Date: 1984-05-23
Speaker: VANDER JAGT (republican)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I think that if our procedural and parliamentary traditions did not get us enmeshed in the way that they do sometimes. it is possible that the most distinguished chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. because of his good judgment. because of his devotion to the jurisdiction of the Ways II 4701 and Means Committee. because of his strong leadership and commonsense. would be prompted to join me in making this motion. I suspect that the chairman will probably argue against the motion. but I happen to believe that down In his heart of hearts in some secret place he wishes this motion well. because all that this motion does is ask our tax conferees to reject the sweeping changes that the other body has made in the real estate depreciation tax schedule. Technically. this motion is called a motion to instruct the conferees. It is no such thing. Because the motion is nonbinding. the motion merely Informs the chairman and his conferees that the Members of this body will stand behind him when he stands for the position of the House. that we will be with him 100 percent if he sticks to his guns. As a matter of fact. the conferees will be sticking to our guns. because when these tax provisions were enacted in 1981. they were enacted with the overwhelming support of this body. They were enacted after many hearings and careful deliberation by the Ways and Means Committee and by this body. We were right when we enacted these provisions in 1981 and the gentleman from Illinois. the chairman. will be right after we pass this motion to stand for these provisions in the conference now. When in 1981 we reduced the real estate depreciation period to 15 years and provided tax credits for the rehabilitation of older buildings. we provided a much needed tax stimulus for a sagging element of our economy. and that. stimulus has worked and it has worked very well. All we are doing when we pass this motion is telling the gentleman from Illinois. the chairman. that we are behind the gentleman when he refuses to let the other body take away the tax vitamins that were prescribed for a sick patient which are now beginning to return that patient to health and wellbeing. Many reliable studies have indicated that if the provisions of the other body were to be enacted. it would decrease investment in real estate development by $8 billion a year. reduce the gross national product by $16 billion a year and 400.000 jobs would be eliminated in the construction industry. And the sad part is that we would be making this sweeping change. $10 billion revenue raiser. without one moment of hearing before the Ways and Means Committee. without any consideration by this body as to the economic or the tax consequences. And this would be in flagrant violation of article I. section 7 of the U.S. Constitution which says that all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives. And no one. by any stretelh of the imagination. can argue that these provisions originated in this body. To make matters much worse. these provisions I think are an illustration of why our Founding Fathers put the mandate into the Constitution in the first place. When the Senate Finance Committees bill came to the floor of the Senate it put the period at 20 years. The economic consequences were so disastrously obvious. the one I have just outlined. to the members of the other body that they resisted and a great controversy ensued. Then In the middle of the night a Rube Goldberg compromise was fashioned and the Senate provision puts it at 20 years this year and 18 years in 1986. I ask you if you were a builder who had been thinking of moving ahead this year or next. but were told by this Congress you get a much better tax incentive if you wait a year and a half. would you not delay just as long as you possibly could? For heavens sake. we are supposed to be helping economic expansion. not slowing it down. And the Senate provisions bring it to a screeching halt for 1V% years. To make matters even worse than that. in order to make this provision revenue neutral and to not tilt the Code one way or another. they had to change the tax credit for the rehabilitation of older structures. And in the process they virtually wiped out this tax stimulation that has been flowing into the urban centers. particularly in the Northeastern sections of the United States. It just does not make any sense. And so. Mr. Chairman. I know that because of your devotion to the Constitution and how you treasure the jurisdiction of the Ways and Means Committee and value the economic revitalization that has taken place in real estate development and in the construction and building industry. that you will not argue too passionately in opposition to this motion. because. after all. this is merely a motion that informs you that the Members of this House will support you as you venture forth to that conference to defend the position of the House. to uphold the Constitution of the United States. to protect the jurisdiction of the Ways and Means Committee. and to refuse to let the other body take away the tax vitamins that you prescribe that have done so much to revitalize the construction inclustry. providing hundreds of thousands of new and additional jobs all across this country every year. When my colleagues join me in supporting this motion overwhelmingly we will just say go forward. Mr. Chairman. with your conferees. and we are with you as you defend the Ways and Means Committee and the Constitution of the United States. Mr. Speaker. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York for purposes of debate only.