Morning Business

MORNING BUSINESS

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, before the Senator from Arkansas leaves—I know she has a meeting for her children—I want to add my accolades to that of my friends from Nevada and California. She has done a good deed. The Bible says: The best thing to do is do a good deed for those who are in need. She has done that, not only tonight but by her efforts in the Finance Committee and on the floor of the Senate because the children her amendment is aimed at are the ones who most need our help. So I know she has to attend to her own children. I thank her. All of America owes the Senator from Arkansas a debt of gratitude.

Mr. President, I am in full accord with what was said before about bringing this amendment to the floor. I do not like class warfare arguments. And I certainly believe there are certain tax cuts for people regardless of their income that stimulate the economy. I thought a tax cut was appropriate. But what really burns me is this idea that is circulating now that the people left out of the tax bill do not pay income taxes and, therefore, they are not entitled to a tax cut.

When you look at the working class, the people earning $10,000 to $26,000, they pay a much higher percentage of taxes than we do. They pay tax on gasoline. They pay a payroll tax. They pay property taxes, if they own a home. They pay the property tax in a passthrough when the home is rented. And their percentage is much higher than anybody else's.

If you want to talk about class warfare, look at this Wall Street Journal editorial today, "Even Luckier Duckies," talking about these people who don't pay income taxes.

America, who would you rather be, a family with $22,000, paying no income tax—but paying a payroll tax, paying a sales tax, paying tax on gasoline—or somebody worth $1 million, God bless them, who pays $150,000 or $70,000 or $100,000, or whatever they pay in income tax? Give us a break. Who is doing class warfare? Who? I would say this editorial is class warfare. It is misleading as well.

"Luckier Duckies"? Well, if you want to define the world just by income taxes, you can. But ask any American—not just those making $10,000 to $26,000—ask any American making $60,000 or $70,000—at least from New York State—what is the tax they hate the most. It is not the income tax. It is not even the sales tax. It is the property tax. Do we define those people as well off because they pay little in income tax? Absolutely not. When a green dollar goes out of your hands for a tax, it is a green dollar, and it can buy food and it can pay rent and it does not matter if it is an income tax or a sales tax or a payroll tax. And, of course, the payroll tax is a Federal tax.

So this is not fair. This argument that these folks pay no taxes is bogus. The argument that they pay no Federal taxes, if they are working, is bogus. The idea that they escape the system scot-free while all the other wealthier people are struggling hard and paying money into the Treasury is bogus. They generally pay, as has been said before, a greater percentage of their income as taxes than more well-to-do people.

I read an article the other day in the New York Times. It wasn't about Federal taxes, but it took one census tract in Southern Queens in Ozone Park. It was an average census tract. I read about a family. They were talking about how tax increases in New York City—property tax increases, the increase in subway fare, which is not a tax increase but has the same effect—and the family was making, I believe it was $34,000. The mother worked in a beauty parlor and the father was a janitor at the library, and they had been saving $5 a week, I think it was, to have a party for their child's communion.

They kept an envelope, and every week Mom put the $5 in. And she started several years before because she knew the date of her child's communion and she wanted to have enough money to have a party for the whole family.

And now, because of these tax increases, because of the increase in the subway fare, and because of a rent increase on the block—and another family who was struggling was told by their landlord he would have to increase the rent because the property tax increased—there would be no party for the young child. It touched me. I wish every one of my colleagues could read that story.

This idea that people making $15,000 or $20,000 or $25,000 are "Lucky Ducks," that is so unfair. It is not right. I would argue that is class warfare. And there are many people in America who are struggling and working hard. A lot of the people in the New York Times article I am talking about are immigrants. There is a very mixed group on those few blocks and around 101st Avenue in Ozone Park, NY. And every one of our families probably came here poor as church mice. Mine did.
And every generation that starts here in America struggles. Mine did. And probably yours did too, Mr. President, at some point in the past.

No one is saying they are oppressed or beleaguered. They are fine people. They are the people who have made this country strong, along with so many others. But to say they are in great shape in terms of the Federal tax law, given the payroll tax they pay, to say they are in great shape, despite all the other taxes they pay—sales tax and property taxes, whether they own their property, or if not, the passthroughs—is just not fair. It is not right. It is not the best of America.

And I am not surprised this Chamber is empty. I am not surprised, during the course of this whole debate, not a single Senator from the other side, with the exception of you, Mr. President, who might have been here not quite by choice—

Mr. REID. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. SCHUMER. I am happy to yield to my colleague.

Mr. REID. How long did my friend serve in the House of Representatives?

Mr. SCHUMER. Eighteen years.

Mr. REID. During that period of time, you served, as did I, with the now majority leader in the House of Representatives,
Mr. DeLay; is that true?

Mr. SCHUMER. It is true.

Mr. REID. Is the Senator aware of a statement made by the Republican majority leader in the United States House of Representatives today that said:

They had their chance. There is a lot of other things that are more important than that. To me it is a little difficult to give tax relief to people who don't pay income taxes.

Is the Senator aware that the majority leader of the House of Representatives has made this statement today?

Mr. SCHUMER. I was not aware of it. I am glad my friend from Nevada has brought it to my attention. It is what I was talking about. It is so unfair to say there were other things more important in the bill than helping struggling families. Before my friend from Nevada came in, I was talking about an article in the New York Times about working families, about the income level we are talking about, and how one family had been saving $5 in an envelope every week so that their son might have a party at his holy communion for all his friends and family. And now they can't save that $5 anymore because taxes are going up and the costs are going up. To say that family is not struggling is amazing.

I also am interested to hear my colleague say that there were other things in the bill more important. If I heard him correctly, it seemed to me that the majority leader is not going to want to change this. Did he say that as well?

Mr. REID. The majority leader said:

They had their chance. There is a lot of other things that are more important than that. To me it is a little difficult to give tax relief to people who don't pay income taxes.

It is clear, in answer to the Senator's question, that the majority leader in the House of Representatives, the person who controls what comes and goes on that floor, has said that these people are out in the cold, for lack of a better description.
They had their chance. As I discussed with the Senator from North Dakota, they had their chance. These people who make from $10,000 to $26,000 a year, their chance is weighed with the problems of people who make much more money. They have no one representing them. As I discussed with the Senator from North Dakota, there is no more populated area than the Halls of this Capitol Building when there is a tax bill up, with lobbyists who are looking for a little niche to help the elite of the country.

These people are not the elite. These people we are trying to help are not elite. They are people who, as Senator Dorgan said, take showers after work, not before. I am terribly disappointed that already the person who sets the agenda for the Republican House of Representatives has said these people are finished. They had their chance.

Mr. SCHUMER. I agree with my colleague. What is the purpose of saying they are doing OK because they don't pay income taxes, when they are paying 7.5 percent of their check into the payroll tax? That is something most Americans support, but they are sure paying a lot. Right then and there, when you have a $15,000-a-year job, and 7.5 percent comes out for the payroll tax, that is food off the table. That is not going without the second vacation or buying some special gift for your wife, that is food off the table.

When you pay that dollar to the Federal Government, to the State government, to the local government, do you think most Americans say it doesn't count because it is not an income tax? It doesn't count to pay property taxes? It doesn't count to pay sales taxes? It doesn't count to pay excise taxes?

That is the kind of logic that is what I call outcome determinative. You look at what you want to do: Help the wealthier classes for whatever reason. And then you come up with the argument that income tax is the only tax that counts.

I wonder if my friend saw this editorial in the Wall Street Journal, "Even Luckier Duckies." Basically, it says this tax bill has made a lot of people very lucky because they won't have to pay income tax. And I asked my colleagues who were not here, how lucky do they think someone making $20,000 a year is compared to somebody making $200,000 or $2 million? Who would trade places? Who of those who make $200,000 or $2 million would trade places with the person who is making $20,000 so they could be a lucky duck and not pay income tax? Give me a break.

This is not America. This is not the generosity of spirit that this country has always shown. This is not the fairness that this country has shown. As I mentioned earlier, I don't like the class warfare arguments. I have supported tax cuts on individuals with some money to stimulate growth in the past and will continue to in the future. But to make it seem as the majority leader did, as did the Wall Street Journal editorial page, which often reflects the majority leader's view, that someone making $20,000 is lucky because they don't pay income tax, and someone making $1 million is unlucky because they pay significant income tax, that is turning logic, fairness, goodness of spirit, and having a good soul on its head.

I am happy to yield to my colleague.

Mr. REID. The Senator is aware that the tax bill, according to this White House, was passed to create jobs. The Senator has heard that?

Mr. SCHUMER. I have indeed.

Mr. REID. The Senator is also aware of people like Warren Buffett who said: I am going to get hundreds of millions of dollars as a result of this tax bill. I don't want the money. I don't need the money. I won't invest the money. You have heard him say this?

Mr. SCHUMER. I have indeed.

Mr. REID. Does the Senator acknowledge that any amount of money that people who are making $10,000 to $26,000 a year receive, whether it is $100 or $500, will be immediately spent to buy things that create jobs for people?

Mr. SCHUMER. The likelihood is much greater than somebody who is given the money who has a large income.

Mr. REID. The Senator is aware that here in Washington Members of the Senate every 6 years have to raise money talking to people to see if they will help us; is he not?

Mr. SCHUMER. People have said I am aware of that.

Mr. REID. Does the Senator think many Senators will go to this group of people who make from $10,000 to $26,000 a year for campaign contributions?

Mr. SCHUMER. I doubt it. Forget the raising of the money. I worry that they don't sit down and talk to somebody who is making that amount of money, ever. Yes, you may shake hands at a county fair. But how about sitting in a living room and talking to the family who is making $27,000 and has dreams for their children and is struggling to do the best for their kids and can't make ends meet? Again, that story about the communion touched me. But there was another one in that New York Times, an article about a family, a husband, wife, and two kids who were going to have to move out of the house they always lived in because their landlord got an 18-percent increase in property tax and he didn't want to pass it on. They were friends. It is a two-family house in a neighborhood in Queens. He didn't want to pass the property tax on as a raise in the rent for the people in the apartment. He had no choice because he couldn't make ends meet. He was not well off either.

Here is a family—they probably don't pay much, if any, income tax; I don't remember exactly what their income was, probably in the $30,000 range—who is going to have to move. They don't know where to find a place to live. The kids will have to be uprooted and go to a different school. Who in this Chamber would not choose to help that family out a little bit?
I mean, create jobs? I have to tell you, a lot of these families have jobs. They had jobs. The hard-working sort of bottom-of-the-ladder jobs that they are starting out at. But not to give them a little break for their children because there is no room in the Tax Code and it is loaded with things for other people? Where are our values? Where are our priorities?

I wish every single person on both sides of the aisle would just go to three homes of someone making between $10,000 and $26,000 a year.

Spend a half hour with them and talk about their struggle and then come back and say we could not reduce the top rate by a little bit less.

I thank my colleague from Nevada for his questions. I think he hit the nail on the head. I am just saddened by this. If it were truly just a mistake, then we would not have heard the language statement issued by TOM DELAY, the majority leader in the other body; if it were just a mistake, we would not have pulled an amendment that a lot of people care about—I am glad it was pulled, myself, because I am not for it—but it would not have just run off the floor. If it was a mistake, they could say, great, the amendment of the Senator from Arkansas was pulled out at the last minute and we are going to put it back in and show that it was a mistake. But, no. There will be a lot of concerns, and maybe we will get it and maybe we will not. I hope we will.

I am troubled—very troubled—by the fact that we have a view here that those making $20,000, or $25,000, or $15,000 are lucky ducks because they don't pay income tax. That is a view some in this Chamber seem to have taken.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that today's Wall Street Journal editorial be printed in the RECORD.