H.Res. 1084

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1084 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), who is my friend and the ranking member of the Rules Committee, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying legislation. This rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6760, the Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act of 2018; H.R. 6757, the Family Savings Act of 2018; and H.R. 6756, the American Innovation Act of 2018.

Mr. Speaker, just yesterday we had members of the Ways and Means Committee and other Members who came to the Rules Committee. They came to the Rules Committee to discuss before the committee the important aspects of continuing the economic growth that we have currently right now in our lifetime in the United States of America.

What a great time to be an American. Perhaps more importantly, what a great time to look forward to a great future, a future not only where the American Dream becomes available to each and every person, but even if you happen to be on the lowest end of the totem pole, perhaps beginning work today, those are the people who have benefited from not only the tax cut that President Trump, this House, and the Republican Senate made sure that we pass, but, more importantly, giving to the American worker the opportunity to have, not just a sense of accomplishment, not just a job, but potentially a career that moves forward.

What has happened as a result of that is what brings us to where we are here today.

They say that success has many fathers and mothers. In this case, it is aunts, uncles, and all sorts of people, Mr. Speaker, who can proudly look up and say: I am a part of what is probably the greatest economy that so many people can now enjoy.

Instead of being isolated to one section of this economy, it will abound.

You will hear me talk about even people who get up early in the morning, early risers. I used to be one of those because I threw a paper route. I would have to get up in the morning, and it gave me a lot of time to think about my future as I served what was my paper route, my small business, and my opportunity in second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth grade, as I developed myself as a young man--not just as a Scout, to become an Eagle Scout--but as a person who saw himself growing up in a great country, America.

That is how I developed my American Dream. I developed my American Dream by sitting down with my family at a table and understanding Americanism and opportunity. It was about the free enterprise system. It was about a dream that I would have.

For too long, Mr. Speaker, we have had those in government who controlled our lives. They controlled our lives with high taxes, more rules and regulations, and a demand that Washington knew more about our dream than we did.

No more, Mr. Speaker, because last December there was an opportunity--a historic opportunity--that was seen as political because our friends on the other side did not vote for the bill. Even today they take advantage and talk about what are supposedly its frailties. But the American people know differently, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have today in America a higher GDP rate than we do unemployment rate. Today we have the opportunity to see that we are going to grow that GDP by asking this Congress to make permanent that which today is in law for only a short 10 years. We believe that what we have done is to give the American people--even people at the lowest end--the opportunity to take part in making America great again. At that same time, we will make their lives so much better.

So, Mr. Speaker, what we are going to do is we are going to talk about this today, and you will see that there are two different visions. One vision wants to go back to higher taxation, rules and regulations, and government control--government control not just in taxation, but also in healthcare--and we are, as a Republican Party and as the free enterprise party, going to stand up and say that we will be there on behalf of all workers and that we believe that the free enterprise system in this country has produced much that has helped so many people.

That is how we pay for Social Security. That is how we pay for Medicare. That is how we pay for Medicaid. It is done through more people working, not through higher taxes, higher unemployment, and more misery.

So, Mr. Speaker, you are going to hear today the argument that is taking place all across this country on the floor of the House of Representatives, and you are going to see that you, Mr. Speaker, and every single Member, will have an opportunity to say that we believe that the economic opportunity

for all Americans is equity. It is opportunity, and it is available at not just a theater near you but in your hometown.

So we are proud of who we are.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

As my colleague was talking about the dismal results, I turned to my phone here and it is all green up and down on the stock market, because the stock market knows that today we are talking about making permanent the things that work for the American people; things that work well for employers; things that work well for bringing stock market prices, not only back, but understanding that many, many Americans and our seniors across this country have invested in the stock market. It is up 40 percent since we have had an opportunity to pass the tax cut.

The success of the free enterprise system is what my colleagues hate. They want to sell government, they want to sell defeat, they want to sell

the things that are the fear about making progress. The facts of the case are real simple, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an article from, of all places, The New York Times, that was dated August 3 of this year. On August 3, The New York Times, who does some inciteful reporting, said, ``Workers Hardest Hit by Recession Are Joining in Recovery.''

[From the New York Times, Aug. 2, 2018]

Workers Hardest Hit by Recession Are Joining in Recovery

(By Nelson D. Schwartz and Ben Casselman)

The least educated American workers, who took the hardest

hit in the Great Recession, were also among the slowest to

harvest the gains of the recovery. Now they are a striking

symbol of a strong economy.

The unemployment rate for those without a high school

diploma fell to 5.1 percent in July, the Labor Department

reported Friday, the lowest since the government began

collecting data on such workers in 1992. At the economy's

nadir in the summer of 2009, the unemployment rate for high

school dropouts hit 15.6 percent, more than three times the

peak unemployment rate for college graduates.

Buffeted by technological change and seemingly out of place

in an economy where skills and credentials are in ever more

demand, this cohort struggled while more educated workers

scored jobs and promotions and rose on the economic ladder.

High school dropouts make up 7.2 percent of the labor

force, and some experts doubted they and other low-skilled

workers would ever fully recover from the effects of the

recession, said Betsey Stevenson, a professor of economics at

the University of Michigan.

``As economists, we worried these workers would be shut out

forever,'' she said. ``But the long duration of the recovery

has pulled them back in. As the economy adds more jobs,

employers have had to dig a little deeper.''

reaching fuller employment

Unemployment among the least educated, the group hit

hardest in the recession, has been cut by two-thirds since

its peak of almost 16 percent in 2010.

The improvement in the fortunes of less-educated workers

was a highlight in a jobs report that showed continuing gains

across a broad variety of sectors.

Over all in July, employers increased payrolls by 157,000,

while the unemployment rate edged downward to 3.9 percent,

near the 18-year low achieved in May.

The data echoed other positive economic news recently,

including a report last week showing the economy grew by 4.1

percent in the second quarter.

And the headlines about President Trump's tariffs on steel

and aluminum and a widening trade war with China seem to have

done little to put a damper on hiring. The manufacturing

sector, which is particularly sensitive to exports, was

robust, adding 37,000 jobs.

Although the payroll increase in July was slightly below

what Wall Street was expecting, upward revisions for May and

June alleviated fears of a slowdown.

Several economists linked the shortfall to the shutdown of

Toys ``R'' Us, and the loss of 32,000 jobs at sporting goods,

book and hobby stores last month.

On Wednesday, the Federal Reserve upgraded its view of the

economy's underlying condition from ``solid'' to ``strong.''

The central bank remains on course to raise interest rates

twice more this year, in September and December, to avert

overheating.

Other indicators suggest the recovery is finally extending

its reach. The Labor Department's broadest measure of

unemployment, which includes workers forced to take part-time

jobs because full-time positions are unavailable, fell to 7.5

percent in July, the lowest since 2001.

All this has translated into better economic opportunities

for workers without a college degree, who account for a

majority of the work force. It is a contingent that was

championed by Mr. Trump during his presidential campaign, and

one that both parties want to appeal to in the midterm

elections in November.

The White House was quick to note that the economy is in

the midst of the longest monthly streak of job growth in

history.

And after 94 consecutive months of job creation, bosses and

human resource departments are recalibrating their

requirements.

``You definitely get the sense that employers are willing

to look at workers they haven't looked at in the past,'' said

Martha Gimbel, director of economic research at Indeed.com,

the employment website.

Unemployed Americans who might not have put feelers out in

the past are also venturing back into the hunt for a job, she

said. On Indeed's search engine, much of the growth in

queries lately has been for positions like full-time cashier,

mobile home park manager, maintenance person and fulfillment

associate.

``This is an indicator that low-skilled workers are seeing

opportunities for themselves in the labor market,'' Ms.

Gimbel said.

Until recently at Steel Ceilings in Johnstown, Ohio, the

company's president, Rick Sandor, insisted on a couple of

years' experience in metal fabrication before considering

applicants. But he's had a harder time lately finding workers

for his company, where shifts run from 5 a.m. to 2 p.m. and

temporary positions start at $14 per hour.

He now settles for candidates who show mechanical skills,

like carpentry or heating and cooling repair. Mr. Sandor is

willing to waive the requirement for a high school diploma as

well and has even hired applicants with what he terms

``minor'' prison sentences.

``If a person was truly trying to get their life back

together, we thought it would be helpful to offer them a

job,'' he said.

Unemployment for less-skilled workers has been dropping for

several years, with a pickup in hiring in sectors like

manufacturing, construction and parts of health care. And to

be sure, the month-to-month figures for unemployment among

high school dropouts are volatile.

But the long-term trend is clear, as is hiring among the

sectors responsible for it. Last month, the leisure and

hospitality field recorded a 40,000 gain in positions, with

half of that coming from restaurants.

For example, Buffalo Wings & Rings, a restaurant chain with

60 locations in 13 states, has been stepping up hiring and

opening new restaurants.

Many outlets have seen double-digit sales growth over the

past year, and some are up as much as 40 percent, said Nader

Masadeh, the company's chief executive. The tax cuts that

took effect in January are playing a role, Mr. Masadeh said--

most families may have gotten a relatively small tax cut, but

it is enough to fuel a few more nights out.

``People feel good. They're going out and spending more

money,'' he said. ``In our segment, $50 feeds you and your

family.''

Still, the hot economy brings challenges of its own. At an

annual gathering of the company's franchisees in June, Mr.

Masadeh said, he was bombarded with questions about how to

retain talent when workers can readily walk out the door and

find another job. And costs are rising throughout his

business.

``Right now the economy is great, but we're also seeing

higher construction costs, higher commodity items, shortages

of labor, so there's always something that counterbalances

something else,'' he said.

That pressure, however, has not resulted in much fatter

paychecks for most workers. The Labor Department said average

hourly earnings ticked modestly higher in July, putting the

annual rise at 2.7 percent. That's below the pace of

inflation in recent months.

One reason for the lack of big raises is that a substantial

number of workers remain on the sidelines, including the

less-skilled ones who are now gradually coming back, said

Simona Mocuta, senior economist with State Street Global

Advisors.

``We are bringing unemployment way below 4.5 percent, which

the Fed considers full employment,'' Ms. Mocuta said. ``But

we are getting very modest wage inflation. This is an issue

not just for the U.S., but in every other developed market.''

``Because the labor market is tight, less-educated workers

have more of a chance of getting hired,'' she added. ``For

people with the highest level of education, it's easier to

find jobs even when the economy isn't doing well.''

A version of this article appears in print on Aug. 4, 2018,

on Page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Robust

Recovery Lifting Laborers Hit the Hardest.

All across this great Nation there are people who were tired of the loss of jobs in this country, the movement of jobs overseas, the continuation of a tax policy that did not allow jobs and money that was earned by American companies to come back here.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, it is not without notice to the American people that the discussion may be on great economic policy that is working for people, we are attacked here in Washington on the floor, and then the subject changes to something else, rather than the overwhelming evidence of how we are doing.

Mr. Speaker, there was a discussion I put in the Record, that New York Times article about those at the very bottom who had been left behind before, under the previous administration's tax increase, to where they lost jobs because we lost jobs in America with the massive spending spree that took place by President Obama and the Democratic Party.

I am pleased to report not just what was said on August the 18th by The New York Times, but even today. African American and Hispanic unemployment rates are at some of the lowest rates that they have ever been.

The Bureau of Labor Standards even passed out a report about the weekly unemployment claims. Those are the claims where people who were seeking jobs, we count those up across the country. They are at the lowest rates since 1969. That means, even though we have a larger amount of people in the country, a fewer numberwise--not percentage, numberwise--are seeking unemployment compensation.

Mr. Speaker, it is working. There is success in the marketplace. What Republicans did is so good that we want it to continue, because people who have their jobs tend to want to protect those jobs. But the protection of the jobs is being done by this administration to make sure that we can sell more of our products overseas.

About 40 percent of everything made in this country is made for export. We are for a larger export market. We are for jobs in this country. Over $50 billion has flowed back into the United States from overseas as a result of what we did last December 18 with the tax bill.

The overwhelming success of people back at home, wherever we are from, is apparent. They are working. They have got an opportunity. Their savings are increasing.

All over my hometown of Dallas, Texas, there are companies after companies after companies after companies that have reinvested in their businesses to make sure that not just ergonomics or new ways to mechanize are employed in their businesses, but, actually, many companies paid, doubling down the amount that they had contributed to a retirement fund or to a 401(k) or to giving company stock or, as in the case of many companies in Dallas, gave a $1,000 bonus and then said to the employee: For the $1,000 bonus I give each of the employees, I want you to know we are going to reinvest in making our business up to date and better, too.

So, Mr. Speaker, no wonder--no wonder--the other side, as they come to the table today with an equal opportunity for time, changes the discussion point to something that is extraneous from how successful this tax bill has been. So we will stand here until the end of our time and say: We need to make it permanent because it works.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity for all the lawyers in the House on the Democratic side to come down and argue their case, but I would politely disagree with them.

The way you save this great democracy is by making it economically sound and powerful and prepared so that we can pay for this government, so that we can understand that America's greatest days lie in our future, so that we can understand it is the American people who want and need to make success, that they want their dream to succeed, not just the government.

What we are hearing today is they have abdicated this debate today from what was an economic debate all the way to a political debate. Economics, you see, has that side of it where people can see what works and what doesn't work, and that is why they have abdicated this fight today on the floor. The fight that they thought they were bringing is not about the success or failure of this; it is about another issue.

Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is that America is economically stronger. We have more people working today than in the history of the country. There are companies that are making money, and there are employees who are making money, and there are employees who are successful.

When that happens, Mr. Speaker, you get an increase in take-home pay, and that is also what Republicans understand about what we have done: an increase in the amount of take-home pay to where the American people gain benefit not just for their hard work, but for their families; to pay for their families to be able to go to a Boy Scout outing; to make sure they are prepared to send their children to school, so that they can pay themselves, not looking to the government to make the payment for them; not looking for a handout, but, rather, making sure that people have the dignity of work, the dignity of opportunity, an honest day's work, an honest day's pay, an opportunity for the free enterprise system, the American Dream, to work.

That is what we are talking about today. We are talking about the success and the limiting success. And the limiting success is, if we make these tax policies permanent, it creates an opportunity for wiser choices, wiser decisions, wiser long-term attributes of success, not for the government, but for the American people.

And that is what the debate is on this side: helping the middle class of this country to achieve a strong footing to where they can make their American Dream work not only for them, but for their children and grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the frailty of the arguments from my opponents is staggering. The newest report out, ``the ACA healthcare market stabilized nationwide for most customers,'' and yet we are told we are not even funding it. It is funded by the government. It is mandatory spending. But the good part is is that they now have an idea of who is in the marketplace and what those correct rates are, and it is stabilizing.

It is stabilizing because what we have done is made the opportunity available for people to have a job to pay for their healthcare. And the ability to have a job means that you not only have a chance to pay for your car, your home or apartment, your daughter or your son's college, but you also have an opportunity to pay for your own insurance, your own healthcare, your own needs to take care of your own family.

This is where we see America, right now, has the largest number of people who are employed in America. Every single economic and social indicator indicates that more people at the highest level are employed. More people at the highest level are having an opportunity to get up and go to work, a chance to make their lives and their family better.

This is the essence of what we are talking about today: making life better for people, giving them a better opportunity back home to have a job that is available.

In Dallas, Texas, where I am from, last week, 2 weeks ago, we had a seminar whereby people talked about and demonstrated what this economy is doing. I had several employers who stood up and said to the media, that was never reported:

We have 10 jobs that are available at a starting salary of

$60,000, but you have to be able to pass a drug test and you

have to come to work every day. We will train you. We will do

the training. We don't need the government or someone else to

do that, but you have to do two things: You have to be able

to pass the drug test, and you have got to come to work every

day, and you have got to be able to go be willing to be a

part of a team that is about your success and theirs also.

What a great deal the free enterprise offers today. Instead of us begging for jobs and wishing they were here, they abound, Mr. Speaker. It is called great economics. It is called making America great again. That is why we want to make it permanent.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have one.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of song and dance on the floor, but it is revisionist history. What some of our colleagues have forgotten is that the African American unemployment during President Obama's Presidency was 15.5 percent. It was called misery. It was called no job. It was called unemployment. It was called more government assistance. It was called, unfortunately, demise.

Mr. Speaker, what we have done by passing the tax cut is to make sure that employers had an opportunity to hire employees. All across this country, there is a marketplace available to people who were ready and willing to come to work, and they have. The figures are, to us, as Republican, normal and regular.

We were told by President Obama and Ms. Pelosi: ``We can't get the 4.2 percent GDP rate.'' That is right. You can't get to 4.2 because your policies and procedures won't let the country do that. We are going to be stuck in the ones.

But, Mr. Speaker, what happened is that a new energy abounded in this country, and it is called optimism and opportunity and success and redevelopment of ideas to bring the American spirit back to the top. And that was, instead of Uncle Sam telling us what to do, we are getting that opportunity to have the success back home.

That is why the largest number of African Americans ever in the marketplace or, thereto, the largest number of women, the largest number of Hispanics in the marketplace today. This is yet another reason, Mr. Speaker, why Republicans are on the floor talking about the economy and my friends are talking about another issue.

Mr. Speaker, we need to be very clear about this. I will be asking all 435 Members of Congress, for them to see the reality and the truth of what is available back home, and that is opportunity can abound for a longer period of time with more success and more opportunity.

The next chance to make sure that the contract that is won by their company or the next successful quarter or the next opportunity that they get to get a pay raise can come because we are making sure that the free enterprise system is sound and secure for the future.

And that is how you save Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid: by working today and protecting American jobs. It is an effort that the Republican Party has had, will have, has today, and we can't wait to see the vote to see who is for the free enterprise system of seeing that success.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the American Dream should be available to everybody: young, old, African American, Hispanic, Native American, even those people who have come to our shores. To make America work, American business has to work.

Making American business work--which is why we have business schools, why we have college-educated people, why we have entrepreneurship, why we have small business owners, why we have people who dedicate themselves to that free enterprise system--comes about as a result of their opportunity to work within a series of rules, regulations, and tax policy that is balanced.

A balanced tax policy would tell you that, if you have the highest taxes in the marketplace, your opportunity levels diminish. Likewise, it would say and tell you that, if you do not pay an honest day's work for an honest day's pay, you would not have employees and would be searching to try and make up that deficit another way.

Today, American business and American workers have more work than we can get done in 1 day, and numbers of orders and opportunities for our future abound. That is what we are here about also.

We are here about the youngest of people who we have in our midst who are second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth grade. We are about those people who are in college, who are studying hard because they want to be a part of a workforce. They want to be part of making their dream better.

But if there are no jobs, that is an indictment on this body. That is an indictment of elected officials and of an administration, many of them unelected, but who have a policy that fits their political ideology, rather than what is intended for success of people back home.

Today, I am going to ask every Member of this body, and I will do it right now, to please understand that you will have an opportunity to vote to make what we have today even more successful for a longer period of time; and to grow the amount of GDP; to grow the amount of investment; to believe in the American worker; to expect the opportunity for there to be an equal marketplace share, where the employer and the employee can both gain, not only in the ability to pay their own bills, but the ability to sustain what we do.

Mr. Speaker, let's not show the short side of this and talk about the negatives or the frailties or the things that really, I don't think, will come to bear, but let's talk about the success. The success is that we are going to move our stock market, as it is doing today, with the evidence that they have that we can, as a body, move our business.

Just this week, we had an opportunity to do what hadn't been done for 21 years. Those pesky Republicans in the House and the Senate and our President are going to sign a bill funding 80 percent of the government to avoid not just a continuing resolution, but to get it done on time, expecting this government, in their balance, to do their job that we have entrusted them with.

Today, we are taking part on the other part of that equation, to the free enterprise system saying: Keep producing jobs. Keep doing the things that small business does; whether you are in Weatherford, Texas, and own a car dealership, and you sell your product and make it available to customers back home, and you expect them to pay and your product to sell and win, or whether we expect to produce products that we sell overseas.

Mr. Speaker, it is the other half of the equation. This same week that we gave 80 percent of the government, including the military and Health and Human Services, the things that they have asked for and need to produce, today, we are asking the other side of the equation, the American people, to continue fighting, continue working, continue believing, not only in your American Dream, but continue to believe that the future of this country is bright and going to be successful for you and your family.

They can drown out the detractors. They can drown out people who brought a different idea to the table, because that brought us 15 percent unemployment for African Americans when we had a President who claims he was there for equality also. Equality is a job and an opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact, the gentleman is correct. I will be closing for us, so anytime the gentleman chooses to do that, he may expend his time.

Mr. Speaker, before I start, could you please advise me on how much time remains for me.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, the opportunity that we have to be on the floor today is about one thing. They want to make it about something else, and that is within their purview and their decision.

What it is about is whether we are going to continue to have the highest rates of employment in this country; the highest and best opportunity for people to continue take-home pay increases; the opportunity for American jobs, workers, and business to have more work than we have employees for; the opportunity to take and have, all across this country, the opportunity for reinvestment; the opportunity for people to be successful; the opportunity for people who are in school today to look up and know they see a bright future.

That is the way the world sees it, at least I think we do here in America, not in Washington. We might be a drug-free work zone up here, but what we have is the ability for this majority to keep pushing its opportunity for success for the American people.

So this week, we took care of making sure we fund, on time, perhaps a little bit early, the government for next year. But we are also going to fund the American people and the free enterprise system.

So, Mr. Speaker, what a fun day, what a great opportunity for people all across schools, and in schools, and people who work to say, one party is going to vote for me and one party is going to vote against me.

I am asking every Member to do it, so that we get together on economic outlook and view. I urge my colleagues to support the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas, my good friend, Mr. Sessions, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, 9 months ago, as the already unpopular Republican tax scam was making its way through Congress, Speaker Ryan stood in this Capitol and made a bet. He wagered that ``results are going to be what makes this popular.''

Today the results are clear, and they are not what the majority and President Trump promised. Big corporations have gotten a windfall. Workers have gotten laid off. Jobs are being shipped overseas, and the richest 1 percent is getting 83 percent of the law's benefits.

Despite those realities, my colleagues seemed to be surprised recently when a survey commissioned by the Republican National Committee was released in the media. It found that the public believes their tax scam benefits the wealthy and large corporations over average Americans by a two-to-one margin--61 percent to 30 percent.

Let me repeat that before the President tries to tweet that it is fake news. It was a poll conducted for Republicans by a Republican polling firm. That is why we are here today with tax 2.1, Mr. Speaker, because the majority's bet is turning out to be a losing one.

Nine months ago, the Republicans were assuring themselves their tax scam was good politics. Back then, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said, ``If we can't sell this to the American people, we ought to go into another line of work.'' With polling like this, some Washington Republicans may have to. But first, they are here today with a package of bills that represents their last-ditch attempt at trying to turn the tide before November. And the sequel is as bad as the original in three key ways.

First, the original Republican tax scam added $2.3 trillion to the national debt to give the wealthy more tax cuts. 2.0 would add another $3 trillion to the debt. You won't see its cost on the budget scorecard. Republicans think they can waive a magic wand and hide the costs. But I have news for them: this is Congress, this isn't Hogwartz. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center says that this is going to cost $3.2 trillion.

It is important that people pay attention to this. I have got to give the Republicans credit for their sneaky ways to try to avoid the realities. They have an amendment that says this massive giveaway to the wealthy magically doesn't count.

And here is the other thing. We won't even get to vote on it. It is in the rule. It will be self-executed once the rule passes. So no one has to take any responsibility for adding all this to our debt.

This is at a time when the U.S. Treasury is borrowing money at a rate of $5.4 billion a day. The Congressional Budget Office recently found that the majority and the Trump administration have blown a $900 billion hole in the Federal budget. The deficit will increase by nearly 32 percent this year alone, with one of the main causes being the first GOP tax law.

Mr. Speaker, what happened to the Republican Party that claimed to care about fiscal discipline?

This majority is drowning in red ink. And the list goes on.

Second, the original Republican tax scam reduced the Medicare trust fund by 3 years. 2.0 could trigger an automatic 4 percent cut in Medicare. That means hundreds of billions of dollars for this program would be lost.

My colleagues on the other side may stand here today and claim that they want to protect Medicare and Social Security. But don't believe them. Don't be fooled. Right after their tax law exploded the deficit, what did the President's chief economic adviser do? He called for new cuts to Medicare and Social Security.

It is no wonder that in the Republican poll I referenced earlier, many Americans worry that the tax law would lead to cuts to these vital programs. Make no mistake: under the majority, these earned benefits are on the chopping block so Republicans can give tax breaks to the wealthy.

Third, the original Republican tax scam temporarily limited the State and local tax deduction, undermining funding for priorities like schools, firefighters, and police officers. Under 2.0, that deduction would be made permanent. More than 45 million Americans claim the SALT deduction, including those in Massachusetts, by the way. They will have a harder time doing things like buying a home if this package becomes law, all while State and local governments have a harder time investing in their communities.

Even while making these harmful changes to the Tax Code, the majority apparently couldn't be bothered to make changes that could actually help Americans who have become victims to natural disasters. In the wake of Hurricane Florence and the largest wildfires in California history, Democrats asked the majority to include an amendment that would provide to all eligible Americans the same type of relief that the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee provided his constituents last year after Hurricane Harvey. That request was denied. It is outrageous that, under the majority, the tax relief Americans get after a tragedy apparently depends on their ZIP Code.

Mr. Speaker, there is a word for doing the same thing other and over and over again and expecting a different result. I think the majority would be hard-pressed to find anyone watching today who thinks doubling down on such an unpaid for and damaging policy is anything other than insanity.

The policies in these proposals are very similar, but there is one key difference worth noting, and that is the process.

The first time around, the majority used special fast-track procedures to provide tax cuts for the wealthy and large corporations. They pulled out all the stops to assure that it became law as quickly as possible. They couldn't even find time to hold a hearing before voting on it. But now, on a proposal they are claiming is for the middle class, there are no fast-track procedures. There is not even a guarantee that this proposal will even be considered in the Senate.

Every middle-class American watching should realize this: with this majority, the wealthy and the well-connected get a windfall under a special, quick process. Their tax cuts were virtually guaranteed under a rigged system. Your tax cuts aren't getting that same urgency. There is no special process for you. This plan will be left in limbo on the other side of the Capitol. And we all know that.

The fact is, their procedures give away the whole game. This isn't about policy. This is about politics. The first tax scam isn't paying the kind of dividends that the majority anticipated. It is unpopular. So they are trying to pass this to have another talking point on the campaign trail. The public didn't fall for the majority's spin with their last tax scam, and I think they will see through this one again.

They will see what this is all about. They will see this for what it is: a proposal that continues the same, old Republican policies at a time when the public is demanding a new direction.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, it is nonsense to suggest that somehow Democrats don't want the economy to work well. The difference here is we want the economy to work well for everyone, not just those at the top. Eighty- three percent of the benefits in their tax scam go to the top 1 percent of this country. The people who are struggling are those in the middle and those struggling to get in the middle.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter to the Speaker and to the minority leader from Feeding America, which basically says very clearly that the Republican tax bill `` . . . did not prioritize assisting those taxpayers who are most at risk of being food insecure, and as a result the new law provides little direct, tangible benefit to the individuals and families served by Feeding America.''

Feeding America,

September 25, 2018.

Hon. Paul Ryan,

Speaker of the House,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Nancy Pelosi,

House Democratic Leader,

Washington, DC.

Dear Speaker Ryan and Leader Pelosi: We write to share

Feeding America's views about ``Tax Reform 2.0'' and the

legislation recently approved by the House Ways and Means

Committee. We previously expressed our concerns about the Tax

Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1) and its impact on the millions of

Americans facing hunger in every community across our

country, and do not believe making its provisions permanent

would ease the burden on those individuals and families

As the nation's largest private response to domestic

hunger, and the country's third largest charitable

organization, Feeding America works to advance public

policies that support food insecure individuals and families

and that expand the resources necessary for them to access

nutritious food. Given that the aggregate annual food budget

shortfall for the more than 41 million food insecure

individuals in the United States now stands at more than $21

billion, our highest priority is protecting the federal

nutrition programs that help these families access the

resources and nutrition needed to succeed.

At the same time, a large percentage of individuals,

including children, who struggle with hunger fall outside the

public safety net, underscoring the profound need for private

food assistance. In 2016, more than a quarter of food

insecure individuals nationwide lived in households that

earned too much to qualify for most federal nutrition

assistance programs. For these working families, the

generosity of individuals and corporations makes possible

vital food assistance that might not otherwise be available.

Regrettably, H.R. 1 did not prioritize assisting those

taxpayers who are most at risk of being food insecure, and as

a result the new law proves little direct, tangible benefit

to the individuals and families served by Feeding America.

According to the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) beginning

in 2021 taxpayers earning between $10,000 and $30,000 per

year will see an increase in their average tax rate, a

circumstance that will apply to all taxpayers earning less

than $75,000 by 2027.

Additionally, changes to the standard deduction and the

availability of itemized deductions have effectively

eliminated the charitable deduction for 28.5 million

taxpayers, according to JCT. The result will be a decline in

charitable giving of more than $17 billion per year,

according to a recent American Enterprise Institute study,

with human service charities likely to be especially hard

hit. Of the 28.5 million taxpayers expected to no longer file

itemized returns, 24.6 million earn less than $200,000 per

year. Donors with incomes below $200,000 are responsible for

62% of annual charitable giving to all human needs charities.

Simply put, the loss of this century-old giving incentive

will have a devastating effect on a wide range of charitable

programs and services delivered in communities across the

country, including those that provide much-needed food

assistance to hungry individuals and families who are not

otherwise benefitting from the new tax law.

H R. 1 represented a missed opportunity to provide relief

for the millions of Americans who struggle to put food on the

table, and we do not support making its provisions permanent.

We do, however, encourage you to undertake Tax Reform 2.0

with the aim of enacting legislation that eases the burdens

on lower-income working families, continues to encourage

Americans to give generously to charity, and ensures the

government has the resources necessary to meet our collective

obligations to provide for the health and well-being of our

neighbors and our communities.

We hope to serve as a resource to you as this process

unfolds, and we look forward to the opportunity to share with

you proposed tax code changes that we believe will have a

positive impact on the people we serve.

Sincerely,

Alabama Food Bank Association (AL); All Faiths Food Bank;

Arkansas Foodbank (AR); Atlanta Community Food Bank (GA);

Blue Ridge Area Food Bank, Inc. (VA); California Association

of Food Banks (CA); Capital Area Food Bank (DC/MD/VA);

Central California Food Bank (CA); Central Pennsylvania Food

Bank (PA); Central Texas Food Bank (TX); City Harvest (NY);

Community Food Bank of Eastern Oklahoma (OK); Community Food

Warehouse of Mercer County (PA); Connecticut Food Bank (CT);

Eastern Illinois Foodbank (IL); Facing Hunger Foodbank (WV/

KY/OH); Feeding America; Feeding America Southwest Virginia

(VA); Feeding Indiana's Hungry (IN).

Feeding San Diego (CA); Feeding South Dakota (SD); Feeding

the Gulf Coast (AL/FL/MS); Feeding Wisconsin (WI); FeedMore

(VA); Food Bank Association of New York State (NY); Food Bank

Council of Michigan (MI); Food Bank for Larimer County (CO);

Food Bank for the Heartland (NE/IA); Food Bank of Central and

Eastern North Carolina (NC); Food Bank of Central New York

(NY); Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano (CA); Food Bank of

East Texas (TX); Food Bank of Iowa (IA); Food Bank of

Lincoln, Inc. (NE); Food Bank of Northern Indiana (IN); Food

Bank of Northern Nevada (NV/CA); Food Bank of the Golden

Crescent (TX); Food Bank of the Rio Grande Valley (TX).

Food Bank of the Rockies (CO/WY); Food Bank of the Southern

Tier (NY); Food Bank of West Central Texas (TX); Food Finders

Food Bank, Inc. (IN); Food Lifeline (WA); FOOD Share of

Ventura County (CA); Foodbank of Southeastern Virginia and

the Eastern Shore (VA); Foodlink, Inc. (NY); Forgotten

Harvest (MI); Fulfill (NJ); Georgia Food Bank Association

(GA); Gleaners Food Bank of Indiana (IN); God's Pantry Food

Bank, Inc. (KY); Good Shepherd Food Bank (ME); Greater

Chicago Food Depository (IL); Greater Cleveland Food Bank,

Inc. (OH); Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank (PA); Harry

Chapin Food Bank of Southwest Florida (FL); Harvesters--The

Community Food Network (MO/KS); Island Harvest (NY); Kentucky

Association of Food Banks (KY).

Long Island Cares (NY); Los Angeles Regional Food Bank

(CA); Mid-Ohio Foodbank (OH); Mid-South Food Bank (TN/AR/MS);

Montana Food Bank Network (MT); Mountaineer Food Bank (WV);

New Hampshire Food Bank (NH); North Texas Food Bank (TX);

Northern Illinois Food Bank (IL); Ohio Association of

Foodbanks (OH); Oregon Food Bank (OR/WA); Ozarks Food Harvest

(MO); Regional Food Bank of Northeastern New York (NY);

Regional Food Bank of Oklahoma (OK); Rhode Island Community

Food Bank (RI); Roadrunner Food Bank (NM); San Antonio Food

Bank (TX); Second Harvest Community Food Bank (MO/KS); Second

Harvest Food Bank of Central Florida (FL); Second Harvest

Food Bank of Northeast Tennessee (TN); Second Harvest Food

Bank of Northwest North Carolina (NC).

Second Harvest Food Bank of Orange County (CA); Second

Harvest Food Bank of Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties (CA);

Second Harvest Foodbank of Southern Wisconsin (WI); Second

Harvest Heartland (MN/WI); Second Harvest Northern Lakes Food

Bank (MN/WI); Shared Harvest Foodbank (OH); Southeast

Missouri Food Bank (MO); Southeast Ohio Foodbank (OH);

Southeast Texas Food Bank (TX); St Louis Area Foodbank (MO/

IL); The Food Bank of Western Massachusetts (MA); The

Foodbank, Inc. (OH); The Greater Boston Food Bank (MA); The

Idaho Foodbank (ID); Three Square Food Bank (NV); Treasure

Coast Food Bank (FL); Tri-State Food Bank, Inc (IN/IL/KY);

Utah Food Bank (UT); Vermont Foodbank (VT); Virginia

Peninsula Foodbank (VA); Weld Food Bank (CO); West Ohio Food

Bank (OH); Westmoreland County Food Bank, Inc. (PA);

Worcester County Food Bank (MA).

Feeding America is the preeminent organization that feeds hungry families in this country. We have a hunger problem in this country. Nothing in this bill today or the bill that the Republicans passed previously does anything to help those people.

So yes, we want the economy to work well, but for everybody. Not just the rich, but we want it to work well for those in the middle and those struggling to get in the middle. We don't want to embrace a tax scam package where 83 percent of the benefits go to the top 1 percent. They may be good contributors, but that doesn't represent the majority of America.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up Ranking Member Nadler's bill, the Special Counsel Independence Act. This vital legislation will allow the people's House to demonstrate that we as a body are capable of putting America's interests over partisan politics.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, to discuss his proposal.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from New York an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, the reason why we are offering this procedural motion is because the Republicans run this House like Putin. We are shut out of everything. So this is our only opportunity to try to get some important business done.

The Republicans can spend every day trying to pass more tax cuts for their wealthy friends and big corporations, but maybe--just maybe--we can do something useful like protecting our democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Intelligence.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from California an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Swalwell).

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to my colleague from Texas, tax cuts for the rich and big corporations aren't going to protect this country from another attack by the Russians on our elections and on democracy.

But here is the deal: You can do both. You can debate your tax scam 2.0 for the rich, and if you vote to defeat the previous question, we can also vote to protect the Mueller investigation.

So we can do both, and I hope my colleagues will vote to defeat the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Torres), a distinguished member of the House Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. Speaker, if I can inquire of the gentleman from Texas how many more speakers he has on his side?

Mr. Speaker, I kind of figured, if this was so popular, that there would be tons of Republicans down here.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Yarmuth), the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on the Budget.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).

Mr. Speaker, if I could just inquire of the gentleman from Texas one more time, just to make sure there is nobody else who wants to speak.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the Republicans have so diminished this House of Representatives. We are being told that tomorrow may be our last day in session before the election, that the Republicans will adjourn 2 weeks early so they can go home to try to convince voters that they deserve to be reelected.

What we are doing today, this tax scam 2.0, is a joke, because they know it is going nowhere in the Senate. They are frightened by the fact that their original tax bill is so terribly unpopular, and rightfully so, because the American people object to a tax bill where 83 percent of the benefits go to the top 1 percent. That is just not fair. People understand things like fairness.

Mr. Speaker, we are asking people to defeat the previous question to protect

the Mueller investigation. Since we are adjourning most likely tomorrow, this may be our only time to do it. You can vote to defeat the previous question. You can still vote for this tax scam bill, but you also can vote on whether or not to protect the Mueller investigation. We ought to do that.

But there is another thing I want Members of both sides to appreciate, as this may be the last rule we bring to the floor.

What we are considering today is record-shattering. The majority broke the record for the number of closed rules in Congress earlier this year. The record they broke, by the way, was their own.

This restrictive process has often shut out debates here on the House floor that the American people desperately want this Congress to have, on issues like gun safety, protecting the Dreamers, and lowering the cost of prescription drugs.

Now, today, the majority is taking is the most closed Congress in American history to a whole new level because, tucked inside this measure, is the majority's 99th, 100th, and 101st first closed rules of this Congress. There has never ever been a moment like this in American history, more than 100 closed rules in a single Congress.

This isn't some arcane legislative matter. Consider what the majority has brought under closed rules, things like their first tax scam and their disastrous healthcare repeal bill.

There are still months to go before the 116th Congress begins. Who knows what other disasters the majority of President Trump will dream up next.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not suggesting that everything that the House considers should be under an open rule. There are times when a closed rule might be necessary. But more than 100 closed rules? There is no justification for that.

Now, I don't know who will run this place in January, but if Democrats are trusted with the majority, we will have a more accommodating process. This place will be run like professionals. Ideas will be allowed to come forward, and the House of Representatives will actually debate again.

But we don't have to wait until next year to force a more open process. We can start right here today. My Republican colleagues have voiced frustration with their majority's closed process. Well, we have the chance here to do more than just talk. We can vote.

So when a closed rule goes down, Speaker Ryan will actually have to start upholding his promise of a more open, more inclusive, more deliberative, and more participatory process.

It would be better late than never. While calling for a more open process, virtually every Republican voted for every closed rule we have considered. The rank and file Republicans are part of the problem.

Mr. Speaker, if they are not going to take a stand on the 101st closed rule, will they ever be able to back up their talk with their vote?

So I ask the majority, as we stand on the doorstep of this dubious distinction, join us in voting against this record-shattering closed rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1084, I call up the bill (H.R. 6757) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to encourage retirement and family savings, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 6757, currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume and thank leadership for bringing this bill to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in support of H.R. 6757, the Family Savings Act, which will make it easier for American families and individuals to save for their future, whether it is retirement, education, or healthcare, helping them to make sure that they are keeping more of their hard-earned income, more of their own money, and planning for their future.

This bill will also help local businesses provide retirement plans to their workers and help workers participate more in all those plans.

Now, according to the Department of Labor and the Federal Reserve, about 69 million American workers have formal retirement plans, which, together, have almost $14 trillion in savings for them.

This bill will incentivize hardworking American taxpayers to continue to put away more of their own money for their future.

One of the things I remember so clearly from growing up is my parents talking to us all the time and saying: The one thing we never want to be for you kids is a burden. We never want to be a hardship for you as we go into our senior years.

I thought to myself at that time: How could anybody look across the table at people who had worked so hard, had come through the Great Depression, had come through World War II, had come through the Korean war, had gone through all kinds of difficulties and had always provided for us and think that? How in the world could they ever think that they would be a burden to me or to my brothers and sisters?

It was unimaginable for me, but that is what they thought. That is what they worried about. They never wanted to be a burden to anybody.

Just think about that for a minute. That generation, often described as the Greatest Generation, was telling us, the next generation, that they never wanted to be a burden.

What we are talking about today is relieving the burden on the next generation by making it easier for people to go into their retirement feeling that they have enough income to actually enjoy their golden years.

H.R. 6757 would allow for every American worker, at all income levels, to save money in universal savings accounts, in which those earnings would be tax-free and could be taken out at any time without a penalty. How unique to be able to take your own money out and use it without being penalized by the Federal Government.

It would also allow Americans to use their 529 plans to pay for costs associated with home schooling, apprenticeships, just like they now can for primary and secondary schools thanks to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

And if one sibling has more money in a 529 account than he or she needs, another sibling can use some of that money to help pay down their student loans.

This bill would allow younger taxpayers to take out some of their own money in their retirement account without penalty when they have a new baby or have an opportunity to adopt a child. This way, younger Americans will feel secure in starting to save for their retirement, knowing that the money could still be there for them at one of the most expensive times in their lives.

H.R. 6757 would also make it easier for small employers to pull together and offer retirement plans to their team, to the folks they work with, their associates. This would help bridge that divide between what benefits large employers might be able to offer to their employees but smaller employers may only wish to be able to do but really can't.

The bill also allows for older Americans to continue saving in their IRAs if they choose to continue working in their later years, and it allows them to keep their own money in their IRAs if those accounts are relatively modest.

For those workers who want their savings accounts to be in conservative investments, such as annuities, this bill reduces the cost of doing that.

Finally, this bill would also help our brave men and women in the Reserves put away more of their retirement by letting them contribute the maximum amount to their military retirement accounts while also contributing to a retirement account from the private sector.

Mr. Speaker, let me tell you why we are really here today. We are really here today because of the overwhelming success of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. It has worked. It is incredible, the growth in our economy.

The number one priority from the beginning of everything we did was about pro-growth legislation that actually made it easier on hardworking American families. You know what, despite what you may hear and the rattle from the other side, it worked, and it is working every day. We can see it in every measurable event of what is happening in America.

Thanks to tax reform, middle-income families in western Pennsylvania and across America are seeing bigger paychecks, more take-home money. How

odd that we allow them to keep more of their own money. That is just who we are as Americans.

Democrats have chosen to distort this success. Republicans are choosing to secure the success by making the tax cuts for middle-income families permanent. We keep hearing: Yeah, yeah, but you are not really taking care of them.

The idea that we use identity politics every day in every way in this House is absolutely deplorable. Tax reform 2.0 is all about that. The truth of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is its success.

The saddest part of it all is not one of our Democratic colleagues voted for it. For that, they will continue to distort the future and use identity politics.

Mr. Speaker, I think we have other people who want to talk on this, but for now, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I remind my friends on the other side that a rising tide lifts all boats. There happens to be 6.9 million jobs now looking for somebody to fill them.

And when we talk about going into retirement, could we please stop trying to divide, divide, divide America? Could we please start being the United States of America instead of the divided States of America?

Every single American benefits from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. That is the fact. I am sorry you didn't sign on for it. We are going to give you a second chance today to show your true colors, which needs to red, white, and blue, not just blue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Renacci).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Wenstrup).

Mr. Speaker, I share my colleague's concerns over the debt. In fact, I started to really become alarmed with it under the Obama administration when we went from being $10.6 trillion in debt to nearly $20 trillion in debt. I just wonder, where were you when this was going on? And why was there not any alarm sounding then?

But again, it is just politics masquerading as fiscal discipline.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Estes), a good friend of mine.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, the hero of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to engage in a colloquy with the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, one topic that has been discussed in the context of the savings and retirement bill is the level of premiums paid to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, the PBGC, by rural electric co- ops and by charitable organizations.

I know the Ways and Means Committee included a study that was intended to provide information relevant to the proper level of PBGC premiums. That study was removed by the manager's amendment.

Could the chairman provide some insights about how this issue will be resolved as we move forward?

I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman, as always, for his insights and his clarity, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I include in the Record a letter from AARP in strong support of H.R. 6757.

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to be here in the people's House on the floor hearing two differing views of America. I really appreciate about putting the jam on the lower shelf. We have actually put it on the table with the lid off so that every single American has benefited.

I know that sometimes we look at things, and people are entitled to their own opinion, but what they are not entitled to are their own facts. The fact is that, under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, every single American has benefited.

This is not just about Democrats and Republicans; this is about Americans. I am hoping that Americans are watching what is going on here right now, where the game plan is always: If we can divide them, we can win. If we don't have any facts, let's just come up with anything and throw it out there and think that maybe the way we use the Gruber effect in the healthcare plan, we are going to rely on Americans not to really look beyond what is going on.

Well, I will tell you what. In every segment of our society right now, we are seeing the lowest unemployment in

history. It doesn't matter if these are hyphenated Americans--I don't know why we have to be this way, because I look at people as being red, white, and blue Americans, not White, not Black, not tan, not yellow. I am talking about red, white, and blue Americans, the same people who provide every single penny to run this marvelous government of ours.

And now what we are proposing today is to allow these same hardworking people the opportunity not to have to rely on a government program, but to be able to rely on their own hard-earned savings. What an incredible, unusual idea to come out of this House.

Look, we know that it is absolutely crucial that, as more and more Americans enter their golden years, they have the security and peace of mind to enjoy those years and not have to worry about whether they have saved enough money. We should be doing everything we can to help them save more of their hard-earned money--it is their own money, by the way--for themselves and for their families. H.R. 6757 does that by giving every single American the tools that he or she needs to help them save for their future and to save for their retirement.

I have heard today the tax sham. I have heard today about growing deficits. I have heard today about the rich, the elite, the people who have private boats, and the people who have jets. But what I haven't heard today is how this incredible piece of legislation, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, has increased and how our economy has taken off.

Now, you can say anything you want, and I understand why you are upset. Not one of you could vote for this. So if you couldn't vote for it and you couldn't be part of the team that won, what you have to be now is the team that says: Do you know what? We could have done it better.

My question is: Where the heck were you in the previous administration? Where were you in all those years when the debt grew from $10 trillion to $20 trillion?

Now, all of a sudden, the light comes on: Oh, my God, the debt is increasing. It is these doggone Republicans. Do you know what they are trying to do? They want hardworking American taxpayers to be able to keep more of their own money. That is just not the way Washington works.

I thank God every day that I didn't start off as a local politician, then move into a county position, then move into a State position, and then wander into D.C. using that same philosophy that we are going to put this on the backs of our taxpayers. We never tell these people that the hand they feel in their back pocket is the government taking their wallet out. Then we decry this fact that: Oh, my goodness, how could we ignore the debt?

Thanks for waking up. Where were you when it was $10 trillion? Why did you let it get to $20 trillion before the bells went off?

Look, there is so much in this bill that just makes sense. This bill was not crafted for Democrats. It wasn't crafted for Republicans. It was crafted for Americans, hardworking Americans, who put all their life into a job, who look forward to retirement. We are giving them that opportunity not to rely on some government program that may or may not be there when they reach retirement.

We are telling them: Do you know what? You get to keep more of your own money now. You get to put it away in a lot of pretax opportunities. You get to know that you can draw down on some of that money without being heavily taxed for needing it.

And while we decry all these inequities, and when we continue to divide Americans and say, ``It is always about the rich; it is always about the elite; it is all about those who have more than you do,'' that is not what it is about. It is about helping every American get to retirement.

Good Lord, how did we get to this position? How did we get to this point in America's history that we will pick and choose and we will decry anybody who has been successful and always label them as the rich, the elite, these horrible, horrible people who have done so much with their life. They just don't deserve that.

Well, do you know what? This is America. There are more stories in this country and throughout our history of people who started with absolutely nothing but an opportunity, an equal opportunity, not guaranteed an equal outcome, but guaranteed an equal opportunity.

What we are doing today is guaranteeing for every hardworking American out there that they can put more of their own hard-earned money into a retirement plan that serves them.

Now, every time we come on this floor, I hear this: divide, divide, divide. We can't possibly be the America that 1.4 million of our fellow citizens died to protect. No, no, no. This is not about America's future. This is about midterm elections. We are more worried about getting reelected than changing the direction of this country.

I would ask my colleagues on the other side, look, I know you are sorry you didn't vote for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. That is why you throw it down all the time and say this is horrible. What did happen is that we are giving you another chance to hop on this train.

I have only been here 8 years, but I will tell you what. I have heard enough in 8 years, coming from the private sector where you have to make it on your own every single day. You have to make payroll. You have to put food on the table and a roof over the heads of your children.

I don't want a government program that does that for me. I want a government program that allows me to save my own money, take less of my hard-earned money and allow me to save for my wife, for my kids, for my grandchildren, and for my great-grandchildren.

That is what this is all about today, Mr. Speaker. It is plain and simple.

One group thinks that the whole idea of government is to make each and every citizen rely on them and depend on them for their very existence. We are offering a chance for every single American--I don't care where they are from, I don't care the color of their skin, the shape of their eyes, or how they vote. What I do care about is that they can go into their retirement knowing that their hard-earned money over the years is going to be accessible to them.

That is what this is all about. I am hoping America is watching.

I will go back to what I said in the beginning. I remember very clearly my mom and my dad sitting there and saying: The one thing we pray for is that we are never a burden for you and your brothers and your sisters.

And I will repeat what I said today. I could not believe that the people who raised me, who fed me, who clothed me, who gave me a future, thought that somehow they would ever be a burden to me, my brothers, or my sisters. The one thing I know that they were sure of: They could save on their own, and they could get ready for their future and for their retirement years.

That is all we are trying to do today. We are trying to make sure that every single hardworking American gets to keep more of his or her money for their own retirement without the government taking advantage of them.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, but I do still have the passion to bring this forward, and I have the passion and I have the belief that, if you can get beyond politics and talk about people, that you can come to a conclusion that this is a solid bill that helps our fellow Americans go into their retirement.

I know that is in your heart. I know you can't speak it sometimes because we are so polarized. Isn't that a shame?

But I will say this. Today we have the opportunity, and what you can show it on--there will be a big screen up there. It will have everybody's name. And you can put a green ``yes'' on there, which says: I am voting for America's future. I am voting for America's retirees. I am voting to make people have peace of mind. Or you can put a red up there and say: Do you know what? I would have voted for it, but it wasn't our bill. And if it is not my bill, if it is not my party's bill, I can't vote for that because there is an election coming up and we have got to polarize this.

Mr. Speaker, I know I am out of time, but I am not out of breath, and I will tell you what, I am sure as hell not out of passion. I know what this country means for everybody, and we are making it possible for them every day in every way.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, America does, in fact, face a retirement crisis. Nearly half of Americans approaching retirement years have absolutely no retirement savings. There is not much gold in their golden years.

Four out of 10 Americans in a recent survey indicated that they are living paycheck to paycheck. They are barely making ends meet. They had little or nothing available in reserve.

When they were asked if they could meet a sudden, unexpected $400 medical emergency, 4 out of 10 Americans said they could not even do that.

Those are the individuals who certainly do not have the resources to save enough to set up a standard of living in retirement comparable to what they had before retiring.

So, as usual, our Republican colleagues are masters at naming bills. It is just what they put in the bills that is a problem.

Now, this bill is a good example. This is the Family Savings Act, but whose family gets the savings? Well, if you are out there listening, probably not your family. For families that have little or nothing in savings, this bill does nothing.

Much like the bloated Republican tax scam and its sorry sequel that AARP condemned this very day, this Republican bill is all about helping those at the top and doing little or nothing for those who are struggling to have a golden year in retirement.

There are, in fact, some modest measures that they have got tucked in this bill that I support and that AARP supports. And I agree with AARP that we should encourage more small employers to offer retirement plans. I am all for the little good parts in the bill. It is just the giant omissions that I oppose.

The first of those omissions is the almost half of Americans that they forgot about, that they left out of this bill.

As usual, the second big problem is they haven't got the slightest care about how this bill is paid for. They are going to go out and borrow more money from the Saudis and the Chinese and anybody else we can beg for to pay for the debt in order to pay for this. They don't pay for a penny of it. That is consistent with their approach, the proud success of this past year, adding trillions of dollars to the public debt because they don't care about it anymore. All their budget deficit hawks, they flew south for the winter, and they stayed there.

The people who can't save at the moment for retirement, they are the folks who rely on one of the most important programs and set of programs that this Congress ever approved, and that is, of course, Social Security and Medicare--over Republican objection.

Now everybody seems to be for those programs, but they are jeopardized when you add trillions of additional dollars to our debt, and that is what this bill contributes to. It adds $21 billion in debt. Nearly half of its cost is for what they call ``universal savings accounts.'' They should be better known as universal tax shelters. And they will do little to increase retirement savings. Rather, they will be universally exploited by people who are already saving to get a little bit more tax benefit.

Over the next five years, existing tax incentives--before this bill is ever approved, those that are already in the law--for retirement savings will cost us over $1 trillion. One study found that two-thirds of the benefits of this $1 trillion of tax expenditures goes to the top 20 percent of Americans.

I don't begrudge any of them. One of them is me. One of them is every Member of this Congress. I think we need to encourage Members of Congress and all Americans to save more.

I expect that those of us who are using these tax-advantaged accounts now don't need a great deal of additional incentive to use them to the maximum. What we do need is to help those Americans who couldn't afford that $400 emergency or who have nothing in retirement savings except their Social Security check. It is not that they don't want to save. It is that, if you can't pay $400 for a doctor bill you didn't expect, you are not going to have very much saved when it comes time to retire.

Now, surely this Congress can do more for these families. I must say, I don't really mean this Congress. I mean the one that is coming in January that cares about the retirement crisis we have now, not the one that has shown indifference to half of Americans.

What we get today, instead, is just another tax incentive for shifting retirement savings around.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself an additional 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, to take full advantage of this bill, you need to have about $100,000 in income. If you even look at this bill, as the Joint Committee on Taxation has done, you will see that two out of three Americans are not expected to use it at all because it doesn't help them.

And what about the one-third who will use it? They are the people, like me, like the other Members of Congress, who earn, on average, twice the median income in this country.

So it does help those of us who have been successful, those at the very top who are the wealthiest. It doesn't help the rest of America.

For those with the resources, the Joint Committee on Taxation looked at the huge price tag on this bill, and they said that what we are basically looking at, and I quote it, is it ``derives from taxpayers shifting savings that are allocated to other types of taxable accounts into a universal savings account'', so just moving the money around.

And we now have a study that really shows what a great job these guys have done with reference to this concept. It is a study that shows, for every dollar of additional debt you get--a little bit of a similar program that was studied--you get 1 penny of additional savings. That is the bargain they are offering us today, really. Spend a dollar, borrow a dollar from the Chinese, and you will generate 1 cent of additional savings.

So under this so-called universal tax shelter, the earning returns from their investment portfolio allow them to avoid some capital gains tax, cost the Treasury, but the Republican universe just doesn't include many ordinary Americans.

It is those who don't have retirement savings in tax-advantaged accounts, who rely on Medicare and Social Security, we need to protect that basic framework for retirement for, and you don't protect it by borrowing ourselves into further debt.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, before yielding to Mr. Davis, let me say this is not about lifting all boats; It is about lifting all yachts. And the 40, 50 percent of Americans who have only a leaky rowboat going into retirement don't get a dime out of this bill.

As to the tax bill as a whole, Republicans came out and bragged, the President put it in writing: You will get $4,000 in additional income trickling down to you every year from this corporate tax cut. Now we know that only 4.4 percent of Americans have gotten a dime of additional compensation as a result of this tax bill. If you have got anyone in Ohio, in Pennsylvania, or in Texas who got their $4,000, I hope you will call us, because I am looking for the first person.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis), a distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind), who has been a leader on retirement issues and was one of the sponsors of the original form of this bill, which has changed a good bit, and on other retirement legislation.

I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Judy Chu), a valued member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, so I will close at this time and initially yield myself 5 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, the Republican tax bill has given us trillions of dollars of additional debt, and so, tomorrow, they propose to freeze in some additional provisions that will add hundreds of billions of additional debt to what they have already incurred.

They would depart for the elections, carefully timed with tomorrow's debate, so that the last thing the voter hears is that the Republicans have passed another tax bill.

Of course, none of its provisions will affect any American for 7 years. That is what they have to offer us: freeze in some inefficient provisions that are not really targeted to ordinary American families that have a special provision in there specifically for Donald Trump and other real estate magnates, a provision they hid and tucked in the conference committee and then put in the final law, one special interest provision after another. They want to freeze all of that in and offer the American people the mirage of relief in 7 years.

This bill that they signed into law as their big tax deal will cost this generation and future generations a huge amount of money just paying the interest on the debt that they have achieved, and having done nothing in this Congress to advance retirement security, having done nothing in this Congress to encourage more savings by more Americans.

They come here on the eve of our departure for the elections with this big family savings account bill. It also proposes to borrow more. It has a great new universal savings account in it. The only problem is that two-thirds of Americans won't take advantage of this universal savings account because it offers them no advantage whatsoever.

As usual, those Americans have been excluded from the Republican version of what the universe of Americans really is.

The cost of doing this is not only in terms of new debt, but a very inefficient approach where you pay, as indicated by the study of a similar program, you have $1 lost, $1 cost in this borrowing, and you get 1 penny of additional real savings.

Now, I am amused a little bit to hear my colleagues come and agree with me about the challenge that American families face of not having $400 to meet an emergency medical expense. How in the world are any of those Americans going to benefit in the slightest from this proposal?

It advantages people who have $100,000 or more with the universal savings account. They are not in that category. If they can't afford a $400 medical expense, exactly how much savings do you expect them to have under this bill? A big zero is what we are talking about.

It is a big zero in large measure because, despite this great tax bill they approved, real wages in America have remained stagnant during the Trump administration.

He has not been able to raise real wages because he continues to engage in supporting programs, just like the one before us today, that are aimed at those at the top and think somehow the benefits will trickle down to everyone else.

It is those people who will not benefit from today's legislation, who are excluded from the great universe that Republicans see. It is those people who rely on Social Security and Medicare, which Republicans have proposed changes in, in their budget proposals, have discussed a variety of ways to trim them, that we can't afford them in their current form.

Well, what, precisely, have Republicans accomplished about Medicare in this Congress? Well, they have a rather significant accomplishment that I have to note. As a result of their tax bill, they have reduced the solvency of the Medicare trust fund by 3 years, 3 years taken right off the Medicare trust fund's future as a result of their tax bill--by a variety of independent sources that have evaluated the impact.

Meanwhile, they are using that tax bill and the debt they have accumulated with reference to the amount of money that we have for Pell grants and other student financial assistance, for Medicaid and the role that it plays, and for other vital services saying: We just can't afford them because we borrowed these trillions of dollars from abroad, and we don't have the resources to meet our other needs.

With every tax policy that they propose, Republicans seem to insist on leaving working families behind. And they have the gall then to turn around and tell those same working families: You have to pay for it in interest, in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, and other services.

Now, there is another really important point about this, which Mr. Kind addressed, because just like the bill we will take up tomorrow, just like the bill we are taking up right now, just like this huge Republican tax sham, there is much in common. The number one thing in common is that not one official in any of the departments in the Trump administration had the guts to come over and face our committee and answer questions about it.

They did not bring a single Trump administration official to discuss, explain, justify, how any of this conforms with all his ridiculous campaign promises. There was none of that on any of these bills.

They kept their bills in secret until the last minute after having no public hearings, inviting no businesses, no academic experts from around the country. They plopped these bills out and rushed them through just as quickly as possible, so there will be as little consideration as possible.

Then they talk about the desire for bipartisan comity after doing this kind of thing. Well, there are many bipartisan ideas out there that could have been considered. Mr. Kind's proposal is designed to help poor people, working people save for college or retirement, and give them some incentive for that. That is an idea that could have been considered.

Mr. Neal, the ranking member of our committee, has advanced some other important ideas concerning savings to expand the savers credit that would help many of these working families get the savings that they need to prepare for their golden years.

Mr. Larson, another member of our committee, has worked on cutting taxes for many people under Social Security with modest incomes and seeing that those who have been more successful pay the same rate on all their income that those who are not at the top of the economic ladder pay on theirs. He has a plan to ensure that Social Security will be solvent through the end of this century.

Those are the kind of creative proposals that we have advanced, but we can't get a hearing on them. We can't get an opportunity under today's bills or any of these others to offer an amendment to add them. The only way we are going to have an opportunity to address those creative proposals and do something for a universe that we define as including all Americans, not just those perched up comfortably on the top of the economic ladder, the only way we will do that is with a new Congress of caring, concerned people who are willing to listen, regardless of whether they agree to divergent views, and try to come up with a truly American answer to resolve this retirement security problem.

I believe that those Americans who are working out there today, trying to make ends meet, who won't benefit from this bill are worried about the tax breaks that have gone to those up at the top, how they will threaten all that they have worked and paid for in their future, and the callous indifference it shows to their children and their grandchildren, who will be saddled with this Republican debt for decades.

The late Texas Senator Ralph Yarborough, a distinguished servant of our State, talked about putting the jam on the lower shelf so that everybody could reach it. Well, this bill puts the jam at the top for the one-third of Americans up there at the top who might use some portion of this bill, but it leaves out the two-thirds who can't reach quite that high.

This bill is not what America needs to achieve retirement savings. In so many ways, Republicans are ignoring the needs of working families.

They are ignoring prescription price gouging, doing nothing about it, and they are ignoring our healthcare needs. In fact, their tax bill actually weakens, significantly, access to healthcare and jeopardizes Americans with higher premiums as a result of a healthcare provision that they snuck into their tax bill.

They show no concern for a living wage for Americans. This bill is just part of that same narrow-mindedness and that same refusal to look at a universe that applies to all Americans. They are leaving families that are struggling to make ends meet behind. They are certainly not letting them reach the jam that they deserve to be able to access, as Senator Yarborough talked about.

Let's reject this bill and look forward to a day, a very hopeful day, for Americans in which all Americans can have their say and we can get a Congress that will resist the injustices of the Trump administration and will reach out to support a better future for our country.

Mr. Speaker, I urge rejection of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1084, I call up the bill (H.R. 6760) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent certain provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act affecting individuals, families, and small businesses, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 6760, currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, for far too long, hardworking American taxpayers watched as an entitled Federal Government took a bigger and bigger slice from their family's budget. But that changed last year. With the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, we choose you, the hardworking taxpayers of this country.

With our new Tax Code, we were determined to let you keep more of what you worked so hard to earn, and, boy, have the results been incredible.

Eight months later, we have seen an economic turnaround with more jobs, bigger paychecks, and historic Main Street optimism. We have gone from asking, ``Where are the jobs?'' to asking, ``Where are the workers?''

One Main Street small-business owner recently told me that, thanks to the new Tax Code, they are hiring more, giving bonuses, buying more equipment, and, as he said, they are set to have their best year ever.

This has meant real change for real people, with nearly 1.7 million new jobs created just since January, and paychecks rising at their fastest rate in 9 years.

While this economic turnaround for America has come as a shock to opponents of the new Tax Code here in Washington, it is no surprise to millions of hardworking families and small businesses across America who were overtaxed and overregulated far too long.

Thanks to our new pro-growth Tax Code, there is new hope and a new optimism in America that wasn't here before. To call it a sudden change from the sluggish Obama-era economy would be an understatement. For a decade, it was like America's economy was going through a 25-mile-per- hour zone.

Now that the high taxes and the uncompetitive regulations of our Democratic friends are gone, we are on an open highway again. It is critical that we keep this strong momentum going, especially for Americans who were hit hardest by the Great Recession.

That is what this bill before us today is all about. By making the new code permanent for our families and small businesses, the Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act will keep America's economy booming and middle class families growing again.

In fact, the nonpartisan Tax Foundation estimates that this bill will add 1.5 million new jobs and increase America's economy over 2 percent. That is on top, as I said, of the 1.7 million new jobs we have already seen created since President Trump signed the new Tax Code into law.

We don't want to go back to the bad old days of higher taxes, with Washington taking more of what our single moms, our hardworking parents, and our Main Street-owned business owners have worked so hard to earn. We don't want to go back to the bad old days when Main Street wasn't hiring, jobs were going overseas, and our economic growth was puttering along.

So given the choice between keeping taxes high and allowing families to keep more of their money, Republicans chose, and continue to choose, the American people.

I thank Representative Rodney Davis for introducing this bill, and Representative Mark Meadows and Representative Mark Walker, along with all of our Republican Ways and Means members, for being the original cosponsors and leaders of this bill.

In closing, empowering families to run their own lives is at the heart of the American Dream. It is the key to America's economic success, and it is the reason that 8 months after tax reform became law, Americans are more hopeful about their future and the American Dream.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), the leader and the original sponsor of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Walker), one of the three original leaders of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith), who is one of our key members on the Ways and Means Committee from rural communities on this tax reform bill.

Mr. Speaker, I'm very proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith), who is a key member of our Ways and Means Committee and who played, again, such a leadership role on tax reform for small businesses and agriculture.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Mrs. Noem), who is a key member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, because of tax reform, Main Street businesses are booming. The chairman of the Small Business Committee has played a key role in that.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentlemen from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen), who started a small business at age 25 and built it up from the ground up.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, let me just fact-check my colleague from Texas.

Since the tax reform bill became law on New Year's Day, 1.7 million jobs have been created in America, with wages rising at the fastest rate in 9 years.

Today, following these new policies, the median income for a married couple with two kids has $3,200 more in their take-home pay than it did just 12 months ago.

I will remind the voters in Mr. Doggett's district that an average family of four making $60,000 a year sees a tax cut of $1,131 that my Democratic colleagues want to steal back.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from

Arizona (Mr. Schweikert), a key leader and member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I note that the average middle class family in the 12th District of California will see a tax cut of $5,508 each year.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Wenstrup), a key member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I have one.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Meadows), one of the three original lead sponsors of this tax bill.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time I have left.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would note that the average middle-class family in my good friend Mr. Neal's district back home in Massachusetts will see a tax cut of nearly $2,000 each year.

So let's fact-check a couple of these claims today. Let's fact-check a few things, starting with my friend Mr. Neal's point about Dr. Wenstrup's call.

That gentleman wasn't complaining he didn't get enough tax cuts. He said his taxes would go up significantly. And he is correct, because under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, this relief goes to middle-class families and low-income families working their way up.

In fact, after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, millionaires of America who used to shoulder 19 percent of the tax burden now will shoulder 20 percent of the tax burden. They will carry more because this tax reform was designed for middle-class, working families.

Earlier today, we heard our respected Democratic leader say many things, including that the GOP tax cuts provide at least $1.3 trillion in tax breaks to corporations. FactCheck.org says that claim is misleading. In fact, of the $1\1/2\ trillion, over $1 trillion is for individual taxpayers.

Leader Pelosi said 86 million middle-class families will see a tax increase. The Washington Post gave her 2 Pinocchios, saying most every U.S. taxpayer can expect some kind of tax cut according to just about every analysis.

A lawmaker from Wisconsin, Democrat: Never let the GOP tell you again they support low taxes. They don't, unless you are already a billionaire or massive corporation.

PolitiFact gave that Democratic lawmaker a pants on fire rating, saying this will provide tax relief for the middle class, and most people in low-income households will see cuts as well.

Leader Chuck Schumer said companies are laying off American workers because of tax reform. PolitiFact said that was mostly false.

A California assemblyman says GOP tax cuts are nothing more than a middle-class tax increase. PolitiFact just killed them, called that just flat-out false.

Senator Claire McCaskill said the tax cuts are not going to be helpful to the vast majority of people. The Washington Post also gave her two Pinocchios, said that is flat wrong, says she ignores the immediate impact of the law, which means noticeable tax cuts for her constituents for a number of years.

And, of course, dozens of Democrats continue to state 83 percent of all tax breaks go to the top 1 percent. FactCheck.org--down, misleading, because it cites projections for 2027. In fact, the only way that will be true is if you vote ``no'' today. If you vote ``yes,'' these middle-class tax cuts are permanent.

We have heard, today, scare tactics about the impact to Social Security and Medicare. Let me cite the Joint Economic Committee that shows the Congressional Budget Office said the Medicare trust fund solvency improved after tax reform. The tax reform strengthened the major funding source for the Medicare trust fund. Americans leaving disability for jobs due to a stronger economy will improve Medicare solvency, and the number of uninsured Americans fell--fell--after tax reform in the individual mandate.

And the final point, let's talk about debts and deficits, Mr. Speaker. This is a pleasant surprise to hear our Democrats suddenly concerned. They weren't, under President Obama, when they doubled the national debt. They added $2 trillion in just 1 year.

I am not going to talk about sailors who drink. I will just say this. Democrats were concerned, didn't care about deficits when they were spending your money; but now that you are spending your money, all of a sudden, everything is changed.

The truth of the matter is: Who do you trust, Washington to spend your money, or you and your family?

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of a point of order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, you know Washington. You know Washington. If you don't have an argument, just scare people; just frighten them to death. That will work.

But people are smart. When you calm down all the rhetoric and all the anger and all the outrage, what we know is this: The Congressional Budget Office--it isn't Republican or Democrat--it found the Medicare Trust Fund solvency got better after tax reform.

In fact, tax reform strengthened the major funding source for the Medicare Trust Fund and now, because we have more people, especially those disabled, going back to work, getting a job that they had hoped for, it is actually improving Medicare solvency. So that great big scare tactic just got fact-checked.

In fact, already this year, the Federal Government is receiving $105 billion more, Mr. Speaker, in payroll taxes and individual taxes, and those payroll taxes are what are the foundation of Social Security and Medicare.

The truth of the matter is, as we look at this bill, both parties claim to be champions of hardworking taxpayers. Well, let's check.

So, under this bill, a single mom, working her way out of poverty, permanently will see $1,700 more in her paycheck each year. Democrats who vote ``no'' will steal that money back from that single mom.

Middle-class family of two, two teachers in my district, with two kids, under this bill, permanently will see a tax cut of $2636. A ``no'' vote steals that money back from that family.

That Main Street business, moms and pops working all hours, all weekends, all year, under this bill, permanently they will see a tax cut of $3,000

every year, and they can write off on their taxes that new computer, that new equipment, that new improvement to their store. A ``no'' vote hammers America's Main Street businesses.

Young parents, struggling to raise kids, where every dollar matters, this bill makes sure that that doubling of the child tax credit is permanent, and millions more Americans, middle-class families, will get help raising their precious children. A ``no'' vote is to take that money back from those young parents. Oh, by the way, take back their tax-free savings for school and college for that child as well.

And, yes, in this bill, we make sure seniors can write off more of their high medical expenses. Some called it the cancer tax. A ``yes'' vote will help millions of seniors and millions of families with high medical bills more easily write those taxes off. A ``no'' vote is to deny American seniors, American families' ability to write off those taxes.

Now, we know, thanks to ObamaCare, high out-of-pocket costs is now the preexisting condition. This bill makes sure that we stand on the side of those seniors, whether they are battling cancer or some other menaces.

At the end of the day, while some would say, look, we need to raise the SALT cap, let me just say this: That SALT cap is a $10 tax cut for the middle class and a $146,000 tax cut for millionaires. In other words, Democrats who vote ``no'' say they just want more tax cuts for the rich.

And the fact of the matter is, States are seeing a $20 billion windfall. State governments and Governors, all they need do, don't pocket that money for their budget, pass it on to hard working taxpayers.

At the end of the day, revenues are up. Payroll taxes are up. Social Security and Medicare are strengthened.

So at the end of the day, who do you trust? Who do you trust with your hard-earned money? Is it Washington, so they can take it and spend it on their special interests? Is it you? Is it your family? Is it your American Dream?

This bill is about making sure that we choose the American people. We choose you, the middle-class families. We choose you, Main Street America, to better use your money than Washington does.

As we conclude, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank our tax team, led by Barbara Angus, our Chief Tax Counsel, Aharon Friedman, Randy Gartin, Aaron Junge, Loren Ponds, John Sandell, Donald Schneider, Victoria Glover, John Schoenecker, and Quinton Brady, for doing a remarkable job for us and for the American people.

I urge a ``yes'' on protecting tax cuts for individuals, middle-class families, and small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.