January 9, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H145 

(Mr. NEUGEBAUER addressed the 

House. His remarks will appear hereafter in the Extensions of Remarks.) 

f 

IMPROVING HIGHER EDUCATION 

AFFORDABILITY 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a 

previous order of the House, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DOGGETT) is 

recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, in 

these tough economic times, our families need all the support that we can 

provide them. Whatever we can do to 

assist those who seek more education 

and training to better prepare themselves for this tougher, tighter job 

market and rising unemployment and 

under-employment rates, we need to 

do. 

That’s why today, Representative 

TOM PERRIELLO and I, joined by a number of our colleagues on the House 

Ways and Means Committee, are introducing the College Learning Access 

Simplicity and Savings Act. We want 

to put more students in class. It will 

make our ability to assist students to 

gain access to our institutions of higher education much easier. Students and 

their families can benefit from additional and more simplified tax credits 

for higher education expenses. 

Last year, legislation that I offered 

simplified the student financial aid 

forms. Now, this legislation will take 

on the 1040. Today, higher education 

provisions are needlessly complex. It 

takes IRS an 86-page brochure to explain to families how to use the existing tax credits for higher education. 

The complex process is so challenging 

that 1 in 4 eligible taxpayers don’t 

claim any of the benefits available. It 

shouldn’t take a certified public accountant to become a CPA, or a teacher, or an engineer. This legislation 

would consolidate some of the existing 

provisions into a single, unified, easyto-understand, higher education tax 

credit that is both more generous and 

easier to use. 

Our bill joins the Hope Tax Credit 

(currently up to $1,800 per year) with 

the above-the-line tax deduction for 

qualified tuition and expenses (currently tax deductible up to $4,000). We 

replace all of this with a new $3,000 tax 

credit that is usable for undergraduate 

education and the first 2 years of graduate school, up to a lifetime limit of 

$12,000. Up to half of this new tax credit 

would, for the first time, be refundable. 

This ensures that working folks, families that are struggling to become part 

of the middle class, will no longer be 

excluded from this higher education 

tax credit. 

This bill is, of course, no substitute 

for a substantial increase and an acceleration of those Pell Grant increases 

Congress has already enacted. But tax 

relief, done in a refundable form, can 

work hand-in-hand with Pell Grants to 

ensure more opportunity. 

We are justifiably concerned with the 

federal deficit, but there’s a real opportunity deficit we need to be concerned 

with also. When our students are not 

able to achieve their full, God-given 

potential, a deficit occurs, and it is 

that deficit, that opportunity deficit, 

that this legislation seeks to address. 

I respectfully call on our new President-elect to consider inclusion of this 

legislation in the economic recovery 

legislation that this Congress must 

adopt as soon as possible. Investing in 

American students is an investment in 

America’s future. Putting Americans 

to work means ensuring that they have 

access to all the education for which 

each is willing to work. 

It was Thomas Jefferson who urged 

public support of higher education, 

wanting the youth of all our states to 

‘‘drink from the cup of knowledge.’’ 

Today, there are students who are 

thirsty for that knowledge, but they 

confront a number of challenges. Mr. 

PERRIELLO and I, and our colleagues, 

hope to address those challenges, and 

we hope we will have the opportunity 

to see this legislation enacted into law 

in the next few weeks. 

f 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a 

previous order of the House, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. CORRINE

BROWN) is recognized for 5 minutes. 

(Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida addressed the House. Her remarks will 

appear hereafter in the Extensions of 

Remarks.) 

f 

WE HAVE TO PUT AMERICA BACK 

TO WORK 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a 

previous order of the House, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. KUCINICH) is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. KUCINICH. We’ve heard the economic reports, over 10 million Americans out of work, 7.2 percent unemployment. Some say that unemployment could go to 10 percent. We could 

be looking at 12 million Americans out 

of work. 

The productive capacity of this Nation is not being used. It’s withering. 

We have to put America back to work. 

Our program actually is pretty simple. 

Jobs, jobs, jobs. Put people back to 

work with good paying jobs. 

How do you do that? 

You go back to that old time religion 

of FDR reflected in the New Deal. He 

rebuilt America. There’s over $1.6 trillion in infrastructure needs that are 

unmet, that can’t be met by local or 

State governments. The stimulus package that we hear discussion about does 

want to do something about addressing 

infrastructure. That’s significant. We 

should support that. 

But we also have to look at our experience, and we don’t want to be 

TARPed again in this Congress; because this Congress voted for a $350 billion bailout of banks. I didn’t vote for 

it, but the House and the Senate voted 

for it. And it resulted in the banks 

using the money, not to help people 

stay in their homes, but in using the 

money to buy other banks, take over 

other banks. They hoarded the money. 

There is a credit freeze. We cannot— 

we must take notice of that. I know 

Chairman FRANK, BARNEY FRANK, is 

going to do that with the next tranche 

of TARP money, try to make sure 

money goes to keeping people in their 

homes. That’s a positive step in the 

right direction. But Congress must 

take note of its experience in the bailout when we’re fashioning a so-called 

stimulus package because we want to 

make sure that the money gets to the 

people who need it the most and it gets 

to people quickly. 

Now, some say that you can do that 

through tax cuts. Well, actually, with 

people being afraid of the economy getting worse, they’re holding on to their 

money. Look at the Christmas retail 

returns. Sales are down dramatically. 

People don’t want to spend if they have 

it. 

So how do you get the economy moving again? 

Tax cuts, tax carry forwards, giving 

businesses that made bad choices a 

chance to get more money so they can 

hold on to it? 

No, we have to prime the pump of the 

economy. And the way you prime the 

pump of the economy is that you create millions of jobs. Putting people 

back to work, rebuilding our roads, our 

bridges, our water systems, our sewer 

system, that’s infrastructure. But 

there are some broader issues here we 

have to look at. 

The banks have shown that they 

can’t be trusted with the American 

economy. That’s generally been the 

case, but now it’s out in the open, $350 

billion later. 

In 1913, the money power of the country was taken away from the people. 

By constitutional privilege it belongs 

with the Congress, but it was given up 

in the Federal Reserve Act. The Federal Reserve is no more Federal than 

Federal Express. But yet it has the 

power to determine the direction and 

use of money in our economy. If we 

could take that power back and put the 

Federal Reserve under Treasury, we 

start to be in a position of being able 

to control monetary policy on behalf of 

the United States people. 

We also have to address the issue of 

the fractional reserve system, which is 

how banks create money out of thin 

air. And then, as they do that, they’ve 

created the conditions where we’ve had 

this kind of Ponzi scheme collapsing, 

banks and the hedge funds working together. So we have to halt the banks’ 

privilege to create money by ending 

the fractional reserve system. Past 

monetized credit would be converted 

into U.S. government money, and 

banks would act as intermediaries, accepting deposits and loaning them out 

to borrowers. Fine. 

But then, with the ability to control 

our fortunes, we then, once we control 

money again, we spend the money into 

circulation on infrastructure; not just 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with HOUSE