Petitions, Etc.

PETITIONS, ETC. -- (House of Representatives - May 20, 2004)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to respond to the gentleman from California, if I may. I very rarely agree with anything he says.

I do agree with one thing he said and that is, the American people are not stupid. I would just like to say to him that the American people can add and they can subtract. The unpaid-for tax cuts, many of them for the wealthiest people of this country, that his party has championed during this last month have added $1.2 trillion to the Federal debt that is already nearly $7.2 trillion. That is an addition of $4,000 to each American's share of the Federal debt. Each citizen's share of the debt would be now, with all these tax cuts that they have passed that are not paid for, $28,479.

Most of us on this side of the aisle have absolutely no problem with the marriage penalty tax relief provisions and most of the child tax credits that are being discussed here today. What we do have a problem with is passing the bill on to our kids and our grandkids. That is fiscally irresponsible.

They should listen to one of the great leaders of their own party, Senator JOHN MCCAIN of Arizona, who said that the Republican Party used to be the party of fiscal responsibility. It used to be the party that would want to pay as you go. That is no longer the case. This is the most fiscally irresponsible Congress in the history of our country.

And so to the gentleman who spoke earlier, I would say my problem is not so much that we should not provide tax relief to middle-income families; my problem is that you are not paying for it and you are passing the bill on to my kids and my grandkids, and that is not right.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I want to answer the gentleman's question. He asked, what did we give the American people when the Democrats had the White House and the House of Representatives and the United States Senate. We gave the American people one of the largest surpluses in the history of this country.

What have they given the American people now that they control the White House, House and the Senate? They have given the American people the largest deficit in the history of this country.

There is a clear difference.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

I just would remind the gentleman again that yesterday he and a majority, almost every single member of the Republican Party, voted for a budget to increase the national debt to over $8 trillion. That is not something I think anyone can be proud of.

Mr. Speaker, I include for printing in the Congressional Record an editorial that appeared in the Washington Post, entitled "Leave No Rich Child Behind" that refers to the bill we are talking about here today.

[From the Washington Post, May 19, 2004]

Leave No Rich Child Behind

The House Representatives plans to take up a bill this week that would provide new tax breaks to families earning as much as $309,000, while doing next to nothing for those at the low end of the income scale. The bill, which could come up as early as today, is the most egregious part of a House tax-cutting spree that altogether would add more than $500 billion to the deficit over the next 10 years, according to estimates by the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center.

The House would not only make permanent the $1,000-per-child tax credit enacted as part of the 2001 tax cut but would dramatically increase the income limits for eligibility. Currently, married families with incomes of up to $110,000 receive the full credit; the bill would more than double the income ceiling, to $250,000. Under existing law, families with two children and incomes up to $149,000 receive a partial tax credit; the bill would make that partial credit available to families with two children and income of between $250,000 and $289,000; families with three children would be entitled to the partial credit up to an income of $309,000.

This is unnecessary, misguided and irresponsible. Families at that income level have already enjoyed significant benefits from the recent tax cuts; they don't need an extra subsidy to help support their children. While tax cut proponents argue that lowering marginal tax rates or cutting dividend and capital gains taxes helps promote economic growth, there is no such claim to be made for the child tax credit. And the increase in the income ceiling would cost $69 billion through 2014, $87 billion if you count increased interest payments on the extra debt.

House Republicans have the gall to propose all this-and many House Democrats don't seem to have the spine to oppose it-while providing almost no extra help for the poorest families. Currently, low-income families who earn more than $10,750 are eligible for a small refundable tax credit. (These are families that pay payroll taxes but don't earn enough to be subject to paying income taxes, so they get a check back from the government.) For example, a married family with two children and an income of $12,000 gets $125 per child. The House bill would speed up by one year a planned increase in the size of this credit, giving low-income families a one-time average benefit of $150 per child. This remedies-belatedly-last year's mean-spirited omission of these families from the accelerated increase in the child tax credit enjoyed by higher-income taxpayers. The cost of this meager improvement: $1.8 billion.

For families earning less than $10,750, however, the House bill would do nothing. Thus, a family with a parent working full-time at the minimum wage ($10,300) would get no benefit from the bill. A better-off but still low-income family with two children would get a one-time $300 average tax break ($150 per child). By contrast, two-child families with earnings between $150,000 and $250,000 get $22,000 in extra tax breaks over the next 10 years ($1,000 per child per year). This is bad social policy, bad tax policy, and bad fiscal policy. You'd think they'd be embarrassed, but they're not.

Let me close, Mr. Speaker, by saying I hope that my colleagues will look seriously at the Rangel substitute. We provide a child tax credit, but we pay for it. I think that is the fiscally responsible thing to do.

We are now experiencing record deficits. We are going into debt. We are passing on to our kids an incredible bill. We need to be more responsible in this House. I would urge my colleagues to support the Democratic substitute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT