Legislative Program

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that information.

I would say to him that--and I think he knows and I know--although I don't think either of us is directly involved in the hour-to-hour negotiations that are going on--but, nevertheless, negotiations still go on, Mr. Speaker--I am hopeful that, on both sides, we can see that which is unacceptable to the other side and put that aside for a later day.

The appropriations process, of course, is about funding government. The appropriations process is about keeping government open. The appropriations process is about how do we best serve the American people.

I am hopeful that that will not get mired down or prevent our success in coming to an agreement on the omnibus because of issues on which, clearly, there are significant policy differences and which can be argued on another day and in another bill, but will not undermine the completion of the appropriations process.

I presume the majority leader hopes that as well. Hopefully, over the next few hours and, really, over the next couple of days, we will work on that because, if we don't, we are going to be here on the 17th, the 18th, the 19th, or the 20th, according to what the majority leader said, in order to get our work done.

Is that accurate, Mr. Leader?

I yield to the gentleman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that comment.

The only thing I would add, Mr. Speaker, is there is also a tax extender bill that is being discussed. The tax extenders are some of the items that Members on both sides of the aisle believe are appropriate and necessary to help grow our economy and create jobs, which has support on both sides of the aisle.

But it is clear that the extender bill, as I understand it, is a bill that can be very, very large--as large as $800 billion in unpaid tax cuts--which, from our perspective on our side in the House of Representatives, will substantially exacerbate our deficit, and that will undermine the viability of getting tax reform done in the next session or in the years to come.

We think, therefore, that it would be far preferable to have pending getting tax reform done--hopefully, next year if we can do so in a bipartisan fashion--and to have a shorter term. The Senate passed a 2-year bill, which is really a 1-year lookback to 2015 and a year forward to 2016. We need to certainly do that. I think we could get a bipartisan vote for that. I don't know where the negotiations are on that bill.

I would like to inform the majority leader, as he probably knows privately, that we have great concerns on this side of the aisle about a bill of the magnitude that is being discussed and the impact it will have on our deficit, on discretionary spending, and on our opportunity to pass major needed--and a bipartisan expectation of doing--tax reform so our tax system is simpler, fairer, is producing the revenue that we need, but it is also making sure the American people understand and can be provided a much simpler system for them to have to respond to.

If the majority leader wants to make any remarks on that, I yield to the gentleman. Otherwise, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source