the gentleman from wisconsin mr ryan is recognized for thirty minutes and a gentleman from south carolina mr spratt will be recognized for thirty minutes the chair recognizes gentleman from wisconsin michigan i yield myself such time as i may consume michigan the motion we are offering today reflects a very simple up or down choice one rejecting the largest tax increase in our nation's history which is contained in the house budget two insisting on the lowest possible level of taxes available in the budget conference and three stopping the raid on social security's cash surpluses both the house and the senate democrat budgets call for historic tax increases and we in the minority can't do anything to prevent that but we hope that with this vote we can at least minimize the damage that these tax hikes will bring let me take a moment to describe the options that we have to work with as a minority the house passed budget would impose hike of three hundred ninety two billion dollars from such things as reimposing the tax penalty and married couples cutting in half a child tax credit and raising marginal income tax rates and low and middle income working families this would increase the averaged family's tax bill by roughly two thousand nine hundred dollars a year and likely reverse the economic progress we've achieved over the past few years so right along with their higher tax bill americans would see fewer jobs increase it was the only way the house democrats critics competition their massive increase in spending their budget makes no effort none to moderate the growth of spending it simply requires taxpayers to spend more of their money to make the democrats budget numbers add up in our debate a few weeks ago the democrats tried gamely to assert that their budget doesn't increase taxes after all and as proof they pointed to the novel policy language that claims that they do not extend that they will extend some of the tax relief provisions and acted in two thousand and one two thousand and three they had these rivers irvine's that say they don't really want to raise taxes but if you read the fine print this would only happen later and only if they hike some other taxes to buy the same amount so even with the flowery reserve fund language the goal the preference of not raising taxes can only be met if they raise taxes but the numbers in this budget tell a very different story by the numbers which is what a budget is all about the house budget raises taxes nearly four hundred billion dollars and numbers do not lie the other option is the senate budget which raises taxes by about two hundred sixteen billion dollars the second largest tax increase in american history this will include higher taxes on middle income earners because a senate vote it still raises marginal income tax rates across the board but at least it attempts to protect the marriage penalty relief child tax credit in a state tax relief unfortunately the other chamber like their democratic counterparts in the house also call for large spending increases and as a consequence their budget w continue to raid the soldier to trust funds in f y two thousand and twelve something the house passed budget and the republican substitute did not do so while the democrat budget in the senate didn't raise as many taxes it did read the and the house republican in the house democrat budget resolution did not so what we're simply trying to do is get the best of both products such that it can be had accordingly our motion would simply direct the conferees to do two things first reject the house's three hundred ninety two billion dollar tax increase again the largest tax increase in american history and keep their tax hike to the lowest possible level permitted under the rules second insist on the lowest possible level of taxes between the house passed and senate passed democrat budgets this language is included because the motion is required to stay within the scope of the two budgets we wish we could do more but this is the scope we've been dealt third it would direct the to stop it raiding social security for the government's operating budget they should do this by running a unified surplus including social security of ninety six billion dollars in fiscal year two thousand and twelve which is equal to the that year we know that this is possible because we proved it could be done in our own budget our republican budget not only balanced the budget without raising anyone's taxes we ran a surplus that ensured the source for the trust funds would not be raided so again today we're simply asking our dead democratic colleagues to do the following one reject the largest tax increase in american history and to stop the raid in the so as to cash surplus this is a simple choice a yes vote supports these objectives a no vote rejects them and with that mr speaker i reserve the balance of my time on the from wisconsin reserve the balance of this time gentlemen to south carolina a year myself or three mins general is recognized for three minutes as we go let me say from the outset what we said yesterday in the wake of this bill but let me refer to third parties in the pen a disinterested third parties like the concord coalition they took a look at our budget and they said on the quickly and i'm quoting thus to be clear the budget resolution does not call for or require a tax increase the center on budget and policy priorities excellent analytical work they took a look at our budgets and they said the house budget does not include a tax increase and finally the hamilton project at the brookings institution independent disinterested said plainly simply this budget would not raise taxes we have included in the budget resolution not one place but twice in different parts of the resolution wholehearted endorsement our commitment i'll play age out of terminations to see that these middle income tax cuts are preserved and then acted and carried forward when they expire per their t the budget resolution does not cause them to expire they were designed to expire written to expire when the are for the impasse at that particular time that was part of the provision in addition i make it clear again that budget resolution allows and exemptions and solutions that are provided the zero want to know three tax cuts all of them or provided allowed to stay in place this year or next year for the next four years so there's very little disagreement about us except i'm wondering about the arithmetic budget resolutions motions to instruct or non binding their violent part of the proper process but they do present a problem they single out specific elements of a budget resolution without looking at one go such as tax reduction interact with other goals such as definite reduction in that respect what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle of offered as a resolution that calls for support of all of the tax cuts they laid out plus a surplus of ninety six million dollars because i asked the gentleman from wisconsin what is this is soon about the bottom line before the tax cuts how big a surplus would you have to have in two thousand and twelve you know of for there to be after taking these tax cuts and ninety six million dollars remaining surplus jemma dealing this assumes that ninety six billion dollar unified budget surplus after those tax cuts are extended is how much it's a ninety six billion dollars cash surplus unified but that wasn't the after the extension of those so what is the surplus before these tax cuts are taken i don't know if top my head would have to be pretty substantial isn't the cost of these tax cuts in the purchase one hundred eighty billion dollars or more well the gentlemen's budget resolution that passed the house had i think about one hundred fifty billion dollars cash or plus and raise all those  that the cost of these tax cuts the revenue impact of these tax cuts in the first year is about one hundred eighty billion dollars if you take that kind of charge against the surplus and still have a surplus left of my six extension of all of the tax cuts that expire in two thousand and ten in addition to having a surplus equal to or greater than the unified so scared of cash or plus so the republican budget subsume accommodated all of these tax cuts and stop the raid on eight budget this budget motion resist all one simple premise to reject the largest tax increase in american history contained in the democrats house passed budget by not addressing the bush tax cut the democratic budget resolution calls for a three hundred ninety three billion dollar tax hike much bigger in my home state of south carolina approximately one point five million people will see an average of twenty four hundred dollars in their tax bills in my district alone about two thousand four hundred forty eight people will be forced by higher taxes and estimates indicate a one hundred eighty two million dollar loss to the local economy which translates in about twenty two hundred jobs being lost mr speaker the government spends too much money as it is i can't imagine what it would be like with an additional four hundred billion dollars of spending we have serious challenges facing this nation and more money is not the solution instead of increasing the burden on american citizens we have an obligation to find real workable solutions the republican motion to instruct calls for a simple or up or down vote on whether congress should increase taxes on working americans by three hundred ninety three billion dollars as the house democrat budget does it directs calm freeze to commit to two things number one reject the massive tax increase in the house budget that increases marginal tax rates re imposes a marriage penalty reimposed is the death tax cuts the child credit in half and raises a range of other taxes as well and number two stop the raid on so security and cash surplus is conferees to produce a budget with a surplus sufficient to halt the raid on cash surpluses in the social security trust funds by fiscal year tw speaker these challenges are going to go away and delaying addressing them just makes them worse and burdens future generations the republican alternative offer solutions and for this reason urged my colleagues to support the republican motion to instruct gentleman from wisconsin reserves a balance of his time gentleman from south carolina just three minutes to the gentleman from new jersey mr andrews jemma from new jersey is recognized for three minutes without objection i thank the chairman for yielding mr speaker it's it's not surprising to me why there is such disorientation from the erstwhile majority about the budget resolution that will be going to conference it's because it contains a principle that they don't understand which is called deficit reduction the erstwhile majority made a living out of borrowing money spending more taxing less borrowing more spending more taxing less borrowing more they turned a huge projected budget surplus into an immense budget deficit and debt which will be paid for by the children and grandchildren of the members of this institution mr speaker here are the facts about the budget resolution the house passed the fact is not one dollar of taxes raised on anyone in the fiscal year covered by the first year of this resolution or the second year now we get to a point at the end of two thousand and nine where the tax cuts which the majority while majority enacted a few years ago expire they passed a law that said that those tax cuts expire we say let's pause at the point and decide what is in the best interests of the country and there's options perhaps the surplus will have grown to the point where we can finance all of those tax cuts and not increase the deficit perhaps there will be a greater revenues that have been projected under our conservative revenue estimates and will be able to afford to extend all of the tax cuts perhaps we'll look at the state of the economy at that time and decide that the best thing to do is extend all the tax cuts to try to engender some economic growth or perhaps we'll decide that a rigid discipline that emphasizes deficit reduction as is in this resolution is the right thing to do the e while majority practice the principle of leap first and look later this resolution says look before you leap it says when we reach the point where the tax cuts expire we will make a judgment about whether spending cuts tax cut renewal or some other strategy is in the best interest of the country not one dollar of taxes raised in the thess first fiscal year covered by this budget and nothing in this resolution necessitates the raising of any taxes on anyone it simply says mr speaker the congress should do something the erstwhile majority never did look before you leap make my articulate friend from new jersey i think what he mentioned was a real good highlight on the philosophical differences between our two parties the question is who is first in line the tax payer or the government we believe that t axpayer ought to be first in line by keeping more of their hard earned money not the government the state of new jersey which is a high tax paying state on average of these tax increases will pay an average of three thousand seven hundred eighty dollars more of the tax increases on democrat pass budget per taxpayer in the state of new jersey with that i like the zero two minutes to the gentleman from florida mr diaz vollard the gentleman from florida recognized for two minutes thank you very much was speaker i listen to the terms of the general jones on the jersey speaking about leap first or you know not leap first you know that it's kind of a very a static way to say it now what he's talking about is leaving on the american tax payer that's what the democratic budget does it does leap on the american taxpayer because it does increase three hundred ninety two billion dollars on the american taxpayer this budget does and all americans are going to be paying for this middle class middle income families low income earners families with children small businesses and we've heard again that they don't want to raise taxes in this budget but if that's true mr speaker then let's instruct the conferees to extend these popular tax provisions these tax relief provisions unfortunately at the committee markup mr speaker the republicans offered several moments to do just that aimed at helping the hard working american taxpayers not one single democrat voted in favor of these commonsense tax cut provisions and what were they mr speaker because they always like to say oh it's tax cuts on the rich no no no let's talk about what they are what they voted against in committee without one dissenting vote they voted against extending that one thousand dollars per child tax credit not only the wealthy have kids in this country m they voted against extending the marriage penalty tax relief not only the wealthy get married at least not in the state of florida that i represent they they voted against the elimination of the death tax that's right they don't even they want that that people to pay more taxes and they voted against extending the state and local tax deduction how does this affect regular middle class americans mister bigger middle income family affording sixty thousand dollars we'll look at a over sixty percent tax increase by the year two thousand and eleven one hundred fifteen million taxpayers will see their tax increases an average of seven thousand nine hundred dollars by two thousand and eleven in florida that i'm privileged to represent over six point seven million gentleman from oregon is recognized for three minutes purchased the gentleman's courtesy it's an interesting debate that is going on here today because in terms of the motion to instruct there really isn't that great a difference of opinion we are in fact going to be able to meet the objectives we are working hard in our budget to make sure that we deal meaningfully with tax relief for those who need it the difference between the republicans the democrats is that they are not willing to make any distinction for them it's paris hilton who's first in line we've made it clear that we're going to work to make sure that the priorities are adopted we have proven that in terms of what we have stood for in the past as well as what working for in the future democrats have repeatedly voted for a lowered tax bracket on lower income people the expansion of the earned income tax credit marriage penalty relief increase in child tax credit excel aeration of the expansion of the ten percent bracket increase expensing for small businesses these were things that people here on the floor who are on our side of the aisle first up as a full alternative when our friends on the other side were engaged in a rather extensive and in unfocused effort to try and provide tax benefits for who need them the least while ignoring the needs of those who need it the most they have given some modest bones to a few in america those ones that make that merit our support will in fact be continued and more important we're going to deal with what is the largest tax increase in american history which the bush administration and my republican friends on the other side of the aisle have set the stage for and that's the tsunami of the minimum alternative minimum tax that's going to cost a trillion dollars over the next ten years and we have made it clear that that's our number one priority to solve a s the house ways and means committee we're working on this we don't have to exceed to every single detail for paris hilton in order to make sure that we deal with the needs of working americans and taxonomic of the alternative minimum tax which has been ignored session after session after session by the republicans when they were in charge i find no small amount of irony to hear my good friend from wisconsin talking about how he's proven it's possible to have a unified budget surplus when for twelve consecutive years of ironclad republican control when they wrote all the fiscal rules wrote the budgets wrote the tax policy i invite anybody to look and i have thirty additional seconds ago and jomo the show many germans recognize one of us in a minute i invite anybody to look at what the now minority proved that they could do it's a pretty sorry record of fiscal irresponsibility i'll yield on your time i'd be happy to my point is simply that the budget resolution that we brought forward is a reasonable meaningful approach to deal with these fiscal problems independent observers agree that there's no tax increase this year or the next and we are on a path allowed for in our budget resolution and the work we're doing in the ways and means committee right now to make sure that we solve the taxonomic of the alternative minimum tax i look forward to our getting past this type of discussion here as my friends on the other side of the aisle seek to substitute rhetoric for their sorry record of non accomplishment and look forward to moving on a long time has expired a gentleman from south carolina reserves the bounds of his time the gentleman from wisconsin  eed the rhetoric i hear from the other side of the aisle is pure orwellian up is down black is white victory is defeat and the largest tax increase in american history is somehow actually tax relief you cannot state good intentions and then and then instead act with cruel actions the numbers of this budget lead to the largest single to tax increase in american history and mr speaker let me quote from the washington post again not exactly a bastion of conservative thought i'll quote from their march twenty ninth edition and while house democrats say they want to preserve key parts of bush's signature tax cuts they project a surplus in two thousand and twelve only by assuming that all these cuts expire on schedule in two thousand and ten and then they some how say that we contrive temporary tax relief well as the chairman knows he's had plenty of opportunities to make this tax relief permanent but he and everyone else on that side of the aisle have declined that opportunity and again it's a matter of priorities democrat friends decide to prioritize the federal budget over the family budget but let's look at how their single largest tax increase in american history is going to impact family budgets let's hear from joan mosquito who wrote an additional two thousand dollars raise in taxes for my husband and me would mean that we would not be able to meet our budget obligations i drive an eleven year old car that cost me more to fix than something and sometimes it breaks and it's cost me more than it's fixed and what it's worth i was hoping to buy a newer car but if taxes go up i won't be able to do that let's hear from robert of garland i'm unemployed and so security my wife works at this point between taxes and utilities were at the breaking point of being able to keep our home if we have an increase of over two hundred thousand dollars per year it may well mean the straw that broke the camel's back we would lose our home that's how the single largest tax increase in american history is affecting that family let's see how it affects linda in raul it quote it would mean the difference whether my daughter and her husband would be able to purchase a car or not for my husband and i it helps us continue with his radiation treatments for his prostate cancer it allows us to continue providing in home assistance for my elderly parents please allow us to retain this money for our needs please don't let government take additional tax dollars from us that's the cruel actions it's not the orwellian rhetoric that we want to somehow preserve the tax relief they're imposing the single largest tax increase on american history a cruel hoax on american families as they try to meet their education budgets and their transportation budget time as acquired a gentleman from wisconsin reserves a balance of his time john the south carolina speaker mannish inquire how much time is remaining on each side the gentleman from wisconsin a seventeen and one half minutes remaining and a gentleman from south carolina has nineteen minutes remaining to be healed three minutes to the gentleman from virginia mr scott gentleman from virginia is recognized for three minutes thank you mr speaker and i thank the gentleman for yielding i think it's important to put up a chart so we'll know who is saying what about fiscal responsibility because this chart shows what happened in the in the ninety's when with president clinton's veto vetoing republican bills after the democrats that the budget off in the right direction we were able to create a surplus that when this administration came in in two thousand and one we had a projected five and i have trillion dollars surplus as a result of republican initiatives that surplus looks like it's going to come in the ten year surplus at about a three trillion dollar deficit swing of eight and a half trillion dollars and to put that in perspective we've spen about five hundred billion dollars in iraq eight and a half trillion dollar deterioration in the budget five hundred billion dollars in iraq that's point five trillion eight and a half trillion deterioration point five attributable to the war and the democratic budget again responsibly dig us out of this mess now the important thing to note is we talk about nine eleven we were broke we had the surplus we were broke with sprint the surplus other than those with european medicare before nine eleven so you can't blame nine eleven for the fiscal cliff that's happened here this budget is responsible  shows how we can dig ourselves out unfortunately we have first of all no leadership from the white house even the republican budget pretty much ignores the president's budget the president's budget had us in the ditch never coming into surplus at least the republican budget has the coming out of out of the deficit and into surplus in two thousand and twelve but it does it in such a way that is not responsible and not in not predictable the republican budget assumes that we're going to say we're going to whack about two hundred fifty billion dollars out of medicare and medicaid but two hundred fifty billion dollars cut out of health care and this is the time when dr the telling us now the d ay they can't absorb the cuts we're having situations now when states of not paying dentist enough for dentist even take medicaid two hundred fifty billion dollars cut it's not going to happen i were not going to go in surplus on the republican budget but the main factor that we have to look at is who's talking the democrats dug us out of the ditch republicans put us back in the ditch and the democrats a digging us out again with a responsible budget the republicans have a budget that is so draconian on health care that forty republicans even voted against the republican budget and so we have a responsible plan that stick with a responsible plan dig us out of minutes to the distinguished gentleman from new jersey mr garrett general from new jersey is recognized for two minutes and you mr chairman despite the hopes of the other side of the aisle you know the constituents of my district are pretty smart people when they were paying a little over two dollars a gallon for gasoline a year or so ago and now they're paying over three upwards of three dollars for a gallon they know that's an increase out of their pocket likewise when it comes to taxes when they see that they are paying so much for their taxes now on the federal level today and after this package goes through on the other side of the aisle they'll be paying upwards to three thousand dollars more they know they're smart of to realize that's a tax increase as well my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have to look to outside nonpartisan groups i call them really nonpartisan liberal think tanks i think is the best term for those things thanks to say that these are not tax increases when they really are when your taxes go up in this year to the next year to next year that's a tax increase they talk about the budget planning process and say don't worry it's only comes at the end of the budget well you know regular families plan during the tire budget if you have a weekly budget for food allotment you want to make sure you have food at the end of the week if you're doing a monthly budget you plan the entire month of a yearly budget a five year budget as this is you do it the entire five years and under this budget under the democrats budget your taxes during that course of that time will go up in new jersey you're looking at a three thousand dollars or more tax increase and when it comes to social security my constituents are also very smart and loud when they say keep your hands off of my social security the republican plan does that republican plan stops the raid on social security and it does so without a tax increase now there is some rumor i'm just hearing around by some democrats on the side of the aisle that they may supply our motion to recommit but i mind you mark my words if they support this motion to recommit it will be as disingenuous as their support and their comments and other things they've done in the past this year when they said that they were going to curtail spending what are they actually do they increased spending by over eleven percent in this budget when they said they weren't a raise or taxes what did they do they increase your taxes by three hundred ninety two billion dollars fire and when they said that they were going to solve the a m t problem what did they do they did not solve it at all support this motion to recommit on the time of the fired them of south carolina gentlemen care to you for the time so we can even out the time between  do have someone on the floor now who would like to be recognized and need to make this point we have other speakers coming to the floor at this time but we had they're not here yet i am a cellphone misspeaking will go back and forth know many of them so three minutes to the germans recognize for three minutes it's a speaker in response to the last speaker if we support this resolution it's because we originally provided in our budget resolution two different aspects of our budget resolution our full whole hearted support for these middle income tax cuts we still have i'll have to confess concern about  but we supported in the budget resolution we file which passed the house we endorsed and place that we would see to the extension of the temperature in individual tax bracket the child tax credit research and experimentation tax credit all the signs read the resolution they are there we were there before you were saying that over the next three to four years we need to see that when december thirty one two thousand and ten comes along these tax cuts will survive and be preserved we're committed to that black and wh reserve accounts where no i'm talking about statements sections in our budget resolution which say even phatic link clearly is the policy of this budget resolution preserve protect and defend the middle income tax cuts adopted credits and exemptions and exclusions and you can go through a closet cleaning in the code and come up with enough offset to provide for the extension of many of these tax cuts maybe all the many without any impact adverse impact on the bottom line the budget deficit and if the gentleman will yield when i understand what you're saying at the first part that those are the heartfelt policy statements of your budget but are you referring then to the other side of the equation to the reserve accounts that are decision does not have to be made now and indeed can be better made closer in time to december thirty one when we see what is the bottom line then how much did we accumulated what's the total deficit what's the forecast for the future at that point in time we can consider these tax it's extension of them by my understanding if you extend all of the zero one and zero three tax cuts that expire on december thirty first the cost of a ten years is about two trillion dollars that's a big decision we think you should make it deliberately and closer in time point of time to when the tax cuts actually expire and immediately also i don't know myself two additional minute generous recognize for two additional not only did we put these tax cuts and stay down support for them in the budget resolution but in addition when the tax cuts were passed and one we had subterfuge or occasionally voted for independent freestanding provisions like the marriage penalty relief we were there democrats were there when that passed the house i voted for the first time it came up and voted for it again repeatedly in our substitute we had a twelve percent bracket and then a temperature bracket we had a child tax credit which we continually increase and we have the are any tax credit extension we had expensing for small businesses many if not all of the things you're talking about here we voted for maybe not on your bills but on the bill because he's a tax policies favoring middle income americans for whom we think tax relief is well  order secondly we have a problem still with the arithmetic that you've got here according to my information looking at c b s most recent report the social security surplus for two thousand and twelve is two hundred fifty five billion dollars if you want to stay out of social security you've got to have a surplus of at least two hundred fifty five unified surplus of at least two hundred fifty five billion dollars m  correct yes sir the ninety six billion dollars unified surplus reflects the cash surplus meaning the amount of over payments on fica taxes payroll taxes for such charity that gets spent another government programs that ought to go to charity the interest on top of that is the number that the gentleman from south carolina talking about that reflects past borrowing past rating of the so screw the surplus we would like to fix that too we think this is a good start let's say from now on if you pay fica bottom line a surplus of two hundred seventy six billion dollars before the tax cuts are taken that's not on the year two thousand and twelve i believe so i think no it was a problem with the numbers here but let me let me one hundred eighty billion dollars i believe is one year much over payments people pay in their payroll taxes in any given year we don't want to keep spending that on other government programs that's point number one point number two the very fact that the gentleman from south carolina is suggesting they're going to accept this motion to to instruct that they're go accept this means they agree there are tax increases in this budget they're saying right now and i just heard him say it we don't want to raise taxes on the middle class we don't want to get rid of the child tax credit we don't want to bring back the marriage penalty we don't want to do away with the ten percent bracket so we will accept this motion to instruct i e the other tax increases in this budget are just that tax increases death tax the marginal income tax rates across the board cap gains dividends let me just make the point more clearly by not quoting a think tank that may be left of center right of center or whatever of center let me quote the washington post clearly no paragon i use myself an additional thirty seconds clearly no paragon of right wing thinking the washington post right after the democrat budget came out quote and while house democrats say they want to preserve key parts of bush's signature tax cuts they project a surplus in tw twelve only by assuming that all of these tax cuts expire on schedule in two thousand and ten they further go on to say quote the budget plan this is the democrat budget plan the budget plan expresses support for certain cuts including the expanded child tax credit elimination of marriage penalty in the tempers and bracket that would require another reserve fund to be filled with hundreds of billions of dollars in tax increases to cover the cost with that mr speaker i'd like yield two minutes to the distinguished member of the house budget committee mr conway from texas gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes to mr speaker thank the ranking member i think the other members in the house listening to this debate assess like a schoolyard kind of a struggle yes you are no you're not yes you are no you're not we're back and forth and both using the same set of facts but the truth of matter in two thousand and eleven and two thousand and twelve however it happens under the current code the revenues of the governor will go up four hundred billion dollars and the rhetoric on the other side of the aisle that this is does not represent represent a tax increase would have a lot greater credibility with me and those on our side of the aisle if in fact our clothes on the budget committee had spit that four hundred billion dollars the chairman mentioned earlier about waiting until december thirty first two thousand career helping folks to comply with a very complex code in a state planning planning requires jury a lot longer period of time to react to the put plans in place than from you know from one year to the next and so to keep states out there hung up with the with the idea that the tax is going to come back fully at fifty five percent i think is unfair the other thing it has to be said is that all of the tax increases go in fully so that the thirty nine percent thirty three percent bracket goes to thirty nine point six bracket if in fact the democrats do want to protect the to percent bracket are going to fifteen percent as they've said they're going to raise taxes on the top brackets are going to raise taxes other places in order to stay within this bill the time the gentleman from wisconsin reserves the bounds of his time may inquire as to how much time is remaining on both sides are consol gentlemen from wisconsin to twelve minutes remaining and a gentleman from south carolina has ten minutes remaining although you'll myself two minutes to try and  it to catch up one additional point i want to make mr speaker is the point about paygo that the gentleman from south carolina mentioned as as it's well known we have a problem with their version of pay go when pay go is designed to raise taxes we don't like when paygo is designed to control spending we like it that's why we're for pay go on spending not on raising taxes but if this mammon is accepted at this motion instructors excepted let's just be very clear it does violate their pay go because the  what we're referring to which is a member that passed in the senate uses their surpluses to pay for quote unquote to pay for these tax cuts pay go says if you're going to reduce taxes you have to offset them with either a tax increase or a spending cut not with surpluses and so this amendment when we believe if you're going to have a surplus it should either go back to so if you're a trust fund pay down debt or reduce taxes that's what we're proposing but just so we're very clear with ourselves here that this baucus some of the acceptance of this policy of not raising all of these taxes just some of them which is the best choice we have between the two options as the minority does violate their own pay go rule by dedicating their surpluses toward this tax relief rather than having offsets either coming from spending cuts or tax increases with that mr speaker you reserve back to balance my time this time gentleman from south carolina taxes you pay for it you know go into the ditch the if you have a tax cut you have to pay for it either with increases of other taxes or spending cuts to pay for if you have spending increases you have to pay for it with cutting spending somewhere else or increasing taxes to pay for it it's a very simple if you're going to reduce taxes you get a pay for by either raising taxes or cutting spending that's what you paygo is correct that's right well you're violating it if you accept this amendment and well that's the concept and that's how we got out of the ditch that we got into and if you build up a surplus then you have something to spend that is consistent with p but the point is that we that we got out of the ditch with fiscal responsibility and as soon as two thousand and one came along you let paygo expired pass tax cuts that we couldn't afford and put us right back into the ditch the fact is that the only way the republican budget makes any sense is that if you have two hundred fifty billion dollars in cuts mostly in medicare and medicaid at a time when we can't even afford the cuts that are already in effect and a put the two hundred fifty billion in context there are plans out there including the all healthy children's act which can cover all children with health care for fifteen billion dollars a year you're talking about cutting health care two hundred and fifty billion dollars obviously obviously you're not going to do it and obviously so the budget is not realistic but what are your priorities tax cuts or we can't afford at a time when we need to cover children we can't even afford the medicare medicaid program we've got now you can't find a didn't most probable states you can't find a dentist because the reimbursement rates are high enough  and here we are cutting medicare and medicaid two hundred and fifty billion dollars this is make or our hope that we would adopt the democratic budget reject the motion to recommit because it requires us to assume two hundred fifty billion dollars in cuts that we're not going to make where responsible budget to dig us out of the ditch that the republicans put us in starting in two thousand and one and i hope again that would reject the motion and adopt the democratic budget as we i thank the gentleman for yielding i listen very carefully to my friend from virginia the only thing that's being cut here is the family budget and it's being cut by the democrats if you look at the numbers of the republican budget government grows each and every year now doesn't grow as fast as the democrat budget in the way the democrat budget grows is by imposing the single largest tax increase in american history on hardworking americans an average in my district the fifth congressional district a tax is an average of twenty seven hundred dollars a year mr speaker is going to be imposed upon those hardworking people as they try to send their children to college is a struggle to try to meet the health care payments for elderly parents as they try to make payments on their health care premiums as they try to try to put together that that capital to launch their american dream and to him to buy their first home the cutting that's going on here is the cutting out of the heart of the family budget by the democrat budget imposing the single largest tax increase in american history and as bad as that tax increase is three hundred ninety two billion dollars over five years pittance compared to the taxes that they are going to impose on the next generation because mr speaker their budget is silent absolutely silent on the number one fiscal challenge facing a mare out of control  spending the republicans are being responsible in trying to ensure that the next generation doesn't see a doubling of their taxes which we all know will happen in so this is the kick the can down the road budget of the democrats when they know that our children and grandchildren will see their taxes doubled from roughly twenty percent of the economy to forty percent now how many of our children and grandchildren will ever be able to own a home start a business send their children to college this is the idea that democrats fiscal responsibility doubling taxes on the american people i want no part of it gentleman's time has expired a gentleman from wisconsin reserved a balance of his time gentlemen to south carolina i yield thirty involving personal exemptions and standard deductions seventeen million dollars if you make a million dollars seventy thousand dollars if you make a million dollars six hundred fifty of your two hundred thousand to a million and eleven dollars one hundred thousand to two hundred thousand of you make less than less than one hundred thousand dollars you get on average zero this is how you call an average two hundred fifty dollars a family tax cut gentleman's time i jemma south carolina chairman you must have two minutes gentlemen recognized for two minutes as chairman i have here a copy of the president's budgetary proposals for the fiscal year two thousand and eight published by the congressional budget office if you turn to page six in it you see that the cost of the tax cut extending the tax cuts which the motion proposes the cost to revenue impact of that in the year twenty twell is two hundred thirty one billion dollars of surplus three hundred twenty seven billion dollars last year the debts it was two hundred forty eight billion if we move to a surplus of three hundred twenty seven billion in the year two thousand and twelve that requires a movement in the right direction of five extends some of the tax cuts the point we're making is if we want to stop raising taxes stop reading so security you know we're going to have to do we're going to control spending that's what we propose to do and sadly that's not what the majority budget d resolutions but in fact i'm sure you're supportive of that in fact true you've got to acknowledge that the number is two thirty one two hundred thirty one billion dollars that's a revenue impact of extending all the tax cuts and if you had nice six of them which is at this time mr speaker like you had two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from california member of the house budget committee mr campbell gentleman from california is recognized for doing this thank you mr speaker you know i've been listening to all this debate and i guess what i don't really understand is why i mean why the democrats here on the other side of the aisle want to oppose this motion to instruct i mean do you want to raid the social security surplus i mean do you like telling people that they're paying money for their own social security for their own retirement and then taking it and using it for other things do you like that do you want to do that i mean do you want to enact the biggest tax increase in american history do you want really to tax people more on capital gains and dividends when over fifty percent of americans now own some sort of stock do you really want to go back to penalize ing married couples and having them pay more taxes after they get married than the two people would when they were single do you really want to reduce the child tax care credit do you really want to stifle economic growth and i know some of you say well you don't think these tax cuts cause this economic growth and let's just assume that maybe it didn't cause at all it can't be a coincidence that since the tax reductions went into place that we've had enormous economic growth enormous job growth and enormous revenue growth to the federal government do you really want to do all that you want to rates largest tax increase american history you want to raise those very blessed and for what so that you can raise spending a lot but tween over the next five years because if you just didn't increase spending you could do all of this you could allow americans to keep their own money but no you want to take their money from them and spend it on your prior and thirty seconds general direction not just all thirty seconds thank you i don't understand why you want to do that but i guess it is because you look at all money as the governments and you allow people to keep some we look at money as belonging to the people who learned it and we allow the government to take that which is necessary but understand that if all you did was keep spending level over the already increase it a little bit over the next five years then you wouldn't have to raise taxes then you wouldn't recognized for three minutes which maker this goes back to something that our president called fuzzy math if i seem hung up on the topic of my app it's because arithmetic is a poor and when you're putting together a budget what they are telling us is they can run a ninety six billion dollars surplus in the year two thousand and twelve even though they're taking tax cuts that will take two hundred thirty one billion dollars in revenues out of the federal treasury it's a stretch to say the least that involves assuming that we will have a surplus in the year two thousand and twelve or three hundred twenty seven billion dollars how far from that are we today last year we had a surplus of a deficit of harmonix they didn't say and just said we're writing social security how absurd can you get here it is right here the social security surplus is two hundred fifty five billion dollars they don't even claim more than ninety six billion dollars on the sur with me every time i talk because we need to be reminded when president bush came to office the national debt was five point seven trillion dollars six years later the national debt is three point scuse me eight point eight trillion dollars an increase of three point one trillion dollars over the last six years sixty percent increase in the dead the united states we've not seen anything like it since the second world war we worried about fuzzy math you better paid because it is the amount of money we have to levy and raise every year to pay interest on national debt which is bubbling a tory you cannot be avoided it has to be paid here's the difference between interest on the national debt which is well over two hundred billion dollars headed to three hundred billion dollars within a foreseeable future and look what he does other priorities things that are pressing and important veterans health care homeland sick education all of those things are the expiration of the three minutes he had allowed himself looking at this time this speaker like the two minutes of the gentleman from nebraska mr smith gentleman from nebraska is recognized for how long two minutes for two minutes thank you mr speaker members i rise today with great concern for our economy i rise because we hear about the debt and certainly my concern is that if we're not careful we will make the debt even worse than it is now four hundred dollars a year as proposed more than that though i am concerned about small businesses farmers and ranchers who face tax increases whether it's the estate tax or other taxes and when i have a small business person come up to me and say we need to do something about the estate tax the death tax because it will devastate their business that gets my attention and my concerns are that we have available capital in our economy because with available capital we see good things happen whether it's investing in the stock market whether it's expanding a small business or whether it's putting money away for a child or grandchild heading to college the fact is available cap all does great things and that's why i rise with extreme concern about our budget because the budget calls for a tax increase and that is what concerns me as so much because tax increases are bad for economic growth tax increases lead to a downturn in the economy and i not only believe that we can do better the next proposed budget but we must do better thank you i reserve the balance of my time or yield to the ranking member general neill's back the gentleman from south carolina has a minute and a half remaining the gentleman from wisconsin four minutes remaining gentleman from south carolina is recognized with a clarification of members let me give you my take on what is before for right now this motion to instruct calls for us to receive back all the revenue levels in the house amendment and insist on listen to this policy statement in section four one of the house amendment that's our budget resolution the democratic budget language that we were put in the budget resolution in the first place secondly paragraph b insists on the lowest possible level of revenue within the scope of the conference or to tell what that level might be weaponized consistent with  above but we certainly will give some consideration to the and then finally set for for a unified surplus of at least ninety six million dollars in fiscal two thousand and twelve i hope we can do it but you've heard me go through the repetitious out here and i think it is a reached even imply that these three variables can be integrated into solving this one motor varied a question if you can do it fine if you can come out of all this having these tax cuts and still having enough six billion dollars surplus gray but i have to tell you i think as far as the man but we are wholeheartedly in support of the middle income tax cuts that are numerated here in the they have been lifted straight out of the democratic budget resolution that's why we're supporti the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized myself but as the remainder of the time mr speaker let me a concur that the resolution does say what the chairman says it does the reason it points to the words in the house budget resolution would say that the policy of the house is to keep these tax cuts but we referred to the deeds of the senate is because the house didn't pay for those to ask us didn't extend those tax cuts the senate extend of those tax cuts the house used the words that said we hope we wish we'd like to extend these tax cuts but they didn't do that they raise the taxes it's the senate the mere fact that the senate passed the baucus a member in the first place is a  house that they're actually not raising taxes the senate looked at the house budget resolution and said you know what this thing's the largest tax increase in american history we don't want to raise taxes on middle income earners child tax credit marriage penalty ten percent bracket and therefore they passed the baucus amendment and what we're saying is we wish we could extend all of the tax cuts since the scope is limited we're saying let's stick with the senate and actually put numbers where the words are in the house by actually lowering the revenue number now the chairman is right he's saying it's a reach to reach these surpluses it's too tough to do it to reach these surpluses if you accept his premise and the premise of the chairman's budget is do nothing to control spending mr speaker we don't have a revenue problem in washington just the last seven months alone we had eleven percent revenue growth that's three straight years of double digit revenue growth at these lower tax rates we've got plenty of money coming in from taxpayers problem is we're spending it too fast that's the problem in washington not a revenue problem a spending problem and if you accept the premise of the chairman the esteem of south carolina that there's no spending problem in washington which i don't accept then he's correct you can't balance the budget you can't stop the raid on social security you can't extend tax relief we disagree how tough is it to do it let me tell you what our budget accomplished the republican substitute we simply said in order to stop the rate of the source for the surplus and make all these tax cuts permanent spend fourteen trillion nine hundred  seventy seven billion dollars over the next seven years instead of the current projection fifteen trillion two hundred eighty six billion dollars that's what we're saying we're saying instead of spending over the next five years fifteen trillion two hundred eighty six billion dollars spend fourteen trillion nine hundred seventy seven billion dollars instead of a growing mind mandatory spending by five point two percent grow it at four point three percent is this draconian is this crazy is this hard know it's what families do around the kitchen table every day we're simply saying put taxpayers first don't make people wait for three years to see if they're going to have their per child tax credit if they're going to have the marriage penalty if estate taxes are going to be higher or lower or somewhere in between tell them now let's tell taxpayers first you get to keep your money and then we're going to tighten our belt here in washington by controlling spending mr speaker the taxpayers deserve this respect they don't deserve to be jerked around we should control spending and by golly we need to prepare for the return of these baby boomers we need to reform these entitlement programs so we can extend or solve expend extend the reliability and that is the biggest shame of all not only does this budget have a large tax increase in american history it proposes that we do nothing for the next five years to control and reform entitlements to do anything to control spending that's a shame that's why we should pass this motion to instruct with that i yield back the balance my time gentlemen back to balance of us time all time has expired without objection the previous question is ordered the question is on the motion all those in favor say the honorable the speaker house of representatives madam this is to go to fire you for a loop pursuant to rules of the rules of the house of representatives that i have received a subpoena for documents issued by the supreme court of new jersey recounting after consultation with the officer general counsel i have determined that compliance with the subpoena is consistent with the precedents and privileges of the house signs and seriously robert member of congress the honorable the speaker house of representatives madam this is to formally notify you pursue to rule the rules of the house of representatives that i've been through with a judicial subpoena for trial testimony issued by the orange county dist court after consulting with the office of general counsel determined that compliance with the subpoena is consistent with the privileges and rights of the house signed sincerely rosamond district director seven seven the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the bill modified by the members printed in the house report one to dash one thirty is adopted and the bills amended and is considered read that the gentleman from west virginia mr right all the gentleman from alaska mr young each will control thirty minutes the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia thank you and ask answer all members may have five legislative days revising stand their remarks and including strange material and i try one two nine four without my remarks now you have myself sex time as i may consent to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle i would observe that this is one of those rare moments in this body when history itself seems to hold its breath we are here today four hundred years after the first english settlers landed in what became jamestown virginia to finally acknowledge a government to government relationship with some of the indian tribes who greeted those early settlers reflect upon that for a moment the ancestors of the members of these indian try is where there four hundred years ago at jamestown and facilitated the very founding and early development of this nation spanning the entire history of this nation they have been here and they have endured extreme adversity these indian tribes have taken part in ceremonies with the visiting queen of england commemorating this four hundred anniversary of the establishment of jamestown and they are a vital part  activities continuing this week i can think of no better time than this week for congress to step up to its responsibilities by using its constitutional authority to acknowledge these indian tribes simply put the pending legislation would extend federal recognition to six indian tribes located within the commonwealth of virginia it is sponsored by our colleague jim moran of virginia and enjoys bipartisan support including virginia represented bobby scott joined davis and tom davis to a co sponsor of h r twelve ninety four and i'm pleased that the natural resources ranking republican member with us today mr don young is also a strong supporter importantly both former virginia governor george allen and mark warner as well as current governor tim kaine have endorsed the tribes recognition and status as sovereign governments the virginia council characters supports a measure as well the authority to recognize a government t relationship with an indian tribe is a very solemn one for the congress it is necessary in this case because the members of the six tribes have faced hundreds of years of discrimination commonwealth of virginia of any records that proved the existence of indians or indian tribes he was instrumental in insert ensuring passage of the racial integrity act in one thousand nine hundred four making it illegal for individuals to classify themselves or their newborn children as indian but it went further than that spending decades changing their race designation on birth certificates and other legal documents from india two colored negro or free issue throughout it all the virginian indians did not break but they held firm to their culture and to their and then a d i would notice that this bill is name for thomas in the redhawk woman jordan whose lifelong pursuit of advancing native american rights and compassed ensuring ensured the promise of education for all indians and securing federal recognition  indian tribes the pending measures was reported by the natural resources committee by voice vote to address claims that the tribes are only interested in federal recognition so that they may conduct gaming all six tribes supported an outright gaming prohibition which was included in this bill this gaming prohibition precludes the virginia tribes from engaging in licensing or regulating gambling pursuant to the indian gaming regulatory act on their l and closing out like the space pay special homage to the gentleman for jr from virginia mr jim moran who has spent several years tireless lee working to achieve better all recognition for virginia's first americans he bobby scott and others i mention tom davis and joined davis have been before our committee on natural resources and testified on this issue and i salute their so perp leadership as well it is because of this dedication to this issue that this legislation is before us today historic occasion marking the four hundredth anniversary of jamestown it is time to put this issue to rest and do the right thing by extending federal recognition to these tribes our job my colleagues  we've heard arguments saying that we should let the tribes undergo the federal the knowledge meant process at the department of interior this would be a reasonable argument except for the fact that the department process is not specifically authorized by congress the intentions behind the creation of the process in one nine hundred seventy eight where the wars are noble enough and braff compelling tribes to use this process is appropriate in certain cases but is the fact that the department is not always abided by its own process and extending the recognition or fi extend recognition to somebody intimate tribes it is a fact that the administration process is bogged down with hundreds of petitions many of which are not filed by tribes that can demonstrate the history of the six virginia tribes and the hearings held on this bil committee has heard convincing testimony describing the rich as sometimes rich but sometimes that is three of the six million tribes i do not read need to repeat the detailed history starting with pocahontas and capital john scapin john smith we've heard a lot of that recently what matters is whether or not the evidence presented to congress demonstrates that continues existence of a distinct indian community from the time of european contact to the present and in this the six groups of petitioners in critical local knowledge and interaction with the tribes is a key consideration and we're obligated this way to weigh very heavily and i deliberation over this bill we have an obligation to the bird to the judgment of the members when bills affected their therefore i trust that h r twelve ninety four will pass the house with a strong majority today and i urge my colleagues to give their virginia tribes are due i'd like to also recognize mr moran has done an outstanding job on this issue and has been a great promoter and i always admire those although not in his district that they've stepped forth and carried this torch on that side of the aisle and i do compliment him knowledge that i'm not ever and with that i reserve the balance of my time gentleman reserves the balance of this time the gentleman from west virginians recognize mr speaker i recognize the tremendous efforts of mr moran of virginia in my opening comments and i know he spoke on the rule on this issue but i now recognize him again the gentleman from virginia mr jim moran for five minutes gentleman from virginia is recognized for five minutes mr speaker and i thank very much my very good friend chairman ray hall he's shown a lot of courage and a also caring sensitivity to the situation that confronts these particular indian tribes and i see my good friend mr scott from for genuine as well who will speak to this and my good friend the ranking minority member as to don young and i i thank him for stepping up on this too and i know that his words are deeply felt and his support is deeply appreciated i want to want to compliment the staff on both sides they've done the research they have provided the accurate information and without that there would be a lot of  has made sure that the facts of become public let me share some of those facts with you that he argument is going to be used that this that these tribes should go through the regular process at the b i a and the argument will be made that this just opens it up to gambling and it's going to be another issue in terms of  corruption that is inherent within casino gambling and so on the fact is that it would be virtually impossible for these virginia indian tribes to provide the documentation that the bureau of indian affairs requires this is a unique situation that doesn't apply in other states because other states it did not make it legal to go into courthouses local courthouses throughout the state and destroy the very documentation that is now necessary now of course the governor of virginia and all the previous governors including senator allen who specifically recognized these indian tribes when he was governor they've all acknowledge there's no question these indian tribes exist in fact they have the oldest treaty that has been in existence in the united states sixteen seventy seven signed with king charles the second but of course that was before there was an american government and as a result ironically we haven't specifically recognized these indians because they have the oldest treaty but these were the indians that enabled the jamestown settlers to survive here we are with the queen is at the white house and we're having all this pomp and circumstance and the very envious that enabled it to happen have not been recognised by our government and in fact have been treated to some of the worst injustices across this land from one hundred twelve to one nine hundred forty six their documents were delivered at least a steroid and then nineteen twenty four there was a racial integrity act passed by a white supremacist dr walter plucker he was head of the divide the bombing of vital statistics very politically powerful and that in effect made it a crime to be identified as an indian you had to check a box of white or colored throughout the state in the parlance of that time this is my friend and colleague from for genya knows what i identifying oneself as an american indian so they don't have the documentation bureau of indian affairs said yeah we would recognise you there's no question you exist but it won't be in your lifetime well four hundred years isn't this time now obviously there's been a lot of intermarriage but the fact is there are records and we can produce those records but we don't have the time and it doesn't seem to me fair to force these indian tribes through a process that may fail only because of governmental action a grossly unjust governmental action it's so gambling is not an issue these in the end tribes even though they should certainly be on a par with all other indian tribes have compromised have accepted language that prohibits them from being able to gamble even vangel of the state gets an enormous amount of money from a lottery but they can't participate they've accepted that this is a matter of pride for these and it's a kind of another two minutes gentleman's recognized for an additional two minutes again thank my very good friend this is a matter of these native americans want to be able to tell their children and their grandchildren and their grandchildren and turn their grandchildren we were the ones that  settlement to survive we have a proud tradition we were recognized by the united states congress now hopefully at some point but other compromise we've made in terms of putting land into trust will be rectified too but that's not going to be immediately put into trust we compromised with the communities we've gone through all of the profitable procedures that might raise some objection to this now members may come to the floor who i suspect have not read the bill with some objection i don't think it's a matter of bias but it certainly is a matter of concern that there has been abuse on the part of some lobbyists working with indian tribes we understand that but gosh this is a unique situation this this is a matter of injustice that cries out to be rectified this bill rectifies that injustice hopefully we can do it in time for the actual date of the english settlers landing at jamestown it's four hundred years overdue and again i thank the chairman and the ranking member and i thank the speaker for the time and in advance recognition act and i want to thank my colleague from virginia mr moran for introducing the bill and the gentleman from west virginia the gentleman from alaska for their leadership in cooperation and bringing the bill to the floor this year marks the fortieth anniversary of the founding of jamestown virginia the first permanent english settlement in north america jamestown as the conus cornerstone of our great republic and its success relied heavily on the help of the indigenous people of virginia virginia as native americans played a critical role in helping the first settlers of james sounds of the harsh conditions of the new world and after the jamestown colony whether the first couple of years of the new world a colony expanded the english pushed further inland and the same native americans that helped those first settlers were coerced and pushed from their land without compensation treaties many of which precede our own constitution were often made in an effort to compensate the virginia native americans but unfortunately as history has shown those treaties were rarely honored or upheld like many other native americans were genya indian tribes were marginalized from society they were deprived of their land prevented from getting an education and denied a role in our society with ginia of native americans were denied their fundamental human rights and the very freedoms and liberties and run and our own constitution this the speaker this bill in the house floor today will finally grant federal recognition to the chickahominy drive the east and chicken of how many economic development that will allow virginia's tribes to become self sufficient those same opportunities will allow virginia's tribes to florence culturally and economically and or lead to a brighter future for a whole new generation that's the speaker we've waited too long to recognize when genius from the time has come for congress to act and i urge my colleagues to support the bill generally sounds fired the gentleman from alaska has recognized i have no other speakers at this time  you back the balance of my time gentleman yield back the balance of the time generals west virginia's recognize mr baker in conclusion i would observe that before the eastern counties ever genya succeeded from the union at the start of the civil war the legal western falling water will be pursued a motion to instruct on yes conrad's twenty one and a motion to suspend the rules and pass h r fifteen ninety five recruiting first vote will be a fifteen minute vote followed by a five minute vote the unfinished business is a vote on the motion instruct on ass contrast twenty one offered by the gentleman from west virginia mr out from whiskey offered by the gentleman from wisconsin mr r allusion twenty one be instructed to recede from the revenue level set forth in the house amendment insist on the policy statement section four hundred one of the house meant to support the extension of such tax provisions as a child tax credit extension of marriage penalty relief extension of the ten percent individual income tax bracket extension of the research and experimentation tax credit extension of the deduction for state and local sales taxes and received a section to ten of the senate resolution which prohibits consideration of an increase in federal income tax rates insist on the lowest possible level to revenue within the scope of the conference in fiscal two thousand and eleven and two thousand twelve and make any commit your adjustments and outlay levels and see set forth a unified surplus of at least ninety six billion dollars in fiscal year two thousand and twelve in resolving the differences between section one hundred one four of