Amendments
AMENDMENTS -- (House of Representatives - September 14, 2004)
Under clause 8 of rule XVIII, proposed amendments were submitted as follows:
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. DELAURO
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Ms. DeLauro:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following:
SEC. 647. None of the funds made available in this Act may be used to enter into any contract with an incorporated entity where such entity's sealed bid or competitive proposal shows that such entity is incorporated or chartered in Bermuda, Barbados, the Cayman Islands, Antigua, or Panama.
Ms. DeLAURO (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask the amendment be considered as read and printed in the RECORD.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Connecticut?
There was no objection.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that debate on this amendment and any amendment thereto be limited to 20 minutes to be equally divided and controlled by the proponents and myself, the opponent.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Oklahoma?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) will control 10 minutes. The gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) will control 10 minutes in opposition.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is simple. It would prevent the departments and agencies under this bill from using any funds to contract with American companies which have created shell corporations in tax haven countries in order to avoid paying U.S. taxes. Both the House and the Senate have now passed a similar ban on the Homeland Security Appropriations bill.
Recent data shows that despite costing our government $5 billion in lost tax revenue, corporate expatriates reaped $1.4 billion in Federal contracts in 2002 alone. This in the middle of a budget crisis. As a result, this bill lacks sufficient funding for public transit for the Nation's commuters and for Amtrak.
We are struggling to find the resources to fund an ongoing war on terrorism, to equip our first responders, and ensure the safety of our ports and air transit. The notion that we would reward these companies for their bad behavior with taxpayer funded contracts is not only counterintuitive, it offends our values as Americans.
This amendment will not affect existing contracts. Let me repeat that. This amendment will not affect existing contracts. It will simply ensure that in the future we will favor good corporate citizens with government contracts rather than rewarding companies for moving overseas and putting tax paying American companies at a permanent competitive disadvantage.
Failing to pass this amendment will allow companies who reduce their tax burdens by setting up these shell corporations overseas to underbid these good corporate citizens. That hurts American companies who pay their taxes and employ citizens across this Nation.
These companies have made a clear choice to leave this country and not pay their taxes. It is now up to us to make a choice. We should set standards. We should set the tone. We should set the obligation that if they are going to do that and not pay taxes in the United States, then in fact they can not feed at the public trough and get government contracts.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ISTOOK. I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut.
Ms. DeLAURO. I thank the gentleman. I appreciate his comments and his argument except that the countries were culled from a list of corporate expatriates and their countries of incorporation. They are the top destinations of corporate tax dodgers. It is also I think important for people to know none are members of the WTO.
Mr. ISTOOK. Reclaiming my time, I thought I was yielding for a question.
The fact that there may be corporate expatriates in these countries does not mean you should disqualify everybody that is in those countries. If you want to get at corporate expatriates, go after them, but do not say that because, maybe, let us pick a number, maybe it is as high as 5 percent of the companies that are chartered in one of these nations is a corporate expatriate you are disqualifying 100 percent.
I do not know what those ratios are, but I do know the vast majority of companies in these nations are not corporate expatriates. The fact that the list that you have of corporate expatriates say these are their chosen destinations does not mean that everybody in those countries are corporate expatriates.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, no. I do not want running debate.
Just because people that may do a corporate inversion, may choose to go to these countries does not mean that everybody that is in there is. If you live in a country or in a city where there is a lot of crime, it does not mean that you are a criminal. You do not say we will go out and penalize everybody in that community because some among them are people that we do not like. We should not do that to any other country on the Earth.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman would not yield me time and I want to say that, in fact, we have been trying over the last probably 2 years to deal with the issue of corporate expatriates. And, quite frankly, as I said in my opening remarks, we have had success in both the House and the Senate. And they have now passed a civil ban on the Homeland Security Appropriations bill. And that is because the rank and file members of this institution and in the other body realize that, in fact, this is the height of un-Americanism.
These are corporations who try to diminish their tax liabilities by going overseas to places like Bermuda and the Cayman Islands, and they do it for one purpose and one purpose alone, and that is not to pay their fair share of taxes to this country.
We have tried in committee, we have tried in the floor and we have, truly, we have had moderate success and for that I am grateful to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. But the fact of the matter is that at every opportunity the leadership on the other side of the aisle, the White House, have truly removed, removed the will of the body in their legislation in the bills that have been passed here.
I would say to you that we are going to continue to address this issue. We do need to make a choice. We do have to demonstrate values and what we are about, and whether or not we are going to allow businesses who walk away from their tax obligation and their responsibility to the United States of America, we are going to allow them as we did this here afternoon to be exonerated from legal liability and then we are going to say to them, come back and get government contracts because your behavior has been so exemplary that we want to reward you with billions and billions of dollars of taxpayers funds.
Do we really believe that that says what this country is all about? It defies logic. Individuals in this Nation and businesses who are good corporate citizens are paying their fair share of taxes. They cannot evade them. They cannot dodge them. Why should these corporations be allowed to do that at a time when we have so few resources that we cannot do anything about health care, about retirement security, about education, about transportation?
I say to my colleagues, those who vote against this amendment surely do have some explaining to do to their constituents and their constituents deserve an answer; and if the answer is they will allow these tax dodgers to be able to get billions of dollars in Federal funds and in contracts, then maybe the constituents ought to think twice when election time rolls around.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I have no other speakers except myself to close. I am not sure if the gentlewoman has any other speakers or if she was yielding back her time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). She reserved her time.
Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I reserve my time until closing. I believe I have the right to close.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) has the right to close.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time.
In closing, let me just say I have no other speakers. As I have said, this is an issue of values, and it is an issue of priorities. We talk a lot today about values and what they mean in our lives, what they mean to this country and who, in fact, is the best representation of the fundamentals of this country, as adhered to in its entire history.
If my colleagues want to stand with corporations who have abandoned our country in a time of war and have gone through such elaborate contortions to avoid paying U.S. taxes or they have to look into their souls tonight and say can they stand with those companies who have been good corporate citizens, they employ Americans, they live up to their responsibilities to their Nation, I think if we ask any American citizen, whether they be a Democrat or a Republican, that the answer would be the same. I have to pay my taxes, why do they not?
Let us put this people's House on record. Let us take an opportunity to demonstrate that we are on the side of everyday Americans, middle-class Americans, and let us tell these corporate expatriates, the free ride is over. Vote in favor of this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) will be postponed.
Are there further amendments?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT