t countries like cue bark a lot of times, you don't need to get into the nitty-gritty there are certain signs where you know the nature of the regime. look at communeism in eastern europe. you don't have to look at the daily life or any of that, look at the fact that there was a berlin wall that kept people in like caged animals. if you look at the difference between north and south korea, all you have to do is look at the satellite photo at night where south korea is lit up like a christmas tree and north korea is a land of darkness and despair. for me, when i think of what is the nature of the cuban regime all you need to know is you've had tens of thousands of people living in cuba, it's a nice island, beautiful, great weather, and they're suffocated so much that they are willing to swim across 90 miles of shark-infested waters, ethis florida straits, knowing they're probably going to die that's all you need to know. this is a stall inist regime

and it is, as my colleague from alabama mentioned, the cuban missile crisis wasn't even just that there were nuclear missiles in cuba pointed at the united states. fidel castro was telling kruschev to fire them into the united states. . if castro had his way there would have been nuclear weapons sent here. so this is the nature of the regime. so what are you doing with this policy? to me i look at it very simply. i think this fact is true. every single dollar spent in cuba benefits the castro regime. every single dollar. if it were otherwise, europe doesn't have restrictions most of the other world doesn't have restrictions. have the cuban people benefited from that? has their standard of living gone up? no this all goes to benefit the government. and to me this is the worst possible time to throw the castro regime a life line.

if you look at what's happening in caracas, if you look at what's happening in moscow, these regimes are buckling because of the decline in the price of oil. so this is a moment of profound weakness for the castro regime. and giving them these concessions is exactly what the castro regime wants. and i'm scratching my head trying to figure out, what do we get in return for this? the americans who had property seized when castro took power, are any of them getting their property back? no. what about the cuban americans who had to flee, they had their businesses taken, property taken. are any of them going to get any type of recompense? of course not. what about freedom of speech, the ability to criticize those in power, is that being extended to the cuban people? not on your life. nothing. although i will say it's interesting, and my colleague from florida mentioned, the

dismal credit rating that cuba has. they don't pay back any loans. are we then going to extend, say, export-import bank loans that are backed by the taxpayer to do business in cuba so the american taxpayer's going to have to pay for that. that's not a good source of business for our taxpayers. the tragedy of this is we've given away leverage that could have come in handy, i mean look these castro brothers on their last legs. when they finally leave the scene we want to use the leverage we have to leverage a democratic transition. instead we're essentially normalizing the status quo. so if the stalinnist dictatorship survives beyond the castros due to u.s. support, you're going to have 11 million cubans who are con signed to another generation -- consigned to another generation of tyranny. i'll say one more thing. when i read the media coverage, i think i can say this because i'm not from south florida, but the coverage is so negative about cuban americans who fled

castroers, like, oh, they're living in the past, all this stuff. for me, the people that i want to talk to, to know the true nature of the regime are the people who suffered under the regime. the people who were forced to flee, who had family members killed, had family members imprisoned. that to me is the number one source of information that i would look to. so the media frames it as if somehow the american policy -- i think it's the castro regime based on stalinist principles. yet it continues to lumber on and the strategy of this is that we're giving them a critical life line so that they can continue having -- governing their country like a political prison. so i appreciate you organizing this to my colleague from florida. we're giving speeches here tonight, but we need to act in this body and we need to show that this policy does not represent the will of the

american people and does not represent what is best for people in cuba that are struggling for freedom. i yield back. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you so much, mr. desantis. you're so right when you categorized this unilateral bad deal as an economic life line to the castro regime. and a person who understands that just as well as you do is our next speaker the gentleman from iowa, a senior member of the house committee on agriculture, congressman steve king. and he could say, hey my state is going to benefit a lot by this deal. the sad reality is that castro doesn't pay his debt, as we had just said with the other speaker. he owes everybody money. this deal will not strengthen u.s. national security, it will not be good for america's farmers and it will not be good for the people of cuba. congressman king for four minutes. mr. king: i thank the gentlelady from florida for organizing this special order and i associate myself with her words, her position. also of that the gentleman from

florida who i didn't mr. speaker, realize how much was in him about this issue. it was instructive for me to listen to that. i've had the privilege of serving here in congress with a good number of members that do a great job of representing the interests of the cuban people and i also had the privilege of going to cuba on a legal trip some years ago before i came to this congress. but i would take you back, mr. speaker, to a time in 1959 and trace some of this history. the revolution against batista in 1959, that was back before we had as many replays on television as we have today. and i recall watching the revolution in cuba and as castro took over, as the promise came that they were going to bring democracy to cuba, that was the promise, it was going to be democracy, it was going to be free and fair elections, it was going to be a government of, by and for the people of cuba. and they were going to choose their leadership. but what happened was i remember seeing on television

the videos of the people who were lined up against the wall and executed, executed without a proper trial, executed without true justice and i remember in particular it's branded in my memory, a man who insisted, if you are to shoot me here in front of this wall, let me give the order for my own execution. and he stood there in a cuban shirt, white pants, white shirt, and he raised his hand and faced a firing squad dropped his own hand and that was the signal to the firing squad and they fired and he was shot to death in front of that wall, along with many, many others. we don't know at this point how many political prisoners have been executed, how many have died in custody. we've got a list of some. we don't have a list of all. but we know this. it's never been, since that time in 1959, the government of, by and for the people of cuba, and the hope that there

would be the day that the cuban people would be free was manifested or at least an attempt to manifest in it, the bay of pigs, and i would have liked to have seen the air cover that would have made that be successful. we didn't get that. but we looked for the day to come ever since, that the cuban people could be free. the cuban people could be free. so since that time there have been the nationalization of the real property where at the time that castro took control of cuba, 25% of the real estate in cuba was owned by americans. they held deeds to that property. there was over land in cuba that was owned by people from other nationalities. every other country was compensated for their real estate except americans. no american that i know of has been compensated for their real estate. they hold those deeds to this day. sometimes a second generation. while i was there, before i came to this congress, while i was there was also a situation where the exchange rate for cuban peso to dollar was 21-1 at that time. so if anyone achieved an

american dollar, they could take into a dollar store and they would get one peso's worth of goods for it or deposit it into a cuban bank and get one peso for that. that's 20 pesos difference. that's one of the things that supported the castro regime financialy. another thing that happened was sugar was six cents a pound. the russians paid them 52 cents a pound in oil for the sugar. that was a subsidy of cuba. and when the soviet union, it was the soviet union rather than just the russians, when it clamsed, then the subsidy for cue -- collapsed, then the subsidy for cuba also clamsed and the cuban economy was no longer propped up and you saw russian tractors sitting out there, having been stripped for part and the only country in the world that i have known to have gone from mechanized agriculture to animal culture because their teams no longer worked. taxi cabs driven by doctors with a russian diesel under the

hood of a 1954 chevrolet. this country has been frozen in time, it has a collapsed and failed economy, it's been propped up by the subsidy of first the soviet union, later on the venezuelans, who are collapsing themselves today. and this is a country of people that are -- they are vigorous people. they're an outgoing hardworking, i'll say a agree garious people. i thought i would see people down there with the thousand-yard hopeless stare and i'm sure that exists but i also saw people that worked hard and they kept their chin up and kept a smile on their face and i thought, these people could be unleashed, if they could be unleashed by the heart beat of freedom, if we could just get them that opportunity to be who they are, they would become a very, very successful island trading partner and nation under themselves and one day an ally of the united states. my dream has been to help them with that opportunity. and my dream has been to one day swim ashore at the bay of

pigs and walk out and wait out -- wade out onto a free cuba with a free cuban people. but mr. speaker, the cuban people have been burdened with more than five decades of marxist slavery that they have had to face. and this policy of the president's that comes right on the cusp of what'slight likely the biological solution in cuba -- of what's likely the biowilling solution in cuba, the end of the castro brothers, and the ability to bring about a regime change in cuba, the united states may have handed cuba another 50 years of living in marxist slavenry when we had just the opportunity for them to be free. our policy here in congress, i'm hopeful, is the policy that says, regime change in cuba, a government of, by and for the people of cuba and i one day hope and pray to do what i have said with my colleagues here and many others, and that is swim ashore at the bay of pigs

and wade out on the shore of a free cuba. god bless them all. thank you madam chair. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you so much, mr. king. and that is our fervent hope as well. and we work and we pray every day for that dream of a free cuba to come alive and we thank you for your voice here tonight. thank you, my good friend from iowa. mr. speaker, many people talk about the last generation of cuban compiles and how this is really not the dream of young cuban americans who were born here in the united states, reared here in the united states, but they come from cuban families, but they really don't really much care about freedom and democracy in the land of their ancestors. and this next speaker mr. speaker, is a gentleman newly elected who understands that that search for a free and democratic cuba is a yearning that lives very fervently in his heart and that is the congressman from west virginia

congressman alex mooney, who was born here as american as apple pie, but comes from a proud livian -- lineage of cuban american heritage. thank you, mr. mooney, for two minutes. moon moon thank you -- mr. mooney: thank you. i want to thank congresswoman ros-lehtinen for arranging this important special session to show solidarity with the cuban people as they continue to live under an oppressive regime. mr. speaker, president obama has senselessly yielded ground with no stipulations for reform to the cuban regime with the announcement of a secret deal going around congress to, quote, normalize, closed quote, relations. this misguided grab for a legacy item has cost our country and the cuban people a valuable bargaining chip for their freedom. of course this is yet another foreign policy failure or more accurately, unilateral surrender from this administration. from the bright red line in

syria, which was crossed with impunity, to sending a secret message to president putin that, quote after the election i will be more flexible, closed quotes, to now rewarding tie ran thes in cuba who -- tie ran thes in cuba to -- tyrants in cuba who continue to oppress their citizens. president obama has chosen wrong policies. the -- this has for decades sought to reggate the cuban people's appetite for freedom. the many realized american dreams of cuban refugees, including my mother, are a great testament to the greatness of the united states and our constitutional rights. as the beacon for freedom in the world, america must continue to use sensible policy to protect our values around the world and in our own backyard. i yield back the floor. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you so

much, mr. mooney. we are a better congress for you being a part of it. thank you so much for being proud of your american heritage and your cuban american ancestry as well. so welcome to congress sir. and mr. speaker, i'm about to introduce another millennial another one of this younger generation of cuban americans who the press continue to say that they don't represent the desires of this new generation. carlos korbelow is one of -- curbelo is one of our newest elections officials. he was born here in the united states doesn't know cuba, and is less than 35 years old, but understands that yearning for a free cuba. and we're so pleased as punch to have him here as a member of our congress. five minutes to the gentleman from florida, carlos curbelo. .

during the 56 years of the cuban tragedy also known as the cuban revolution, there have been two scants. first the nature of the castro dictatorship, which abuses its people and poses national security threats. the second that to varying degrees, the occupant of the white house has always been on the side of the cuban people and in opposition to their oppressors for decades have collaborated with america's dangerous allies. today, this is regrettably no longer the case. by trading an american hostage cruelly held by cuba, for three criminals convicted of spying against our government, include understanding one who was serving a lifetime sentence to

conspire to murder american citizens, the president sent a message to our enemies that the united states can be extorted. what was the cuban's government reward? three convicted spies and full diplomatic relations and an economic bailout for a financially and morally bankrupt regime. the men who rule cuba today had nuclear missiles installed on the island and pointed them at the united states. one day they were cash rich and had troops to fight along side our most dangerous enemies. they supported colombia's farc and ordered three america's citizens blown out of the sky in the tragic shootdown of february 24 1996.

a few months ago they were caught shipping arms illegally to north korea and collaborated with venezuela in last year's crackdown which resulted in the death of over 40 students. human rights atrocities by the dictatorship against its people continue. the castro regime resorts to violence because they know it is the only way they can maintain control since the cuban people are desperate to be free. the president's decision to ease sanctions only serves to bolster the dictatorship and apparatus of repression. there is virtually no private sector in cuba. more than 85% of cuba work for cuba and earn less than $20 a month. foreign investments doesn't benefit the average cuban. people with foreign capital are only allowed to keep 8% of their salaries.

cuban workers are slaves of the dictatorship. now it's important to note, mr. speaker, president obama's administration approved sanctions in the recent months against venezuela and north korea. why then, is it rewarding an enemy of the united states just 90 miles from our shores that are collaborates with both of these regimes? why does the president insist on an incoherent foreign policy that too often rewards our enemies and punishes our allies. as other american presidents has shown us in the past, this is not an effective strategy dealing with cuba's military dictatorship. we have to ask ourselves what kind of neighborhood do we want to live in, the americas, western hemisphere is the america of the world, what kind of standards do we want?

do we want to endorse the chronic abuse of human rights, the imprisonment of people who disagree? that is the nature of the cuban government. and we, the united states of america and by the way the other nations of this hemisphere have agreed that we support a democratic form of government and that we want this part of the world to be free without exception. there is one glaring exception and it is cuba. our sanctions policy. some say, well, it hasn't worked. of course the sanctions have worked. the sanctions have denied billions and billions and billions of dollars to a regime that would use those profits to oppose our interests throughout the world. what did the regime do when it had resources? it had troops all over the world. it exported revolution. and if you don't know what exporting revolution means in

the context of cuba, it means aggressively opposing america's interests throughout the world. today we remember in a very special way four men that were brutally assassinated by the cuban regime on february 24 1996. one of the spies was convicted of conspiring to murder these young men, three of whom were american citizens and the other was a resident of our country. these four men are dead. and the cuban spies are free. but it isn't too late, mr. speaker. the president still has time to get back on the right side of this issue and on the right side of history by standing against cuba's dictators with the

victims of their brutality and for a strong american foreign policy that advances our national security interests. again, i want to thank my distinguished colleague from south florida for her leadership. we have admired her for so many years for her work on this issue. and i yield back the balance of my time. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you so much. you are a fresh young voice and i thank you and mr. mooney for being here tonight. i'm pleased to yield three minutes to a gentleman who understands what freedom is all about. he was one of the speech writers for our great president, ronald reagan. senior member of the house foreign affairs committee. and he is the chairman of the europe subcommittee and here tonight with one of his trip lets christian, who wants to be an author and invent tore. i think what kind of life would

he have under the the communist tyranny of cuba as opposed to the freedom and democracy that we enjoy here. with that pleased as punch to yield three minutes to my good friend from california, mr. rohrabacher. mr. rohrabacher: america is about to send a message to the world. exactly on whose side are we on. and i'm very proud to stand here with my colleagues, standing on the side of liberty, of justice, of treating people did he sently, of government that -- decently rather than the government that serves them, the bureaucracy, the tyrants that hold power. that is what this is all about. let us understand who this castro gang is. castro murdered the freedom fighters who overthrew the

government of batistea. castro took people out and shot them in the head. these were people that risked their lives to bring democracy to cuba. he has allied himself over the years with gangsters and tyrants throughout the world. he has had a safe haven for the drug dealers of latin america to look to him as the moderator of dispute between these gang sters that murder each other and murder any who gets in their way. he has allied himself with drug dealers and during the cold war he was allied to the hilt to the communityists. he wanted his country to become a nuclear base to attack nuclear bombs on the people of the united states. let's not forget that. this is a man who wanted to kill

americans by the millions. for us now, well, that's history, let igones be buygones. are you kidding me? when people have that much hatred to the people of the united states, we aren't going to sit aside and forgive him. by the way, he isn't asking for that. the castro regime is saying accept us as we are, a country that has had more political prisoners than any other country and we are going to accept them as they are. when people were struggling during the cold war, castro was on the wrong side. during the cold war, he wanted to kill americans by the millions by having soviet missiles in his country. and what does this agreement that this administration -- what will -- what will be the effect of it? they say, we have been told, if

you have fair trade, people are going to get better and liberalism. i call this the ha -- hug a nazi fidel theory. no matter how much trade we have, they will manipulate it so that the people in power that has oppressed their people, take that wealth, manipulate that wealth that is coming in and submit their own power. it is clear what this man has and that is continuing the oppression of the cuban people. let's not be partners to that and let us stand for liberty and justice. the soviet union has fallen and time for castro and communism and cuba to fall as well. ms. ros-lehtinen: hours after

president obama anounsed in a shocking way that we resume diplomatic relations with cuba, raul castro put on his military uniform and said, don't worry, we aren't changing a thing. it's still the same failed regime. we have got nothing from that deal. i'm pleased to yield the remainder of our time to the gentleman from florida chairman of the appropriations subcommittee on transportation, housing and usual and development, chairman mario diaz-balart who i had the honor of serving with his older brother. i have the honor of serving with his youngest brother now, mario. born in the united states and just like carlos and alex mooney , a gentleman who is 100% american and so proud of his cuban ancestry.

the remainder of our time to mr. diaz-balart. diaz-balart diaz-balart let me thank you for your leadership. as we heard tonight. your leadership and the cause of freedom does not stop at the shores of cuba. wherever there is oppression there is the clear concise voice of chairman ms. ros-lehtinen:. we have heard a lot and i know that time is getting short. but i want to quote somebody who we have not quoted as far as i remember here tonight. and this is president obama. when mr. obama was running for president he stated what his policy would be to deal with the cuban tyranny. he said my policy will be guided by one word freedom. and the road to freedom for arnold palmer cubans must begin with cuba's political prisoners

right to free speech a free press, freedom of assembly and must lead to elections that are free and fair. mr. obama went on to say, i will maintain the embargo that provides us with the leverage tore present the regime with a clear choice as we take significant steps towards democracy beginning with the freedom of all, all political prisoners mr. obama said. we will take steps to normalize relationships. that is the way to bring about real change in cuba through strong, principled democracy. in essence, that day then candidate obama, now president obama drew a red line about what the right policy was to deal with the cuban regime. and sadly, on december 17, president obama announced that he was breaking that promise that he was once again breaking

his own red line. now we've heard tonight, but also heard from the vast majority of the pro-democracy within the island were struggling and have objected to president obama's policy change. if you don't want to do it, if president obama doesn't want to do it for the sake of a future of freedom for the cuban people he should stand firm for the sake of the national security interests of the united states. as we have heard today, today, right now as we speak, not 50 years ago, the cuban regime harbors fugitives from american law including cop killers and terrorists. and what is president obama's answer? no problem. we'll normalize relations.

. no problem, we'll norm asize, you can continue to do that -- we'll normalize, you can continue to do that. two airplanes were shot down in international air space and the people who were in prison, including one -- was in prison for conspiracy to murder, not only is it ok, no problem, we'll normalize, but, no, we'll send them back so you can go back home. mr. speaker, the night is late. but i know and i'm confident that unlike president obama, this congress will continue to stand firm with the cause of freedom and the cause of a free cuba. even while president obama does not. i yield back. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you so much, mr. diaz-balart. you so eloquently stated that we have so much to -- we've run

out of time. so we yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the lady has yielded. the chair will remind all members not to refer to guests on the floor of the house. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? >> mr. speaker, i send to the desk a privileged report from the committee of rules for filing under the rule. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 27. resolution providing for consideration of the bill, h.r. 37, to make technical corrections to the dodd-frank wall street reform and consumer protection act, to enhance the ability of small and emerging growth companies to access capital through public and private markets to reduce regulatory burdens and for other purposes. providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 185, to reform the process by which federal agencies analyze and formulate

new regulations and guidance documents. and providing for consideration of the bill, h.r. 240 making appropriations for the department of homeland security for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2015, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to house calendar and ordered precipitationed. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2015 the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from ohio ms. kaptur, until 10:00 p.m. ms. kaptur: i thank you, mr. speaker, and rise this evening to paint a picture of u.s. job loss resulting from our trade policies, extending back now almost three decades. i rise because america has a huge good jobs deficit because we have a gigantic trade deficit. that means more imports come in here than our exports go out, largely because markets in other places are closed. our workers, our communities

have paid a tremendous price for this. i oppose any further nafta-like trade agreements such as the transpacific partnership which the administration is proposing, that will ship out more u.s. jobs. we've had enough. the american people have had enough. since 1975 when wall street's free trade job outsourcing roulette began, america has amassed a $9.3 trillion trade deficit with the world. if you look at this chart, we have on here every single trade agreement that was signed and all of the lost jobs that resulted from the growing trade deficits we're amassing with countries around the world. this never happened before in the united states of america. over our history. it is a very serious problem. the staggering loss of productivity associated with this deficit translates into a

huge job loss here at home. in fact, that $9.3 trillion of accumulated trade deficit of more imports coming in here than exporting going out has actually cost us over 47,500,000 lost american jobs. most of those were really good jobs that paid living wages jobs that just evaporated from our communities. jobs that were shipped to mexico or china, korea bangladesh honduras, guatemala, turkeyal salvador --el salvador everywhere in the world. and to undemocratic countries where workers are treated like a bonded class. our workers, no matter how loyal or hardworking became expendable as this began.

in fact they were treated like expendable widgets. and what is being hurt in the process is the belief of the public that the value of hard work has any meaning. there are some workers who simply dropped out. yes, american jobs are being outsourced year after year for over a quarter century now and workers are being treated like a game of musical chairs. our jobs have been shipped out to penny-wage sweatshops hidden by the iron curtain of unanimous towns in distant places most americans will never visit. anonymity, exploitation and hidden squalor are as fund only in free trade as the hollowing out of american jobs our communities and our middle class. those who exploit workers in our country and globally believe they are so powerful

the american people won't be able to rein them in. and they think this congress will continue to behave as it did before despite the evidence that this doesn't work for the american people. some of those very powerful interests are asking for another fast track trade deal, to do it all over again in something called the transpacific partnership. on an even bigger scale. including nations with the grossest violations of basic wourker rights. let me turn -- worker rights. let me turn first to the broken promises of nafta, which was really the fundamental agreement passed, over my objections, in the early 1990's, and another agreement cast that dealt with central america. fast forward to this past summer, when thousands of migrant children from central america swarmed our southern border remember that? and the american press asked surprise among their arrival

and some people even threw tomatoes at buses that carried children from one destination facility one detention facility to another. these children had lived under 20 years of nafta and cafta in mexico guatemala, salvador and honduras, and they had experience with the nafta trade agreement and the cafta trade agreement, which covers those countries. trade agreements that were sold as opportunities that would rise the tide of all boats, all workers. well, what happened? here in the united states we had a huge loss of jobs to those countries. and mexico and central america's infrastructure wasn't modernized. their standard of living wasn't raised. in fact, the promise that those countries somehow would turn

into stylistically rustic versions of the american consumer market never happened. they were told new jobs would abound. but our nation began to hemorrhage jobs to mexico, as wages in mexico and throughout central america began to drop. those deficits became part of the overall total. and the problem is that most of these countries where the free trade agreements were signed, what you see happening is more goods coming in here than our goods going out. a little trickle going to some places. here with mexico what happened, ever since nafta's passage, we were promised trade balances every single year. it's gotten worse and worse and worse. this week the broken promises sold to the american public and their elected officials that these agreements would really

work and the people that voted for those agreements should pay some attention to the debate that is trying to withhold funding for the department of homeland security. because of the president's action on immigration. the stories of the youth being shipped back by the plane loads tell of their families' land being stolen from under them. the land was handed over to multinational agriculture corporate groups who come in and grow for example, palm oil. local displaced farmers were forced into urban settings, desperate in search of food, in search of work at factories where jobs, that were promised in return for the land, guess, what never materialized, so here on our own continent the children became the ref jis of trans-- the refugees of transnational economic policies. that harmed the entire

continent. hardly anyone even talked about that. but when you have this kind of disruption, when you have so much job loss and when you have land transferring title with millions of farmers disrupted from their way of life, what do we expect? millions of displaced people in mexico in central america, living in the shadow of border plants and urban factories exist in a state of peen age that makes older versions of slavery look positively ben i have sent. squating on poisoned ground in shacks, i have been in those shacks. i have gone to those places. when you do, you never forget it. next door water in gullies that surround these places is so polluted that communities smell of a rancid odor and even chickens that they keep to try to feed themselves die from the drinking water. we've seen it. we've been there.

the displaced population on the run is surging thanks in large part to nafta and cafta's agricultural provisions, those very flawed provisions that provided no opportunity for adjustment as a first world nation met the economy of third world nations. the terms of the agreement forced the revocation of the land and allowed multinationals to buy up vast tracks in the interior, pushing untold millions of peasant farmers who remain nameless off their land and into the labor pool. yet we as americans are surprised when their children as migrants flock to our southern border? if we seriously looked at the impact of our free trade agreements we would easily see the havoc wrought on local economies throughout the lands on the other side of the border. those who forced this to happen should know the consequences of their policies. and what they would reap.

legions of desperate workers willing to do anything to survive. now let me turn to the transpacific partnership that proposes to expand trade into regions with the worst labor violations and working conditions. we can't be fooled into thinking expanding trade agreements with 11 new nations in the pacific rim will actually be the end to american jobs being shipped overseas. of the 11 nations with which the united states is negotiating the transpacific partnership, nine have wage levels significantly lower than our own. this will only intensify the already real reduction in wages american workers are experiencing year after year as our jobs are shipped overseas to increase profits of shareholders as they take advantage of impoverished laborers. and worse yet, for the immigration debate, as those who run the countries realize, the next move will be to

vietnam. for even cheaper labor factories on this could be the nent will shut down, further exacerbating the poor economic conditions of our southern neighbors. leaving even fewer options other than for those individuals to flee north seeking any economic opportunity to sustain themselves. i wanted to spend a moment looking at the korean agreement because that was one of the latest ones they brought up here as a free trade agreement. and they promised there would be thousands of jobs and that america would be able to sell 50,000 vehicles to korea. well, guess what? we haven't even hit 10,000, while there have been over 561,000, half a million, vehicles sent from korea here. so look at what's happening with the korean agreement. another free trade agreement just passed a couple years ago, the proof is in the puddinging.

the fast track procedure, which allows no amendment here on the floor yields this. more red ink for the united states. we were promised the korean agreement would create jobs and help balance our trade deficit in an effort to strengthen our economy and rebuild the american auto industry. nothing could be further from the truth, as with every other agreement. we are in deep trade deficit with it promised 70,000 jobs. in actuality, we have already lost 40,000. it's going in exactly the opposite direction. the u.s. census bureau revealed the 2.8 billion trade deficit with korea the highest u.s. monthly trade goods deficit with korea on record. the u.s. historic trade deficit

with korea had imports from korea and lackluster 3.5 billion in exports to korea from the united states. auto sales did not surge, as we were promised. exactly the reverse is true. and now we can look at china. you know, the story is no different. you think we would have learned something. but if you look at trade with china and china became a member of the world trade organization in 2001. americans were promised again that that would expand market opportunities for the united states companies thereby increasing jobs here and american prosperity. how has it worked out? united states has lost over 64,000 manufacturing firms and at least 5.8 million manufacturing jobs to china. to china. in the year 2013, the latest

complete year of data, america actually racked up a $319 billion trade deficit with china and you know this to be true because everything you buy, coffee cups clothing, electronics, even solar panels, all made in china. the massive deficit we have racked up with china, just in one year amounted to a loss of 1.5 million american jobs. and that's just one year's damage. what america needs is not more of the same nafta-style trade agreements. what america and american workers need is a trade policy that creates jobs, opportunity and wealth in this country first. we need balanced trade accounts not trade accounts that are in the red, with every single country with which we have racked up these deficits. the american people not just

the global corporate elite need to be in the driver's seat again and that's where congress has to do its job. our nation needs a trade policy that is results-oriented, that will yield jobs in america. we must open closed markets of the world. we must grow our exports. and we must hold who wrote those agreements accountable for the damage they have done. and we must not create any more free trade agreements that addition a hole deeper. we must create jobs by moving our nation towards economic independence by rebuilding our own manufacturing base at home, by restoring our domestic energy security and by making sure that these agreements result not in deficits, but in trade balances and even more important, trade surpluses. mr. speaker, there are ways that a developed nation can trade with the developing world

without gutting its own economy. america has got to figure out how to get there. and no trade deal should be brought up here under that fast track procedure where congress can't amend until we fix what's wrong with these agreements. haven't we learned in three decades that that flawed trade model just simply isn't working. pushing huge grade agreements through congress on a fast track course with no opportunity for amendments is not the way to create a strong middle class rising wages and real opportunity for the american people. this is the time to hold this administration and this congress accountable for changing course and start to invest in this country again and make sure that these trade partners with whom

we do business open their markets. for us to do any less is to continue to harm the american people and continue to have this enormous downward pressure on job creation in this country in wage and benefit levels in this country where the average american hasn't seen a raise in years. we have to change. this is too great a price for the american people to pay. for this evening, i thank those who are listening. i thank the speaker for his time this evening. i yield back my remaining minutes in this special order. thank you all for listening. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. does the gentlewoman have a motion? ms. kaptur: i would like to make a motion that the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. say aye. those opposed, no.

the house stands adjourned until 10 >> of the houses back tuesday at 10 a.m. for morning speeches and live coverage here on c-span. the top democrat on the house budget committee chris van hollen laid out a proposal today encouraging companies to increase worker wages. that is next on c-span.

the heritage foundation is holding its summit with republican members of the house and senate. we will hear tom price discuss. later, ted cruz on the republican agenda. >> dr.an anthony fauci is on the front line battling against infectious diseases. >> we have drones that have been given to people who are hiv-infected. i can show you the dichotomy in the early 80's if someone he came into my clinic with aids, the median survival would be six to eight months which means half of them would be dead in eight months. now, if tomorrow when i go back to rounds and somebody comes into our clinic who is 20 plus years old relatively recently infected and i put them on a combination of three drugs a

cocktail of anti-retroviral therapy, i can predict that we can do mathematical modeling if you do your medicine regularly you can live an additional 50 years. to go from knowing that 50% of the people will die in eight months to knowing that if you take your medicine, you can live essentially a normal lifespan. just a few years less than a normal lifespan. that is a huge advance. >> the director of the national institute of allergy and infectious diseases sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific. >> next, congressman chris van hollen talks about wages and economic policy. the maryland democrat spoke at the center for american progress. >> good morning and welcome to

the center for american progress action fund. i'm counselor to the action fund. it is my pleasure to welcome today's keynote speaker congressman chris van hollen of maryland, ranking member of the house budget committee. as congressman dan holland knows, the federal budget is more than about dollars. it is about our nation's priorities. it is true the budget is a blueprint for how the nation will spend it dollars it is also a blueprint for the type of nation we want to be. will be an nation athat supports a vibrant middle class? we believe the success is growing the economy where every american can share. last year, we release a report on the middle class and we looked at a prototypical american family and look at how they have been doing over the last decade.

we found a family that makes $80,000 a year, two kids two parents working have really faced and middle-class squeeze. that is because their incomes have been stagnant over the last decade. basically, no rise in income from 2000 to 2012. they face higher health care costs, higher education cost higher childcare costs. they have $5,000 and less disposable income today than they did a decade ago. if you wonder why people are still a little angry, i think that is part of the reason they are. in a world where we have promise of the american dream, if you are actually fallen behind it does not feel that way. that is why we are so excited to have congressman then holland discuss ideas about what to do. these ideas i think will contribute critically to our nation's discussion. later this week, we will be

releasing a report which will discuss how to raise incomes and wages and how to grow the middle class. we believe those ideas are critical for economic growth over the long term. the congressional budget committee has a role to play in a long-term economic course and that is why we are excited to have the congressman today. since his election, he has worked to advance job creation, economic growth and shared prosperity. he played instrumental role for his constituent who had been president for the regime for years. he has fought to clean up the chesapeake bay, crucial investment in capital area transportation. he has been a leading voice on having budget and policy priorities that really addressed the nation's challenges and a

key fighter for the middle class. we are excited to have him here to detail how we can have the economic growth agenda that expands opportunity and invest in the middle class. [applause] >> thank you. i want to thank the entire team here at the center for american progress for the opportunity to be here with you this morning and the contributions that makes the great public policy debate of our time. you are just important at how to implement ideas in the real world. many of the proposals you would here today have their roots in ideas that have been percolating here for years.

today, i want to present an action plan to respond to what i believe is the defining economic challenge of our time. how america can lead the world in sustained economic growth in a way that provides a for mower broadly shared -- more broadly shared prosperity. we must ensure that all americans that work hard and play by the rules are rewarded with a fair share of a growing economic pie. there are competing ideas for how to do this. we are going to have the budget season shortly in congress over the next couple months. in the next couple of months, the president the republicans democrats in congress will put forward their budget blueprints for the nation. while these budgets are loaded with numbers at their core, they reflect the plan for the future direction of the country and

after best, -- at their best, reflect the values of our nation. after i discussed the major economic challenge we are facing i want to review the highlights of the budget plans that republicans and democrats have put forward today and see how they measure up against the challenge we face. then i want to propose a new action for your consideration and the consideration of my colleagues. an action plan to grow the paychecks of all americans, not just the wealth of a few. that will be the order of the presentation. the economic challenge, how current proposals as backup to meeting that challenge and additional action plan that i think that can meet that challenge. so the economic challenge we face wills will captured in the jobs report released last friday by the department of labor.

there is a good news part of the story. it is very good news. the economy has continued to grow and more americans are finding jobs. last month our economy created 252,000 jobs tapping the best year of job growth since 1999. the unemployment rate fell to 5.6% which meant the unemployment rate fell faster last year than any year since 1984. the private sector has now added jobs for 58 consecutive months. 11.2 million jobs total. gas prices are down, the stock market is up and the deficit has fallen rapidly. this is all very good news. it would not have been possible without the tough decisions president obama made right after he was first sworn in to stop the economic freefall and put the nation on a path to

recovery. but, i think everyone here knows there was a sobering side of to last friday's jobs report. one economic indicator remains grounded -- workers paychecks. in fact, after a pretty solid increase in november, average hourly wages actually went down a little in december. that was captured in the "new york times" business section headline that came out after the jobs report. job growth fails to help paychecks of workers. that tells the sobering side of the story. what i want to emphasize today is that this is not a new story. let me show you the first slide here. this shows what has happened in the recovery since the year

2010. the red line is the jobs increase which you see is that he. -- -- study. the blueline reflects real wages -- flat and stagnant. but, what is even more surprising to many people is this is not even a new story from last month or the month before or even from 2010 which is where this particular slide starts. this is a story that has been going on for much longer period of time. now, if yoou look at this slide right here, you will see the dark blue line on top -- i don't know if anyone -- everyone can see the chart -- that line shows productivity growth in the economy beginning in 1950. you should all have handouts.

the light blueline reflects a typical workers compensation -- wages and benefits. if you look at the far left of the chart, that is 1950, you will see that the productivity growth line is rising and the typical workers compensation is rising with it. those lines are joined. that is the kind of economy where the pie is growing and everybody is getting a bigger slice. since the 1970's, you could see those lines diverging. there has been a troubling trend ever since. productivity continues to go up and up. the stock market has gone up and up, but paychecks and compensation for most americans have been very flat in real

terms. as you can see, this has become a chronic problem dating back to the 1970's. there is a disconnect between the value workers are creating and what they are taking home. so it is no wonder that so many americans feel they are on a treadmill and falling behind. if those productivity gains that topline, has not slowed into real wages and compensation for workers, where have they gone? where have they gone? well, this chart tells that story. the income gains from increased productivity has gone overwhelmingly to those at the very, very top of the income scale. the top 1%. the after-tax real income of the top 1% grew by 200% between 1979 and 2010. five times as fast as the income

for the 60% of people in the middle. the middle class. these are numbers from the nonpartisan congressional budget office. now, i think people have seen it the growing body it economic evidence that shows the lopsided distribution of income not only hurts the middle class and those working their way into the middle class, it also slows down overall economic growth. a steady stream of reports on economists at cap, oecd, the imf, and many others show when the rules of the game are rigged to channel all the gains to the very top, it slows down the pace of economic growth throughout the economy. this is not just a question of economic fairness. it is a question of economic

growth. a program with strategy is one that promotes broadly shared prosperity. giving working americans a larger share of the economic pie can make the entire pie grow faster. even the wealthy can be better off with a smaller slice. henry ford understood this principle. he doubled the pay of his autoworkers and as a result they became customers who could afford to buy the cars they were making on the assembly line. higher wages resulted in ford motor company selling more cars and everybody was better off. henry ford and his workers. so our challenge is to implement a strategy to rapidly grow our economy in a way that creates greater prosperity for all, not just the wealthy few at the very top.

as i said, the upcoming budget debate will give the american people an opportunity to hear very different approaches to this challenge. i look forward to that debate. let's look at the budget plans that republicans and democrats have proposed to date. there is no simple solution, we all know that. one thing is clear -- the tired republican mantra of cutting tax rates for the very wealthy only make this problem worse. the democratic approach of cutting special interest tax breaks to invest in expanding economic opportunities for all provides a solid foundation for an economy that works for everyone, not just the wealthy elites. let's take a look at each plan starting with the republican budget. republicans in congress, not

necessarily around the country but in congress, continue to cling it to the triple down -- trickle down. of economics. the idea of cutting tax rates for very wealthy people will give them even more money to spend and invest and that will trickle down to the masses and lift all economic votes. republican sometimes argue these tax cuts for the wealthy will not increase -- result in larger deficits because they will generate so much economic activity that the lost revenue on the tax cut will be mostly recouped. i think we all know the problem with this trickle down theory. it has already crashed miserably in the real world. in the aftermath of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, we had a sluggish economy and stagnant incomes for most americans. the only things of that went up

were the incomes of the already wealthy who got additional tax cuts and the deficit which went through the roof. here is the thing. our republicans colleagues in congress remained undeterred from this real-world experience. here are the tax highlights from their last budget proposal. they would cut the tax rate for the folks at the very top by a whopping one third. they would take it from 39% today down to 25%. you could do the math. when you give very wealthy people, millionaires a big tax break, they are going to -- as t his slide indicates, the average tax cut for millionaires is at least $200,000 a year. hours after the new congress was

sworn in last tuesday, they changed the rules of the house to make it easier to disguise the deficit impacts of such tax cuts for the wealthy. since the real world math the network, they wanted to invent a new congressionally imposed math. far from lifting this tax cut for the wealthy will further squeeze middle-class taxpayers. the low respected and nonpartisan -- well respected and nonpartisan center indicates a neutral plan offered by candidates mitt romney and paul ryan would have increased average taxes on middle-class families with children by more than $2000. if you cut the top rate -- at the top, you have to recover a lot of income. if you do it in a neutral way --

you can try to but there are not enough to recoup all that lost revenue so you have to go after the people in the middle. that is why there tax proposal mathematically increases the tax burden on middle-class families, according to the nonpartisan tax policy center. what else do they do? well, to add insult to injury, the republican budget dramatically reduces various tax benefit for middle class and lower income americans, right? it fails to extend enhancements to the child tax credit, to the earned income tax credit and the college tax credit called the american opportunity tax credit. the republican budget also wipes out the tax credits that are helping millions of americans afford health care all the affordable care act. taken together, these budget

choices will cut tax benefits to millions of working americans from single parents earning a minimum wage the families of college students with incomes up to 180,000 $180,000 all cutting tax breaks for millionaires. republicans refuse to join us the democrats on the hill, to close tax loopholes that have led a growing number of corporate conversions. a maneuver used by some corporations to move their addresses overseas, change their american identities in order to escape their tax responsibilities to american taxpayers. by the way, when they pay less, everybody else pays more. meanwhile, the republican budget plan absolutely slashes a part of the federal budget wheat used

to make strategic national investments in education scientific research and innovation, and our vital national infrastructure. investments that historically have helped power our economy and build ladders of opportunity essential for a thriving middle class. here is the chart. this shows the amount that we spend on the part of the budget we used to invest in education and scientific research as a share of the economy over time. when i said slash i don't use that lightly. you can see that redline below the straight line across. that is what their budget does to this investment portion of our budget. as a share of the economy, the republican budget cuts the

domestic discretionary budget almost 40% lower than the lowest level in the last 50 years. take the lowest level of the last 50 years, they cut as part of the budget by 40% lower. you will fly that proportionally, we will have a devastating effect on the investment of education and scientific research and things the power the economy. i think most americans would agree that commendation of policy -- cutting tax rates for the wealthy, increasing the tax burden on americans and cutting vital public investments will not result in sustained economic growth with more broadly shared prosperity. in fact, it will stack the economic deck even more heavily in favor of the very wealthy and powerful. let me hit the highlights of the current democratic budget proposal which are aimed at growing the economy and opportunities for all americans.

i don't know if you can read this. i do think it is important to understand that this is a description of current policies that have been put forward by the president, democrats in congress which would go a long way to lifting our economy and opportunities for more americans. if you look at this you will see the infrastructure initiative, the president has proposed closing a lot of the tax breaks that perversely into the vice american corporations to move jobs overseas. close those in use the savings to invest in and the structure and establish an infrastructure bank for public-private partnerships. we know investments in early childhood education are critical and the president has a $76 billion initiative in the

budgets to do that. one that was adopted by democrats in congress. we increase our investment in scientific research which has showed huge dividends for the country over the years. we provide sequester relief. if we do it on the defense side, we should do it on the nondefense side. we made things permanent such as the college tax credit. we have increased -- it is not in their budget. we make permanent the r&d tax break for businesses. increased the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. equal pay for equal work. student loan relief. a number of initiatives we have put forward. earned paid sick leave so people don't have to lose their means to support their families when a

loved one gets sick. comprehensive immigration reform which of the congressional budget office indicates will help grow the economy. and modernizing regulations to ensure fair payment of overtime work. the administration's game board with a proposal the other day. those are just some of the foundations that the budgets provide right now. now, i think of those policies will absolutely help boost the economy. they will absolutely help provide for more shared prosperity. it is a strong foundation. but, i believe in order to tackle that decades old problem of chronic stagnant wages and very flat incomes for most americans, we need to go further. that is what i want to talk about today which is an action

plan to grow the paychecks of all, not just the wealthy. it begins with this observation. our tax code today is stacked in favor of people who make money off of money and against those who make money off of hard work. first, let's take a look at the size of spending that takes place through the tax code. take a look at this chart. this is entitled "spending through the tax code is very high." if you look at that red bar then very high red bar, that is $1.4 trillion a year. that is the number that the nonpartisan congressional budget office says we are spending through the tax code from tax breaks like deductions, credits and tax exemptions.

i just want to briefly go over the concepts of spending through the tax code. economists call these tax expenditures because using these mechanisms to shelter income from a tax that is due is simply another way of delivering an economic benefit. just as you can deliver that same economic benefit through direct government spending right? if the government provides any of you with a tax exemption worth $1000, it is the same economic benefit as if the government gave you $1000. take a look at this chart. it shows that more is spent on spending through the tax code the reduction's and tax exemptions each year than on social security. that is the next bar over. more spent through the tax code

through these exemptions than on medicare and medicaid combined each year. more spent through tax breaks than all of our defense spending and nondefense spending. a lot of these tactics miniatures have sound -- tax expenditures have sound benefits like promoting savings by including money we put towards retirement savings. like in the business world providing the research and develop it tax credit to promote investment. on the other hand, there are some provisions in here that are only in here because par for leads -- powerful elites with well-paid lobbyists have succeeded let the tax advantages for corporate jets or hedge funds managers.

when you look at the distribution of these tax expenditures who they go to on the income scale, this is what you find. that red piece on top of that bar on the far right shows according to the congressional budget office, 17% of these tactics miniatures -- tax expenditures go to the top 1%, right? the top 1% get 17% of the tax benefits in the tax code from the duction's or tax-exempt -- tax exemptions. that is $150 billion in tax benefits through the code every year. now, why do the top 1% have this

huge disproportionate share of tax benefits? one big reason is they have a lot of income from things like the sale of stocks and the tax code imposes lower tax rates on that kind of unearned income than it does on much income earned through hard work. the current system allows billions of dollars of capital gains to pass tax-free to multimillion dollar fortunes. not surprisingly, because the tax code favors those who make money out of money, the disparity of wealth has grown even faster than incomes. take a look at this chart. again, interestingly, you see back in the 1920's huge wealth disparities but it came down and

down during that time when worker productivity was matched with wages. again, beginning around the late 1970's, you see this wealth disparity taking off. now, the top 1% wealthiest households own 42% of the wealth of the country. that is because we have a tax code that enforces this preference for wealth overwork. -- over work. let's go back to the early chart where we begin to tell that story about the separation of worker productivity and flat wages. the proposal that i am making today to reform the tax code begin from that premise that we need a tax code that rewards those who earn their living through hard work and rebalance it against the fact that is in

favor that people who make money off money. this chronic problem of frozen paychecks and stagnant middle-class incomes from both directions. first, it is designed to promote bigger paychecks. second it lets middle-class workers and those working their way into middle-class keep and save more of what they earn. so let's start with the incentives for higher pay and growing wages. my goodness, if the tax code could be used to provide for corporate jets and resources surely we can use the tax code to incentivize corporations to give their employees pay raises or invest in apprenticeship programs that result in better skills and bigger paychecks. in the next 10 days, i will introduce the ceo-employee paycheck fairness act which is designed to record corporations

to give their employees fair pay increases when their top executives are getting big bonuses. it is very simple. it says that corporations cannot continue to take unlimited tax reductions -- deductions for their ceo and executive bonuses unless they are giving their employees a pay raise that reflects worker productivity plus cost-of-living increases. you saw that chart earlier. you solve that beginning in the late 1970's, productivity kept going up, average worker compensation was flat. let's see what happened to ceo compensation. here it is. this chart shows you back in the late 1970's, ceos received a 30 times the compensation of the average worker.

today ceo compensation has skyrocketed almost 300 times compensation of the average worker. the average ceo compensation at the top 350 firms is over $15 million a year. between the year 2007 and 2010, corporations claimed a total of $66 billion in deductions for ceo and other executive compensation. now, under the bill i am introducing, corporations could still the duct -- deduct up to $1 million for their salaries f or executives. but, they would not get to cut their workers pay or lay people off and take those huge

tax deductions for the multimillion dollar bonus packages. if a corporation is doing well enough to give their executives big bonuses, it should be giving its employees a raise. this bill is very simple. no raise for workers, no corporate tax breaks for executive bonuses. it is a common sense a step we can take today to make sure the economy works better for everyone. we are also looking into a variation on this incentive linking the corporate tax inductions -- deductions be available the similar profit-sharing plans to regular employees. as studies by cap and others have shown, there is solid evidence that giving workers a stake in voice and the company they work for not only benefits workers, it makes those businesses more competitive as well.

i also believe we need to support those businesses that invest in building the employee skills that lead to higher pay. apprenticeship programs area proven pathways to successful careers and higher incomes for workers while making those businesses more competitive. yet, apprenticeships are underutilized in the united states compared to our economic competitors. here about 150,000 people start a private ships each year -- apprenticeships each year. if we launch as many apprenticeships per capita as they do in germany we would have about 2 million more here in the united states each year. some states like south carolina offer tax credits for apprenticeships. we should adopt the successful models to incentivize more businesses to invest in them credit chips -- in apprenticeships and other

job-training programs that allows employees to earn while they learn. now, the first two elements of this plan are things i just talked about. ceo-employee paycheck fairness act and training programs. those are using the tax code to incentivize higher pay for workers and more skills that lead to higher pay. as i said, we have to address middle-class wage and income stagnation from both sides. we need to boost wages and use the tax code to do that. but, we also need to allow middle-class workers and many of those working towards the middle class to keep more of what they earn. and, so the next item on here begins in a very important way

to address that. to try and boost the take-home pay of middle-class workers and those who seek to join the middle class. and, allow them to save more of what they earn. again, as i said, the current tax code is skewed in favor of people make money off of money. we want to make sure the tax code works for people who make money off of hard work. and that's why i propose a paycheck bonus tax credit of $1,000 per worker or $2,000 for a two-earner couple to boost the after-tax take home pay of middle class americans. i also intend it to be at least partially refundable, and we'll look at ways to do that. this paycheck bonus credit would be indexed to inflation and phased out at incomes of $100,000 per individual,

$200,000 per working couple. now, as we shape the tax code to give hard working middle class americans more take-home pay, we should also encourage americans to save for their future. this is another area where c.a.p. has done much good work. not surprisingly, americans who are struggling to pay their bills don't have a lot of leftover income to put away for their future needs. and while the current tax code provides for such savings vehicles like 401(k) plans or individual retirement accounts this can be difficult to access or set up, some employers don't provide them, and the top 5% of income earners get more tax relief from these savings plans than the bottom 80%. as a result, the typical worker nearing retirement age has only saved up enough in an ira or

401k to provide $500 a month in retirement income. so i propose to build the savings of typical workers with the saver's bonus of $250 each year that an individual directs at least $500 of his or her paycheck bonus tax credit or earned income tax credit into a tax-preferred savings account. studies show that even small financial incentives can encourage many more people to participate in these savings plans. we also need to make it much easier for people without access to those plans through their employers to set up these accounts. last year president obama took a major step forward by providing an easy way for employers to allow their workers to deposit some of their paychecks into designated myra accounts that the treasury department will be rolling out.

as part of this action plan, i propose to allow taxpayers to use their tax returns to immediately direct their $500 contribution which would earn the $250 saver's bonus and do it right there. direct their funds in the matching bonus to the savings vehicle of their choice. right there on your tax return check off you're going to do $500 or more direct to your savings, get $250 saver's bonus and do it right there on your tax form. if a working couple were to each direct $750 of their paycheck bonus credit which they'll be getting which will be new income to that household in a sense, or someone receiving their eitc were to do that, after 40 years they would save $300,000 under reasonable growth assumptions.

this plan also recognizes -- so i talked about the saver's bonus at the top of the list there -- the next item relates to take-home pay for two-earner families. and this plan recognizes that the current tax code creates a disincentive for second earners in a household to join the work force, because the first dollar earned by that second earner is taxed at the rate on the last dollar earned on the household member who is already in the work force. and this marriage penalty is especially pronounced for families with young children or elderly live-in dependents who face large childcare or adult daycare costs if the second spouse chooses to enter the work force to support the family. so to address this, we should

provide these families with a 20% tax deduction on up to $60,000 of their income. this rewards work, reduces the marriage penalty and makes the tax code fairer to second earners and their families. in addition, we should modernize the child independent care tax credit. the cost of childcare has increased dramatically since 2001, but cap on eligible expenses has remained the same. it's remained stuck at $3,000 for one child. this is eligible expenses. and 6,000 for two or more children. in addition, this cap on the child and dependent care tax credit is incredibly poorly designed. it phases down starting at lower income levels meaning virtually no one can access its higher level of benefits the way it

interacts with other parts of the tax code. we should modernize this credit by significantly raising the amount of the eligible credit, indexing it to inflation so it doesn't get stuck again and making it refundable so that millions of families that struggle the most to pay for childcare will be able to benefit from this credit. and the details are in the handouts that you have. we estimate that over the next ten years the elements of this plan will provide over $1.2 trillion in tax benefits that are aimed directly at boosting the take-home income of working middle class taxpayers and those working to join the middle class. more than 150 million americans will benefit in some real way from this effort to raise flat incomes experienced by so many. and this plan to reward work is fully paid for but changing

system some of those ways that our current tax code is wired in favor of making off of money instead of earning money from hard work. so it's paid for with a combination of two sources. first, it curves the tax breaks that favor portfolios over paychecks. as i discussed earlier, the top 1% of income households currently receive 17% of the benefit of major tax expenditures, the spending in the tax code. a total of about $150 billion a year or more than $1.5 trillion over a ten-year budget window. without increasing anybody's top tax rate, we can reduce this disproportionate share of benefits and dedicate the revenues to tax relief for hard working middle class taxpayers and those working to join them.

second, we should adopt a high roller fee to curb financial excessive financial speculation. by acting in coordination with the european union and major financial markets, the united states can reduce the kind of market gambling that creates no value for the economy by placing a tiny fee on trading in the financial markets. we already place a very tiny fee on stock transactions to fund the securities and exchange commission, and many other countries including the u.k. france, singapore and hong kong have some form of these financial trading market fees. the e.u. is moving toward a trade aring fee of .1%. ten basis points. on a broad range of financial market transactions. for comparison purposes, the united kingdom already applies a fee that is five times higher than that on their stock trades, 0.5%, 50 basis points.

a 0.1% financial market trading fee would be virtually imperceptible to average investors who already bear transaction costs on every trade that some estimate to be three times higher than that. at the same time, this fee would rein in the kind of computerized, high-speed trading that skims value from regular investors without adding value to the economy. american financiers and high rollers have claimed that such a fee would push financial trading overseas, but if we do it in concert with others, we can curb unproductive financial speculation and replace it with a source of revenue to support the action plan to grow the take-home pay of 150 million americans, and in doing so, grow the whole economy. as i said at the outset, this proposed action plan builds on the already-strong foundation of the budgets president obama and democrats in congress have

proposed in the past. those budgets which steadily reduce our deficits over the next ten years, strengthen the ladder of opportunities to help americans achieve the american dream. this action plan, which by itself will not add a penny to the deficit, will further help us meet t the economic challenge of our time. a rapidly growing economy that works for all americans, not just those already at the top. in closing, let me leave you with this final comparison of the tax differences between the republican approach and this action plan. what it would mean for a family in the real world. as i indicated earlier, the trickle-down tax cuts for the wealthy in the republican budget result in an average tax cut of over $200,000 for millionaires. and at the same time as you saw earlier, the tax center found that a comparable republican plan presented by mitt romney and paul ryan would have the

effect of raising taxes on middle income families by an average of $2,000. now, at the outset when the introduction was made, she mentioned that c.a.p. had looked at a family at the $80,000 income level and said that over a period of time that family had lost about $5,000 as a result of the forces i've been talking about in my speech. let me show you what this plan would do compared to the republican plan for a middle class family. as i said, the romney-ryan plan which is very similar to the one on the republican budget would increase taxes by $2,000 on a typical middle class family with kids. this plan, and we took an $80,000 family. we did not coordinate in advance. this is a typical working

family, two-earner couple paying for childcare for one child on an $80,000 income. and under this plan they would get a $4,400 tax benefit allowing them to keep more of what they earn to help their family. so i look forward to this debate going forward. we need an action plan that addresses this problem from both sides, as i said. we need to encourage companies and businesses to give their employees a fair wage, and we need to allow middle income families and those families working their way into the middle class to keep more of what they earn. and in doing so, we need to build a fairer tax code that rewards paychecks for work and not just money from making money. and i look forward to this

debate going forward, i thank you for your attention and again, i thank c.a.p. for all their important contributions to this debate. many thanks. [applause] >> thank you so much for laying out so many critical new ideas. i think we have time for just a few questions, so as people are thinking through their questions, and billy will be here to give you a microphone, let me just start with one brief question. you know, there's a debate in washington, that seems, about fairness versus economic growth. and i just thought it'd be helpful to, you talk a lot about how the tax system could be more fair, how we could have a more fair economic system. how do you see that relating to economic growth?

>> well, i think that's a great question. as i indicated in my remarks the economic evidence indicates that our entire economy will grow faster if more people are earning the benefit of their hard work and productivity. when you have that big gap between worker productivity and income, it doesn't just hurt the middle class families with flat income, it actually slows down overall economic growth. so if you want a growing pie for all, we need a pie where everybody can get a little bigger slice. and as i indicated earlier, even the folks at the very top can do better with a somewhat smaller slice of a larger pie. they will end up ahead of the game just like henry ford was ahead of the game. >> great. over here in the middle. with the tie. could you just identify yourself? >> yes. peter rosenstein with the american academy of --

[inaudible] congressman, i think the plan is great. >> thank you. >> obviously, the problem is when democrats controlled both houses and the presidency, we couldn't do this. we have clearly not gotten this message across because you have the largest majority you have now of republicans. most of this, we think, will most likely go nowhere. how do you convince voters in very simple language that this is good for them? because clearly, they don't understand it by their votes. so we've just heard an hour of a discussion that's very complicated using a lot of federal legalese. how do you put that into an ad of 30 and 60 seconds so that the average middle class voter understands what you're talking about and will vote for democrats to get this done in 2016? >> so, first of all, i think the average voter out there, the average voter is one of those voters who's feeling the squeeze

we talked about, right? and that squeeze didn't begin last year or the year before that squeeze has begun over a period of time. and as i indicated, i think that a lot of the proposals democrats have put forward in the past will help address that issue but i don't think they address it with the full force that is necessary to move that graph that we saw, the one with the rising productivity but flat wages. and so that's why i'm proposing this new action plan. and i believe when you go around the country and just show, you know, working americans what the differences in the plans will be that the republican plan that was put forward in the congress last year that mirrors the romney-ryan tax plan will squeeze middle class taxpayers and that this plan will provide over $4,000 worth of new income to a typical $80,000 two-earner

family with a kid, that that tells them we're actually focused on things they care about -- their pocketbook and the economic squeeze. so, look, i see this as the start of a conversation. we want everyone to participate in this debate. but i do believe that this action plan will, you know, in time get the attention of the american people, and i look forward to the continuing discussion. >> over here. this side. >> hi, congressman van hollen, rob schroeder from market watch. just wanted to ask about the financial fee. what transactions in particular would this apply to? would it just be stocks? would it be retail investors? and can you talk about the timing?

why now? you mentioned the market's up. >> sure. well, this is, this would apply in secondary markets, it would apply to, yes, stock trades. as i indicated, we already have a very small fee on stock trades to help fund securities and exchange commission. and the u.k. already has a 50-basis-point fee on stock trades. what this proposes is a fee one-fifth that size, right? one-fifth of what the u.k. has on stocks, but on a broader range of market trading. so in equities, in derivatives. which really matches the kind of approach that the european union is looking at. so if you take a look at what the e.u. is currently looking at, we intend to work with them and in concert with them and other major markets to address that issue and address, you know, the argument that if you do it unilaterally, the trades will move to another financial center. i mean, interestingly, you know, the financial sector is pretty good. i don't blame them, they go over to the european markets, they

say don't do this because otherwise all the trades will flow to the united states, and then they come to the united states and say don't do this because all the trades will flow over to london and european markets. so that's why we need to do this together. but in addition to the revenue as i indicated, there are important policy reasons to be imposing this small fee, dampening excessive speculation and, as i said, dealing with this issue of computerized high-speed trading which essentially, skims value out of the economy for the high-speed traders but doesn't do anything for everybody else except for, in fact, reduce their shares. >> i am just wondering if you have a time rain in mind of what you will finalize the details. the tax break heart would work

and do you know what the increase looks like? chairman ryan already dismissed this plan as a tax hike. >> first of all, we are moving forward on pieces of this right away. i will be introducing the ceo employee paycheck fairness act in the next ten days, and then we will continue to put into legislative form some of these other provisions over a period of time, but we want to kickoff the debate. there is a lot of detail here but obviously, we need to flush out more. i am not surprised by the response from republicans on the hill who put forward a budget that cuts cut the top tax rate for millionaires by a full one third which has an effect of squeezing middle-class thales. -- families. republicans always say they are for smaller government and less spending. when it comes to the tax code they are simply for spending

money through the tax code on powerful elites and the already wealthy. as we saw more is spent through the tax code each year than on social security or on medicare or medicaid combined. republicans have done a pretty good job of steering that $1.3 trillion of tax expenditure benefits to folks at the very top which is why you see rising wealth inequality that's absolutely staggering. 42% of households, 1% of households owned 42% of the wealth. apparently that's the republican plan, the status quo. they want to make it even worse when it comes to middle-class families as we saw. >> thank you for the great ideas. >> thank you for the discussion.

[applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> the heritage foundation is holding its moment. up next, house budget committee chair discusses gop priorities. later, texas senator ted cruz talks about republicans agenda. on our next washington journal, congressman bill tourist -- bill flores joins us will talk about the gop agenda and president obama's upcoming state of the union address. and then democratic republican talks up -- democratic senator talks about concerns in the wake of the paris attacks. and in the sunlight foundation on the effectiveness on current lobbying on current members of congress.

you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. >> up next, tom price of george talks about root -- budget priorities. he chairs the house budget committee. from the heritage foundation, this is just over one hour. [applause] >> all right, look at that. ok.

thank you, everybody for sitting tight and waiting. all right ok here we go. congressman price assumed the budget ship at it and important time. as we know, the country has enormous challenges right now and the house budget committee is at the forefront of addressing the challenges. he has big shoes to fill frankly. congressman paul ryan has been a very effective advocate for reform. in his tenure as chairman, he introduced the ryan road map which began a national conversation about where we go in the future, about entitlement reform and how to repeal obama care and what to put in place. before the ryan budgets, these

were the third rail of politics. reform those at your own political peril and there was a lot of criticism at the time when the ryan budgets first came out that this was too dangerous for republicans. we've seen what happened. the numbers are going up. this is not the third rail of politics any more. liberal scare mongering has become fairly ineffective. not that it is something to be considered but we've seen it can be beaten back. remember the ads of pushing granny off the cliff. those didn't work so well in the last election. and i think that what we've learned about this is that the american people are plenty smart, have plenty of wisdom and when they see you take a bold stand for something that will help them in their daily lives they'll rally to your side. it is a reason to be encouraged and a reason for more members of congress to have political courage to address these kind of issues. so congressman price picks up the mantle on the success of the past and we they there is not -- and we think there is no better

person to do this. he's been an ally of the heritage foundation and so taking this chairmanmanship and pushing on is something we are looking forward to. and we are looking forward to hearing from him today on what we are doing and looking to the future. so please help me in welcoming tom price to the stage. [applause] >> thanks, tim. great to be with you and back at heritage. i want to thank heritage for the opportunity to be here and heritage action for the work you all have done. it is incredibly important work

to continue the advocacy on behalf of all americans. and thank you all for showing. i see some familiar faces in the audience and not so familiar. so welcome. you may have stumbled in out of the rain and stumbled into a fascinating opportunity but hopefully this is the spot where you intended to be this hour. i have a hard stop at 1:00 but i'll make some remarks and we'll do q&a and i'm happy to talk about what you want to talk about. but the house budget committee and the deadlines coming up early in the year so that you can hopefully get a handle on what we're looking at. i can't tell you how excited i am about the opportunity to chair the house budget committee. the opportunities that we have are really remarkable. the past four years, if we're honest, have been a muddled mess. with what we've seen from the senate democrats and the kind of activity that the house struggled to get through the floor, even though they would -- we would put good policy in the senate, it just got shoved into harry reid's bottom drawer.

so i can't tell you how excited i am to work with a senate that wants to get something done and hopefully get things to the president's desk. i think we're in a win-win situation. if we can get anything to the president's desk, we win. because if he signs it, it will be good policy for the american people and if he vetoes it, then it begins to demonstrate to the american people the contrast we have been unable to do so because of the muddled mess over the last few years, the contrast from those trying to solve the challenges and problems in the country and who is standing in the way. the president will be laid bare and the emperor has no clothes. so i can't tell you how excited i am looking forward with the budget committee. the budget is not just numbers on a sheet of paper. it is our vision. it is the kind of policies and programs we could put in place

to address the challenges and the problems that we have so that we can provide for -- an opportunity for all americans to have a greater opportunity to succeed. and that is what a budget is. and so we will lay out our path for real hope and real opportunity as we move forward. a few years ago, many of you will recall that the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, then mike mullen, was asked what he thought was the greatest threat to national security for the united states. the greatest threat. this is the highest ranking military officer in the country is asked what the greatest threat was to our national security. and you all know what he replied? the debt. the debt. $18 trillion and growing. and the total debt exceeds the gross domestic product and we're on an absolutely unsustainable path.

and the budget committee is where we get our fiscal house in order. why do we want to do that? again, it is not just numbers on a page and making things add up to zero to get a balanced budget, but with a debt that size, paying the interest on the debt, servicing that debt, every single dollar that services that debt is a dollar that can't be used for education, can't be used for healthcare, can't be used for transportation or energy. that can't be used for national security. it is literally at a point where it is approaching choking off the actual vitality of our great country. so that is the reason. it is not just numbers on a page. it is making certain that we provide for a greater amount of opportunity for all americans. you all know now that we find ourselves in a situation where we as a nation are spending about $3.6 trillion a year.