Legislative Program
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of inquiring of the majority leader the schedule for next week.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. As it relates to the continuing resolution that I know the gentleman said may come up, we haven't had any details that have been shown to us on what that might look like in terms of other items in addition to some kind of short-term or even what the duration of a short term would be.
If there are any dates that the majority has already started thinking about that would be included in a continuing resolution, any extraneous items--there is some other funding that has been thrown about. There has been talk about Senator Manchin, that there may be some agreement that Senator Manchin would have some kind of permitting reform. I am not sure if that would be a part of a continuing resolution or a stand-alone bill.
If the gentleman could provide any clarification on any of those items that we haven't been privy to in conversations, I yield to my friend.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Obviously, we will be staying in touch on that. Hopefully, Ms. Lofgren will have some conversations with Ms. Granger about details because we haven't seen those yet. We surely would like to be more involved in those discussions.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. As we are more in the first half of September, obviously, this would all be at the very end of September. Hopefully, we wouldn't wait until the midnight hour. We are all aware of the deadline.
Hopefully, we can get something brought, ideally agreed upon by both sides, which we are nowhere near right now, but at least to have more direct conversations well in advance of the deadline, so we are not here watching the clock strike midnight wondering.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Hopefully, we can start seeing actual language next week so we can either get to a place where we are in agreement or try to resolve those areas of disagreement.
As the gentleman was talking about the calendar and other items that may be coming up, I noticed there were no conversations about any of the legislation that we have been talking about bringing to the floor to address inflation.
We just saw Tuesday, as the President was holding a party at the White House to celebrate inflation, we saw, yet again, more devastating news on the inflation front, to the point where the markets tanked during that party at the White House.
We have a package of bills that would help bring down inflation, bring down energy costs, and help those families who are struggling as we get ready to face another cold winter. There are expectations right now by all the experts that energy costs will go up again because we have limited supply here in the country.
As we identify those bills and yet not see any of them being listed for debate on the House floor, can we try to get some kind of direction on whether this majority will work with us to bring bills to the floor to address these real problems that are hurting families all across the country?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of different bills the gentleman mentioned. Each one of them, by the way, when you rack them up, adds up to trillions of dollars in new spending. If trillions in Washington spending were going to solve the problem, then we would have no inflation.
Obviously, it has gone the opposite direction, and it is going the opposite direction because of the trillions of dollars in new spending if you go down the line. Obviously, the gentleman went through all of those things, and I would like to respond to a number of them because it just doesn't mesh with the realities of where our economy is today.
If you look at the numbers--and we can talk about other countries-- other countries have passed bad policies that have wrecked their economies. You can see Europe right now finally having a renewed debate on energy policy because they passed some really foolish energy policies that are destroying their energy economies and making them more dependent on Russia, for example, to get their oil and to get their natural gas. They are finally waking up.
A lot of them shut their nuclear plants down, which is safe, sound nuclear energy. They wrecked their economies. They are starting to reverse that. I am glad they are finally waking up and reversing course.
It seems like right here in Washington the failed policies that President Biden has put in place, they want to double down on. When you look at the results of it, that is why we get where we are which is double digit increases in food costs that our families are facing. Electricity costs over 15 percent higher just over the last year, and it is about to get worse because the bill that the President was celebrating at the White House had another increase in taxes on natural gas, which will raise those costs even higher.
Mr. Speaker, I will yield to the gentleman in a moment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, electricity rates are 15.8 percent higher than last year.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. In America. This is all in America. Families that we represent are facing the burden of all of these policies that started in Washington that are ultimately ending up taking money out of their pockets.
When you go to the grocery store--if you can afford to get there--if you find the food on the shelves, it is 13\1/2\ percent higher. We have seen the list, whether it is eggs, dairy products, bacon, some of them are 30 percent higher individually, but it adds up to about 13\1/2\ percent more that you are paying at the grocery store.
Mortgage rates. If somebody is trying to become a first-time home buyer, which is part of the American dream, today it is 110 percent higher to get a mortgage than it was a year ago. Most economists, including many Democrat economists, point to the trillions in spending in Washington as the reason for that. Families have figured this out and said: Stop the madness.
Yet, again, at the White House in the most tone-deaf thing I have seen in a while, the President is having a party celebrating a $730 billion increase in taxes and spending at the exact same time that the market is tanking because of the inflation created by all this spending.
To finish it up, transportation costs are 11.3 percent higher. That is what is happening in America.
Again, Europe did a lot of these same bad policies. They figured it out, and they are starting to reverse course. They just got rid of their Prime Minister in England because of what they did to wreck their energy economy.
We brought bills--as I shared with the gentleman over months--we have brought a number of bills forward that would solve these problems, and not one of them has been scheduled for a vote on the House floor. We want to address this problem. We don't just sit back and go: Well, it is happening in other countries, so let it stay racking up in America. It doesn't need to.
These are all unforced errors that are the result of failed policies, and instead of stopping the failed policies and working with Republicans to turn it around and lower these costs, it seems like there is a desire to just double down and talk about trillions more to spend.
If spending was solving the problems, then we would have none of these problems. The problems have gotten worse with each multi-trillion or multi-hundred-billion-dollar package of legislation that has come out of this body.
At some point, I would hope that the other side would look and recognize and say, okay, forget about Europe and Asia. They need to look in the mirror and say, why did they create some of their problems?
We can do something about these problems. We brought those ideas forward, and every single time we have been told no, which must mean that this is okay. Because this is not okay to us, and there is a way to reverse it.
If just spending more money and having parties at the White House to celebrate that spending while Rome is burning is where we are going to be, I think there is going to be a day of reckoning on that. I don't think the country is comfortable where we are. And when the idea is to just keep spending more money and act like--maybe it is another $5 trillion--what is the number that is going to finally get us out of this mess? If it was trillions, we would be there already.
Maybe, just maybe, we need to look at going the other way. Stop paying people not to work, for example, when everybody is looking for workers. Unfortunately, the IRS is looking for 87,000 more people. And as CBO just confirmed, a lot of that is going to be going after hardworking families, families making under $400,000 a year, even though we were promised on this floor that wouldn't happen.
We brought an amendment to ensure that President Biden's promise would be upheld. We brought an amendment that would say and ensure no American making under $400,000 would see their taxes go up with these 87,000 new IRS agents. The majority rejected that amendment. Literally, the day of the vote, the Congressional Budget Office came out and confirmed that it is over $20 billion in new taxes.
That bill is going to cost families making less than $400,000. Those families are already struggling. They would love to save up and buy a new house. They can't even afford to get to the grocery store to pay 13\1/2\ percent more. If they try to go get a mortgage today, they are going to be paying more than double for that mortgage than they were a year ago.
At some point we have got to stop these failed policies that are causing these problems. Go look at what some of these other countries are doing to finally reverse course because they are, and they need to, but so do we. I would hope that we would bring some of those bills to the House floor because we could start reversing these horrible trends now.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, first, to clarify, it wasn't me who said that the IRS agents, this new army of 87,000 IRS agents, would be going after people to collect $20 billion more in taxes who were making less than $400,000.
It was the Congressional Budget Office who put in their report the day of the vote that that is exactly what would happen, is that those IRS agents would, in fact, be going after people making less than $400,000, to the tune of $20 billion in new taxes.
We brought an amendment to stop that from happening, to say they can't go after those people making less than $400,000, which is what the President promised. The Congressional Budget Office report was right there, saying $20 billion is what they would pay in new taxes. The majority rejected the amendment. So clearly, the intention was to have those IRS agents go after them.
Again, those weren't my numbers. That was the Congressional Budget Office. If there is a dispute the gentleman has, take it up with them. But they were the ones who came out with that report the day of the vote. Maybe that was why the bill was rushed through. But we pointed that out, and no one disputed that the Congressional Budget Office put those numbers out there.
But the President still kept saying, don't worry. They are not going to go after them, not a dime. But CBO said $20 billion in new taxes those low- and middle-income families will pay. We tried to stop it. The majority rejected it.
Now, to go to the oil and gas comments the gentleman made about President Biden, you would think, listening to your comments, that Joe Biden was John D. Rockefeller, and he is drilling everywhere. Well, let's first----
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. And I won't say the gentleman did, but as the gentleman talked about all this production and drilling that is going on and all this oil that is coming out, it was Joe Biden who said, as a candidate, ``no more drilling on Federal lands. No more drilling, including offshore. No ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period.''
Then he carried out policies to back that up and stop drilling.
We have pointed out many times, major companies in America that want to increase production, as the gentleman did say, that they are not increasing production. They tried, and they have been rejected on the permits they would need.
You can't just go drill a new hole tomorrow. Every well ultimately depletes. We all know that. That has been going on since man invented the ability to drill for oil in the world. So as oil depletes, you need to get new permits to go into these areas. The Biden administration, over and over again, rejected those new permits.
So there are leases out there. Again, a lease might be like you have a car. You have got a car in your driveway. Well, if you don't have an engine in the car, the car is not functional.
If you have a lease, the lease doesn't do you any good if you can't get the permits to build pipelines. We have talked about the pipeline problems as this administration, over and over again, has blocked new pipelines.
How do you move the oil? How do you get the permit to go and explore for more?
So what the President did--again, if we were just maxed out on drilling here, why did the President get on Air Force One and fly 5,700 miles to Saudi Arabia to beg them to produce more oil? They said no because they don't have the ability over there.
The President called Vladimir Putin and asked him to drill for more oil. Putin said no.
You don't need to ask those countries to produce more oil because we have it here, but there is documented evidence, over and over, where this administration has said no to permits, no to the ability for us to produce more of our own energy.
So what happens? The price goes up. They are talking about, during this winter, the inability for people to have home heating oil. So they are importing it from countries like Russia because they are not allowing more production here, where companies are trying to produce more and being turned down by this administration.
The Secretary--I think it was the Secretary of Energy--when asked, what is your plan to produce more in America, she started laughing. It is not a laughing matter, but that has been the attitude of this administration.
To finish up on the point where the gentleman started talking about all these bills that we voted against, starting with the $1.9 trillion spending bill that this administration came right out of the box with. As the economy was starting to turn around, and people were starting to bring workers back, trying to get workers back, a $1.9 trillion package of bills came forward to pay people, in part, not to work, to stay at home; made it harder for people to get workers back.
But what it also did--and this is something we brought up during the debate--checks were being sent to people.
Well, we pointed out that checks were going to end up going to people in prisons, and we were told that wasn't going to happen. Just like with the 87,000 IRS agents, when CBO debunked that. Don't worry; nobody in prison is going to get checks. Turned out later, the Boston bomber got a check.
Who knows how many billions of dollars went to prisoners to be paid-- taxpayers are already paying for them to be housed, to be fed, to get healthcare. But then they also got checks, actual checks in stimulus money. We had an amendment to stop that from happening.
But ultimately, yes, we voted against those things because we wanted to see our economy back open.
When there was this idea that everybody had to stay home, that wasn't the case when we started last year. In fact, many States started to open again. There were some States that stayed shut down.
By the way, you can see a massive movement around the country, where New York State alone lost about a million people who moved to States like Florida because they didn't want to be shut down anymore when there was a State that was open, following safety protocols, protecting their people, but allowing people to live in freedom again and live their lives.
So people moved out of States, the shut down States like California and New York and moved to States that were open. You can see the numbers, and they are dramatic numbers.
So not every State handled it the same. But the States that opened were having a lot more success in protecting their people at the same time, but the States that stayed closed had devastating consequences.
Not to mention what we saw with children being shut out of school, the learning that wasn't happening. Those are devastating numbers we are seeing today because this administration changed the science--and that is documented--changed the science over at CDC to cater to the unions who wanted to keep schools shut down. So millions of kids didn't learn at the levels they should have, and those numbers are still showing up today, that those kids were left behind; lost a year or 2 years they will never get back because other kids were in school learning, when the unions wanted to work with the Biden administration to keep schools shut down.
So those are the things that we tried to address. None of those bills were allowed to come to the floor. But that is where we are.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, if Joe Biden wants to keep producing more energy, we are giving him opportunities, but he says no. He said ``no'' many times, and he campaigned on that. We will continue to push to bring those bills to the floor.
We are going to continue to push to bring bills to the floor to solve a lot of these problems that we have identified, and we have bills to address them. If the majority doesn't want to bring them up, I understand. That is the prerogative of the majority, but we are going to still keep talking about them.
We are going to still keep pushing every opportunity we can to bring down inflation, to lower energy costs, and to address so many of these other problems that people are still facing today.
If that single mom who is working as a waitress two shifts is going to be audited by some new IRS agent who is tasked, under the terms that we saw, with going out and generating that money, if the result of that is that she has to pay more money, it doesn't mean she is cheating on her taxes. If all of a sudden an auditor is coming after you, who knows what kind of pressure they are putting?
But it is 87,000 more IRS agents tasked with going and generating not $20 billion. The $20 billion is just for the people making under $400,000. It is over $250 billion that some of the numbers show that they have to generate, meaning they are going to have to go out and find that from taxpayers.
That doesn't mean every one of those people they audit is a tax cheat. It just means that person is going to now face an audit who otherwise is working two or three shifts to meet the demands of these higher costs that they are facing because of inflation.
We are going to continue fighting for those hardworking families and fighting to lower the burden on this government, take some of that heat off so they can spend more time at home with their family, not working two or three shifts or worrying about the next audit they are going to face from a new IRS agent who is told to go generate more money. Hopefully, we can address that. We will continue to push for that.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, we will continue to be honest with the American people. It was the administration that used the 87,000 number. If that number should be lower, I would love to hear what that number would be.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland. If the gentleman has a number, please tell me because that is what we heard from the administration.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. We will continue to tell the truth about these policies. Clearly, there is a disagreement on many of them, but that is why we have this debate. I look forward to continuing it with the gentleman.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source