Buffett Rule Act of 2012

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank my colleague, Mr. Levin.

I was just listening to the previous speaker. The issue is not whether we reduce our long-term deficits. We've got to do that. The question is: How? And every bipartisan group that has looked at this issue has said in order to do this in a smart and credible way, we have to make some additional tough cuts in reforms. But we also need to raise additional revenue. And if we don't raise any more revenue, it means that everybody else is going to get hit even harder. Seniors on Medicare will have to pay more through the voucher plan than our Republican colleagues have proposed. Kids' education grants and loans will be cut. Our investment in infrastructure will be cut.

So what we've said is, Let's take that balanced approach to reducing the deficit and that folks who have done very well should contribute a little bit more toward helping our Nation in that way. Our Republican colleagues have said, No, no, no, no, we're not going to ask people like Warren Buffett or Mitt Romney or very wealthy people to pay one more penny--not one--toward reducing our deficit.

And, Mr. Speaker, I've got to say it's astounding that our Republican colleagues would bring this bill to the floor of this House any day, but especially today. There is apparently no embarrassment factor about the fact that just yesterday this tape surfaced with Mitt Romney talking about the fact that 47 million Americans are not paying enough Federal taxes, that they're somehow not taking personal responsibility. You might as well name this piece of legislation: Give Mitt Romney Another Big Tax Break. Because as the gentleman from Michigan pointed out, the real Buffett rule says to people like Warren Buffett and people like Mitt Romney and to people who have done very well: We need you to contribute a little bit more toward deficit reduction, just like you were doing when President Clinton was President. Just go back to paying the same rate as when President Clinton was President.

And, by the way, President Obama has called upon this Congress to immediately extend tax relief to 98 percent of the American people and 97 percent of all businesses that do business pass-throughs. What our Republican colleagues want to do is to say to Bain Capital and some of the Fortune 100 companies: You don't have to pay any more to reduce our deficit. And they use the language of small business as a cover for that.

Now let's look at who was among those 47 percent of Americans that Governor Romney was talking about yesterday. Seniors who paid into Medicare, who paid into Social Security, who don't have any Federal income tax liability. They're being under-taxed, apparently, or they're not taking personal responsibility. How about our soldiers? We decided that soldiers should not be taxed on their combat pay.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank the gentleman.

Soldiers who are fighting in Afghanistan, we decided that they shouldn't have to pay taxes on their combat pay. Apparently, Mitt Romney wants them to have to pay taxes on that money where they're not taking personal responsibility. Millions of other Americans are working hard every day to make ends meet. They may be making $25,000, have two kids. And you're right, we have standard deductions and we have personal exemptions so that people making $25,000 a year don't get hit really hard with income tax. And yet those individuals are paying an effective tax rate more than Mitt Romney.

As the gentleman from Michigan pointed out, if you combine the different parts of the payroll tax, they're at 15 percent. Mitt Romney is at 13 percent. And you know what the Buffett rule would do, the real one? The real one would say for people like Warren Buffet and Mitt Romney, they should at least pay 30 percent over $2 million. There's a phase-in between $1 million and $2 million. That's what the real Buffett rule does.

And what adds insult to injury is that while Mitt Romney and Republicans are proposing a tax plan that would give a break for folks at the very top, the nonpartisan, independent Tax Policy Center says they want to pay for that by increasing taxes on middle-income Americans to the effect of about $2,000 a year more for an average middle class family. Those are people on top of the 47 percent who are just paying payroll taxes.

So here we have a proposal by our Republican colleagues to provide big tax breaks to folks at the very top, and they want to come and make a mockery of the real Buffett rule. The real Buffett rule would actually generate $47 billion. Is that going to solve our deficit problem? Of course not. Will it contribute to helping it? Yes.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has again expired.

Mr. LEVIN. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. That would actually raise some money to help reduce the deficit and ask for some shared responsibility.

This bill is the ``pretty please'' bill. Pretty please, Warren Buffet, pretty please, Mitt Romney, won't you help contribute a little bit more toward reducing our deficit?

I can understand why people like Mitt Romney would love this bill because it asks nothing more of them at a time when we should be taking a balanced approach to reducing our deficit.

Just last week, we had a debate here about sequester. Everybody agreed, Republicans and Democrats, it would be really bad to have these across-the-board cuts take place. Buzz saw cuts. Our Republican colleagues and we both talked about the negative impact on defense, also on the FBI, on border security.

You know what? We had a proposal to pay for part of that to prevent the sequester with the Buffett rule and some other cuts. Our Republican colleagues talked about the terrible consequences of the cuts, but they just don't want to pay for them. They don't want to ask very wealthy Americans to contribute one more penny.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source