current tax rate, extend the current tax rate. this extension gives us a bridge. the time we need to dig into the tax code and find a way to make it work for all americans. not just some. perhaps even more importantly it stops the largest tax hike in history. it's worth repeating. the largest tax hike in history. madam speaker, this tax increase would threaten more than 700,000 american jobs, and for those folks lucky enough not to lose their jobs, it could very well lead to lower wages for them. .

these are real people. real job creators in america. we are talking about now stifling that at a time when job growth in america is anemic at best. my fellow speakers earlier talked about just that issue. in regards to what's changed. what's changed in america since that increase or the 2001, 2003 tax decrease was passed by the democratically controlled

congress in 2010. what's changed? you heard from my good friend, mr. gowdy, nothing's changed. now we are going to look at those job creators and let's slap them again. let's take away the certainty for people in my district that have -- we have almost 11% unemployment in my district. now we are going to crush them again? by taxing those job creators and putting jobs out of the reach of real americans. i thank my friend. h.r. 8 will prevent real hardworking americans from getting hit with a -- the history's largest tax increase. we have an obligation to make sure that we can do this. we extend it for a year. it gives us the opportunity -- it's been decades since we had real tax reform. and we have the opportunity to have, ways and means through regular order, to have input

through democrat, republicans alike, experts in the field to talk about how we craft tax policies that are going to carry us through the next decade. mr. scott: another minute. mr. nugent: this is such an important issue, madam speaker. this is about the future of america. this is about how we move forward. now, ways and means had 20 committee hearings already on this issue. one of my favorites was the fair tax. that's what we are talking about as we move forward. having the ability for the american people to hear debate on this floor in committee section through the open process in which we can amend laws or legislation that's going to come forward to this house and get input from all of us, democrats and republicans alike. because it really is about how to -- what kind of -- what are we heading as a nation and we talk about job creation, this is

about job creation. this is ing this about sustaining the jones had and allowing american business entrepreneurs to create more jobs. it's not some crazy idea. this is real america. these are businesses in my district. with that, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: thank you, madam speaker. the real issue here today is are we going to continue something we know out ler -- utterly failed. more than 10 years ago, this deal was made with corporations that we would cut the tax rate, they would produce jobs. we didn't get the jobs. half of it didn't work. why would a country as intelligent as ours want to continue that failed policy. we are a critical -- we are at a critical crossroads here and we better, this time, get it right. in that regard, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer, a member of the committee on ways and means.

mr. blumenauer: i appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy. she had it right. we've begun down this path. we had an opportunity for taos see how effective the bush tax cuts were in creating employment in america. versus high rates in the clinton era, a couple of percentage points higher. look at job creation. 22 million jobs in the clinton years when we were balancing the budget for four years in a row, reducing the deficit, versus an anemic job creation in the bush administration that was less than 5% of that. we've tried it. with all due respect, it's really hard to characterize what happened in 2010 as bipartisan legislation. the republicans in the senate refused to legislate, it was going to be all the tax relief expire, and a consensus was

made. compromise was made to extend it, hopefully we could work things out. but we didn't. we're right back in the same spot. i would respectfully suggest that what we are looking at now with my republican colleagues, when they talk about the largest tax increase in american history, put the republican romney bill in effect. 23 you're going to have that massive cut for the wealthiest of americans, the only way you can make that deficit neutral is by raising taxes on the other 95%. you can quibble with assumptions of the various independent you're going to be raising taxes on the people who make the 95% of the rest of

america. that's not right. it's not necessary. there are better alternatives an you're going to hear it in the form of the democratic alternative that's going to come forward late they are afternoon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from georgia and my colleague on the rules committee, mr. rob woodall. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. woodall: thank you, madam speaker. thank you, my colleague from south carolina, for yielding me the time. i don't actually have the words for this debate. i had to bring some with me, madam speaker. what i brought are the very words president obama spoke from right here behind me? his state of the union address in 2011. as you remember, we just had

done this thing we all agreed on. and by we, we were not in congress at the time, but this thing you agreed on with the president and with the senate to not raise taxes on job creators, why did you agree on that? let's look at what the president said. he said, we measure progress with the success of our people, we measure progress by the success of our people by the jobs they can find and the quality of the jobs they can find. opportunities for a better life we pass on to our children. that's an project the american people want us to work on, together. talking about when we came together to prevent the largest tax increase in american history from impacting americans. here's what he said. we did that in december, thanks to the tax cuts we passed, americans' paychecks are bigger today, businesses can write off the full cost of investments and these steps taken by democrats and republicans will grow the economy and add more

than one million private sector jobs. that's whierness & young says doing what the democrat pross pose to do is going to kill 700,000 jobs because as the president said, doing what we all agreed on, doing what we're proposing to do here today, added one million jobs. that's the president's address in 2011. he went on, he talked about the parade of lobbyists who have rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries. he says, those with accountants and lawyers can work the system and pay no taxes at all but the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. it makes no sense, he says, and it has to change. he's right. he's right. but the proposal that my friends on the democratic side are bringing to the floor raises taxes. on these small businesses that create jobs. the president knows that's not fair he goes on he says, tonight, i'm asking democrats

and republicans to simplify the system. get rid of the loopholes, he says, level the playing field, he says, and use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years without adding to the deficit. that's what the president called on us all to do. that's what this rule that my friend from south carolina allows us to do. and that's what, if we're willing to put politics aside in this election year, we can do. together. as you did in 2010. madam speaker, i'll close now. that was the 2011 address. maybe you think that was just the enthusiasm of our cooperation there at the end of the 2010 but it wasn't. standing right here in this chamber, 10 feet behind me, this year, -- 10 feet behind me, this year, the president said this, we had an opportunity at this moment to bring manufacturing back but we

have to seize it. we should start with our tax code. right now, companies get tax breaks for moving jobs and profits overseas, meanwhile, companies that choose to stay in america get hit with one of the highest tax ratesed in the world. it makes no sense, and everyone knows it, so let's change it. what you do does not change it. what you do dooms our small business owners to continue to operate at one of the highest tax rates in the world. we can do better. we have the bill to do better, together we will do better. i thank my friend from south carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: 97% of small business in america will not be affected at all. i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. andrews: americans who served on the school board or parish council or the board of trustees of their fire company that has ever had a dispute

about what to do know that one of the ways to resolve a dispute is to say, listen, let's take the things we agree on, and do them, and set aside the things on which we disagree and argument about them later but let's agree on the things we can do and get them done. i think virtually every member of this chamber agrees that if a family makes less than a quarter of a million dollars year, their taxes should not go up. let's pass a bill that says that and then move on to the things on which ewith disagree. here's one they have things we disagree on. the majority's bill on the floor raises taxes on 25 million americans and there's some of the -- and they're some of the americans who least merit and deserve a tax increase. for example, an e-4 corporal in the marine corps with four years of service, married, with

two children, sees his taxes go up by $448 a year under the republican bill. under the democratic bill that marine's taxes do not go up. a military police sergeant, an e-5 in the air force, eight years of service. with a spouse and three young children, would see a tax increase of $1,118 a year. how could this be? in 2009, president obama increased the earned income tax credit which helps low income people work for -- who work for a living and he increased the child care tax credit which is working people with children. we pay our marines and our air force, our army, our sailors, a lot less than we should. they're very underpaid and they take advantage of these tax breaks. as the tax breaks -- i would

ask the gentlelady for 30 seconds. ms. slaughter: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. andrews: the democratic bill preserves these tax rules for working families, including members of the military. the republican bill does not. so i would urge my friends on both sides of the aisle to do the following. let's oppose the bill on the floor which gives us a chance to amend the bill. when we amend the bill, let's cancel out the tax increase on the air force sergeant of $1,118, and let's cancel out ea the tax increase on the marine corporal of $448. vote no. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: i ereserve. is the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert in the record -- to insert the record just referred to by mr. andrews into the proper spot. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: thank you. i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from

vermont, mr. welch. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. welch: let's first of all define what these two bills are. number one, the democratic bill would provide tax relief to 100% of americans. 98% would get tax relief on every dollar of income. 2% would get tax relief on -- on up to $250,000 of income. above that, they would be going back to the clinton rates. the republican bill would provide 100% of americans tax relief, including those top 2%. at what cost? $1 trillion added to the debt, number one, and number two, higher taxes on military folks and low income folks who would be hammered by the tax increases in the republican bill. why is that? well, there's two reasons. one, the underlying philosophy behind the republican bill is the trickle down -- is that

trickle down economics work. it is a proposition that says the tax cuts that go to the 2%, the highest income americans, who don't need them, will benefit 98% of americans who don't get them. of. there is absolutely no evidence to back them up. this is a totally doubling down an economic, trickle down economics. our bill basically has two propositions. number one, if we're going to work ourselves out of the biggest recession that we've had since the great depression, we have to increase employment and we have to increase demand and that's why we've got to give purchasing power to the vast majority of low income and middle americans and that's why we sustained the tax breaks that we've had in place since the bush tax cuts were passed. number two, we have to pay down on the debt and have money to invest in things like infrastructure, science and

education. that's $1 trillion that would be made available by going with the democratic approach. so we've been here before. trickle down economics versus middle class commitment. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from north carolina, mrs. ellmers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from south carolina is recognized for two minutes. mrs. ellmers: thank you for recognizing me today. i rise in support of h.r. 8. madam speaker, i'd like to speak about one sector of the economy that will be the greatest harmed and that is our farmers. our farmers provide for our nation and deserve our gratitude and protection from unnecessary harm. in my district, thousands of farmers and their families wait in fear that their homes and businesses will be destroyed by the devastating tax increases

on the horizon and, yes, i am including the inharpteans tax or the estate tax or which i like to refer to as the death tax which i think all in all needs to be repealed in full. but let's just talk today about what will happen if we do not pass h.r. 8. our farmers will be forced to lay off workers. they will be forced to sell off equipment and land because that is where their investment is and they will not be able to pass it along to their families the accomplishments that they and their ancestors put forward because most farms are family owned businesses. what i'm speaking of is the inherentans tax going up. it will increase to total asset income $1 million, increase it 55%, currently at $55 million at 33%. you can see that will be

devastating. as steve mitchell of mitchell farms in my district noted, and i quote, it will be very hard for our son to carry on. we have paid taxes all our lives and now they want to tax us when we die. with the value of our farm equipment these days it wouldn't take long for a family farm to run up against this limit. we are here today because our economy and job creators continue to wait anxiously for new solutions. h.r. 8 will ensure that our family farmers, job creators will be protected. thank you, madam speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. ms. slaughter: madam speaker -- the messenger: madam speaker. the secretary: madam speaker, i have been directed by the senate inform the house that the senate has agreed to s.con.res. 55, directing the clerk of the house of representatives to make a correction in the enrollment of h.r. 1627 in which the

concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i am pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. engel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. engel: i thank my new york colleague and friend and, madam speaker, i rise today in strong opposition to h.r. 8 which should be more appropriately named the job prevention and recession protection act. we always hear talk about tax reform, but the only solution my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have to offer is an extension of a failed policy , skyrocketed the debt and contributed to the current state of the economy. my republican colleagues say their man will create jobs. if that's true why didn't it work during the bush administration when we lost millions of jobs? the republican philosophy always seems to be to help the wealthy and give the back of their hand to the middle class. so let's put this in perspective. at the same time the majority demands we give the wealthiest

a break. they cut medicare and medicaid, early education programs, title 10 family planning and food stamps and the list goes on and on. madam speaker, i'd laugh if this wasn't so tragic. our government should be about giving everyone a fair chance and making sure that we help the middle class and working people. unfortunately the current republican philosophy seems to make it easier for those who are already ahead and more difficult for everyone else. the republican proposal would give our military soldiers a tax increase while giving millionaires and billionaires a huge tax break. that's why i strongly support the democratic substitute, introduced by congressman levin. it is in stark contrast to the million dollar boondoggle proposed by the majority. ours continues the tax cut for the middle class and requires the wealthiest to pay their fair share, as well as they should. unless we have debate on tax reform, the democrat proposal is the only one worth

supporting. madam speaker, i ask my colleagues to oppose h.r. 8 and to support the democratic substitute and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: madam speaker, we reserve our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: may i inquire -- two minutes to the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for two minutes. mr. cohen: thank you, madam speaker. this week there was some disturbing news about members of the house. one of our finest, longest serving members of ohio, mr. latourette, announced he wasn't going to run for re-election because of the gridlock and the difficulty of getting things done. he was for income, revenue, not for grover nor quist pledge that most of the republicans signed. and because he was for revenue, which is what the democrat plan is in taxing the wealthiest and most blessed financially in

this country, he gave up because he said you couldn't get things done. that's a shame. people ask why is there partisan grit lock. this is a perfect example. the two sides agree that people making $200,000 a year or married couples, $250,000, should get continued tax breaks. we should pass that as the senate did. we know that can become law and guarantee those tax breaks. the difference that we have is whether people making over $200,000 single or $250,000 married get tax breaks. they will get tax breaks on that amount of income but not on the income over that. i've been blessed in my life and i've had sufficient moneys to do the things i want. but i've never made $250,000 a year. i consider that a lot of money. on the democratic side we call that middle-class tax cuts. the reality is and my perspective, it's upper middle class tax cuts and middle class tax cuts.

the only people at the top who are having to pay a little more are the very wealthy and predominantly millionaires. when i grew up millionaires was somebody who had a net worth of $1 million. today it's somebody who makes $1 million. rock stars, business tycoons, bankers. they can afford to pay it. they're not spending that money. we need americans who spend their money to stimulate our economy. we need purchasers. so that's why i'm against the republican plan and for the democratic plan. i thank the lady for the time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will advise the gentleman from south carolina that he has 7 1/2 minutes remaining and the gentlelady from new york has 9 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from south carolina is recognized. scot coth thank you, madam speaker. i yield one minute to the gentlelady from kansas, ms. lynn jenkins. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from kansas for one minute. ms. jenkins: stopping the tax hike isn't about taxes, it's

about jobs. raising taxes on the so-called rich will hit nearly one million of these businesses and in this weak economy will risk destroying 700,000 jobs. is it worth it? raising taxes simple low allows washington to spend more. if we want to have a serious discussion about reining in our out-of-control spending, i welcome that debate, but first we should do no harm to our fragile economy. extending current rates gives us time to pass our plan for comprehensive tax reform without risking thousands of jobs and another recession. c.b.o. estimates this action will produce two million jobs next year alone. the choice is clear. let's stop the tax hike and create jobs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield two

minutes to the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas for two minutes. ms. jackson lee: madam speaker, although i have great affection for the gentleman from south carolina, i am so enthusiastic that ranking member slaughter is managing this bill. i rise in great opposition to h.r. 8, but enthusiastic support for h.r. 15. this is a gift to america's women, working women, mothers and let me give you the role. every taxpayer will get relief on $250,000. that, by the evidence of this letter from small businesses, will be 97%, 98% of small businesses and they are women, most of them, many of them. women who are in their homes having a one-person small business, women who have hired people in a five-person small business, women who are getting ready to start their small business.

then, of course, the child tax credit. what a boom for working mothers and others who need that desperate relief. and then of course the marriage tax relief. eitc, if you come from the gulf region, we will save for hurricane katrina victims. they were able to get some minimal relief to carry them through. the higher education tax credit. the adoption tax credit. and as i indicated, the childcare tax credit. tax credit as well for expensing small businesses. what are my colleagues and my friends on the other side talking about? a job-killing, economy-killing, deficit-busting h.r. 8 is not the way to go. and so i am enthusiastically here to tell the women of america that this is a vote for you today. those women who get up every day, who design a way to make a living, when there is no job, these women, along with men who have come into understanding

what small business can do to america. i'm excited because the 18th congressional district i consider a host of small businesses. everywhere i go, individuals are talking about their small businesses. 10 seconds? 10 seconds? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for an additional 10 seconds. ms. jackson lee: thank you very much. i want to submit in the record, madam chair, a letter of small businesses from the maine street alliance oppose -- main street alliance opposing h.r. 8 and supporting this legislation democrats are offering. this is a celebration for women. this vote today will enhance opportunities for women, small businesses and families across america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to -- 2 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from iowa, mr. steve king. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa for two minutes. mr. king: thank you very much. i thank the gentleman from south carolina for yielding and leading this debate on the reform debate for real tax reform. the time i came to this

congress, i made the pledge that i would push for tax reform. i believed at the time that the debate that had been taking place in this congress over the preceding years would flow in the following years. i remember the inspiration came when billy and dick did went around the country and debated tax reform between the fair tax and flat tax. i don't know anyone debating the fair tax to lose that debate. i can think of only one time that we had a serious debate on tax reform and that was a time that we had some debate and i testified before the ways and means committee in favor of a national sales tax. this rule that's before us expedites this debate. it expedites the consideration of a bill providing for comprehensive tax reform. and i look at the conditions that are in here. there are five conditions that are written in and the fair tax meets all those conditions. i think by design. i'm looking forward to an open debate that will take place at

least within the ways and means committee and hopefully coming here to the floor. it says to me as i look at this rule that the legitimate proposals that would come for real tax reform will be in order before the ways and means committee. so i encourage those committee members as this expedited debate takes place, bring them in form of an amendment. let's have a real debate. let's put the fair tax up against everything else. i have done that now since about 1980. even though i lost a couple debates with my wife and my family and one or two with my staff i never lost a debate on the fair tax because the american people understand this -- right now the federal government has a first lien on all productivity in america. if you punch a time clock monday morning, uncle sam gets into his hand what he wants until he gets his share and then he puts it in his pocket and you get to keep what's left.

let's change the tax from production to consumption. let america grow, let america breathe. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: i'd like to inquire of my colleague if he has further speakers. mr. scott: we have one. ms. slaughter: i reserve the balance of. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: i yield one minute to mr. farenthold of texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. farenthold: america has waited long enough for the uncertainty over taxes to go away. this gives us the opportunity to avoid a huge tax increase and gives us the opportunity to have that debate about a fairer, flatter, simpler tax that the american people want and need in this economy -- and this economy wants and needs. we shouldn't be having a big argument over these extensions. they passed on a bipartisan

basis under speaker pelosi. they should pass on a bipartisan basis this time. we do not need the politics of envy and to divisiveness. we need tax reform and this puts us on the path to do it. i urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: if my colleague has no further speakers, i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. slaughter: we understand that the majority intends to have a last-minute change in the rule. the amendment would create a number of obstacles to middle class tax cuts. around the last-minute change, the middle class taxes could not be cut until the senate has approved the entire republican tax reform agenda and we don't need that kind of obstacle or that kind of bill. we need quick action on tax cuts. i hope we can get that today. but let me remind you that you

need to vote against this rule unless you want the republican bill to pass automatically. tax cuts are simple, it was quite wonderful to see the senate of the united states do the sensible thing and say everyone $250,000 and other would receive a tax cut. unfortunately, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are the only ones standing in the way of that tax cut becoming law. therefore our current proposal demands that any middle class tax cut be accompanied by an additional tax cut for the richest 2%. such a proposal would be and has been a fiscal disaster. it would expose the nation's deficit, fail to create jobs, and perpetuate the record of inequality that faces our nation. the off the-repeated premise that we need to protect job creators will lower corporate taxes and lower taxes for the

wealthy should be put to bed. it has been thoroughly and convincingly disproven. instead of protecting tax loopholes for corporations and serving the wealthy at the expense of the middle class, we should be making the tax code more simple and fair by asking everyone just to pay their fair share. our proposed middle class tax cut would be a great first step towards doing just that. in addition, madam speaker if we defeat the previous question, i will offer an amendment to the rule to give the house a vote on h.res. 746 which would prohibit us from going home until the president signs middle class tax cut into law. otherwise, we will be going home perhaps tomorrow with that undone. there is in excuse for congress to go on summer vacation at the end of this week. no other american leaves work with a job half done and neither should we. it is our duty to deliver results to the american people and we should not leave this town until every middle class family has a tax cut in their hands. in closing, i urge my

colleagues to support the middle class tax cut, vote no on the rule, on ordering the previous question and i ask unanimous consent to put the amendment in the record with other extraneous material. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york yields back. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: thank you, madam speaker. i wonder what my friend from texas would have said if she was still here to the 253,000 women, small business owners, who will be impacted by higher taxes based on the actions of our friends on the left. i wonder, madam speaker, what my friends on the left would say to the 710,000 newly unemployed americans because of their actions on the left. i wonder, madam speaker, what my friends on the left would say to the senior citizens who make less than tchrs 100,000. to senior citizens who make less than $50,000.

who would see 185% increase on their taxes for their dividend income. madam speaker, my friends on the left asked a very interesting and telling question when they asked, who deserves a tax increase? well we on the right have a very clear toons that question. we believe everybody deserves a tax decrease. madam speaker work unemployment for the 41st month over 8%, with unemployment in south carolina over 9.4%, i would suggest, madam speaker, now is not the time to engineer fairness. now is the time for us to keep taxes low. madam speaker, everyone in this room can agree we need to take steps to turn our demi around. but while one side of the room wants to divide our nation to

do so, we understand that punishing some americans in the name of helping others is not the solution. we must lift everyone, everyone up, otherwise we will all just end up in the squishy, nebulous middle and america isn't about being mediocre. america is about being the best. the strongest. and the leader of the free world. let's stay there as a nation. madam speaker, i move to amend the resolution with the amendment i have placed at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. scott of south carolina. add the following new section, section 10, a in the engrossment of h. reform 8, the clerk shall, one, add the text of h.r. 6169 as passed by the

house as new matter at the end of h.r. 8. two, confirm the title of db conform the title of h.r. 8 to reflect the addition of h.r. 6169 as passed by the house to the engrossment, three sign appropriation provisions within the engrossment. b upon the adoption of the text -- upon the addition of the text of h r. 6169 as passed by the house, to the engrossment of h.r. 8, h r. 6169 shall be laid on the table. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: the amendment instructs the clerk to add the text of h.r. 6169 to h.r. 8. madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the

amendment and on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. the question is on the amendment and on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient numbering are risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of adoption of the amendment if ordered, adoption of the resolution, if ordered. this will be a 15-minute vote. a 15-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 240. the nays are 183. the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the amendment. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no.

the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. 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 238. the nays are 18 . the amendment is adopted. the question is on adoption of the resolution as amended. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i

ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. 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 speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 240. the nays are 184. the resolution is adopted. without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the house will be in order. would members kindly take their conversations off the floor, clear the well of the house, clear the aisles.

for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to take from the speaker's table senate concurrent resolution 55 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution. the clerk: senate concurrent resolution 55, concurrent resolution directing the clerk of the house of representatives to make a correction in the enrollment of h.r. 1627. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the consideration of the concurrent resolution? without objection, the concurrent resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on house administration be discharged from further consideration of house concurrent resolution 135 and i ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection? stand corrected.

the clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 135, concurrent resolution authorizing the use of the rotunda of the capitol for the presentation of the congressional gold medal to aung san khi. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the concurrent resolution? without, the concurrent resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? ms. ros-lehtinen: mr. speaker,

i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourns today it adjourn to meet at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on post poped questions will be taken -- postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? ms. ros-lehtinen: i ask that the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 750, providing for the concurrence of the house and senate amendment to h.r. 1905 with an amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 750, resolution providing for the concurrence of the house and senate amendment to h.r. 1905 with an amendment.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlelady from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen, and the gentleman from california, mr. berman, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from florida. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognize -- recognition? >> i yield to the gentlelady. ms. ros-lehtinen: mr. speaker, by prior agreement with the gentleman from california, who will do the same, i would like to yield five minutes of my time to the gentleman from ohio, mr. kucinich, and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control those five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection? mr. kucinich: reserving the right to object. are we apportioning that five minutes from each side? i yield to mr. berman. mr. berman: at the point where i am recognized i will be asking unanimous consent for the same kind of referral of time to your control.

ms. ros-lehtinen: mr. speaker. mr. berman: mr. speaker, am i recognized for unanimous consent request? the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the request from the gentlelady from florida? without objection, so ordered. the gentleman from california. mr. berman: mr. speaker, i would also ask unanimous consent to yield five minutes of my time to the gentleman from ohio and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control those five minutes? the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the measure under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. ros-lehtinen: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. ros-lehtinen: mr. speaker, i have spoken on this floor many times about the iranian threat and the need for action to stop it, but ultimately we

will all be judged by a simple question -- did we stop iran from getting a nuclear weapons capability? if the answer is no, if we fail, then nothing else matters. if we fail it would be of no comfort to the american people whose security and future would be put in danger. if we fail it would be of no comfort to our ally, israel, whose very existence would be put in danger. history is full of avoidable tragedies, of foolish countries that have allowed their enemies to prepare to destroy them. the entire world now is fully aware of iran yeas true intention. now is the time -- iran's true intention. now is the time. as sir winston churchill said, you ask, what is our aim, i can answer for one word, victory, for without victory there is no survival. to get us on that path to victory, mr. speaker, i ask my

colleagues to render their full support to the iran threat reduction and the syria human rights act of 2012, a bicameral , bipartisan agreement that represents the strongest set of sanctions ever put in place against the regime in tehran. it black lists virtually all of iran's transportation and financial sector and cuts off companies that keep doing business with iran from access to our markets in the united states. this legislation also imposes sanctions to prevent iran from repatriating any proceeds from its oil sales, depriving the iranian regime of 80% of its hard currency earnings and half of the funds that support its budget. this bill also imposes tough new sanctions on the national and iranian oil company, the national iranian tanker company

and iran's islamic revolutionary guard corps. it also targets iran yeas use of barter transactions -- iran's use of barter transactions, the insurance to iran yeas energy sector. it targets specialize financial messaging services to the central bank of iran. mr. speaker, in 1995, the late former secretary of state, warren christopher, said in terms of its organization, programs, procurement and covert activities, iran is pursuing the classic route to nuclear weapons which has been followed by almost all states that have recently sought a nuclear capability. that was in 1995. secretary christopher added, there is no room for complacency. will congress pass the iran-libya sanctions act in 1996? that law, now call the iran sanctions act, sought to target iran's economic lifeline, its energy sector, and deny tehran

the financial resources to pursue its nuclear ambition, to sponsor violent islamic group and to dominate the region. regrettably, just a couple years after enactment of that law, the clinton administration issued a blanket waiver of energy sector sanctions that has been continued by successive administrations. in 1996 u.s. concerns were not shared by our allies in europe and asia who offered that trade, dialogue, engagement would succeed in moderating tehran's behavior. this allowed the iranian threat to flourish. however, they continued to develop new legislative countermeasures in the form of the iran freedom support act of 2006 and the comprehensive iran sanctions accountability and divestment act of 2010 to address these iranian threats and to hold the regime accountability for its human rights violations, for its

state sponsorship of violent extremists and for its pursuit of nuclear capability. we have analyzed iranian reaction and behavior in response to these new sanctions. we have looked at what steps our allies have undertaken and considered the actions for the paralysis of the united nations, but most importantly, mr. speaker, we have intensified our response as the iranian threat has evolved and grown. . this bipartisan, bicameral agreement seeks to tighten the choke hold on the regime beyond anything that has been done before. it sends a clear message that the american people, through their elected representatives, are fully committed to using every economic and political lever at their disposal to

prevent iran from crossing the nuclear threshold. through this bill we declare that the iranian energy sector is off-limits and it black lists any related unauthorized dealings. it will undermine iran's ability to repatriate the revenues it receives from the sales of crude oil, depriving iran of hard currency and funds needed to sustain its nuclear program. . further limiting the regime's ability to finance this illicit activity. it also expands sanctions against iranian and syrian officials for human rights abuses, particularly those facilitated by computer and network disruption, monitoring, and tracking by those governments. yet we should be under no illusions, mr. speaker, that this legislation is a magic wand that we waived and we will resolve the problem overnight.

sanctions have helped to knock the regime off balance but unless the executive branch fully implements these measures immediately, the regime is likely to regain its footing and further speed up its nuclear march. so let us act now to stop that march. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time is reserved. the gentleman from california. mr. berman: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm very pleased to yield a national leader on the issue of nonproliferation and human rights and particularly our effort to stop iran's nuclear weapons program, the democratic whip of the house, the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding. first i want to rise and thank chairwoman ileana ros-lehtinen for her continuing leadership and focus on this important issue. as she does on so many other issues as well. mr. speaker, let me thank my

friend, the gentleman from california, and ranking member, the foreign affairs committee, mr. berman. his leadership on this issue in congress is second to none. and i commend him for his work. this is a bill i expect will pass with overwhelming support from both parties and for good reason. iran cannot be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. america's policy, as president obama has stated, is prevention not containment. we have many tools at our disposal to prevent iran from attaining nuclear weapons technology. while president obama is keeping all options on the table, the best diplomatic tool we have to deter iran is the sanction regime his administration has expanded along with our allies in europe and elsewherement these sanctions have already had a significant effect and iran continues to face the prospect of severe economic repercussions

if they fail to abandon their nuclear weapons plan. president obama deserves credit for his tough stances. the new sanctions this legislation would impose target entities conducting business for iran's insurance, energy, and shipping sectors. as a result of prohibit shubs on --prohibitions on repratting oil revenues, these angst -- repatriating oil revenues, these would -- iran's banking sector, including its central bapping, is already sanctioned. a result of the iranian government's financial support for terrorism in the region and around the world. there is no better evidence why this bill is so important than the fact that two weeks ago a terrorist attack in bulgaria that killed six innocent civilians, five vacationing israelis. there have been numerous press reports linking iran to that attack. as long as iran continues to pursue nuclear weapons, call for the destruction of israel, and

provide arms to terror groups like hamas and hezbollah, it will face the consequences in the form of sanctions. may i have 30 seconds? mr. berman: pleased to yield 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman. thank the speaker. as long as they provide arms to terror groups, they will face the consequences in the form of sanctions, isolation, and the continuing reality of the option of military action. the united states continues to stand strongly with our ally, israel, and i am proud to have led an effort earlier this year with the majority leader to strengthen u.s.-israel military and intelligence relations. i urge all of my colleagues to unite behind this bill just as we have behind that one. nuclear armed iran is not an option. for the middle east, for the international community, and for the united states. i thank the gentleman for

yielding me the time. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: mr. speaker, i yield 2 1/2 minutes to an american patriot, someone who has been relentless in his efforts to stop america from blundering into foreign adventures, congressman ron paul from texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. paul: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i think this bill would be better named if we called it obsession with iran act, 2012. this is what we continue to be doing is obsessed with iran and the idea that iran is a threat to our national security. iran happens to be a third world nation. they have nom significant navy, air force, intercontinental ballistic missiles, the iaea and c.i.a. said they are not on the verge of a nuclear weapon. it's so similar to what we went through in the early part of this last decade when we were beating the war drums to go to

war against iraq. it was all a facade. there was no danger from iraq. this is what we are doing. beating the war drums once again. now since the bill has come back from the conference we are dealing with civil liberties in syria. i happen to be a civil libertarian. i'm very concerned about civil liberties. let me tell you, this bill is not going to do anything to enhance the civil liberties of the individuals in syria. now, if we were really interested in the civil liberties -- in civil liberties, why would we look to ourselves? why wouldn't we look to the things that we do here? what about our searches under the patriot act? what about the policy of assassination and assassinating american citizens? what about risk by the military, national defense authorization act? what about the drone warfare? do you think we are protecting civil liberties by arbitrarily dropping drones or threatening to drop drones any place in the

world with innocent people dying? if we care about civil liberties in syria, why don't we care about the secret prisons we have and the history of torture we have had in this country? what about the fact that will decisions are being made by the executive government and we sit idly by and approve of it by saying nothing and the american people put up with it and we march in this direction, marching in to a determination to have another war. when you put on sanctions on a country, it's an act of war. that's what this is all about. the first thing you do when war breaks out between two countries is you put sanctions on -- you blockade the country. this is an act of war. what would we do if somebody blockaded or put sanctions on us and prevented the importation in this country. we would be furious, we are the aning tonieses, we are there

poking our nose in other people's affair just looking for the chance to start another war. first it's syria, then iran. we have too many wars. we need to stop the wars. we don't have the money to fight these wars any longer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: i'm so pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. turner, a member of our committee on foreign affairs. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. turner: thank you, mr. chair. i rise in strong support of h.r. 1905, the iranian threat reduction and syria human rights act of 2012. i'd like to aflawed chairwoman ros-lehtinen's tireless efforts on this legislation to ensure that iran's terrorist regime does not threaten the security of the united states and our greatest ally in the middle east, israel. i'm sure many of you remember

that iran was found by the federal court to have been directly involved in both the 1983 attacks on the marine barracks in beirut, which killed 241 soldiers. and the khobar towers bombing in saudi arabia where a suicide bomber killed 14 airmen. the victims and their families won a judgment in court against the iranian government, but difficulty ep forcing it because -- enforcing it because iran could hide behind sovereign immunity. i introduced h.r. 4070, which is now part of this bill to change a specific part of federal law to allow assets seized from the iranian government to be allocated to the beirut and khobar towers families, to recover the judgments owed to them. it is time that iran was held accountable for their involvement in the deaths of our

soldiers, i'm proud to say this provision is truly bipartisan. together my colleagues on both sides of the aisle stand together against iran. the victims' families, justice that they are being denied. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. berman: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.res. 750, yield myself 2 1/2 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. berman: the bill before us today marks a significant step forward in our sanctions effort against the iranian regime and its illicit nuclear weapon -- nuclear program. the sanctions effort which even tehran acknowledges is already having a stressful impact on iran's economy. i want to commend my colleague, ileana ros-lehtinen, for her work on this legislation. i'm proud to be the bill's chief co-sponsor in the house. building on previous sanctions,

this bill adds to what the gentlelady and i set out to do when we introduced it. for example, through further limiting transactions with the central bank of iran, an initiative i originated, this legislation restricts iran's ability to repatriate the revenue it receives from its diminishing oil sales. it includes provisions to slamp down on iran's oil exports by targeting the national iranian oil company and the national iranian tanker company and it expands sanctions on iranian shipping, and financing in the energy sector. the bill also increases sanctions on transactions with iran's islamic revolutionary guard corps. the spearhead of iran's nuclear proliferation and terrorism efforts, and the dominant player in the iranian economy. furthermore, my suggestion now includes a measure which expands sanctions beyond financial institutions to include more

than 200 additional individuals and companies that have been linked to iran's nuclear w.m.d. and -- weapons of mass destruction and terrorist programs. i ask unanimous consent to submit a list from treasury into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. berman: and of critical importance this bill vastly strengthens sanctions on both iranian and syrian human rights abusers. the provisions are very important, but the iranians should not be fooled into thinking this is the last word on sanctions. far from it. finally, mr. speaker, i want to call on the administration to implement the authorities we have given them, fully and without delay. iran's nuclear time clock is ticking. time is not on our side. the actions of the executive branch took yesterday including the first ever sanctions on foreign banks, more than two years after it became law, are a good beginning but iran's nuclear weapon program continues the pace.

every day it is enriching more uranium and hire levels. the only hope we have for a peaceful solution is to apply enough pressure to ensure that iran ends its nuclear weapons program. the bill before us and the action the administration has taken applies significantly more pressure but let there be no doubt, there is more we can do, more that we will do, if iran does not end its nuclear weapons program. verifyably and completely. we have more work to do and i reserve the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: what this is doing is stopping any kind of negotiated deal and put us on a path towards war with iran. you know, it's likely that any negotiated deal that would prevent a nuclear armed iran would provide for iranian enriched uranium for purposes under the four-seam work of the nuclear nonproliferation weapons treaty which restricts

safeguards and inspections. so we're taking a path here that guarantees that we're put on a glide slope to war. why are we doing this? we don't have enough wars in this country? we are not involved in enough places around the world in war? this is a bad resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to yield 3 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from ohio, mr. chabot, who is our subcommittee chairman on middle east and south asia on the committee on foreign affairs. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for 3 1/2 minutes. mr. chabot: i thank the gentlelady for yielding and i thank her for her strong support on this particular issue and on so many issues in this congress. madam chairman and mr. speaker, i rise in support of this well-crafted legislation which significantly ratchets up pressure on the regime in tehran as well as on all those who support or otherwise enable

its dangerous quest for a nuclear weapons capability. as we stand here today, iran's setry fuges continue to spin and -- centrifuges continue to spin and if allowed to cross that threshold, iran, which former president george w. bush aptly called the world's primary state sponsor of terror, would no doubt be embolden to threat u.s. global and regional interests. questions of rationality aside, the regime would also have the ability to follow through on its repeated threats to eradicate the state of israel. iran cannot be allowed to acquire this capability, and i believe that this legislation may very well significantly enhance pressure on the regime.

the nuclear program is, however, a symptom of a disease remember than a disease itself. a nuclear program is not in and of itself what makes this particular regime so nefarius. rather, it's the preverse -- nefarious. rather, it's the perverse of the regime that makes it so dangerous. no doubt the regime in tehran is a blight upon the iranian people and on the region and in fact the whole world. to speak of the program independently of the regime is putting the cart before the horse. but this legislation does not fall into that trap. in addition to targeting the nuclear program, h.r. 1905 puts significant pressure on the regime for its horrific human rights abuses and supports the oppressed iranian people in their fight for freedom. mr. speaker, i urge the

adoption of this critical legislation, and i want to once again thank the distinguished chairwoman, ms. ileana ros-lehtinen from florida, for her leadership on this issue. she has been pushing and pushing and pushing against this corrupt iranian regime for such a long time. and to do right by our ally, israel, and also ultimately do what's in the best interest of the people of the united states as well. it's in nobody's interest to have a nuclear iran. so i want to thank her for her leadership and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. berman: yes, mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield a minute and a half to the ranking member of the subcommittee on terrorism, nonproliferation, trade, the gentleman from california, mr. sherman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for 90 seconds. mr. sherman: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i want to thank the chairwoman of the foreign affairs committee for her work on this bill and reaching an agreement with the senate banking

committee. i rise in strong support of this measure. i especially want to thank the chairman for working with me on title 3 of this bill as it reflects several years of our work together. title 3 targets the iran revolutionary guard corps and began its life as h.r. 2379. then designated the iran revolutionary guard corps implementation act which i introduced with the chairman in may of 2009. these provisions impose tough secondary sanctions on any person, including foreign companies that conduct any significant transaction with the irgc or any of its designated fronts or affiliates. the irgc, through its support of hezbollah and its direction action has much blood on its hands. i want to thank the chairman and staff for including section 303 which applies sanctions to

governments and countries, not just companies, that provides support to the irgc. and for provisions which indicate that if you want to be a federal contractor you must certify you do not do prohibitive business with the irgc. this bill also includes important provisions i first proposed in the stop iran's nuclear weapons program act that would provide sanctions for those who lend money to the iranian government. it includes another provision i authored which will implement sanctions against those firms that give the iranian government the technologies for surveillance and oppression of their own people. what we're doing is not enough to force iran to ban its nuclear program. we should stay in session and pass more sanctions against iran. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: i ask unanimous consent to put into the record a statement by the national legislation which says the new

sanctions push the u.s. and iran closer to war. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. kucinich: i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from texas, representative ron paul. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. paul: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i'm still rather impressed with the obsession over a weapon that does not exist. and no concern whatsoever about many nuclear weapons that are held by countries that never even joined the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. it is called for in the debate that iran should end all its nuclear programs. but they're permitted to have the nuclear programs under the nonproliferation treaty. and the other countries that have weapons, including the countries that hold the weapons that came from the soviet system, seems like that would be a much greater danger. you know, the investigation by the u.n. or by the c.i.a. has

never indicated -- they said they won't even do it to 20% if they wouldn't merely allow the west would cooperate and sell them this material, they say, we don't need it, but they need 20% enrichment with medical isotopes, so our refusal to deal with them prompts them to take it up enrichment to 20%, 5%, of course, is what they're allowed to do for nuclear energy. but this idea that we can badger people and then defy the law, what we're asking them to do is to close down their program is you're asking them to defy international. they are agreeing to this. they have a right to do this under this treaty. for us to come and say, well, they must quit it, i think it really is very close to an obsession on a country that is incapable of attacking us or attacking -- they don't have a

history of invading their neighboring countries. the last time they were at war was with iraq and we bugged iraq to go into iran. i find this very distressing that the obsession continues. i find it very upsetting this vote will of course be overwhelmingly in support of correcting the civil liberties of syria and making iran total -- give up on something they're permitted to do. a vote for this, in my opinion, in time will show it's just one more step to another war that we don't need, we have not been provoked, they are not a threat to our national security and we should not be doing this. we've been doing it for too long, for the last 10, 15 years, which is obsessed with this idea we go to war and try to solve all the problems in the world and at the same time it is bankrupting us. i strongly urge a no vote on

this resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. royce, who's the chairman of the foreign affairs subcommittee on terrorism, nonproliferation and trade. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. royce: i want to start here by commending chairman ros-lehtinen for this sustained focus on iran that she has had for many, many years and i also want to thank ranking member berman for the strong pressure that he has put on the regime in iran as well. recently we had the administration fighting hard against bipartisan sanctions, targeting iran's central bank. but what i want to point out is in a bipartisan way here, congress insisted and today the administration touts the impact of sanctions on iran's economy. here's the point i'd like to

make. we'd be in a much better position if in the executive branch, both democrats and republicans -- right now we have the problem with the obama administration slow walking this -- but had they been more willing to work with congress to craft tougher sanctions earlier, we'd been in a lot better position now. the bill's stepped up penalties on those cooperating with iran's energy and shipping sectors. frankly, that's the achilles' heel that we should be aiming at. very importantly, this bill also includes the human rights title to go after those abusing iran's citizens. let's let iranians know that we are on their side and we are going to focus on those crimes against humanity, on the brutal regime opposing them. it's a regime that beats, that imprisons. i talked to some of these victims that often rapes its own people in order to try to impose its will. it's a regime that executes political prisoners by the hundreds. congress is increasing the

pressure. many of us, certainly the chairman, would like to go further. iran's centrifuges are spinning, but this is progress here today that deserves support. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. berman: thank you, mr. speaker. and i'd like to recognize my friend from florida, a member of the foreign affairs committee, the author of the bill which declares iran's energy sector a zone of proliferation, mr. deutch, for 1 1/2 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. deutch: thank you, mr. speaker. first i'd like to recognize chairman ileana ros-lehtinen and ranking member berman for their extraordinary leadership and their tireless work to bring forward a bipartisan, a bicameral bill and i thank you for working with me to include several of my provisions in the

legislation, including the iran transparency and accountability act, a measure for the first time require companies to disclose their business with iran on s.e.c. filings and for the first time create a public listing of these disclosures to clearly and definitively let the american people know which companies continue to support the illicit nuclear weapons program of -- elicit nuclear weapons program of iran. this expands sanctions against the iranian regime and those who face -- those who in the face of united international opposition continue to contribute to iran's quest for nuclear weapons. this bill sends one clear message to the entire world. if you do virtually any business in the iranian energy sector, the financial lifeline of this's nuclear program, you will be subject to sanctions. today the u.s. congress takes sanctions to an unprecedented level by sending this legislation to the president's desk. congress can initiate a

crackdown on the iranian regime. these punishing sanctions are a means to an end and we cannot for one moment take our eye off the end game. again, i thank the chairman and ranking member for their leadership. i urge my colleagues to support this important bill. now is the time to stand for human rights in iran and syria. now is the time. now is the time to stop iran from developing nuclear weapons and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: i ask unanimous consent to put in the record a publication from the international civil society action network, what the women say, killing them softly, the stark impact of sanctions on the life of ordinary iranians. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. kucinich: i yield myself half a minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kucinich: the senate banking committee summarized this bill saying it aims to prevent iran from preventing

them from hard currency, end quote. spoken plainly, this would destroy the iranian economy and further hurt the iranian people that we claim to support. iranians are already suffering under sanctions as they experience rising food price and lack of basic medicine. for example, the sanctions against the iranian banking seblingtor have diminished the currency, have impacted ordinary lives of iranians. the price of rent, bread have all increased. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: i'd like to yield one and a half minutes to the gentleman from illinois, mr. dold, an esteemed member of the committee on financial services. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. dold: thank youing mr. speaker. i want to thank the chairwoman for her leadership on this issue and the ranking member as well.

i believe a nuclear-armed iran is the greatest threat we have to our national security here at home. this is not a right vs. left issue. this is a right vs. wrong issue. mr. speaker, this legislation is significant. in its seriousness and its scope. by black listing virtually all of iran's energy, banking and transportation sectors and specifically targeting those who enable iran's attempted evasion of sanctions. this legislation sends a powerful signal to the iranian regime that they should not ever question the resolve of the united states congress to do what is necessary to confront iran's ill list nuclear am bigs. this legislation is a product of bipartisan efforts and the hard work from many people. i certainly appreciate chairman ros-lehtinen and ranking member berman's focus to try to get this passed as quickly as possible. i'm pleased to have contributed to strengthen -- to have

contributed to strengthening this package with bipartisan proposals that i introduced with representative deutch who we just heard from to declare the iranian sector a zone of concern. i also want to note the significant contributions by senator mark kirk, who has been a consistent champion and leader on the forcefulness of iran sanctions. i look forward to this legislation's passage today and implementation with urgency by the administration. i look to continue to work with my colleagues in congress on this issue until we can affirm that the iranian regime is no longer pursuing nuclear weapons capability. -- capabilities. i urge adoption of this resolution and for the immediate inch ltakes of this resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. berman: i'm pleased to yield to the gentleman who organized the iran working group seven or eight years ago to focus congressional attention on the looming threat of a nuclear iran, my friend

from new jersey, mr. andrews, for a minute and a half. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my rashes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. andrews: i thank my colleague, the gentlelady from california, for recognizing some grave and serious point. they recognize that on the 11th of september, 2001, 19 people armed with airplane tickets and box cutters wreak havoc on the united states of america. they recognize that a group of people with a small, improvised nuclear device could wreak havoc far worse than that on the mall that stands in front of this building or on times square. weapons these days are not just delivered by intercontinental ballistic missiles. they can be delivered by uh haul trucks or by other mean -- by uhaul trucks or by other

means. this is the threat of iranian nuclear pr live ration to the united states. the choice is whether we should take concerted action to prevent that threat or whether we shouldn't. i commend the gentlelady for choosing to unify this congress this country work the rest of the world, with the proposition that we should present the iranian leadership with a choice. if they decide to abandon their nuclear weapons program, which they ill listly concealed for 25 year -- ill list it -- illicitly concealed for 25 years, then the sanctions imposed will be lift and we can move toward peace and progress. but if they do not, they will most certainly suffer the consequences of a deteriorating economy and problems within their social structure. we have made our choice to stand united in favor of these strong sanctions. we are presenting the iranians with their choice. let us hope and pray they make

a choice for peace and renewed prosperity. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: i yield myself 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kucinich: we went to war with iraq assuming there were weapons of mass destruction, iran doesn't have weapons of mass destruction. one of the problems with this bill is it effectively states that sanctions on iran's central bank would not be lift unless there's a regime change. we're bringing in a whole new dimension here. now we're talking about regime change. because this resolution creates a new requirement for the terminations of sanctions that are dependent on the cessation of the central bank's financing of the revolutionary guard and imposing new restrictions on the president's ability to work sanctions. what are we doing here? setting the stage for another war. regime change and uping the bar for iran and essentially laying the groundwork for a conflict. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: i reserve the right to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves her time. the gentleman from california. mr. berman: i'm pleased to yield one minute to a former member of the foreign affairs committee, my friend from texas, the gentlelady, sheila jackson lee. one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is reck thesed for one minute. ms. jackson lee: i thank the ranking member and the chairwoman of this committee for bringing us together. i don't like -- i don't like sangs, mr. speaker, but i rise in strong support of this legislation. when i say that, i understand what sanctions can do to women and children and families. i'm remind odd -- reminded of the debate on apartheid and sanctions in africa -- in south africa. we saw w457ped with sanctions when we came together as a nation to bring down the dastardly structure of apartheid. iran right now today can stop this legislation by shedding

itself of all signs of build agnew clear weapon. the regime change is not by war. this bill does not suggest war. it means that voluntarily, by election, their governments can change. what i believe is most important is that we recognize, having seen that fallen woman bleeding in the street, that human rights abuses are massive. they are massive in their influence of iraq, where they are innewsing the treatment of residents of camp ashraf. that must stop. this legislation is crucial because it impacts the human rights abuses, it indicates that there is no giving on a nuclear weapon, and it gives iran right now today the ability to stop this legislation and sanction by owning up to eliminating any sign of a nuclear weaponization and treating its people with dignity and responding to the needs of the people in camp

ashraf. i thank the gentleman and i support the legislation enthusiastically. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expire. the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: i yield myself 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kucinich: collectively, the provisions in this bill move the goal post from negotiations over iran's nuclear enrichment program to regime change. i just want to point out the record of our country on regime change isn't all that good. yes, we knocked out saddam hussein under the lie that he had weapons of mass destruction, and now al qaeda is all over iraq. so what are we about here? are we setting the stage for another war where we siphon the revenue out of this country, send it to war machines, can't meet our own needs. since when does iran achieve greater importance than our own country? that's what i want to know. i want somebody to explain that to me. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. does the gentlelady continue to

reserve? the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. berman: could i get another indication of the time remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california has 4 1/2 minutes remain, the gentleman from ohio has three minutes remaining. mr. berman: and the gentlelady from florida? the speaker pro tempore: and the gentlelady from florida has 30 seconds. mr. berman: in this case, i'm pleased to yield a maine and a half to the ranking member of the western hemisphere subcommittee, a longtime member and leader on the foreign affairs committee and a very act i have legislator on the issue of today, the effort to stop iran from getting a nuclear weapon, my friend, mr. engel, for a minute and a half. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. engel: i rise in strong support of this legislation and i'm glad that the senate and

the house finally came together on this very, very important bill. this bill has very, very strong support, as you can tell, on both sides of the aisle. and the reason it does is because iran has proven itself to be a very, very dangerous player. iran is the leading supporter of terrorism in the world. iran supplies and supports the terrorist group hezbollah in lebanon and in fact now we see what's going on in syria and if it was not for iran, assad would not be able to continue his brutal ways and his murdering of his own people. right now, as we talk, there are iranian guards fighting on the side of assad in syria and iran chooses to be -- continues to be a rogue nation.

iran must not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. she has lied to the world consistently in talking about her purposes of the weapon but iran is not fooling anybody. so what these sanctions do is it hits at iran's oil and natural gas sectors, making it very, very difficult for them to launder money and making it very, very difficult to continue their repressive ways. the world has spoken. this isn't only the united states. these are countries all over the world. unfortunately, the blocking of some vetoes in the united nations, there would be already -- there would be sanctions in iran. i urge my colleagues to support this. i think there's a reason why virtually every member of congress on both sides of the aisle supports it and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: i yield myself sun minute.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. kucinich: these sanctions are hurting ordinary people in iran. i point out earlier, matters like the price of rent. bread. americans can understand that. education. all of these things are increasing. and these sanctions then directly undermine iran's civil society. by giving the regime a chance to crack down even harder on internal dissent. these sanctions will ensure that those crackdowns continue. ordinary iranians are struggling simply to make ends meet under the sanctions regime that already exist. they cannot afford to spend the time necessary to participate in social movements or provide basic social services to push for democratic change in their country are these the effects we wish to have on the iranian people and iranian americans? if not, passing this kind of broad, indiscriminate bill sends the wrong message. if the sanctions imposed on

iraq are impressive, we know they are not effective in supporting a democracy movement and they did not prevent a war with iraq. in fact, the sanctions including this legislation hurts our ability to negotiate with iran, imposes -- and poses long-term harm to the iranian people. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from florida continues to reserve. the gentleman from california. mr. berman: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i have no further requests for time. i'd like to just raise a couple of the issues that my friends from -- mr. paul from texas and mr. kucinich from ohio have put forth in the context of opposition to this bill. this is not the next step to war. this is the alternative to war. iran having a nuclear weapon is

unacceptable for many, many reasons. it means the end of nonproliferation regime. it means weapon -- countries all through that part of the world will seek their own nuclear weapons. it raises the specter of nuclear weapons being passed on and dirty bombs being passed on to terrorists and there's nothing in the comments of the regime that could let one relax and think they would never be the first to use those nuclear weapons. that is unacceptable. our alternatives are either war or finding a diplomatic resolution of their nuclear weapons program, the end of that program, they've been found not by the white house, not by some as a rule cans in foreign policy but by the iaea and the u.n. security council to have violated their obligations urn the

nonproliferation treaty to which they are a signatory. they don't ratify the additional protocols they move ahead with enrichment plants they don't need for a peaceful nuclear weapons program. they do not have a right to enrich. you could argue they have a right to a nuclear energy program but not a right to enrich. they conceal information in violation of their treaty obligations. this is hopefully the final step, but if not we'll have to intensify the sanctions to achieve that diplomatic program and iran is not some bucolic, peace-loving state that has never done anything against its neighbors. everyone knows that hezbollah is a direct foreign agent of iran that gets its funding, training and sponsorship and its directions from iran. we know what they've done to the marines in lebanon, we have known what they tried to do to the saudi ambassador here in washington. we know that in delhi and bull

gare rah -- bulgaria and other area -- airs -- areas around the world, their efforts to carry out attacks against israeli diplomats and citizens. their record as a state sponsor of terrorism is the largest and most impactful in the world. they are pursue agnew clear weapons capability. it is our obligation to do every measure we have to stop them from getting that and we want to do it peacefully this strategy we are embarked on is a way to find a way to do this without resorting to war and i urge my colleagues to stand strongly behind this bill. this is the alternative, it is the only feasible alternative, otherwise were faced with two very dismal prospects, a military action or an iran with nuclear weapons and all that means. i urge an aye vote and yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: i yield myself one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kucinich: sanctions are a form of leading to war. sometime ago we were talking if iran would have a nuclear weapon. but then the bar has been lowered to say nuclear weapon capability. and now the game is being changed to say not just nuclear weapon capability but we want regime change as well. i mean, if this isn't a prescription for war, then i didn't participate in the debate in this house of representatives in october of 2002 warning this congress, chapter and verse that iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, no role with al qaeda in 9/11, did not have any intention or capability of attacking the united states. this is a diversion of that debate all over again. i mean, come on, what are we

doing here? why is this more important than our country? you know, our postal service is going into manufactured default. no debate on the house floor about this today. but an attempt to manufacture a war with iran. what are we about? the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady from florida continue to reserve? ms. ros-lehtinen: correct. i will retain my time to close so if mr. kucinich could wrap up his part of the debate we can conclude. mr. kucinich: could i ask how much time remains? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio has one minute remaining. the gentlelady from florida has 30 seconds remaining. mr. kucinich: oh, fine. i yield myself one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kucinich: this legislation also requires the president to impose sanctions on those who are responsible for complicit and certain human rights abuses in syria but it fails to acknowledge that our own

country and number of our allies are actively participating in stoking things on the ground. we also read that al qaeda has also been involved in syria. so, look, this -- we have to get serious about what america's purpose is in the world. it's not to be a heavy foot. it's not to proliferate wars all over. the first thing we have to do is take care of things here at home. jobs for all, health care for all, retirement security for all. when we do those kinds of things then we can be policemen of the world. until then we can't tell people how to live, and we can settle this matter with iran without war. we can settle it through diplomacy. diplomacy. it will be real interesting to try it. let's not use this political

climate to push us into a war. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to place into the record an exchange of letters with the chairman of committee on energy and commerce, mr. upton. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself the remaining time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for 30 seconds. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you. i appreciate it. i'd like to recognize the commitment, dedication and tireless efforts of the members of our house foreign affairs committee familia, particularly our staff director, ranking member berman once described as driving a hard bargain. just ask her hubby, jason. also, thanks to matt and arie. thanks to chairman johnson of the senate banking committee and his staff, particularly colin, patrick and steve as well as ranking member shelby and his staff. a strong and warm thanks and a big hug to my good friend, mr. berman, the ranking member and his staff, particularly shana,

allen and ed as well as minority staff director richard, and i'd like to thank senators menendez and mark kirk and the critical representatives deutch, sherman and dold. let's stop iran before it's too late. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 750. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative -- the gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. camp: mr. speaker, pursuant to house resolution 747, i call up the bill h.r. 8, the job

prevention and recession prevention act of 2012, and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 8, a bill to extend certain tax relief provisions enacted in 2001 and 2002, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 747, the bill is considered as read. after one hour of debate on the bill it shall be in order to consider the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part b of house report 112- 641 if offered by the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, or his designee, which shall be considered as read and shall be separately debatable, minutes controlled by the proponent and an opponent. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on h.r. 8, and, mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection and the gentleman is recognized.

mr. camp: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 8, the job prevention and recession prevention act. in doing so i and my fellow republican house colleagues have made an important choice, the choice to focus on job creation. unfortunately, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who oppose this important piece of legislation have made a different choice. the choice to focus on tax hikes that destroy jobs. the job prevention and recession prevention act stops the tax hike we face at the end of the year and provides a one-year extension of the low tax policies originally enacted in 2001 and 2003 and then extended again in 2010. the 2010 bill was supported by 85 current house democrats, 40 current senate democrats and president obama. importantly, this legislation

allows congress time to pass and enact comprehensive tax reform. without causing undo harm to our fragile economy. economists have noted that comprehensive tax reform, when paired with appropriate government spending cuts, could lead to the creation of one million american jobs in the first year alone. the choice republicans have made is to pass this bill, work toward comprehensive tax reform and create jobs. in contrast, my democrat colleagues have proposed raising taxes. they claim the tax hike will only affect the rich. what they don't want to tell you is that in reality this tax hike will hit nearly one million small businesses and 53% of small business income. a study conducted by ernst & young concluded that the democrat tax hike could lead to the loss of over 700,000 jobs.

that's the choice that democrats made, to raise taxes on families and small businesses and destroy jobs. america is at a crossroads. as this chart illustrates, and the question is, which path will our country take? the democrats' path will cause 700,000 lost jobs. or the republicans' plan that will lead to the creation of one million jobs in the first year? what's even worse is that in their quest to raise taxes on the so-called wealthy, several of my democrat colleagues have made it clear that they're willing to hold low and middle income americans hostage by threatening to let all taxes rise at the schedule -- as scheduled at the end of the year if they don't get their way. now, these massive and imminent tax hikes are part of the fiscal cliff or jobs cliff as i

offer refer to it that we face at the end of the year. the nonpartisan congressional budget office says going over the fiscal cliff could cost america two million to three million jobs. this will be a devastating blow to almost 13 million americans who are unemployed as well as to the middle class americans who have been struggling in the obama economy. now, mr. speaker, the choice to me is obvious. let's pass this bill, let's work toward comprehensive fax reform that creates a simpler, fairer tax code for all americans, most importantly, that creates the jobs we so badly need. i urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to reconsider their choice, to increase taxes and destroy over 700,000 jobs. now is not the time to dig the hole we're in any deeper. instead, democrats should take the advice of people like former president clinton and larry sommers and join

republicans to stop the tax hike, work to strengthen our economy and get our country back on track. and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: there is a choice to be made here, and it isn't what the chairman has put forth for one second. everyone in this body agrees that we should extend the middle class tax cut. the senate passed a bill that does just that. the president is ready to sign

it this week. the middle class families of this country need certainty, not some vague promises about something to be done in the future. so the question is, if everybody agrees that we should continue the middle class tax cut, why don't we come together? the answer is this. the senate bill continues all the tax cuts for every american household on their first $250,000 of income. 114 million families would see their tax cuts extended in full. 97% of small businesses would keep all of their tax cuts, according to the joint tax committee. 97%. so why don't the republicans

join us in acting? i think the answer is clear. this chart shows it. they're insistent, their priority is cutting taxes for the very wealthy. they want to give households that earn more than $1 million a year a tax cut on average of $160,000. this chart shows that we have here for middle class families $2,200. for the verywelly, $160,000. that's over 70 times more a tax cut for millionaires than for typical families. and what makes it worse, if possible, is it would add $49 billion to deficit this

republican bill also would raise taxes on 25 million families, 25 million. those who benefited from the eitc, from the child tax credit, and a higher education tax cut which they would credit -- credit that they would eliminate altogether. and it's still worse. the bill we're going to discuss tomorrow, so-called tax reform, essentially would provide someone earning more than $1 million a $331,000 tax cut. this debate is not about tax reform. it's about whether or not we protect the very wealthy at all costs. at all costs. for middle income families.

for everybody except the very wealthy. there's talk about 700,000 jobs being lost. that study financed by special interest friends, it's been discredited by every fact checker. and you know, they're talking about 70 times more for the millionaire than for middle income families on average when in 201193% -- in 2011, 93% of income growth went to the top 1% of wealthy households. 93%. and they come here and say, as their first priority, is protecting the very wealthy. now this isn't about tax reform. we need to work on this. this is about whether the first priority of the republicans is

protecting the very wealthy, holding hostage middle income families. let middle income family hostages be released. be released. join together for what everybody says they are for. let's pass today our substitute and give a middle income tax cut to everybody. including 97% of small businesses. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time is reserved. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the distinguished chairman of the health subcommittee, mr. herger. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. herger: mr. speaker, this house must act to stop the midnight tax hike that threatens to hit all american

taxpayers on december 31. this midnight menace includes a 50% cut in the value of the child tax credit. higher taxes on dividends for seniors living on fixed income. the return of the infamous marriage penalty for working families. and the alternative minimum tax ensnaring middle income taxpayers. an average family of four with an income of $50,000 could see a tax increase of almost $2,200 a career. the president says he wants to stop the midnight tax hike for some taxpayers, but not all. he claims that he merely wants the wealthy to pay more but the truth is, that his tax increase proposal would especially hit small business owners.

as someone who comes from a small business background myself, i understand that many small businesses pay taxes as individuals. their income includes money that they reinvest in the business to expand and hire more workers. a big tax increase could harm the very businesses we are relying on to create more jobs. in fact, a new study bierness & young suggests that the president -- by ernst & young suggests that the president's tax proposal would cost more than 700,000 american jobs. mr. speaker, what lane will you choose? i urge the house to pass h.r. 8 and prevent a tax hike for all americans. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr.

levin. mr. levin: i yield myself 10 seconds. when you look at mr. herger's district, he's standing up to protect 180 people who have income over $1 million, sacrificing a middle income tax cut for 285,000. i now yield two minutes to the very distinguished chairman, former chairman, and a gentleman from new york, mr. rangel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. rangel: thank you, mr. chairman. i've never been so fortunate in this house to have the republicans state the argument as clearly as they have this afternoon. and i think wally herger said it. it is possible not that we're talking about a tax cut. people are working every day to try to make ends meet. they don't know the wonderful

tax cut that they are enjoying. but you bet your life if we don't come together, we don't reach agreement, they'll understand what a tax hike is. and that's exactly what's going to happen to 98% of the tax paying people of this great country. taxpayers who work every day who raise their families porks buy from the local merchants that keep small business alive are going to find out, probably too late, that the republican party says you don't deserve the lower tax rate. then they may ask, what's holding this up? if everyone agrees that they should have it? we're going to have to explain to the middle class what the republicans are explaining to us. that somehow we are to believe that less than 2% of the population is creating the jobs

and really supporting the economy. i don't know where they've been or how they're going to come become but they haven't been creating jobs and they haven't been spending and investing money. but even if there was a controversy, why the heck are we holding hostage 98% of the people? if republicans agree and democrats agree and liberal and conservatives and even tea party people agree that these people work hard every day, should continue to have this tax cut, then why the heck don't we agree to give it to them? and if it ever becomes that we're in a political debate and it's only about less than 2% of 100%, then let's fight like the devil over that and see who prevails. but it's not going to be hard for us to explain this if you do this to the hardworking american people, shame on you.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield three minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, mr. roskam. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. roskam: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i'd like to pause and just listen and think through a couple of arguments we've been hearing over the past couple of weeks from our friends on the other side of the aisle and from the president of the united states and one is that people should pay their fair share. that's an interesting argument, mr. speaker. let's look at that a little bit closer. so if the president's will were to prevail on this, in other words if this tax hike goes into place, then the top tax rate for some small businesses would be over 44%. now contrast that to the top tax rate that president obama is proposing would be 28%. now, all afternoon, you're going to hear a lot of things

go back and forth but you won't hear anyone contradict those numbers -- those numbers and that disparity, mr. speaker, because they are true. there is no sense in telling corporations you get a 28% rate and the top rate for small business is 44%, there's nothing fair about that. let's look at another argument. another argument is that this smu closes a budget gap and this is deficit reduction and we're all about deficit reduction and let's have at it. the little secret on the deficit reduction is at best, the most generous estimate, is this would take care of, what, maybe seven, eight, nine, 10 days of spending, maybe. but who would pay the cost for that? i'll tell you who pays the cost for that. the job creators and the people who are looking for jobs right now, mr. speaker. according to ernst & young and other who was looked at this, some estimates are that it

would cost 700,000 jobs. i know nobody that is willing to say you know what we have got too many jobs. let's thin the herd. there's too many people working. let's thin the herd, there's too many people working and let's do it buzz of democratic dogma. we have leading depps on the other side of the rotunda saying let's embrace the fiscal cliff and grab on to the dogma and go right off the cliff regardless of the outcome. you know what? that's ridiculous. and we have an opportunity here to make some certainty, to move to the next year, not to the move to the next year just for the sake of another year but to move to next year to fundamentally reform our tax system. to create a more competitive tax code that is broad and fair and wise and well thought out and that does what? that creates the most competitive tax code in the world right here in the united states. mr. speaker, it could be great.

we could have a great tax code but what we've got to do is create a year of certainty to move forward. i urge the passage of this and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i yield myself 15 seconds. it's ironic that the gentleman from illinois min midses adding $50 billion to the deficit over 10 years of continued -- if continued, which is your policy, would be $1 trillion. that's something you just shrug your shoulders at? i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon, another distinguished member of our committee, earl blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you. it is an interesting question, which lane are we going to choose. the study that's been offered by our friends on the other side of the aisle is bogus and i invite people to actually

look at it and look at the critiques that have been offered up. but we've had a real-life experiment. because these tax rates that are being talked about are exactly what we had in the clinton years. at which time some of our good friends on the other side of the aisle predicted calamity. job loss. the economy would crash. what in fact happened is we had 22 million jobs that were created. what has happened is that when they had a chance to experiment with their vision in the bush years, when they put in place these tax reductions if they would have worked, what would have happened? did employment even match what happened in the clinton years? no. in fact, it was barely 5% of what happened in the eight

years of bill clinton. in fact, the obama administration, when it took, after the first few months when it was in office and could be credited with responsibility for the economy, has produced more private sector jobs than the entire bush admferings in eight years. -- administration in eight years. the job loss that's gone negative has been slashing in the public sector, primarily teachers and firefighters and police officers at the state and local level. mr. speaker, the strategy here is to continue punting. our republican friends are punting on the farm bill. our republican friends are punting on s.g.r. they're now proposing a budget solution that gets us past the election because they can't face up to their own tea party extremists and they're split. may i have 30 seconds?

mr. levin: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. mr. blumenauer spak that's -- mr. blumenauer: that's what is at sfake here. i suggest we take what we can agree on, the 98% of this tax reduction, agree on that, not punt, give some real certainty and then have an honest debate about their proposal to increase taxes on the middle class at the expense of -- to be -- to the richest americans, let's have that debate and not hold people hostage in the short-term. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the distinguished chairman of the trade subcommittee, the gentleman from texas, mr. brady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. brady: thank you, mr. speaker. and i appreciate chairman camp's leadership on this

important jobs issue. this recovery is the weakest since world war ii. it's dead last. millions of americans can't find work. millions of americans have given up looking for work. businesses on main street are struggling. business confidence is down. consumer confidence is down. this economy is not working. and yet the president has a plan. he gave it to us a couple weeks ago. he said, i want to raise taxes on small businesses and professionals. but here's the cost. in real terms for our economy, 700,000 more americans will be kicked to the unemployment line. the economy will grow slower. in fact, it will shrink. paychecks will shrink. less investment in america. what kind of plan is that for a recovery? republicans -- and also, seniors are going to write more checks on capital gains and dividends to uncle sam, the

dividends they live on. small businesses will be able to expand less often because of this. republicans think there's a different choice for america's economy. we want to stop the tax hikes. we want to grow this economy by one million new jobs. we want to make sure that you save your whole life as a senior, you invest in dividends in the home and land that you keep it to survive in your retirement years. we want to make sure the death tax doesn't come back to life. think about this, you work your whole life to build a family-owned farm or business and when you die uncle sam swoops in and takes more than half of everything you worked a lifetime to earn. that's the choice between the republican plan to stop the tax hikes and grow this economy and the president's plan to raise taxes and hurt this economy. it is the clear choice. the house is going to act and more importantly we are going to make sure that america has

the best tax system in the world again so that we can compete and win so our kids and grandkids have the opportunity for the strongest economy in the world. it's a clear choice. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to another gentleman, a member of our committee, mr. pascrell from the current state of new jersey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. pascrell: thank you, mr. speaker, mr. ranking member. mr. speaker, this bill makes it as clear as day just what the priorities of the majority are. instead of shifting the tax burden away from the middle class who haven't gotten a raise in a long time and small businesses, this bill does the exact opposite. and for you to continue to say that this is going to be a burden across the board on small businesses, it is delusional.

90% of small businesses won't be affected by our bill. to the anti-tax crusaders, this bill will raise taxes on the middle class, your bill, and working poor, your bill, by enaverage of $1,000. in new jersey this bill will make 3.2 million middle class and working poor familiar lows pay more taxes -- families pay more taxes so 231,400 millionaires can get a bigger tax cut. it's as simple as that. you can shake your head all you want. those are the facts. this bill will add almost $1 trillion more to the deficit than the democratic bill. my lord. i don't hear you talk about that. i don't hear you say that. i wonder why. just saw that .3% of the taxpayers can get an average tax cut of over $74,000.

at least the last time the republicans took this shortsighted trickle down approach we had a $5.6 trillion surplus thanks to bill clinton. in 2008, we were $11 trillion -- over $11 trillion in debt. we quite simply can't afford to give millionaires another tax break and make our children and our grandchildren foot the bill. the proof is in the pudding. in 2000 when we first tried the supply side voodoo unemployment was 4.2%. by 2008 -- 30 seconds? mr. levin: i yield 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional 15 seconds. mr. pascrell: thank you. to those members concerned with tax fairness, today well concentrated with the top 1% is

at the same level as the period immediately preceding the great depression. so you shrunk the middle class with your great economic ideas between 2001 and 2008 and what you did -- what you did is made the rich richer. i salute you if you think that's what america is about. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: thank you. at this time, mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from ohio, the speaker of the house. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio, the speaker of the house, is recognized for one minute. the speaker: i thank my colleague for yielding and remind my colleagues for the last 18 months we have been in majority we have focused on jobs. the american people are still asking a question, where are the jobs, and that's why we got over 30 jobs bills now pending over in the united states

senate. after today we will have another bill sitting over in the senate that will help create more jobs in america. two years ago the president said we shouldn't raise taxes in this time of a slow economy. i agreed with the president. the congress agreed with the president. all of republicans and 119 democrats voted to extend all of the current tax rates. and here we are some 18 months later, economic growth is actually slower than it was when president obama made those remarks and yet the president wants to raise taxes on the so-called rich. well, let me tell you who the so-called rich are. about a million of those people you want to increase taxes on are small business owners. small business owners who pay their business taxes through their personal -- their personal tax return. i know all about this. i used to be one of them.

i have a subchapter s corporation and whenever the company so-called profits were i had to pay taxes on those whether i actually got the money or not. and so when you look at what you want to do, what the president wants to do, he wants to tax a million small business owners. ernst & young has come out and made it clear if you do this, 750,000 jobs are going to be destroyed. at a time when the american people are asking, where are the jobs and so, listen, it's time to put the rhetoric aside. it's time to put the politics aside. i another we are in election year but my goodness, raising taxes at this point in the economy is a very big mistake. extending all the current tax rate, which our bill does, for one year so we have time to revise our tax code, lower rates, fairer rates for all americans, which is what needs

to happen if we're truly going to make america more competitive, put more americans back to work and bring some of those jobs that have been shipped overseas back home, we all know we need to revise our tax code and reform it from top to bottom but that's not going to happen overnight. so extending all of these rates for one year will provide certainty. certainty for who? certainty for small business owners. people who can make decisions about what they want to invest in terms of new plants, new equipment, whether they want to hire new employees. this is the most commonsense thing we can do and there's to reason that we shouldn't. and when we look at the proposal coming from our colleagues across the aisle, it raises taxes on dividends. probably not a smart thing to do as when you look at senior citizens, many of them who depend on their dividend income, they're going to get whacked by your proposal. and under your proposal not

only do we tax small business people but, oh, yeah, the death tax comes back in full force because it fails to address one of the most penalizing parts of our tax code. i believe that the proposal that my colleague, mr. camp, and his committee have brought forward is a reasonable, responsible approach and i would urge its passage. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i yield myself 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 15 seconds. mr. levin: look, no one here should desort the fact, 95% of small business people would keep all the tax cuts. in the speaker's district there are -- he's sacrificing the middle class for a few with over $1 million. i now have the pleasure of

yielding two minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from south carolina, mr. clyburn. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. clyburn: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank mr. levin for yielding me the time and for his leadership on this very important issue. i rise in strong opposition to this legislation. south carolina, my home state, is home to many -- fort jackson, columbia, the third army headquarters in sumpter, paris island and the marine air station in buford. i proudly work to represent these military communities and i oppose h.r. 8 because of the hurt it would visit upon middle income and military families. a new report out today for the center for american progress documents the harsh impact that

h.r. 8 would have on many military families. for example, a private in the united states army in his first year of service who's married with an infant child would have a $273 increase under h.r. 8. now, that's real money to a young soldier. a marine corporal with four years of service who's married and has two children would see a tax increase of $448 under h.r. 8. that family's already struggling to make ends meet. and finally, mr. speaker, a military police sergeant in the air force with eight years' service, a spouse and three young children would get a whooping tax increase of $1,018 under h.r. 8. mr. speaker, these are just three examples of how the republican bill would negatively impact our military families.

the senate has passed a middle class tax cut and the president told us he would sign it. the only thing standing between the middle income and their tax cut is the republican leadership in this house. mr. speaker, it is time that we come together and extend to the middle class an income tax cut that is fair, that will create jobs, that will offer security to families and stability to communities. i urge a vote against this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield myself 15 seconds, and i would just say that the gentleman's remarks refer to the stimulus bill. a failed stimulus bill that was promised to create, you know, unemployment under 8%. frankly, it's never been there. for 40 months we've been over 8%. these are spending items that failed, that failed in the stimulus program. that program did not work. at this time i yield two minutes to the distinguished member of the ways and means

committee, the gentleman from louisiana, dr. boustany. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. boustany: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of this very important legislation. the administration and congressional democrats seek to raise taxes on america's families, small businesses and job creators. there's a very clear choice here. either we can let small business owners, the job creators, america's entrepreneurs create jobs or we could follow a path that they're advocating over here and that is tax small businesses. i stand in strong support of creating american jobs. over 940,000 business owners will see higher taxes if the president and washington democrats are allowed to raise the top two rates. this means over half of our nation's small businesses will see higher taxes at a cost of over 700,000 fewer jobs for americans. over 700,000 fewer jobs for americans. allowing these tax cuts to expire will hurt middle class

families. if we pass this, the average taxpayer in my state of louisiana will see tax relief of almost -- on average of $1,800. the average family of four earning $50,000 could see a tax decrease of $2,000. a single parent earning $36,000 per year could see tax increases over $1,100 if these provisions expire. mr. speaker, this administration continues its assault on the american family and the american -- the american businesses with its tax and spend policies. our country can't afford it. certainly america's families and businesses can't afford it. what we need is this. one-year extension to allow us to move forward with a real comprehensive approach to tax reform. we have a real opportunity to do what's right for america, to promote american competitiveness. this is the moment. let's seize it. let's do it. but we need to take this step today to get us where we can move to that next step and that

next point. so i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, let's quit dilly-dallying around with this. the american people want us to step up and be leaders and solve some of these problems. let's step up and be leaders. let's extend these provisions. move forward with a 21st century tax code. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i now yield to the very distinguished member of our committee, mr. crowley from the great state of new york, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. crowley: i thank my good friend from michigan for yielding me this time. i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 8. the reason i oppose this bill is because this bill will impose taxes on hundreds of thousands of u.s. military families, our heroes. that's right. of the millions facing a tax hike, hundreds of thousands are u.s. military families. let's call this bill what it

is. it is the republicans' tax hike on our heroes act. now, i know those on the other side of the aisle will come down here one by one and claim they are extending tax cuts for everyone. but you're extending tax cuts for people earning over $1 million a year and raising taxes on families earning under $45,000 a year. this bill scales back tax breaks put in place by president obama and directly aimed at benefiting working families. let's make -- let's take a moment to put a face on the 25 million americans whose taxes will go up including hundreds of thousands of u.s. military families. if you're an air force staff sergeant with eight years of service, a spouse and three young children here stateside at home, the republican tax hike on our heroes act will raise their taxes by $1,100.

a new recruit, a private in the u.s. army in their first year of service earning a little over $18,000 a year, $18,000 a year, men and women on the front line defending our freedom, if they're married with an instant child at home, they'll see an increase under this bill of $273. a tax increase under the republican tax hike on our heroes act. it begs the question -- how are my colleagues who represent fort hamilton in brooklyn going to vote on the republican tax hike on our heroes act? are you going to stand with your military family constituents or with the 2%? how -- my colleagues who represent fort diction in new jersey going to vote -- mr. levin: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. mr. crowley: on the republican tax on heroes act?

my colleagues who represent fort monroe in virginia, rock island in illinois, biel air force base in california, today, the choice is clear, stand with the democrats and the president who put forward a plan that asks america's wealthiest to support this great land and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: thank you, i yield one minute to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from minnesota, mr. paulsen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for one minute. mr. paulsen: mr. speaker, i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, last week i took part in a roundtable conversation in my district with over 20 small business leaders. they discussed the devastating impact that these looming tax hikes would have on job creation, not only across the country, but in minnesota. the sentiment that was echoed throughout this entire conversation was that washington should not be raising taxes when our economy is still struggling to recover. these job creators understand all too well what our country

is facing as we approach on january 1 this tax cliff, this fiscal cliff, this jobs cliff, and the message from all of these spures was simple -- job creators and business leaders alike were saying very directly, stop the tax hike. studies have shown this would negatively impact half of all business income. a loss of over 700,000 jobs potentially. 14,500 of those jobs are in my home state of minnesota, mr. speaker, but if we extend these rates and we move toward tax reform we could have a positive impact of one million new jobs. mr. speaker, the choice is clear. with the national unemployment rate over 8% for over 40 consecutive months, we must stop the tax hike. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, were levin. mr. levin: i yield myself 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: look, i want to repeat, joint tax says 97% of small businesses would keep all of their tax cuts. and in mr. paulsen' district,

there are 1,345 people with income over $1 million compared with over 325,000 households. that's the equation at stake here. that's the equation. i now have a real pleasure to yield two minutes to the very active gentleman from massachusetts. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for two minutes. >> i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. neal: there is one undisputable fact here and that is the bush tax cuts used borrowed money. how much sense did that make to borrow the money to give tax cuts to the wealthiest people in america, the top 2%? the argument at the time was simple low this. that we should give tax cuts for the people at the top because they create jobs for the people at the middle and the bottom. fact, the slowest economic growth at any time since

herbert hoover was president of the united states. the assault on the clinton presidency was he raised taxes. top bracket. 22 million jobs. the greatest economic growth spurt in the history of america. a reminder to our friends, unemployment rate of 3.8%. so borrow the money during the bush years for tax cuts. so that we can give the wealthy -- and my goodness, what a ride they've had for these 12 years. it is unbelievable when you look at what those rate cuts did to people at the top. we have a responsibility here to protect the middle class from a big tax hike next year. last week the senate passed a bill that would extend tax cuts for 98% of the american people. the middle class. and now it's up to the house to provide some certainty to the middle class that their taxes are not going to go up next

year. instead of doing so, what are we doing today? once again we are having an argument about what to do for that top 2% of income earners in america. who our republican friends can never seem to do quite enough for. even more troubling, this tax package ends president obama's bill for helping college students and not only do we hold the middle class hostage to extending tax cuts for the wealthiest but they want to raise taxes on 5 million. mr. levin: 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. neal: we need to extend the child tax credit and earned income tax credit and that's what we need to be doing today and providing them with some sense and security and support and, my god, could we do any more to help the wealthy in america than what our republican friends have done? the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: at this time i yield one minute to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from texas, mr. marchant. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for within minute. mr. marchant: i prize in support of the job prevention and recession prevention act of 2012. businesses in my district in texas and across the country are reluctant to hire and make investments due to an uncertain economy and at an impasse over taxes. this bill is a thoughtful step to bolster our economy and bridge the gap to tax simplification. this bill provides a serious game plan and a timetable that shows the american economy how to move forward. if we don't act, the looming tax hike could destroy an estimated 700,000 jobs according to an ernst & young study. and it's no surprise then that the institute of international finance said that there is a strong case to extend lower

bush era taxes due to expire at the end of the year in order to avert a fiscal cliff. i am proud to support and urge my colleagues to support this bill that helps u.s. job creators and give businesses more confidence to put americans and texans back to work. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: could the speaker indicate how much time is on each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has 11 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 13 3/4 remaining. mr. levin: maybe i'll reserve if you're ready. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield two minutes to a distinguish member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from nebraska, mr. smith. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nebraska is recognized for two minutes. mr. smith: thank you, mr.

speaker. i rise in favor of the bill that we are facing here today to spend an interesting debate that we've had now for sometime. i learn a lot traveling around my district, but it was especially compelling when i was at a manufacturing plant less than 40 employees and they told me unprovoked that they said the estate going up to 55% would devastate their business. those were their words. devastate their business. it's not just farmers and ranches -- ranchers that would pay the estate tax, it would be small businesses. very thriving small businesses who put people to work, who provide health care and business and truly the 35% rate is a compromise. i would prefer to see no estate tax given the fact that it is double taxation and certainly

55% is what many folks would consider confiscatory in nature. so i rise in favor of the bill we are debating here today. i think it is better policy, certainly better for our economy that we would not raise taxes on the american people. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to another distinguished member of our committee, mr. becerra from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. becerra: mr. speaker, when the wall street banking crisis of 2008 hit, causing the worst recession since the great depression, it was the middle class that took it on the chin. more than eight million americans lost their job through no fault of their own. and as millions of americans were losing their jobs and their homes, the big banks received bailouts and c.e.o.'s continued to receive million dollar payouts. while too many middle class americans are still out looking for work, this congress is voting again to give over

$160,000 a year in tax breaks to the richest % of americans while the average american will be lucky to get about 1/100 or 2/100 of that amount. can anyone blame them for thinking that the system is rigged against them? mr. speaker, we all admire financial success, but when we give away trillions in tax cuts we cannot afford to those who need them the least, it's the middle class who has to make up the difference. to pay for these tax cuts, our republican colleagues have voted to end medicare and would force seniors to pay $6,400 more for their own care. on top of that, republicans propose changing social security, slashing its budget by over $800 million. it's an ideological agenda that chooses millionaires over the middle class. regular folks pay more so folks like donald trump and mitt romney can get yet another tax break.

einstein is credited for saying the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. 11 years after the bush tax breaks became law and drove us deeper into deficits, let us not repeat these mistakes. we should stand with the middle class. mr. speaker, this should be an all hands on deck moment. america works best when the middle class in america is working. let's start talking about how we can get all americans back to work and strengthen our economy. i urge my colleagues to reject this bill and support the democratic alternative which is focused on the middle class and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield myself 15 seconds. we have a note here from a small business and they were asked, how wine crease taxes impact your businesses? less hiring. if rates were allowed to increase, would that affect your ability to hire new employees?

absolutely. we've done nothing except cut staff for four years now. a tax increase could spell disaster. at this time i yield three minutes to the distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from washington state, mr. reichert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for three minutes. mr. reichert: i thank the gentleman for yielding and, mr. speaker, most americans think that the economy is moving in the wrong direction and most of them think it's congress' fault. and that we've not done enough to help them take care of their families and give them financial security. they don't want political rhetoric today. they don't care who's wrong or who's right. they want to know what we're doing now, what we're doing today to make buying groceries and gas and paying the electric bill affordable. mr. speaker, if we don't act, a family of four that earns $50,000 -- earns $50,000 a year will have an increase in their taxes of $2,200 every year. that's real money, mr. speaker,

that's the difference between buying a box of cheer yos, that extra box, and paying the gas bill and saving for college. and for the job creators, the mood is even worse. we all know that small businesses create jobs. every one of us in this house know, small businesses create jobs. but the democrats would raise taxes on them, killing 700,000 jobs. i refuse to raise taxes on small businesses while they struggle to bring our country out of this recession. i refuse to destroy over 700,000 jobs that support families who need and want red winners -- bread winners, not handouts. we must ask ourselves every day, what else can we do for these families? you know, we can offer them some long-term security so that when they die their families, their farms and their small businesses will survive and thrive.

but tax increases don't even stop when you die. if we do nothing, the death tax increases to 55%. we pay tax when we earn the income, we pay when we invest our income and we pay again when we leave it to our kids. you want to talk about a fair tax code, mr. speaker? so today i am voting to -- for a clear path forward. after 41 months of unemployment above 8%, we must stop the tax hike. i am committed to tax reform that will create jobs, grow our economy and support families. i am voting today for working families, for small businesses, for entrepreneurs, and for family farms, mr. speaker. this bill puts america back on the right track. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: could you tell us, please, again how much time

there is? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has nine minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 9 3/4 minutes remaining. mr. levin: ok. i now yield two minutes to another active member of our committee, mr. doggett from texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for how much time? mr. levin: two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: two minutes. the gentleman is recognized. mr. doggett: now is not the time to let the republicans raise taxes on thousands of texas families in order to provide more tax breaks for a privileged few. republicans would hike the taxes by almost $500 for a maried marine corporal with four years of service and two children. that's wrong. nor is this the time for republicans to tax opportunity. a single mom working as a nurse,

helping a daughter attend the alamo colleges or texas state or a.c.c. would be denied the $2,500 hire education tax credit that i authored. all of this in the very same bill that would give a republican who earns $1 million a tax cut that is larger than that marine or that nurse will earn in an entire year. if there were an olympic medal out there for protecting those sitting atop the economic ladder by suppressing at the expense of those trying to get a foothold on one of the first rungs, these republicans would have no competition for going for the gold. nor has this trickledown republican approach grown our jobs and our economy. extending tax breaks for those at the very top, it was done in 2010, over my objection. it hasn't grown jobs in the past

year. any more than it helped to avoid the bush-cheney recession. and as for this much urged report, it was bought and paid for by the same millionaires that are going to get the tax break bigger than what the nurse or the marine earns all of next year, along with a few large corporations who have paid for the report. it is not credible. it is not just to see some americans have to lose tax breaks in order to help the few gain even more. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: at this time i yield three minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman from tennessee, mr. black. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized for three minutes. mrs. black: thank you, mr. speaker. you know, when nearly 23 million americans are struggling to find full time employment, president obama and his democrat allies seem to think that now is the time to raise taxes on small

businesses. the president may be satisfied with 8% or more unemployment rate for 41 straight months, but i am not and, more importantly, the american people are not. the american people don't need to settle for a country with fewer and fewer opportunities and a diminished future. and so the house today will vote to stop the tax hike for all taxpayers. and tomorrow we will vote to move forward with a comprehensive tax reform. and this is a critical step in providing the certainty that our small businesses desperately need to grow and create jobs. now the democrats' proposal to raise taxes on nearly one million small businesses will cost more than 700,000 jobs and they have not even offered a plan on tax reform. this is more of the same failed leadership that has given us the weakest economy recovery since

the great depression and democrats think that we are just one more tax increase away from prosperity. but we're a nation -- but when is a nation ever taxed its way to prosperity? prosperity is built by the american people, not the government. american entrepreneurs and small business owners are the life blood of our american dream. and they're the backbone of our economy. it is clear that we must stop this tax hike and reform our broken tax code, to revive our struggling economy and keep the american dream alive. i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure to yield two minutes to our ranking member on budget, mr. van hollen from maryland. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker, and i thank mr. levin. it's very important everyone

understand the choice that's facing the house today. the democrats will offer an amendment that will immediately extend tax relief to 100% of american people. the senate has already passed that proposal and if our republican colleagues vote for it today, we can send it down to the white house, the president will sign it today. someone asked what we're going to do today, we could provide immediate tax relief to 98% of the american people. now, let's be clear. the democratic proposal provides tax relief to everybody up to $250,000. what our republican colleagues are saying is, they will deny tax relief to 98% of the american people unless people making over $250,000 get a bonus, an extra tax cut. in other words, unless the top 2% get an extra tax cut, nobody else gets anything. it gets worse. we've heard a lot of talk here about small businesses.

that we need to adopt the republican plan in order to support small businesses. it's just not true. the democratic proposal, according to the nonpartisan independent joint tax committee, provides tax relief to 97% of the businesses that we're talking about here. in fact, they point out that the other three percent -- other 3% of businesses include about 20,000 businesses that make over $50 million a year. now, they may be good businesses, but these are not mom and pop businesses. the language we're hearing from our republican colleagues would use small businesses as a cover to providing breaks for firm it's like -- for firms like fortune 100 pipeline company, enterprise products partners, price warners house cooper, good business, not a mom and pop, k.k.r., investment banking, and guess what?

bane capital. bane capital, the kind of small business that our republican colleagues are trying to protect. this is all really in service to the trickledown ideology. we tried it in the bush administration, at the end of eight years we saw a net job loss. can i have 15 seconds? mr. levin: i yield an additional 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional 15 seconds. mr. van hollen: i thank you. we tried trickledown. we lived it, we saw net job loss. but who picked up the tab? the rest of the country. because it drove a huge hole in our deficit and in order to deal with that, if we don't ask folks at the top to pay a little bit more, the rest of the country ends up picking up the tab. that's just not right and it doesn't help the economy. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield myself 15 seconds. to say that my friends' proposals just aren't bold enough. the economy isn't growing, unemployment is still above 8% for 40 consecutive months. we need to get on a plan for comprehensive reform.

not just raising taxes on a segment, not just pitting one group of americans against another, but let's get a comprehensive reform so we can get certainty, we can get job growth, we can get economic prosperity and get americans back to work. i now yield two minutes to the distinguished member from new york, a member of the ways and means committee, mr. reed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker, thank you, mr. chairman. i rise today in support of the proposed legislation to make sure that we do not increase taxes on any americans come the end of this year. i think it's prudent, it's responsible and it's the right message to send to america, that we are going to stand with every american and every small business owner across the country and say, end of the year, no tax increases. and i appreciate my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and their passion and their commitment to raising taxes them. get to choose what threshold, $200,000, $250,000 or more, but

it's clear to me that there's a clear distinction that the american people will have an opportunity to decide from this -- come this november between my democratic colleagues across the aisle and this side of the aisle. my democratic colleagues across the aisle, raise taxes. as part of the solution going forward. this side of the aisle, i'm proud to stand, mr. speaker, to say no to raising taxes on any american moving forward. now, the gentleman had recognized and said that some of these tax increases that we're talking about in regards to businesses are not the mom and pop shop. well, i'll tell you something. i just had a conversation with dick clark from my district, a owner of villager construction. that's a mom and pop shop. a company out of cuba, new york, in my district. that's a mom and pop shop. those are people that have told me that one of their greatest concerns as small business owners is the tax burden that they're going to face next year. let's not stand for rhetoric,

let's do the responsible, prudent thing and say no to tax increases and i leave it up to the american people who i believe are hardworking taxpayers who are not stupid. they know what the distinction will be by the end of this year, next year, when they come to the voting booth in november. that we stand for no tax increases and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are going down the path of let's raise taxes. now is not the time to raise taxes in an economic climate where people are struggling and we're trying to have the job creaters have the capital so they can put people back to work for today and tomorrow. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: thank you. i now yield two minutes to the gentlelady from new york, mrs. velazquez, who's ranking on small business and who has toiled in the vineyards and beyond on behalf of the small businesses of this country. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized for two minutes. ms. velazquez: thank you, mr. speaker.

thank you, ranking member, for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the bill before us today. republicans love to focus on small businesses when it's convenient for them. they claim it is imperative to pass today's bill because if we don't, small firms will be harmed. however, today's bill is only good for millionaires and billionaires. not the nation's job creators. the argument that a partial extension of tax cuts hinders small businesses hiring -- republicans are using a warrant definition of a small firm that counts literally as a small business owner. i don't think that the average person considers $2 -- 237 people, whose income average more than $200 million, a small business owner. contrary to the republican claims, this is not what

american taxpayers think of when they hear small businesses. when most people think of entrepreneurs, they envision small manufacturers, architects, main street restaurants and hardware stores. those americans who reached their save togs create jobs in our communities. tax cuts should go to real small businesses that are creating jobs, not people who are simply moving money around for their own profit. instead of addressing the top concerns small business owners, a lack of demand for their goods and services, this bill simply gives more tax cuts to the very rich. the numbers don't lie. over 80% of the value of these cuts goes to millionaires. that is an average tax cut of $164,000. let's call this bill what it really is. a tax cut for the rich. not for small businesses, that

is not what our economy needs. vote no. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: how much time remains? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from camp, has 5 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, 2 3/4 minutes remaining. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from illinois, mr. dold. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. dold: mr. speaker, i think my colleagues are confused. they keep talking about how my colleagues and i are looking to try to raise taxes on a segment of the population. actually, what this does is extend current tax rates for everyone. for every single american. i can tell you that there are people all across the country right now that foreclosures are up. they're concerned about how they're sending their kids to school. we have energy prices that are on the rise. we want to make sure that the government's not taking more

from them. i have to tell you that i think that what we're talking about right now is trying to empower the american people. we want to make sure we have upward mobility. we want to try to create growth in our economy. mr. speaker, in 2010 the president of the united states came before the american public and said our economy's too fragile. >> if the gentleman will yield? mr. dold: i have a very short period of time. said our economy is fragile and we should extend these tax rates. that's when the economy was growing at 3.5%, mr. speaker. the commerce department came out with statistics saying we are growing at 1.5% today. there's no way in the world we should be taking more out of the pockets of the american public. it's just not feasible. 2/3 of all net new jobs, mr. speaker, are created by small businesses, but this isn't just for small businesses. this is for every single american. we're running the experiment today, if you want to talk about higher taxes, more taking. in the state of illinois. if you want to take a look at

the state of illinois, we are dead last in too many categories. jobs are picking up and they're going to neighboring states. they're leaving because we decided to take more from hardworking taxpayers in the state of illinois. well, frankly what we want to do is make sure we extend these for an additional year so we can have real tax reform. that's what this is about. we want to talk about pro-growth tax policies so we can get the americans back to work. this is about jobs and the economy. frankly, the good news is, and i tip my hat to my colleagues because when i talk to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle they also indicate to me that the number one issue is jobs and the economy. so let's come together. mr. camp: another 15 seconds. mr. dold: let's come together. let's not talk about how we want to raise taxes on the middle class because frankly that's just inaccurate, not true. we're looking to try to make sure these get extended for an additional year so we can get

these people back to work. aapplaud you for trying to get up -- i applaud you for trying to get up there and plead your political point. we need to work together and get this passed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: how much time is left? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has 2 3/4 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 3 1/4 minutes. mr. levin: do you have more than one? mr. camp: i have one more and then myself. at this time i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from oklahoma, mr. lankford. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for two minutes. mr. langevin: thank you, mr. speaker. -- mr. lankford: thank you, mr. speaker. there has been tremendous hyperbole in the congress today. all this energy how we're trying to raise taxes on different groups. let's clear this up. this is about keeping the rates the same for another year for

all americans. really this debate is not about tax rates. the problem that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle seem to identify is the problem in america is that some people in america have too much money and the solution to fix this problem is if people go down the street, find someone with a bigger house, take some of their stuff and bring it to the other house the problem in america will be solved, things will be fair. but the issue is not whether we should tax one group more and distribute that to another group. that doesn't create nor jobs. that doesn't create more stability. that doesn't pull us out of a recession. that only makes one group feel better that they took money from one group and gave it to another. there are two philosophies at work here, because we want to make this debate about taxes, it is a philosophical issue. one group says the purpose of taxation is to take from one group, redistribute to another one to make america fair.

the other group, the republicans say the purpose of taxation is to collect as little as possible to efficiently run the government so that individuals are able to keep their money. we became the most powerful, prosperous nation on earth because americans were able to keep what they earned, invest it into other things and be able to grow it. here's the real proposal. number one, keep tax rates the same for another year. number two, fix the broken code. 70,000 pages, 3.8 million words in this tax code. it needs to be fixed. it's miss rabblely complicated. no american feels confident that when they file their taxes they got it all right. we got to fix this code and be able to simplify it dramatically. it's being to take time to do it. let's extend the rates for another year. let's get this right for all americans, not just some. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin.

mr. levin: i now yield the balance of our time to the distinguished whip, mr. hoyer from maryland. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for the remaining 2 3/4 minutes. mr. hoyer: thank you, mr. speaker. designed to fail, that's what this bill is. designed to fail. and very frankly you made sure that it was going to fail when you passed the amendment that added the reform bill and this bill together. designed to fail. how sad. i don't think you want to raise taxes on anybody. i understand that. i'll accept that premise. but what we ought to do is to make sure that the agreement that we have with the senate and the house that at least, at least the 98% of americans who make less than $250,000 ought to have no increase in their taxes. at least we ought to do that.

america knows we have agreement on that. and they're wondering why when you have agreement, don't you take that agreement and give the assurance and certainty to 98% of the american working people that they won't have an increase in their taxes so they'll have the confidence that they'll have money in their pocket to perhaps purchase that refrigerator that they need or that oven that they need or perhaps a new car or help their kid go to college, why don't we give them that confidence, i say to my friends? mr. speaker, i wish we would do so. today we could embrace the agreement that the senate has come to and tell the 98% you're safe? and in addition to that, by rejecting this bill we will reject taking money out of 25 million people's pockets that they rely on to support themselves and their children. that's what the senate bill

does. it protects the wealthiest in america while telling some of the poorest in america, the least well-off in america, you're going to pay more, you're going to get less. how perverse. how undermining of our economy. how undermining of the confidence of our people. ladies and gentlemen of this house, we're better than this. newt gingrich talked some years ago in 1998 about the perfectionist caucus and, mr. speaker, he said, embrace agreement. he was agreeing with president clinton and newt bring rich at that point in time on a budget which adopted pay-go one more time which is one of the reasons why we balanced the budget four years in a row. the senate bill now leaves 98% of the people -- excuse me -- the bill we're now considering, the house ways and means bill leaves 98% of our people at

risk while our bill gives 100% of the people a tax cut. let us reject the house bill, let us adopt the substitute, let us send it to the senate and make it law. the president will sign it and it can become law and give confidence and help to those 98% of americans. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. hoyer: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. camp: and i will just say, this isn't just about taxes, and i would agree with my friend from maryland, republicans do not want to raise taxes on small businesses, job creators, investors because it's also about the economy. this has been a dismal recovery. the worst since the great depression. unemployment has been above 8% for 40 consecutive months. their answer is to raise taxes on the small business sector.

the area where we need to have those jobs to be created. we're saying, let's keep the law the same for one year. we're the only nation in the world that has all of these tax provisions expiring year in and year out. let's leave this the same for one year. then, let's move and adopt comprehensive tax reform in an expedited procedure to do that so we can finish it next year. if we go down their path, their path of raising taxes on small business people, 700,000 jobs will be lost. if we go down our path of extending current law for a year, bringing certainty, extending that law for a year, moving forward on comprehensive reform, addressing some spending problems we know this nation's had, three years of $1 trillion deficits, if we do that we create a million jobs. vote for h.r. 8. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has

expired. all time for debate on the bill has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, seek recognition? mr. levin: i now call up the substitute. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman from michigan offering an amendment to the bill? mr. levin: i am. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part b of house report 112- 641 offered by mr. levin of michigan. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 747, the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, and a member opposed, each will control 10 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: could you make clear as to who has the right to close on this amendment? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has the right to close. len levin i now yield two minutes to another member of our committee, the distinguished gentleman from georgia, mr. lewis.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. luis cdebaca mr. speaker, mr. lewis: mr. speaker, i want to thank mr. levin for yielding. after two years of talking about spending cuts and deficit reduction, republicans somehow believe it is wise to fill the pocket of each and every millionaire in america with an additional $160,000 tax cut. we've been here before. this is the same picture. mr. speaker, we all know what this is about. this is about two competing visions of america. the democratic vision is opportunity for all americans to prosper while the republican vision reserves prosperity for the select few.

that is not right, mr. speaker. that is not fair. that is not just. america's hardworking families needs tax relief and they need it now, not tomorrow, not next week, not next month, not next year but now. if you believe in a strong, solid middle class, vote no on this bill. if you believe in american opportunity, vote no on this bill. if you are serious about reducing the deficit, vote no on this bill. i urge all of my colleagues to vote no on this bill and to vote yes on the levin amendment. it is simply the right thing to do. we can do better, much better by voting for the levin amendment. it is the right thing to do.

it is the fair thing to do. it is the just thing to do. we should do it and do it now. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. camp: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman claim time in opposition to the amendment? the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. camp: let me just say that this substitute increases taxes, it increases taxes on small businesses, the very sector that we need to be growing, to bring us out of this recession. it does not include tax reform, there's no path to tax reform. our codes had 5,000 changes in the last decade. the complexity is making it difficult for americans to know what their responsibilities are. they suspect others get a better deal under the code because of the complexity. if we can take that away and move to a system that has a lower rate, revenue-neutral, that closes off some of these

5,000 changes that have been made in the last few years, we can create a million jobs in the first year alone. one of the things that led use in this recession is the housing crisis. and here we have a letter from the national association of homebuilders saying that housing can be a key engine of job growth that this country needs. however, the recovery we are seeing remains fragile. as the rest of the economy's experiencing softening conditions, now would be the worst time to raise taxes. the national association of homebuilders believes that lower rates, simplification and a fair system will spur economic growth and increase competitiveness. that's good for housing because housing not only equals jobs, but jobs need more demand for housing. this is just one area that if we raise taxes as this substitute attempts to do, we're going to really close off whatlogical recovery we've been seeing and obviously it's been very anemic. quarter economic growth is just

over 1%. we need to be the best country in the world. we need to have the strongest country in the world. we need to have the best tax code in the world. raising taxes on one group of americans against another is not a way to get america's greatness back. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i now yield one minute to the gentleman from new york, mr. crowley. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for one minute. mr. crowley: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of the substitute -- democrat substitute on this tax provision. i would like to note that not a single one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and i have tremendous respect for chairman camp and the members of the ways and means committee, not a single one refute what had i spoke about before -- refuted what i spoke about before. about the fact that if the republican tax bill were to pass, as opposed to the democratic tax bill, there would be an increase in taxes on our -- on 225,000 military men and

women. many of whom are in active duty, overseas as we speak. i mentioned in my remarks that under the democratic bill the e.i. -- eitc rate, the earned income tax credit, under the bill would afford a sergeant in our army today with eight years of service, married with three children, and has basic paff of $34,723, would receive on the democrat plan a benefit of $3,508. can i have an additional minute? mr. chairman? mr. levin: yield an additional minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for with money minute -- for one minute. mr. crowley: under the republican bill, be very clear about this, mr. speaker, the earned income tax credit under the republican bill would only be $2,390. now, i do the math. that means under the republican bill that sergeant and his or her family would have a $1,118

tax increase. you can't get around it. that's the facts. that's the numbers. they speak loud and clear. and not a single one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle refuted that. we have refuted the $250,000 issue as it pertains to small business men and owners. the reality is the men and women on the front lines defending this gemsy, defending our freedom, defending our way of life, allowing for small business men and women to prosper in this country, they're not worth a tax break. your bill increases taxes on our military men and women. there's no getting around it. a vote for the republican bill is a vote to increase taxes on military men and women. a vote for the democratic substitute is a tax cut for our military men and women. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman from new york has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield myself such type as i may consume.

i don't have to refute what the member from new york says because the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation has already done that. they've said the matters the gentleman's talking about are not tax increases. those are spending through the tax code. that spending was put into the tax -- i will not yield -- to the stimulus bill. we know how unsuccessful that was in lowering our unemployment rate below 8% as broomsed. at this time i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from new york, mr. reed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the chairman and i rise in opposition to the substitute amendment that we're debating here, mr. speaker. the reason why is it's clear. the democratic substitute amendment that we're discussing is a further expansion of tax increases that the senate passed recently. i'm opposed to those tax increases. we're the -- we're dealing with a situation where the proposed amendment will raise the estate tax and take 55% of our

hardworking americans' asset when is they pass away. they are raising taxes on dividends and capital gains, at a time when senior citizens rely on those most in these dire economic times. they also seek to raise taxes on those making $200,000 to $250,000 and above. raising taxes on those individuals goes right to the heart of our small businesses across america, coast-to-coast, north to south. and this dire economic time, i actually agree with president obama when he signed the tax rates in december, 2010, when he says, in those dire economic times we don't raise taxes on americans. i just ask my colleagues to join me and say, reject this substitute, freeze the tax code and deal with the issue of comprehensive tax reform over the next 12 months and put no americans in harm in having their tax bill increased at the end of this year. and with that, mr. speaker, i

yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: it's now my real pleasure to yield two minutes to the gentleman from connecticut who is the chair of our caucus and an active member of our committee, two minutes to mr. murphy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from connecticut is recognized for two minutes. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. speaker, and i thank our distinguished leader as well. this debate today is extraordinarily informative. this isn't about democrats or republicans. this is about saving and preserving our middle class. a lower michigan from connecticut said to me recently, a mother who came out to talk about student loans says, when only the rich can follow their dreams, we have a problem. so here today we face a very clear choice. i think all americans understand . we should be able to come together as democrats and

republicans and provide a tax break for everyone up to $250,000. lauren was right. we have a problem. a constituent of mine said, why is it that congress doesn't understand what they're doing is throwing all of us into the deep abyss of uncertainty? it's that deep abyss of uncertainty that all americans are concerned about. and what they want is us to come together and we know that we have a bill that has passed the senate, a bill that the president will sign, a bill that we virtually agree on on both sides of the aisle. so what really frustrates the american citizens and the people in my district is that we can't come together. i implore my colleagues on the other side, don't plunge us further into this dark abyss.

do the things that the wealthy amongst us have more than the ability to shoulder and make sure that we all come together as americans and do the right thing on behalf of our constituents. that's what the laura michigans want, that's the kind of cream that we need to provide for all american citizens and that's what this country dust desperately needs, is a congress that will take leadership. there are times when you need to step aside and there are times when you need to step up. we need to step up as a congress and pass this. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield one minute to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs. black. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized for one minute. mrs. black: thank you, mr. speaker. as i have been back in the district talking to my constituents and visiting many of the businesses and the job creators in the district, i have continued to hear from them that

if we have one more tax increase on them, they're just not sure that they can survive. now, these are good people that i go to the grocery store with, i go to church with, i know how hard they're working, i know highway hard their families are working in order to keep businesses -- how hard their families are working in order to keep businesses going in their communities. when we know that two out of every three jobs are created by a small business man or woman, we cannot, we cannot at this time when our economy is so fragile impact those very folks who are creating the jobs for so many people in the district. and i hear this over and over again and they look at me and say, diane, please go back to congress and please relay this to the members of congress. that we need to make sure that we have certainty and that we don't -- may i have 30 seconds? mr. camp: i yield an additional 30 seconds. mrs. black: that we don't impact

them in their businesses, so they have to close down. and once again increase the amount of unemployment. so, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle do not have a plan. their plan is to increase the taxes on this group of people. second to that are those who continue to say to me, especially those who are looking at planning for their families for the future -- future of what they're going to leave for them, they're not going to have that -- they're not going to be able to leave those things that -- because the estate taxes are going to go up. we cannot do this to the people in my district. i'm going to be here to fight for that and to make sure that when we have this vote today -- the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady from tennessee has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i might ask my colleague from michigan, how many speakers do you have left? mr. camp: i'm prepared to close. i'm prepared to close. mr. levin: it's now my privilege to yield one minute to our

distinguished leader, the gentlelady from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute -- the gentlelady from california is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i thank him for his legislation on the floor today. to strengthen the backbone of our democracy, the great american middle class. today we can do just that by passing president obama's middle income tax cut which is on the floor today as the levin substitute. it's already passed the senate and could be signed into law by the president before the weekend. we have an opportunity, we have an opportunity to give a tax cut to 100% of the american people. we have an opportunity to relieve some of the uncertainty that exists in our economy as to how we are going to pay the bill. and how america's working

families are going to pay the bills. we have an opportunity for fairness, which is an all-american value, for fairness, for our families, for our businesses, for our budget. we must not, as some people in congress are doing, miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. we have to take advantage of the opportunity that is here today. the bill provides for fairness in the middle class and certainty as i mentioned. the republican alternative, which says not only do we want to give 100% of the american people a tax cut, we want to give a bigger and better tax cut to people making over $250,000 a year, 2% of the american people. in order to do that we greatly increase the deficit which would