Death Tax Repeal Permanency Act of 2005

DEATH TAX REPEAL PERMANENCY ACT OF 2005 -- (House of Representatives - April 13, 2005)

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his leadership and his recognition on this very important legislation that is before us today. I am very proud of the work of the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), our Member of Congress, a very distinguished member of the Committee on Ways and Means, for his initiative and leadership in presenting to the Congress today an alternative that makes sense to the American people, that is fair to America's families.

The gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy) speaks with authority on the issues that impact rural America, small business, and America's families and certainly America's family farms. He has their interests at heart. He knows firsthand what their challenges are. That is what makes his proposal so wise, and we all appreciate his leadership.

Mr. Speaker, in the 20th century, in the early part of the 20th century, our country made a decision to honor our American value of fairness by moving forward toward a progressive system of taxation. But under 10 years of Republican rule, this Congress has consistently passed legislation that has moved away from a progressive Tax Code. Republican tax policies have rewarded wealth over work. In its analysis of the President's budget, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that the tax rate on wage income is nearly twice the rate of capital income, unearned income. And now today Republicans have come to the floor with an estate tax bill continuing their harmful approach.

The Republican estate tax bill again rewards extreme wealth. The Republican approach would hurt more people than it helps by increasing taxes and administrative burdens on more than 71,000 estates. And it comes at a staggering cost of nearly $1 trillion over 10 years once it takes full effect.

Democrats want to be fair to all Americans, and we support being able to pass a better life on to our children and our grandchildren. But we cannot support putting the luxuries of the super-rich before the needs of America's families. The difference between the Democratic and Republican bills is that Democrats take a more responsible, indeed, a responsible approach that gives immediate tax relief to small businesses and farmers across the country.
The Pomeroy substitute would provide relief to 99.7 percent of estates in America, 99.7 percent; and .3 percent of estates would not be covered under the bill. That is a small percentage, but a huge amount of money being deprived from the National Treasury. The savings achieved by pursuing the more fair and targeted approach put forth by the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy) would cover about one half of the long-term shortfall facing Social Security.

Think of it: if we pass the gentleman from North Dakota's (Mr. Pomeroy) bill, the savings would cover one half of the shortfall in Social Security down the road. It would strengthen Social Security for generations to come. That is the choice we are facing today. Do we want to put the wealthiest .3 percent of estate holders ahead of millions of American workers who have earned their Social Security benefits with a lifetime of work? Do we want to continue reckless Republican tax policies or return to a fair system of taxation?

This is a remarkable choice before us, and I hope that the American people can avail themselves of the information to understand what is at stake here. Basically, it all comes back to our deficit, to our budget, and whether we have fiscal soundness in our budget or not. What the Republicans are proposing is saying to average working families in America every day they go to work, and every paycheck money is taken from their paycheck for Social Security. What the Republicans are doing today is putting their hand into that pot and saying we are taking that money and we are going to subsidize the super-rich in our country, the largest, wealthiest estates in our country, .3 percent.

Mind you, the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy) has covered 99.7 percent, which is most, of course, 99.7 percent of the people in America. So anyone listening to this is not, odds are, affected in any positive way by what the Republicans are proposing. In fact, they will be hurt because of what it does to Social Security and what it does in terms of capital gains for over 71,000 families in America.

So I think the choice should be clear, to choose to reward work. We respect wealth. The creation of wealth is important to our economy. But that does not mean we take money from working families to give more money to the wealthiest families in America. And this at the same time as the tax cuts that the administration has proposed to make permanent, that would give people making over $1 million a year over $125,000 in tax cuts.

Who are we here to represent? This is the reverse Robin Hood. We are taking money from the middle class and we

are giving it to the super rich, and not only the super rich but the super, super, super rich.

So let us come down and vote for America's workers, let us come down in favor of America's families, and let us recognize that everybody, the wealthiest as well as those not so wealthy, everyone in America benefits when we have fairness in our Tax Code, where we have balance in our budget in terms of our values and in terms of our fiscal responsibility.

I urge our colleagues to support the very responsible Pomeroy resolution and vote no on the irresponsible and reckless Republican proposal.

http://thomas.loc.gov