimes it's hard to predict which path the storm will take. i tell you, week of heard tonight and i'll say it again, there's a storm brewing here in washington, that may seem like it's miles, perhaps hundreds of miles away, but it's not. and unlike our kansas storms,

it's pretty evident the storm, this storm's going to hit america. unless this congress and this president acts. every american will pay higher taxes next year. let me rephrase that. every tax paying american. because you know half of americans pay no federal income tax. so i'm talking about the half that actually pay. income at a capital gains rates will go up, the death tax will go up, as well, child tax credit and standard deductions will decrease. all of this is certain to happen unless we act. and i really believe, it's been mentioned that this would be the biggest tax increase in american history, i think it actually might be the biggest tax increase in human history. it could be. we'll look forward to those figures. our economy is just starting to show signs of life again, however weak. can you imagine what it will mean for the economy if taxes go up at the end of the year? can you imagine?

when where -- you can imagine where the stock market is going to go in the final quarter if congress goes home before the election without acting to extend the lower capital gains rate think? know my colleague, colonel west, noted that the president might not be a great student of history. all he has to do is study hits own comments -- his own comments. less than two years ago, the president said, you do not raise taxes in a recession. that's president obama. the president of our country. if he can study his own history, i agree with him. i agree with him on a lot of things, but he said, you don't raise taxes in a recession. sure we might have emerged from a formal definition of a recession, but i don't think there's anyone out there who believes the economy is growing by leaps and bounds and i don't think you can shoehorn a massive tax increase onto an already overburdened american economy. you just can't. america needs and deserves a tax code that's not premised on putting american versus american in a class warfare struggle.

unfortunately that seems to be the only real solution this president has. the so-called buffett rule, it's only a gimmick. it's just a gimmick. trying to distract the american people from the reality, that he wants the biggest tax increase in american history and he's going to get it unless we can change this before the end of the year. i proposed a bill to call the american opportunity of freedom act that would make permanent the bush-obama tax cuts. yes, the bush-obama tax cuts. look back over history. this president extended the tax cuts. he signed them. remember, he called those tax cuts a -- i want to be right here on the quote, a substantial victory for middle class families. this was the president obama out on the campaign trail saying, we have to extend these tax cuts. i agree. i also support comprehensive reform, including a fair tax. i think my colleague from georgia is going to visit about that, i hope. co-sponsor of the jobs through growth act. and numerous other proposals to make our tax code fairer,

flatter and more simple. the bottom line is we need to do something now. our tax code should not outpace the bible in number of words, it certainly doesn't outpace the bible in wisdom. families shouldn't have to read 100-page booklets to fill out their tax returns. if you call the i.r.s., you call one hour, the next hour, another hour later, you will get a different answer every time you call in because even the folks who are implementing the tax code, they don't know what the answer is. yeah. americans out there just trying to do the right thing, just trying to do their fair share, mr. president. your i.r.s. agents can't even tell them the right answer or the same answer. the most fundamental purpose of the tax code is to raise enough revenue in order to fund essential functions that fall within the purview of government. i just got of a a skype phone call with fourth and fifth graders in kps. they had a lot of great -- kansas. they had a lot of great questions. i thought the best question was, why are taxes so high?

of course, he probably doesn't pay much taxes, he probably heard that at home. but the answer i gave him was this, because we spend too much money. and on top of that, we borrow another $1.1 trillion under the obama budget. and so not only taxes high, they're still borrowing money so they can spend it, it comes down to how much we spend. i think we can agree that washington's problem is not not enough revenue but too much spending. washington has created this storm. washington has created this storm. but unlike the tornados that sweep across the plains, we have an opportunity to avoid the devastating consequences of the approaching storm that's coming at the end of this year. and i'm excited to be here to talk about that because i must tell you, i am optimistic. we can solve this problem. we can take advantage of the approaching storm and actually do comprehensive tax reform that can change the future for all americans. we can pull this economy out of the dull droms go back to the

days when the economy actually grew. when jobs were being created. but in today's environment, the uncertainty created by this administration and by tax law that's not permanent, that is dragging down our economy. we can avoid that, we can do much better and i'm happy to be here tonight to talk about that. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. reed: i thank you so much, my colleague from kansas, for coming down this evening to talk about this issue. and you are exactly right. when i listened to the comments you had to offer and as we go into this debate about comprehensive tax reform, i think there's somewhat of an agreement on both sides of the aisle that tax reform needs to be done. because our tax code is way too complicated. 70,000 pages of tax regulation and statutory language, legislation on top of legislation. we need to firmly attack that tax code in a way that focuses on the primary goal of what our tax code was originally enacted

for, to raise revenue. not to engage in policy determination or picking winners or losers through the tax code and advancing social policy through the tax code. but focusing on a tax code that raises revenue to cover our lawful, legitimate government expense as put forth in the united states constitution, it limits federal government. if we adhere to that principle and that goal, i am confident that both sides of this aisle will come together and achieve what could be one of those historical moments in this chamber again, where we set the country on a path to a more competitive and prosperous future moving forward. and with that, would the gentleman from kansas like to speak? mr. huelskamp: have you read the entire tax code? mr. reed: i have tried. i've read numerous parts of. it especially when i'm up late

-- of it. especially when i'm up late at night and can't sleep. it immediately puts me back to bed. mr. huelskamp: it probably would be my guest that there isn't a single colleague of ours that has read this tax code. now there's probably some special attorneys in this town that claim to have read it, read that whole tax code. as you mentioned, how many pages? mr. reed: 70,000. mr. huelskamp: 70,000 pages. 3 1/2 times the size of the bible, perhaps, longer of all of shakespeare's works and it's all about centralizing power in washington. we have a grand opportunity, i agree, with challenges come opportunities. we have a tremendous opportunity. and it will have to be a bipartisan opportunity. i agree with you. we have to have the president propose a solution and his only solution right now is, let's just raise taxes. god forbid, just let them go up automatically. if he does nothing, if he refuses to help us make america more competitive, if he refuses to help us, we have the single largest tax increase in american

listry and we can't stop him if -- history and we can't stop him if he's not willing to help out. i think the american people are demading -- demanding comprehensive tax reform. we can't afford the massive tax increases in the law. i am optimistic that we can and will do the right thing. especially when we have to look -- i have a friend of mine in junction city, kansas, met him in a town hall, his name is tom. he's a small business owner and he said, i'm going to start a small business or i would but because of those tax increases at the end of the year i'm not going to do that. he said, i would have hired seven people. those seven people not hired in junction city, kansas, don't show up on any list but they show up in junction city of seven more people, seven families that don't have the income they need. and they probably end up having to have some government assistance or get help from church or neighbors. we can't forget in this town, it's not about us, it's not about special interests, it's about the american people and getting this economy going again. so i appreciate the opportunity to talk about that and the

common goal of those of us sitting in the chamber tonight is get this economy moving again and actually being competitive internationally. so i appreciate your leadership on that, congressman reid, and fantastic job here tonight -- congressman reed, and fantastic job here tonight. mr. reed: i appreciate your comments and kind words. as we move forward i'd like to bring a good friend of ours from wisconsin into this conversation, who has been a stalwart down here on the house floor and joins us numerous times on these opportunities that we have a chance to debate the issues of the day and with that, mr. duffy, it's an honor to yield you time. mr. duffy: i appreciate the gentleman from new york yielding. as we talk about these issues, and i've been listening today as my colleagues have been discussing the tax policy, but you take a step back, you look at all of the different rules and regulations and bills that have taken place over the course of the last 3 1/2 years, it's a torrential rain. and we have to take almost a rain drop by rain drop, looking

at each policy, each rule, each law that's gone into effect and i want to take a moment to step back from the tax debate and first start with the conversation in regard to the budget. because i think most americans that i've talked to, they're very nervous about what's happening with this ever-expanding government, but ever-expanding debt. many americans know we owe now $15.6 trillion. they know we've borrowed $1 trillion every year for the last three years and so they will step back and go, what's the plan? how do we address this problem? i know a lot of the moms in my district, they're concerned about who's lending us that money, it's the chinese. they're concerned about their kids that they're raising so well, educating so well, what kind of america they're going to grow up. in what kind of budget are you going to have, how are you going to fix it? if they were to look to the

senate, they would look at sooned -- look and see that for the past three years, the senate wasn't willing to pass a budget, they weren't willing to put out a plan. if they were to look over to the president, and ask the president, how do you deal with this cancer that's grown in america which is our debt? how do you deal with it? i think they'd say, mr. president, you've given us a budget, but it's a budget that never balances. it's a budget that includes all the tax increases you've ever discussed but it doesn't balance. it's a budget that we brought to this house floor and it was such a political document that doesn't accomplish the goals that the moms and dads of america want accomplished that not one republican nor one democrat voted for that budget. we need real ideas to be put on the table. we need bold leadership to address the large issues that we face in this country. and for the last two years, the house republicans have given

that bold leadership. we've been willing to put our ideas on the table, on how we fix the great problems of our generation. and i'm proud of our freshman class, i'm proud about house republicans for willing to step out and lead. and part that have leadership has been a reform of our tax system, our tax code, making it more competitive and more fair. i want to talk about that a little bit which is the conversation tonight. i think many americans may not know this, but as of april 1, april fool's day, we have the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world. and that's because the japanese on april 1 were the last ones to lower their taxes, making us the highest tax country. that's a problem. we find ourselves in a situation in america where one party is asking for a more competitive tax code that will encourage investment and growth in america. we have the other side, which is the president's side, that

encourages under the auspices of fairness that we increase taxes. and as i talked to people back at home, these conversations oftentimes come up and i'll ask my friends at home, i'll say, listen, if you look at businesses in america, can you name a few of them that don't pay taxes? are there a few businesses here that you can identify that don't pay taxes? and virtually everyone in the town hall will shake their head at me and go, i can name that business -- can't name that business that doesn't pay taxes. so ask them, if you want that business to pay taxes, if you're just willing to raise the tax rate from 35% up to 40%, which is what the president wants to do, will they now pay taxes if you just increase the rate by five percentage points? no. the tax code is broken. for generations, long before i got here, i was riding my trike

when people were carving out special interests in the tax code, 70,000 pages in the tax code that's for special interests. special loopholes, that people in my district don't take advantage of those 70,000 pages. it's for the special interests that come to this town day after day and what have we done? we in this house have said, that's not fair. that's not right. let's carve them all back in. let's reduce the complexity of the tax code, bring all these people back in and make them, yes, pay their fair share. . what we can do is take the top rate from 35% and bring it down to 25% and the other rate down to 10%, and if you do that by eliminating all the loopholes in the code, you will bring in more revenue and it will be fair. doesn't that make sense? raising rates doesn't accomplish

it. reforming the tax code is where we have to go. let's get a bipartisan group together, carve out those special interests, reduce the rates and make us more competitive. we hear a lot about the buffett tax, right? it's a tax on investment income. and, listen, there are two different kinds of income. you have the income that you get from your salary, your searled income. -- salaried income. you put your 40 hours or 80 hours and that pay check comes in and you are guaranteed to get it. and there is also investment income. around the world, investment income is taxed at a lower rate. you say why? well, the reason is if you invest $100,000, you're not guaranteed to make anything on

that $100,000. actually you might lose that $100,000, but if you are lucky enough or smart enough to make money on that $100,000 investment, we say you should be taxed little bit less than that which is guaranteed under salary. but there is something else. we want to encourage investment in america, because we know if we're investing in our infrastructure and manufacturing facilities and businesses, if we have investment, what happens? we create jobs. job growth in america when you have investment in america. and we want to make sure this is a great home for investment. and if you raise the taxes on investment, you will get less of it. let's make sure we have a great investment tax rate so money around the world wants to pour into this country and take advantage of one of the best

work forces in the world, which is right here in america. one point before i yield back. there are a lot of people who talk about raising taxes to bring in more revenue. i think it's important that we are very clear that when people are talking about raising taxes to pay down the debt, that's not what is happening. people are asking to raise taxes to spend more money. there is no effort to reduce spending in this town. those who want to increase taxes want to spend more, they don't want to spend less. but if you bring in more money into the federal coffers look at tax history. every time we are raising tax rates, there isn't a correlation of bringing more money into the federal coffers. raising rates doesn't mean more money. if you can grow your economy and put your people back to work,

more people pay taxes and more people who pay taxes, more money comes in and we have more dollars to pay down our debt and not only that, less people on food stamps and energy assistance because they have a job. this is commonsense reform that this group in the house is talking about and if we could implement it and take the weight off the shoulders off our entrepreneurs, job creators and investors, we could see explosive growth. i look forward being forward to be part of a team to engage in the great debate to make sure we are the most competitive and best place in the country to invest and with that, i yield back. mr. reed: i thank the gentleman from wisconsin for joining us and the words and september meant you have expressed. as we go into the election and november 2012, i think we are having this conversation about

tax reform, and there are some differences that the american people are going to be able to choose between. and one of the fundamental differences when it comes to tax policy is i see a base philosophy, differential between my colleagues on the other side of the aisle in the democratic party and those of us on this side of the aisle and the republican party. and that base differential in philosophy is what i hear from the other side of the aisle when they say let's increase taxes on the top 2%, this group or that group, it's a fundamental belief i would submit that they believe that that money is better given to them here in washington, d.c. to then go out as they in washington, d.c. feel is appropriate. and the philosophy on this side of the aisle that i'm firmly committed to and i'm sure many

of my colleagues are committed to, is that that money is the individual's money, the american citizen's money. they are the ones who earned it and punched the clock around the 24/7 or 8:00 in the morning until 4:00 in the afternoon or midnight to 8:00 a.m. it is their money. and the more that we can keep that money that they earned as citizens and individuals in their pocket, they will do the right thing. we believe in the individual. and from the arguments that i have heard from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, i would say they differ in that opinion. they truly do believe that washington should be the judge of where those resources go because for some odd reason, they sit here in washington and come up -- try to come up with

one-size-fits-all answers at the end of the day and that that money is washington, d.c.'s money and not the individual. and with that, i would like to bring our colleague in from georgia, who i know is a strong advocate of the fair tax proposal that has been out there and one of the things that i have to say about this freshman class. we have changed the culture of washington, d.c. and we are going to allow all alternatives to be on the table and have an open and honest conversation with all of america about reforms that are going forward and in going forward in a way that solve our nation's problem and everyone will be given a fair shake to express those ideas and i'm sure my colleague from georgia i is rising to offer his insight and proposal as an alternative to the income tax structure that we presently

exist under. and if i'm wrong, i apologize but knowing his reputation and words around this town, i'm sure we will hear a little bit about that. mr. woodall: i appreciate my friend from new york yielding. there is a better way to create the united states tax code and the truth is -- i came down here tonight because i knew we were going to have that debate of ideas we are talking about. whether it is your leadership on this special order or enthusiasm of my friend from wisconsin brings to the floor, we're talking about the challenges that we face, using a different language than we use in this body. this is a floor that has been taken over by freshmen tonight and this is an institution taken over by new ideas. i mean new ideas from all aspects of this institution. i hear my friend from wisconsin talking and my friend from

wisconsin says and he comes from a competitive district. all this talk about these crazy republicans. the people of wisconsin, they can choose whoever they want, choose a democrat, republican or independent and they chose him and his message is not what i'm going to get for you, but we don't need a subsidy here because we have the hardest working force in the world. his message is not how to give you an unfair advantage over your neighbors, his message is how can we make the american economy the most competitive in the world because if we do that, the american people will grow. that is a different take on what happens in washington dl d.c. and what happens in the tax code. i know my friend from new york sits on the powerful ways and means committee and you have to have a ways and means committee. they are the ones who write all

the tax code. the tax code is a complicated thing to do but what this ways and means committee is doing, this is an election year and crazy things, a buffett rule to solve the deficit problem that if it had been in place this year and collected that revenue for the next 250 years, it still would not have balanced the budget from last year. this great savior of all that ails us in this country, president obama's buffett rule if it had been in place for the next 250 years, it would not have balanced the budget gap from last year. we have all this nonsense in a political year. and i know my two friends wouldn't brag on themselves but i'm going to brag on you for you. we have had more serious hearings about fundamental tax

reform in this ways and means committee over the last 16 months than we have had in the last decade. this is a committee that by virtue of simplifying the american tax code is going to undo the work of the ways and means committee for decades and decades and decades in the past but doing it not to exploit the power of the position but help grow the american economy. as an alternative to the buffett rule, i brought down a chart to demonstrate what happens in today's tax code. my friends on the ways and means know it, but the benefits from all the loopholes and exemptions and it makes sense. the folks who are paying the tax taxes and they are the once benefiting from the carveouts and we have a choice of two futures. we can either implement the president's buffett rule which by simple math will have nol effect on growing the economy or

paying down the deficit or we can simplify today's tax code to make it flatter and fairer. and that's what my friends on the ways and means committee have been working on. chairman dave camp have been working on with a sincerity that i have never seen before. and you are absolutely right, they said bring all-comers. we aren't the smartest people in the room. if the idea comes from lawrenceville, georgia, bring it. if it comes from new york, bring it. if it comes from tennessee, bring it. we wantal the ideas and let the chips fall where they may. what is different in this town with this republican class is we don't have to rig the game to get to the outcome, we just bring the debates to the floor and let the facts speak for themselves and guess what? have a vote. and if it's a good idea or a bad

idea, we see both of those happen on this floor and the ways and means committee is leading in this tax process. this would have been a great year for the ways and means committee, a great year for you all to play some sort of game with the tax code. i have seen it happen in congresses past. it's not going to happen. not going to be real but we are going to play the game. the folks on this year would rather lose in november, having tried each and every day to do the right thing that we in november, having played the game the way it's been played for so many years. so serious is the effort in the ways and means committee that it was included in the house-passed budget this year, flatter, fairer rates. eliminating exemptions, loopholes, carveouts, all of those things that the american people look at and lose faith in this body. you have stood up to them all.

you have stood up to them all. you have said no more. there is a better way. i appreciate my colleague for taking on the time tonight. and i ask him to commit this to memory. and i say to my colleagues who may be watching, you will find myriad charts to talk about all the things that my friend from wisconsin discussed, my friend from kansas discussed and easy to visualize ways and if we want to get a handle of what's happening in america, call it fairness, economic growth, you name your ill, a flatter and fairer tax code is the beginning of that -- it's not the end but the tax code was not designed to implement social policy. it was designed to collect revenue to run the national defense of this country and if

we get back there, if we get back there, the american taxpayer is going to be the beneficiary and i thank my friend for his leadership. mr. reed: i thank my friend from georgia and the passion that you bring to the floor on this issue and all the issues that you bring to our attention. . we are committed to having an open and honest debate with all of america because the taxpayer deserves no less. we are here to do what needs done done. we are here to lead -- to be done. we are here to lead. that's why i appreciate my colleague from georgia on the budget committee because i know there was some political heat put on that budget committee to back away from coming up with a budget that we can stand for in this chamber. but we took the stand and you took the stand. as part that have budget committee to say, you know what? we are not going to engage in the politics of old, we're not going to be afraid to lead. because the problems that face

us in america today are generational. they are the same level threats that generations before us faced. and the most recent example possibly that jump it's to the top of my mind is world war -- jumps to the top of my mind is world war ii, when the real fate of the american government, the american symbol of freedom and democracy was at risk, with a threat from europe with as if fascism and the ex -- fascism and the expressions coming out of that area of the world and what did america do? and that's the history lesson i bring to this chamber tonight. america leadership, our president, our leaders, did not look to divide america on that issue. that leadership led by uniting america to come together to face the generational threat and survive so that the america that they had could be passed on to

our generation and this generation and grandchildren's generations to come so they have the opportunity to succeed and take care and live that american dream. it is time for our nation to come together, not be divided. and i am very confident, because i have faith in the american individual, that come november, 2012, the american people will make the right call and between the choices that will be clearly articulated between both sides of this aisle, we will see what needs to be done and the right decisions will be made and we will overcome this generational crisis that faces us in our national debt and this economy that is bogged down in stagnation, debt, doubt and despair. and with will -- we will overcome it. because failure is not an alternative. and with that i'd love to yield to a great lady on the ways and means committee, a fellow fresh man, and a good friend, mrs. black from tennessee.

mrs. black: thank you, mr. reed, for yielding to me. i want to thank you, as a fellow member of ways and means and a freshman, for bringing us together tonight for this special order. this is such an important issue and the american people really need to hear that there is a choice. there's a choice between a system or a plan that is going to take more money out of the pockets of our hardworking taxpayers, or one that's going to put more money in those pockets. and make a system that is fair, flatter and simpler. as i've traveled throughout my district over the last 16 months now, i've continued to hear from my businesses in particular, that there's so much uncertainty out there and i ask them, what is the uncertainty? what is it that's keeping you awake at night? that keeps you from growing your business and as a result of that creating more jobs? obviously when people have jobs, they have money in their pocket and what do they do when they have money in their pocket? they spend that money. and they spend that money to buy other products and services

which means that the economy grows. and what they tell me is there are really three things. one is they feel like they don't know when a new mandate is going to come down, such as the health care. and that's going to cost them money. they also don't know when we're going to put another regulation on them and many of the businesses are very burdened by regulations that frankly, those are not the same regulations you see when they do take their businesses offshore which means we are just driving them offshore. and the third is the one we're here tonight to talk about and that is tax. we have heard in a number of our hearings in ways and means that all the way from the corporate tax down to the individual tax and the tax that many of our small businesses use that they are willing to give up those deductions and loopholes that are currently in the tax code to get something that is fair, flatter and simpler. this tax code has none -- not been reformed in 5 years. what it has had -- 25 years.

what it has had is a lot of things that are added to it and it only complicates it more. but it does something else. it picks winners and losers. and by having a tax reform that would make things fairer, flatter and simpler, we wouldn't be picking winners and losers. it is far too complicated. you know, most of the american people don't realize that the united states has the highest corporate tax in the world as of april 1, when japan lowered their corporate tax. we became, oh, i don't know that we want to be very proud of this, but we became the country that has the highest corporate income tax. talk about driving people offshore. so, in our tax reform, we bring the corporate income tax down to a level that is an average for all of the countries that we do trade with and that we are in competition with and we bring it down to 5%. we do something that makes sense -- 25%. we do something that makes sense. it's a commonsense reform. likewise, when we take a look at our other businesses that are not the large businesses that

are corporations but the small businesses, and there are about 60% of the small businesses are pass-through. that means they're in the individual tax system. am i hearing that we're out of time? mr. reed: we are coming to our end of time. mrs. black: if i may then just conclude with a couple of words -- mr. reed: i would greatly -- be honored to yield to my colleague from tennessee for closing comments. mrs. black: i'm going to bring this back to a time where i served in the state legislature. and the state income tax at that point in time -- because it was -- i think that i hear a gavel that says i am done whether i wish to be done or not. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.

mr. garamendi: mr. speaker, i want to thank the leader for the opportunity to take this hour to discuss some extremely important issues here in the united states. we just listened to an hour discussion on taxes with actually very, very little spess fessity as to whose taxes are being cut and exactly what those tax cuts would mean to the american economy. and to the people of america. normally when we take the floor as we do most every week on the issue of the american economy, we talk about making it in america, rebuilding the great american manufacturing industry. we've seen over the last 20 years that the american

manufacturing industry has declined by some 40%, 45%, from just under 20 million americans in manufacturing to just over 11 1/2 million. in the recent months we've seen a resurgence of the american manufacturing sector, but nonetheless it is still very, very small compared to what it once was. if we're going to rebuild the american economy, we do have to rebuild the american manufacturing sector. i'm going to come back to this tax debate here very, very quickly. but i think we ought to put it into context of what taxes mean to the american economy, which taxes can be cut and which could be raised. and the key issues in building the american economy are here on this chart. taxes being one of the second pieces. but the rest of them are also important. international trade issues, for example, how do we deal with china and the china currency issue, how do we deal with the

importation of extraordinary amounts of material, equipment and goods while at the same time exporting even less and less? how do we deal with that? the energy issues, exceedingly important if we're going to rebuild the american economy. labor issues, how do we prepare the american labor market, that is the men and women that work in america, oh, by the way, i heard something here from my colleagues on the republican side that just drives me crazy. when they say that half of americans don't pay taxes, then they say, oh, we mean income taxes, let's understand that every american worker up to those who earn $106,000 pay 6%, almost 7%, excuse me, 8% of their total income in taxes. that's the withholding tax. and by the way, it was the democrats who actually reduced the social security withholding

tax to half of what it was in previous years. so let's understand that every american worker pays taxes. now, the income tax issue is another matter and we'll come to that in a few moments. but americans who work pay taxes. and let's not forget that in this discussion. in any case, labor is a major issue. this issue of education is now very much being discussed in america. and i want to really focus on that during this one-hour discussion. research, critical to the future of america's economy. and finally the infrastructure upon which all of this is built. these are the issues that the democrats have taken up in building and restarting, reigniting the american dream. reigniting the american dream so that men and women in this country can get a decent job, earn enough to be in the middle class and raise their families, own a home if they want to own a

home, take a vacation when they need to have one, or want to have one, and be able to have health care so they need not worry about bankruptcy which is in this nation -- caused more than 60% of the time by health care and health care problems. so, trade, taxes, energy, labor, education, research and infrastructure are the key issues in reigniting the american dream and rebuilding the american economy. tax is a major portion of this and i don't want to forget about taxes. we just heard this one-hour discussion about it. the question is, who is taxed? and who gets the tax benefits? less than a month ago, our republican colleagues put on the floor of this house their blueprint for the american economy. their blueprint for how we are going to use government or reduce government, their

blueprint on how we are going to raise the tax revenue necessary for the operations of the government. very, very interesting. because essentially what they have done is to take money away from education and give money to the wealthiest of americans, those who earn more than $1 million a year would under the republican blueprint on taxes pay less and less. actually, they would see a tax reduction, remember, those whose adjusted gross income is over $1 million a year would pay less taxes, they would get a tax break of $394,000 a year, minimum. now, if you're a billionaire, the tax cut would be in the millions and millions of dollars. is that fair? i think not. we just heard fair tax on the floor. i must tell you that the

republican proposal in their blueprint voted out of the house of representatives, now the blueprint for the republican action on this year's and future budgets and appropriations would reduce the taxes for millionaires by $394,000, for billionaires, millions and millions of additional reductions in their taxes. that is not fair. what we on the democratic side have proposed is to make certain that the elements that lead to a growing economy and a just society are in place. let's talk specifically about education. in the previous congress, the democrats took up education and said, this is a fundamental element in economic growth and social justice. the opportunity to get to the middle class is largely dependent upon the education that a person is able to receive

, in k through 12 system and higher education. specific steps were taken for those in low income communities whose schools are unacceptable, specific money was put to those schools through the title one programs so that they could raise up the standards of education and provide those who do not have the family support, those who thank do not have the economic support -- those who do not have the economic support to get a decent education in k through 12. much, much more needs to be done. but that was put in place by the democrats in the last congress. . take a look at the blueprint, the republican blueprint for the future, cut title 1, pull money away from the low-income communities where the necessity of education must be available to every one of those students. higher education.

another example. in the previous congress, controlled by the democrats in this house, the senate and the president, there was a significant improvement, expansion of the pell grants, this is money given to low-income and middle-class families to assist them in going to higher education. expansion, yes. community college and part-time students for the first time covered, given the opportunity to get a pell grant so they can improve themselves in the community college or in higher education, four-year programs. from a little over $4,000, $5,500, increase to those who are eligible, very important in providing the educational opportunity that students must have if they are going to succeed in a highly competitive world economy.

secondly, interest rates on student loans. most every student now attending school, a higher education, takes out a loan. the interest rates on those loans were over 6.5%. now, we did two things as democrats. we took away from the banks who were ripping off the students, the student loan program, put it back into the government saving upon billions upon billions and re-invested that money back into lowering the interest rates for the students. not a bad thing from 6.8% to 3.4%, all of this designed to make it easier for students to take out loans to be able to pay back those debts over time. we did a couple of other things

for students who had taken out loans. low-income and middle-income families. we changed the way and the timing of which the loans needed to be repaid. we said, you are going to have to pay no more than 15% of that loan each year of your discretionary income, that is the income over and above food, shelter and clothing, giving students a longer period of time and having to devote less of their money to pay back the student loans of the my colleague will discuss this in more detail. in addition to that, we made it possible for the educational system to receive additional money for this fundamental economic development called research. we increased the research for health care, for mental health, for agriculture, for energy. all of those things are the essence of today and tomorrow's

economy, research being necessary. now, what did the republicans do? in their blueprint, voted on by 100% of the republicans, this was their budget, sometimes called the ryan republican budget, every one of those things that we put in place to assist students in getting an education was dramatically and drastically reduced, while at the same time taking money away from students and handing that money to the oil industry and to the millionaires, the multi millionaires, the billionaires. remember, a minimum tax reduction for millionaires of $392,000 a year while at the same time taking money out of the pockets of students. increasing -- not just increasing, but doubling the interest rate on student loans

from 3.4% to 6.8% costing every student an additional interest payment on their loan. that's the average. those above average, that number will go much higher. pell grants, reducing the pell grants. eliminating from the opportunity to get a pell grant more than one million students over the next 10 years, nearly 400,000 students would be immediately -- see a reduction in their pell grants in the year ahead and 100,000 not being able to get a pell grant at all. this is economic fairness? i don't think so this is wise economic policy? i don't think so. giving to the wealthiest 1% in this country an enormous tax break and taking it directly out of the pockets of students is bad economic policy. it's bad policy for education and it will not re-ignite the

american dream but will stifle the american dream. we will not stand for that. we are rising up and saying no, no, we aren't going to do this and give to the millionaires and billionaires while taking money away from the students of america. this is an important issue. this is not only an issue of economic fairness but an issue of growing the american economy. and we know where we stand. we stand for educating the work force, so they can compete. now joining me is the gentleman from the great state of michigan who represents detroit, who has been on this issue from his very first day here in congress. representative clarke, have at it. mr. clarke: i thank you, mr.

garamendi for yielding me time. the message, we have to continue to cap student loan interest rates at 3.4%. student loan borrowers and their families should not have to pay more on their student loan debt. the president has done all he can do right now to help bring relief to our student loan borrowers and now it's time for congress to act. but congress needs to do more. we have to reform the system and change the system. and that's why i wrote and introduced the student loan for giveness act of 2012 and cut student loan debt and that's a real economic stimulus that will create jobs here in this country. i thank you for yielding me time. i yield my time back to you. mr. garamendi: let's stay on the student loan issue for a while here. this is the reality of student

loans. the debt levels, according to the federal reserve bank and this has been updated, student loans comprise a larger portion of the personal debt in america than credit cards and auto loans. actually, the number recently just in the last couple of days has risen to about $1 trillion of outstanding student loans in the united states. the auto is somewhere around -- little over $700 billion and then the auto and credit cards about $700 billion. we are talking about a huge amount of outstanding money. and the interest rate, you are hitting at the gut of every student and those who have graduated. and when you combine that with the republican blueprint of immediately requiring a larger payment on graduation, you're

really stifling the economy. and i know you wanted to talk about this, mr. clarke, about the way in which the republican proposal would actually slow down the economy by dennying -- well, go ahead. you and i were discussing this earlier. mr. clarke: many students are paying $1,000 a month. if they can invest it our students have the ambition and discipline and go through school and graduate they will start their own businesses and be entrepreneurs and that's how you create financial security for our families and economic security for our country. many of our borrowers, they can't take the risk of starting their own business or starting a family or buying a home because of student loan debt.

if we can keep that debt as low as possible, that will help stimulate our economy. mr. garamendi: exactly right. my kids graduated from college and fortunately they didn't have to take out stupid loans. we gave them four years and fifth and sixth year, they were on their own. student loans, right at $1 trillion now. the doubling of the interest rate, which was in the republican budget blueprint, will stifle the economy as those kids graduate, they have to pay off that loan immediately, not as we propose, 15% of their disposable income, but even a higher percentage. that's money they can't use to buy a car. they have to pay the bank. that's not money they can use to start a home or buy a refrigerator or any other economic activity.

unnecessary. now we can't allow that to happen. and so what we need to do and here it is, this is a ticking time bomb for the american economy. this is a ticking time bomb for the american economy. today, after today, there is just 66 days left before the student loan interest rate doubles to 6.8%. is action being taken? mr. clarke, you have a bill in. the democrats have proposed a bill to keep the student interest rates now at 3.4% and pay for that by reducing the subsidy that every american taxpayer gives to the oil industry over a -- $12 billion of our tax money, now goes to subsidize the wealthiest, most

successful, most profitable industry in the world. the oil and gas industry. so what we have proposed is the big five would get more than $5 billion a year in your tax money to subsidize their fat profits which over the last decade have been more than $1 trillion. yes, that's right, more than $1 trillion in profit and adding $5 billion a year of your tax money to their already substantial profit. we would take back that $5 billion and use it to reduce the interest rates on student loans. now, the republican proposal. let's understand, this is a big issue across the united states and erupted on college campuses and there is outrage and concern, the republican budget that came out of this house less than a month ago has hit a stonewall. the public doesn't like it. and so today, just late this

afternoon, a proposal came from the republican caucus to introduce a bill to not double the interest rate. good. but how are you going to pay for it? interestingly, you know how they are going to pay for it? they are going to take money away from the seniors. in the affordable health care act there is a provision that allows seniors to get free checkups, free preventative checkups. the republican proposal doesn't go to the millionaires or billionaires and doesn't ask them for any sacrifice but says we made a mistake on doubling the interest rate and we are going to pay for it by taking away money from seniors and their health care. what in the world are you doing? what are you doing? why would you do that? why would you take from the poor

and seniors more money and give it, while keeping the millionaires, the billionaires and the oil industry whole? i don't get it, but that's their proposal. our proposal is to go to those who have extraordinary success, the oil industry and say, after a century, after a century of subsidizat inch on and make sure they do not see a doubling on the payments on their student loans. mr. clarke. mr. clarke: thank you, mr. garamendi. the other point you are making about student loans and capping of interest rates, how they'll create jobs, that's absolutely right. when they are freed up not to

pay these high interest rates, it will create jobs. some people will say they signed the contract with the high interest rate on there, but this is the point, those student loans that our government issues to students and to their parents to provide our students with a way to get their education when they can't afford to pay for that education, that's not just a help to get that student a degree, those loans are to help our country become stronger. the more americans that we have who are properly trained and can contribute to our country to their full potential and able to create more jobs by building the best products, by providing the best services and developing the best technology that can be sold worldwide that helps our entire

economy. so these loans are to strengthen our entire national economy, it's not just for the borrowers' benefits. we don't want these interest rates to be high. and we want to put a cap on them. my bill, the student loan forgiveness and they can have a second chance to pay lower rates on their student loans by allowing them to pay down their student loan according to their income. if they aren't making enough money, they don't have to pay a lot of money. they can pay 10% of their discretionary income each year and once they do that for a 10-year period, the remainder of the student loan will be for deleff given. we want to free up their money, invest in starting a business, buying a home, starting a family, all of that will create

jobs. cutting student loans, keeping the student loan debt as low as possible, that is an economic stimulus for all of us and makes our country stronger and creates jobs. . many of us told our kids, if you work hard, if you study hard, if you go to school, if you borrow money to get your degree and graduate, you'll live a better life. you'll likely make more money. because of student loan debt, because it's grown so much, because of the prospect of interest rates going back up, the american dream that was supposedly created by the availability of student loan debt has now become a nightmare to many borrowers. and we've got to cut this debt. this is the real debt, my colleague from california, that we need to cut. because this is the debt that really costs us jobs. we need to cut student loan debt, we can take that initial step right now by keeping

student loan interest rates on loans at 3.4%. that's the first step. now i'm asking the american people, demand that congress reform the student loan system. let's change the system. let's make it affordable for everybody to be able to get a decent education and to repay that money back. so i again thank you for giving me this opportunity to share this time with you and the american people. this is so important. you know, many times in this body we talk about, we got to cut taxes to stimulate the economy. that we've got to cut debt in order to provide people freedom. well, what person in this country can be free when they have to personally pay student loan debt that will take them years or even decades if ever they'll be able to pay that off? and the reason why i say that is that i know senior citizens now who are still repaying their student loans and at their age, there's no way they'll be able to pay those loans off. and it doesn't matter if they go

bankrupt, going bankrupt doesn't mean anything, the government will still come after you for all the student loan money because you can't discharge the student loan debt in bankruptcy. it's a cruel, unfair burden that certain student loans are imposed on americans. we need to cut that burden, cutting that burden is not only fair, but it will create jobs for our country. we want our graduates to be able to have their money to invest, invest on starting their own businesses. i'm from detroit, our city was built up, we built up this country's economy because of entrepreneurs who were able to pursue their dreams. now the very people that we have trained to pursue their dreams cabinet do so because of -- can't do so because of student loan debt. that's outrageous. congress, keep student loan interest rates at 3.4%, cap those rates, do it now. thank you and i yield back. mr. garamendi: i thank you, mr. clarke. the clock is ticking.

not the clark clock, but the clock is tick -- clarke clock, but the clock is ticking. 66 days before the student loan interest rates double. we had a long conversation here about tax policy from our colleagues on the republican side. they didn't happen to mention the burden that's being placed on students if we fail. and they didn't talk about their proposal to take the money away from seniors and continue to provide support for the superwealthy and their oil companies. joining me on this conversation is the gentleman who was the chairman of the labor, education committee, now the ranking member has been an advocate for students and education for more than 0 years, err -- 0 years here in the halls -- 30 years here in the halls of congress. a gentleman who was largely responsible for those improvements that i talked about early in this discussion.

congressman george miller and i have the pleasure of representing the county, we're neighbors, we've worked together all these years. i'm delighted you came to join us here tonight. no one knows more about this than you do, mr. miller. let's discuss this. mr. miller: thank you very much, john, thank you for taking this floor time for this debate. and thank you for the effort and the fight that you have led on making it in america. so that once again america makes things, once again america has a robust manufacturing economy, whether it's this generation of manufacturing or the next generation of manufacturing, that america remains competitive around the world and making it in america, for sale around the rest of the world. nothing could be more important to the sustaining our manufacturing base in this country, to sustaining our ability at innovation and growth, economic growth that takes place as a result of that

innovation, than the education of our young men and women throughout this country. and nothing is more important to their well-being and their families and this has proven out every year as we do studies that years of college and college completion are very important to the economic security of that individual and that individual and the family that he or she may formulater in life -- formulater in life. it pays huge -- form later in life. it pays huge benefits to go to college. that's why we've tried to make college affordable. many of us are upset how the costs have doubled in many ways across the states. but the fact of the matter is, while we're struggling with the issues of cost of college and trying to get the states to do more on behalf of their public institutions, the fact of the matter is we have to make sure that college remains affordable for young people and that's why in 2007 we made a decision to lower trt rates on student loans so -- traits on student loans so

it would be more affordabler to fuents to not only go to college but then in playingdy paying back the debt they incurred because of the subsidized student loans. and we made that effort, we did it on a bipartisan basis at that time. and president bush signed that legislation into law. and we put some of that money into deficit reduction and into reducing the interest rates. in 2010 we followed on with legislation proposed by president obama and our committee and others to make sure that we coin crease the pell grant, so those students in most need, those families in most need would have the pell grant as an underpinning of making college more affordable. we continued with the subsidized student loans, to make college more affordable. we went to an income-based repayment system so that a student that may be starting out in a good career but a bad entry level pay scale, they begin that

career, they'll be able to pay back their student loan and also continue on with their life. if they make more money, they pay more money. and it's very important so that they can choose the profession of their passion, not just the profession that yields the most money. because many of our students, the minute they heard about this program said, i can now be a nurse, i can be a public health assistant, i can be a prosecutor, i can be a public defender. what their passion was in life. they could be a teacher and now know that they can afford to pay back their student loans. and the interest rate is very important at this time as families and young people try to figure out what their indebtedness is going to be and how they're going to pay for college. especially at this time of the year when young people are getting their acceptance notice from universities and colleges all across the country and now they sit around the kitchen table with their families and say, how are we going to afford this? what's the debt we are going end to up with? and it's an important procedure for families to go through. as they think about this. but all of a sudden now we see

that when the president submitted his budget, looking forward to july of this year, he asked that we continue to keep the interest rate at 3.4%. and that's very important. that's the choice the president made. the choice that the republicans made in the ryan budget was to let it go to 6.8%. and in fact there was a unanimous vote on the republican side for the ryan budget to let it go to 6.8%. we think that's wrong, we think that's unfortunate for families in the middle of this economic turmoil, that we're coming out of in this country. but they need these assurances. we think that interest rate should stay at 3.8%. of course we want to pay for it, just as we paid for it for the first four years, we want to pay for it again. we believe that that should come out of the unfair tax breaks that are extended to oil companies, that cannot be justified when the price of oil is $104 a barrel. they get the tax break when it's

$134 a barrel, $150 a barrel. we think that time has come and gone, that the oil companies can continue to pursue the quest for oil and the recovery and we appreciate that. but the fact of the matter is, price alone provides them the basis on which to go out and seek out the hydrocarbons necessary for our economy and for the world economy at this time. so this is about choices. this is about choices. do you believe the interest rate should be 3.4% or do you believe it should be 6.8%? by unanimous vote, the republicans said it should be 6.8%. i have to tell you today, i'm quite excited of this dramatic turn of events, this dramatic turn of events where the republicans today have said that they want to keep the interest rates at 3.4%. and we welcome that. we welcome the fact that when they saw the president out in the country talking to young people, talking to parents, knowing that these parents and young people are going through this process to figure out how to finance their education, that

he made a compelling argument that this interest rate should remain for the next year at 3.8%, that the republicans have come and decided that they embrace that provision. i was excited when i saw the presidential candidate said he was for this. i was excited this morning when i read in the papethart republican leader in the senate said, nobody's against this. oh, yes, my friends on the other side of the aisle were unanimously against this a week ago. but i think the president sold this idea to the nation and apparently sold the republican party and we should welcome that because that's in the interests and benefit and we should work together to make sure that this happens on behalf of families and on behalf of young people. but of course there's always the kicker, when the republicans do this. our choice is that an unjustified tax cut to the largest oil company in this country and in some cases the world, that they -- we should stop providing these tax subsidies to those oil companies. their choice unfortunately is

this, to wipe out and to repeal the preventive medicine account in the accountable care act. in the health care reform act. to wipe that out. so where do we find the republicans paying for their desire now to join the president and lower the interest rates to 3.4%? they wipe out immunization programs for young children, so children now, we're going to send either less healthy children and children with fewer i houstonizations to school and -- immunization to school and in our community, or the parents are going to have to pay for it and they can't afford it, that's why we're doing that. they also chose to knock out screening programmings for -- programs for breast cancer. once again, just as the accountable care act extends health care to women, stops making women a pre-existing condition, that their gender denies them health care automatically under the current insurance systems or makes it so expensive that it's very difficult for them or their families, just as that's within

the reach of women, the republicans take away the preventive care that extends that screening to millions of women across the country. and then of course the screening for birth defects. the screening for birth defects. for couples that are concerned or have been told by their doctor that their child may have birth defects. or that the pregnant -- pregnancy may be with birth defects and the choices and the difficulties they have to make. that screening's important in terms of early intervention, in terms of turning around the outcomes for these children. so that's where the republicans chose to get the pay-for, to go to those most in need, to go to those who have been denied health care for generations because of their gender, because they're women, to take, and we all know and our family and our friend and our neighborhood, the community wes represent, what women encounter with breast

cancer and the importance of screening. somehow they've decided that that's how they will pay for reducing the interest rate from 6.8% on july 1 to 3.4%. i urge them to join us and to pay for this in essentially a painless way, with respect to these unjustified subsidies for the largest oil companies in the country. it's very important to the agenda, mr. garamendi, that you have put forth, that we've worked on, you've worked on before you ever came to the congress, and that is building up the jobs base, the manufacturing base, recognizing the contribution that this economy can make to future energy choices, to future transportation choices, all across the board, and do it here in america. but we're told even in a time of this tragic recession that we do not have enough skilled people to carry that mission out. we've got to build that, we've got to educate these young

people and that's what student loans allows to happen for people cho who can't simply write a check for the education of their children. who simply can't, you know, say, well, i got a deduction, that's enough, that will take care of this year. families struggle to try and accomplish what every generation has, that their children will live better, will contribute more to america than we did in our generation, my grandparents wished it for me, my parents wished it for me and they worked hard to provide it. but when you say now, oh, by the way, we're not going to allow for screening for poor women who might have breast cancer, we're not going to test for birth defects for young children, we're not going to provide immunizations for young children, what are we going to do, turn america into a third world? we struggle to get the same immunization into the hands of poor people around the world because we recognize the prick -- the public health benefits, but they've chosen this.

so i'm excited they've seen the wrong direction that they were headed with the ryan budget, the republican budget, to double the interest rates on student loans but i'm very, very concerned that they've decided to extract the price from women and children once again as they have in the past in their budgets and so i urge that we can get this student loan taken a care of before the 66 days you put up there, before this time bomb goes off in the middle of every low income and middle income family in america system of thank you again for making this time available to us to discuss this we hope you'll have good action on behalf of all americans, all americans, women, children, students, and their families. it's quite possible to do it's quite possible to do. all we have to do is reach across the aisle and work together and make sure we don't make victims out of part of our society so that others can go to school. going to school is important, women's health is important,

childhood immunization is important, so are dealing with birth defects in the best we possibly can. we owe that to those family, that tezz -- to those children. thank you very much for this. mr. garamendi: mr. miller, thank you for the dedication you've made for many, many decades for the education, the well-being of children and the labor and work force here in the united states. there's very few men and women that have spent the number of years and have been so successful as have you in making it possible for kids to get an education and for adults to get an additional education. we didn't talk about all the elements of the educational system, we focused on the student loan, pell grants that the republican blueprint would impose on the united states as well as the tax policy that has come if that blueprint which essentially is a tax policy of continuing to reward the super

wealthy while at the same time taking away from the struggling middle class, the men and women working every single day to keep their food on the table, the family in the house, pay e rt 'sne of the most unfair tax po that i've ever seen in the many yea involved in public pois, and if you that. would stick around a second, i want to come back to the education of those mennd women already in the work force but i want to make a point here, before we took up this one hour, our republican colleagues spent the hour talking about tax policy. they overlooked their own tax policy, just went with some easy rhetoric about we've got to cut taxes and make sure the job creators do not have an additional burden. it was and it is a fact that it is the democrats in this house that actually put forward a very significant stimulus for business on tax policy. it was the democrats that took

and reduced the taxes on businesses that invested in america. by allowing american businesses, big and small, write off 100% of every capital investment that they made. that lasted for a year until the republican -- our republican colleagues took power here when they reduced that writeoff to 50%. still good. better than the normal depreciation schedule. but that's stimulated enormous investment in -- by businesses in improving their capital so they can be more productive and increase their output. we also took very specific steps among the democrats to reduce the burden on both businesses and on employees when we reduce the payroll taxes. we're unable to continue the business side of that when the republicans took power here but we were able to continue the reduction in the payroll tax for employees.

very important. stimulus for the economy allowing men and women that are working to have more that they could then spend and make ends meet. those are all things we did. and we ended one other very onerous tax break. this was done by the democrats in this house. in 2010 session. and what we did was to eliminate a tax break that american corporations had for offshoring jobs. and that brings me backto the make it inricael. making it in america, you cannot give a tax break to american corporations for offshoring j it was more than $12 billion a year in tax reduction for american corporations that sents overseas. you go, what in the world was that all abo? it was in the tax weinedt and i will say for the american public out there, we got precious little support, in fact, no support from the republican caucus on this floor when that bill came up for a vote.

wrongheaded and very, very destructive. these are the policies that create a strong economy. education, a well-educated work force is the most important element in any economic strategy. it was the american strategy in the 1950's, 1960's, 1970's, 1980's. it has fallen off but men and members of congress like mr. miller have maintained education, not only the k through 12 and higher education system but the reinvestment in the work force. reinvestment in the work force, making sure the men and women on the production line and those laid off can go back to school, get an upgrade in their education, learn better skills, perhaps as a welder or computer technician or all the other thousands of different types of jobs. being able to go back to school in the work force investment

programs as well as the pell grant programs that mr. miller put forward to allow community college students, part time community college students to be able to take out a pell grant. let's run through them. i've got seven of them up here but there are five that are critical in any economic development strategy and mr. miller has done the education piece and led that fight. education, research, manufacturing, infrastructure and making sure you're paying attention to the international world. those are the five that are there. mr. miller, why don't you help me wrap up here and we'll be on our way and thank the american public for listening to this discourse on how education policy fits in to growing the american economy and building up the american middle class and reigniting that dream. mr. miller: thank you very much. education obviously is one of the most important ingredients, it's the best investment we make in terms of return to the

treasury because of the increased productivity and success of the people who complete their education. the important factor here is that when we think about this, we really have to develop a system where our students are engaged in a modern learning environment, where they have access to the technology, where they have access to resources outside of the traditional classroom, where their instructor, their teacher, has that kind of access so we can integrate their education into what's happening and what people see is happening in the rest of the economy, in the world around them. so we can create that learning environment and we can create that teaching environment by changing the way we have traditionally done things in this country. we looked at high performing, when we look around the world and say, where are the students that are high performing, where are their students that do the best and we look at what's taking place in those countries, we see a partnership between communities and parents

and students and teachers working out, recognizing that that school is a huge economic asset of that community. maybe the most important thing, where parents and the community have that say. and so that's what we're trying to two. unfortunately, we haven't been able to get reform in the rewrite of no child left behind yet, in this congress. it's been a number of years, we weren't table do it in the last congress but i want to thank the obama administration and the secretary of education because recognizing the ingredient the role that the ingredient of education plays in the economic recovery, they've gone with the race to the top program, the waivers programs, what they're realy saying is if you want to take your state and go to the future, if you want to take your district and go to the future, we want to partner with you. what will that mean? that means that those governors and those local superintendents of schools, state superintendents of instruction, that they're making the decision that they want to join

in an effort to have internationally benchmarked standards and internationally benchmarked curriculum and assessments, no longer just filling in the bubble on a multiple choice. but because of the sophistication that we've learned in assessment, we learned from the workplace, what we learned from employers, these students will be able to demonstrate the depths of their knowledge, the understanding, they will be richer, they will be better able to adapt to the needs of employers or they can go on and get a master's degree, they can get a college degree they can get a doctorate degree. but the fact of the matter is, the world of learning is changing dramatically and i think that while we're bogged down here in partisan fights, unfortunately, the administration has struck out on a bold path and i think there's now 40 states that are either have applied or are hoping to apply for waivers. there's 47 governors that say

we should have internationally benchmarked standards in this country so we know when our students are learning, they're learning at the same level the students at shanghai are learning or in finland or in singapore or japan. and that's the change that's possible. but the fact of the matter is, congress has to want to go along with that the governors are taking the lead. they're taking the lead. the big city mayors are taking the lead. they understand this in terms your agenda, congressman garamendi, on making it in america, jobs in their community that educated work force is the most important investment they can make and for parents, that good school, people talk about remodeling their bathroom or adding on a bedroom or landscaping the yard to add value to their home. you turn that into a high performing school, you have more value than anything else you could possibly tchosmenabble real estate association will tell you that the first question people ask, what school will my children go

to? what district is this? and we now have the ability and capability and with partnering up with the entire school staff, we have the ability to dramatically improve the learning environment, the teaching environment, and the outcomes for all of our students. that's the excitement because this comes along at a time when america now realizes, yes, we thought after 1980, we couldn't make anything in america. we recognize that and we see foreign investment coming back to america and we've got to have the talent ready to absorb that. thank you again for this opportunity to integrate education into the make it in america agenda. i think, obviously, i think it's the most important point. as i talk to venture capitalists and the people in the high tech fields and the biotech fields in our state and around the country they tell you over and over again, the work force they're looking for is a well-educated, ataptable,

understanding work force that can work with people all around the world now because you can sit in one room and work with people everywhere else in the world. mr. garamendi: mr. miller, your passion for education was on display in this last discussion. and thank you for that passion and thank you for the opportunity, the service you've provided to america in leading the fight for improvement of our education system. just a couple of thoughts, not random but specifically on the subject, yesterday, i was in california for the opening of a new manufacturing facility a company, altech, in birmingham, alabama, decided they were going to stay in america for the production of these bucket trucks, the kind of trucks that utility companies use that take the worker up to work on the power line way up in the top of the -- on the top of the pole. they decided to stay there. they're going to hire an additional 100 people to manufacture these bucket trucks in dixon, california.

and in the discussion i had with the manager and the president of the company, i asked him, how are you going to train the workers? he said, we're going to do it at the community college. we're going to do it at the community college system of the programs that you have put together over the years where the work force investment program, meaning we're investing in the workers, the retraining of workers, electricians, welders, line jobs, well-paying, middle class jobs. that's what it's all about. the most important investment that any society can make is the investment in the education of its people. we need to do more and that eneducation of the work force -- education of the work force, that investment also entails the individual's participation, the loans that they take out, the

pell grants that they receive are essential in giving them access, as you so well know, and then when we find a blueprint that passed this house, the republican blueprint, that basically takes away that opportunity, it stifles the american economy. i share with you your enthusiasm for the newfound awareness of our republican colleagues. it only took a week, and it evenly took three speeches by the president and they had an oh-my moment, they made mass take, yes. but don't double down on that mistake by paying for the reduction in that interest rate, by taking away from the vulnerable people of america. and i think not only the children and their vaccinations and breast cancer and early detection and those, but also the senio, in their prevention and detection. that's not how to do it. we know better, your proposal, the proposal that mr. hanson, of

using the resources that we're now giving to the most bealty industry in the world, our tax money -- wealthy industry in the world, our tax money literally given to the oil industry, to recoup that and use that instead for the very future of this country. final one minute comment, we're finished with this evening, it's bths it's been a good night. thank you so much for joining us. with that, mr. speaker, we yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i send to the desk a privileged report from the committee on rules for the filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 631, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 3523, to provide for the sharing of certain cyberthreat intelligence and cyberthreat information between the intelligence community and cybersecurity entities and for other purposes. for providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules, providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 4628, to extend student loan interest rates for undergraduate federal direct stafford loans and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed.

mr. nugent: mr. speaker, i move the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the house stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow for morning hour de

>> jon stewart and wanda sykes are just two of the comedians who have attempted to entertain at the correspondents' dinner. it will be shown live this saturday night. see video of past dinners at c-span dirg/videolibrary. >> president obama spoke at the university of iowa. he called on congress to keep interest rates from doubling. this is 30 minutes.

>> it is good to be back in iowa. can folks give it up to blake for that outstanding intro ducks. and i want to thank the university of iowa pep band for firing everybody up. there is some good hospitality here, i should know, i've spent a little time here in iowa. spent a little time here in iowa. i'm glad my hometown of chicago will get to return the hospitality when your football team kicks off its season at soldier field. i want to thank a couple of guests, first of all, your

congressman, dave loebsack, is here. attorney general tom miller. [applause] state treasurer mike fitzgerald. your mayor, matt hecht, the president of the university of iowa, sally mason. so, i have come to the university of iowa to talk a little bit about you. and some of the issues you guys are dealing with every single day. i believe that college isn't just the best investment you can make in your future, it's the best investment you can make in your country's future. i'm proud of all of you for making that investment because it's never been more important.

in today's economy there's no better predictor of individual success than education. that's at the top. right now, the unemployment rate for americans with a college degree or more is about half the national average. their incomes are twice as high as those who don't have a high school diploma. a higher education is the single clearest path to the middle class. i know that those of you who are about to graduate are wondering what's in store for your future because not even four years ago, just as the global economy was about to enter into a free fall, you were trying to find your way around campus and now four years later, you're looking at what it means when you leave this campus. the good news is, today our

economy is recovering. haas the good news. but i'll be honest with you, it is not yet fully healed from the worst economic crisis since the great depression. our businesses have added more than four million jobs over the last two years. but, there's still a lot of americans who are out there looking for a job or at least finding a job that pays the bills and helps cover the mortgage. there's still too many families who don't have that security, that basic middle class security that starts slipping away even before this crisis hit. but what i want all of you to know is the degree you earn from iowa will be the best tool you have to achieve that basic american promise, the idea that if you work hard, if you give it your all, if you're

responsible, then you can do well enough to raise a family and own a home, send your own kids to college, put a little away for retirement. it's the idea that each generation is going to have a little more opportunity than the last. that's -- that's at the heart of the american dream. and i can tell you as a parent now, when i see malia and sasha doing well, there's nothing more important to me. and that's true for american families everywhere. and it's the hope your parents have for you. that's the hope you'll have someday for your own kids. and keeping that promise alive is the defining issue of our time. i don't want this to be a country where a shrinking number of people are doing really, really well and a growing number are barely able to get by. i don't want that future for you, i don't want it for my

daughters, i don't want it for america. [applause] i want this forever to be a country where everybody gets a fair shot. and everybody is doing their fair share. and everybody is playing by the same set of rules. that's the america i know, that's the america i love, and that's the america within our reach if we work for it. and this is personal for me. >> [from audience] i love you. >> i love you back. i love you guys and i believe in you guys. that's the most important thing, i believe in you, i believe in your future. and i think about my own life.

my grandfather had the chance to go to college because this country decided that every returning veteran of world war ii should be able to afford it through the g.i. bill. my mom was a single mom. my dad wasn't around. she raised two kids by herself with some help from my grandparents because she was able to get grants and work her way through school. and i'm only here today, and michelle is only where she is today, because of scholarships and student loans that gave us a shot at a greatings. that's how we succeeded. this country has always made a commitment to put a good education within the reach of

everybody who is willing to work for it. that's part of what made us special. that's what kept us at the forefront of business and science and technology and medicine. that's a commitment that we need to reaffirm today. now, here's the challenge, since most of you were born, twution and fees at -- tuition and fees at america's colleges have more than doubled. that forces students like you to take out more loans and rack up more debt. the average student who borrows to pay for college now graduates with about $25,000 in student loan debt. and in this state, it's even higher. americans now owe more on their student loans than they owe on credit cards. and living with that debt means you've got to make some tough choices. it might mean putting off buying a first home. or chasing that great startup idea you've got.

maybe you'll have to wait a little bit longer to start a family or save for retirement. and when a big chunk of every paycheck foe toward loan debt, that's not just tough on you and on middle class families, that's not good for our economy. that's money that could be going into businesses is going just to service debt. and as i said, this is personal for me. i know something about this because michelle and i, we went through it. and it wasn't that long ago. we've been in your shoes. we didn't come from wealthy families. we needed loans and we needed grants. to get our way through. and that meant when michelle and i graduated from college and law school, we had a mountain of debt. when we got married, we got poor together.

we combined our assets and they were zero. now we combined our liabilities and they were a lot. we ended up paying more for our student loans in the first few years that we were married than we paid on our mortgage each month when we finally bought a small condo. and we were lucky to land good jobs with a steady income. but we only finished paying off our student loans about eight years ago. think about that. i'm president of the united states. it was only about eight years ago we finished paying off our student loans. [applause] and let me tell you, it wasn't easy making those payments because once we had malia and sasha, we're trying to save for their college education, even as we're paying off our own college educations. so this is personal. this is at the heart of who we

are. we've got to make college more affordable for more young people. we can't put the middle class at a disadvantage. we can't price out folks who are trying to make sure that they not only succeed for themselves but help the country succeed. we can't price the middle class out of a college education. that -- we can't do it. [applause] especially when most new jobs in america will require more than a high school diploma. higher education, whether it's at a four-year institution or a two-year program at a community college, it can't be a luxury. it's an economic imperative every family in america should be able to afford. before i came out here, i had a chance to meet not just with blake but with a number of other students and we had a little round table and the stories they told me were so

familiar. one young man, single mom, she'd lost her job, he was already about $30,000 in debt, he was only halfway through here at university of iowa. another young woman, her dad had been laid off at maytag, they were trying to figure out how to make ends meet, she was about to graduate. now, what i told them is, you're making the right decision because over the lifetime of earnings, you will more than earn back this investment you're making. but, making it more affordable would sure help. it would sure help. [applause] now, i'm going to have a specific request for you. i'm going to need your help. but let me briefly tell you what we've already done to try to make college more affordable. i'm not just interested in talking the talk, i want to walk the walk. so before -- before i took office, we had a student loan

system where tens of billions of taxpayer dollars were going to banks who were the middlemen on the federal student loan program. so they were getting billions of dollars in profits managing a loan program where they had no risk because it was all federally guaranteed loans. so we changed that. and there were folks in washington who fought tooth and nail to protect the status quo. one of them said it would be an outrage to change a system where banks are managing this thing but the real outrage was letting them serve as middlemen and siphon off profits while students were working two or three jobs to get by. we fowlingt and we fought and today we don't have middlemen. that money is going directly where it should have been in the first place, it's going to help more young people afford college. and then last fall, i acted to

cap student loan payments faster so nearly 1.6 million state of the unions who make their payments on time only have to pay 10% of their monthly income toward loans once they graduate. which means if you decide to become a teacher or a social worker or a guidance counselor, something that doesn't pay a lot of money, you can still afford to do it because you'll never have to pay more than 10% of your income in order to stay current on your loan. and then we decided, you know what, you guys need more information about this whole process. we want to have students -- we want students to have access to a simple fact sheet on student loans and financial aid so you have the informs you need to make your own choices about how to pay for college. some of you know, we set up a new consumer finance protection bureau to look out for consumers.

and so they're now put ought a fact sheet called know before you owe. something michelle and i could have used before -- when we were in your shoes. then the we said it's not enough just to increase student aid, we've got to stop subsidizing skyrocketing tuition or we'll run out of money system of the cools themselveses have to keep their tuition low. we challenge -- so we put out the collage to -- the challenge to colleges and universitys and i told congress, steer federal aid to those schools doing a good job of keeping college affordable and we put colleges on notice if you can't stop tuition from skyrocketing, the funding you get from taxpayers is going to go down, we're going to put money into schools doing a better job. and we're going to hold schools

accountable. of course, it's public -- as public universitys like this one know, states and state legislatures have to do their part by making higher education a higher priority in their budget. last year, over 40 states cut their higher education spending. that's not good. these budget cuts are one of the biggest reasons why tuition goes up at public colleges and has been over the last decade system of we're challenging states, take responsibility. if you can find new ways to bring down costs on college, make it easier for students to graduate, then we'll help you do it at the federal level. so that's what we've already done. help master's degree families, more young people afford a higher education, offer incentives to states and

colleges and universitys to keep costs down. that's what we've been doing. now, -- now comes the tricky part, we've got to get congress to do their part, that's where you come in. there are a couple of things i'd like congress to be doing this year. first, they need to extend the tuition tax credit we put in place when i first came into office because it's saving middle class families thousands of dollars. they get a tax break when they are helping their kids go to college. that's important. second, we need congress to safeguard aid for low income students so that today's freshmen and sophomores know they'll be able to count on it. we've got to make sure the pell grants are there for people who need them. number three, we've got to give more young people the chance to earn their way through college by doubling the number of work

study jobs over the next five years. that's an achieveable goal. [applause] and then, most immediately, and this is where i really need you guys, congress needs to act right now to prevent interest rates on federal student loans from shooting up and shaking you down. that's where you come in. you see, five years ago, congress cut the rates on federal student loans in half. that was a good thing to do. but, on july 1 of this year, which means about two months from now, that rate cut will expire. and if it expires, interest rates on these loans will double overnight.

and for each year that congress doesn't act, the average student with these loans will rack up an additional $1,000 in debt. that's basically $1,000 tax hike on more than seven million students around america, include 250g,000 students here in iowa. let me see if -- i'll do a quick poll. this may be unscientific, how many people can afford to pay an extra $1,000 right now? i don't think so. stopping this from happening should be a no brainer. it makes me sick just thinking about it. helping more young people, helping more young people afford college should be at the forefront of america's ageneral ta and it shouldn't be a republican or democratic issue.

this is an american issue. the stafford loans we're talking about were named after a republican senator. pell grants named after a democratic senator. when congress cut these rates five years ago, the majority of democrats voted for it but 77 republicans in the house of representatives voted for it too. now, the good news is, the senate introduced a bill last night that would keep student loan rates from doubling. that's the good news. and what's also good news is some republican senators look like they might support it and i'm ready to work with them to make it happen. that's good.

but i've got to tell you, the republicans who run the house of representatives have not yet said whether or not they'll stop your rates from doubling. and they've hipted that the only way they'd do it is if they cut things like aid for low income students. so let me scratch my head there for a second. think about that we're going to help some students by messing with other students. that's not a good answer. how many people think that's a good answer? one of these members of congress you know, sometimes i like to just get these quotes, because i'm always interested in how folks talk about this issue. you've got one member of congress who compared these student loans, i'm not kidding here, to a stage three cancer of socialism.

stage three cancer -- i don't know where to start. what do you mean? what are you talking about? just when you think you've heard it all in washington, somebody comes up with a new way to go off the deep end. and then you've got the spokesman for the speaker of the house who says, we're -- meaning me, my administration, we're just talking about student loans to distract people from the economy. now, think about that for a second. because these guys don't get it. this is the economy. this is the economy. this is about your job security. this is about your future. if you do well, the economy

does well. this is about the economy. what economy are they talking about? you are the economy. if you have a skills, if you have talent, if you are starting a business, if companies are locating in iowa because you have a well-paying work force, that is the economy. that is how we are going to compete -- making sure our next generation earns the best education possible is exactly america's business. [applause] making sure that education is available to everybody, not just a few -- that is