Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, under rule XXII, clause 7(c), I hereby announce my intention to offer a motion to instruct on H.R. 2419.

The form of the motion is as follows:

Mr. Cantor moves the managers on the part of the House at

the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on

the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 2419 be instructed not

to agree to the provisions contained in section 12808 of the

Senate amendment (relating to qualified forestry conservation

bonds).

Madam Speaker, today we remember the 1.5 million innocent victims of the Armenian genocide who horrifically lost their lives 93 years ago. The tragedy of the Armenians was the first genocide of the 20th century, but sadly not the last. Now, in a 21st Century rife with renewed ethnic and religious hatreds, the memory of the Armenian victims must remain fresh in our minds. It was Adolf Hitler who asked his generals, after deciding to brutally attack Poland in 1939, ``Who still talks nowadays about the Armenians?'' By remembering the Armenians on this day, as well as the millions of other victims claimed by genocides worldwide, we can individually and collectively contribute to the prevention of future atrocities and the end of genocide once and for all. I'd like to thank the Armenian-American community and the millions of others who have worked to ensure the American people never forget the victims of the Armenian genocide.

Madam Speaker, when an act of random cruelty bewilders us and pulls us down, exceptional displays of generosity, courage and heroism can serve as a potent counterforce. They comfort and replenish the bereaved, and they remind us of the extraordinary selflessness our people are capable of. Nowhere has this been truer than in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech tragedy.

Today, we are faced with the memory of the horrific events that occurred one year ago at Virginia Tech. It is no easier today, than it was then, to find the words to express the pain and sorrow that was felt across the Hokie nation.

Once again I stand here with a heavy heart and extend my deepest sympathies to the families and friends of all the victims; especially those of Emily Hilscher and Rachel Hill, two victims from the Seventh District of Virginia. We will always be left with their spirit, energy and enthusiasm that will never die, but rather will live on in our memories forever.

Madam Speaker, 60 years ago, outnumbered and under- equipped, the Jews of Palestine beat back five invading Arab armies to win a miraculous victory. Thus, the 2,000-year-old dream of reestablishing a state in the Jewish ancestral homeland was realized.

Since then, Israel has wrought out of barren desert and swamp a vibrant and flourishing state. It has harnessed its ingenuity to join the world's ranks of leaders in science, technology and cancer research. Israel remains a vital ally in the globe's most dangerous region.

And in a post-9/11 world, it is an encouraging reminder that a Democrat state can maintain its humane principles in the face of unrelenting terrorism.

So today, as Hamas rockets continue to rain on Israeli communities, and former U.S. Presidents are used by Hamas as props in their propaganda war, we, in this Congress, stand to reaffirm the enduring 60-year friendship we have had with Israel.

Mr. Speaker, just a few months ago, we said farewell to a great woman and a great patriot, my colleague of several years, Jo Ann Davis. Jo Ann was a terrific friend, and the Commonwealth of Virginia suffered tremendously from her loss.

Since my days of serving with her in the Virginia House of Delegates, Jo Ann fought for and embodied the core values of Virginia. She was an ardent advocate for veterans, national defense and a strong military. The naming of a Gloucester post office in honor of Jo Ann Davis is a wonderful tribute that will serve as a reminder of her love and service to Virginia's First District.

I thank the gentleman.

First of all, let me respond to some of the assertions made by our friend from Illinois. He tries to portray this as a choice, a budget document that represents a choice between the Iraqi people and the American people. I beg to differ with the gentleman.

This budget document is not a choice about that. This budget document represents a choice about the future of where we're going in this country. This represents a choice about whether we here in Washington are actually going to do something for the American people.

You know, if you think about the American people right now when they're watching us on TV, you know, I don't blame them when they look at the TV in disgust and say, you know, they just don't get it up in Washington.

They believe, and they're right, that Washington is broken and we have got to do something to fix it. Frankly, we have got to get the Federal Government working for the people again. But that means we have got to spend less.

The gentleman from Wisconsin talked about the fact that there is absolutely no treatment, no curtailment of anything having to do with the earmark question. Earmarks are just the tip of the iceberg as far as our spending culture is here in Washington. Let's go ahead and take the first step. Let's reform that process because we have got to spend less.

Let's face it: gas prices, they're too high. The American public is sick and tired of excuses coming out of Washington. But the way to fix it is not to put more burden on the American family while they are already facing the prospects of $4-a-gallon gas this summer. That's just not what we do. People across this country are worried about their health care. They're worried about their jobs. This stuff about we're going to provide you with middle-class tax cuts, have you looked to see what's in this document? This document will lead us to the largest tax increase in American history.

The choice here is not between whether we are going to provide for our national security and the people of America. The choice here is whether we are going to trust in the people to control their own destiny.

Mr. Speaker, I commend those sponsors of the bill who brought this piece of legislation to the floor. And I rise to recount a story that I was told in August when I was in Israel with several of our colleagues. We visited a young family who was then living in Sderot. And the mother told a story about the pain that her children are living through and about the requirement that her kids now understand that wherever they go throughout their day, they must first know where the safe room is because they will know ultimately that rocket will sound and the kids will have to scurry to safety.

But what touched me the most about the story of this young family was the mother, again, explained how 2 years ago they uprooted their family from Gush Katif, a community in the south of Gaza when Israel pulled out of the Gaza Strip. And it was then that her children asked her, why, Mother? Why do we have to do this? And she explained to the children that they have to do this to give peace a chance so that they and the people of Israel could live in peace and live a normal life. And now where are they?

Clearly, a contagion of fear has spread across their community. But they should ask, what is it that they've done wrong to live under these kind of conditions?

And frankly, whatever conclusion the world comes to, we know now that the only crime they've committed is trying to live in freedom in a Jewish state. And that is what Hamas is going after, because for Hamas and their terrorist allies, the primary objective is to destroy Israel.

But important to all of us in this Congress is the fact that what befalls

Israel in its struggle against Hamas, its rockets and other attacks have severe implications for us in America and the rest of the civilized world. The Israeli people are squaring off against an arm of the radical Islamic movement that includes al Qaeda in Iraq, al Qaeda in northwest Pakistan and Afghanistan, as well as Hezbollah in Iran. Hamas' success and ability to win sympathy from the world will only motivate and encourage these various movements.

So, Mr. Speaker, as the United Nations engages in its denunciation of Israel's acts of defense, we in America must unite in solidarity with our only democratic ally in the Middle East, Israel.

Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to congratulate the Speaker and the leader for bringing this bill to the floor with such expediency. I do hope this is the beginning of a year in which we can count on cooperation for strong pro-growth fiscal policy.

Now, there is not a person in here who likes everything in this bill, and I certainly would be one who is counted that there are provisions in here I would rather not see. But I want to focus on the provisions that I think work, and they work because they will point towards job creation. At the end of the day, if we are talking about stimulus, the best stimulus is a job.

There are two provisions in here, one which is the bonus depreciation and the other, 179 small business expensing, which mean incentives for our entrepreneurs and our small businesses and large businesses to have cash come to the bottom line to be able to create more jobs.

If we can imagine the entrepreneurs in our communities at home who are dealing with the question of whether they can deal with an economic downturn or not, whether they have to let off jobs or not, this is real relief to those entrepreneurs and those small businesses. That is why I am excited about these provisions that will create jobs.

In response to some of the discussion which has ensued on the floor here, I want to say that unemployment insurance and other things that may or may not be what one is for, if we are talking stimulus, let's call those what they are. Unemployment insurance extension of benefits are enhancing a safety net. I don't think any of us would say that is stimulative because, frankly, it allows individuals a safety net while they are looking for a job. That is not stimulus for our economy.

Long term I would like to see this House continue to focus on the uncertainty in the investment environment. My colleague from California was here saying it is about capital, it is about the lack of investment going on. We need to focus long term on lifting the cloud of uncertainty for the investors and families in this economy so they can count on the fact that their allocation of capital from a risk-based standpoint is going to be rewarded, and that means keeping cap gain dividend rates low, lowering corporate rates so that we can reward those who take risks in our economy to create jobs.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I think what we are hearing across the country today is a collective sigh of relief on the part of tens of millions of American families who now will not be subjected to an over $3,000 tax increase this year. This is real relief for real people and real families to compensate for a flagging economy and the soaring cost of living.

Yet with the economic anxiety gripping this country, it is just astounding to me that it took so long to bring a clean AMT bill to the floor. As the majority's concession makes clear, this was the wrong time to raise taxes on the American people. The government never intended to collect the AMT revenue from the 21 million American families who this year would have fallen under the AMT net.

So the horror stories that we continue to hear all year long about increasing the deficit was thus only smoke and mirrors for a desire to raise taxes. And thank goodness we are here today because passage of this bill is vindication for those of us who refuse to cave in to tax- and-spend onslaught, and it is my only wish that this day had come sooner.

I thank the gentleman, and I too thank the gentleman and salute both sides of the aisle in bringing this bill to the floor. And I do rise in support of this bill.

I think, if one thing was clear on 9/11, we saw the unthinkable come to reality. And going forward, given the context of this bill, I don't think there is any way that we can quantify the risk posed by the terrorists in terms of coming up with, God forbid, their next scheme of attack on this country. That is why this bill is so important. Because, in addition to providing a security backstop, this legislation will encourage urban development and will bolster economic growth.

So, Mr. Speaker, again, given the challenges and complexities in a post-9/11 world, we are compelled to consider and pass this legislation, and I would again urge its passage.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Firefighter David M. Loving of the Richmond, Virginia Department of Fire and Emergency Medical Services and to congratulate him on receiving the National Public Safety Medal of Valor award. This award is the highest national award for bravery by a public safety officer and it recognizes extraordinary valor above and beyond the call of duty.

On August 6, 2005, Firefighter Loving was off-duty and on his way home after completing a 24-hour shift when he came upon the scene of a horrific traffic accident on Interstate 95. A motor home had rear-ended an 18-wheeler parked on the shoulder of the highway. Firefighter Loving stopped to offer assistance and was advised that there were people trapped inside the motor home. As the motor home filled with smoke, Firefighter Loving, without any safety gear, climbed inside the vehicle and was able to untangle the victim and pull him to safety. Within minutes, the motor home

was engulfed in flames and witnesses stated that the victim would have died prior to the arrival of the first responding emergency unit without Firefighter Loving's heroic actions.

Please join me in congratulating Firefighter David Loving and the four other recipients of the National Public Safety Medal of Valor award this year and in thanking these exceptional public safety officers for their service, dedication, and heroism.

Mr. Speaker, just as she did this evening, on November 9 of this year, Speaker Pelosi stood on the floor of this House and told the American people that the middle class was long overdue for tax relief. She said that an AMT bill had to be about tax fairness, fiscal responsibility and keeping America competitive.

Yet, once again, Mr. Speaker, the current attempt at patching the AMT rings hollow. As the ranking member indicated, we know where this debate is going; and, frankly, we know where this bill is going: nowhere. This attempt, just as others that have failed, illustrates to me the disconnect between this majority in this House and the American people. In fact, it echoes what's been going on in this House over the last several weeks, if not months. Here we are a week and a half before Christmas and we've not finished the work that the American people sent us here to do.

But, in fact, it is the disconnect between the majority leadership and middle-class American families that troubles me most. If you look at what's going on out there, families are worried about the flagging economy which has fueled alarming levels of anxiety. In spite of a weak dollar, skyrocketing gas prices, falling home values, and other mounting concerns, the Democrat majority in this House refuses to accept the reality of a $2,000 plus tax hike facing millions of middle- class families.

Let's get to work. Let's realize that this bill isn't going anywhere.

The House majority refuses to cut taxes or sustain expiring growth, pro-growth tax cuts without first raising other taxes. Their dogged adherence to this policy as it applies to AMT puts them at odds with the American people.

The overwhelmingly bipartisan Senate bill, as has been said, rightly abandoned the misguided idea of raising taxes to cut taxes just so Washington can spend more. In this tax fight the stakes for everyday families are high, and the potential consequences are severe.

Mr. Speaker, just 4 weeks ago Speaker Pelosi stood here and promised the middle class tax fairness and fiscal responsibility. In light of this attempt, I wonder why we can't just come together, stop the political games, and

support real tax relief for 23 million American families.

Madam Speaker, when an act of random cruelty bewilders us and pulls us down, exceptional displays of generosity, courage and heroism can serve as a potent counterforce. They comfort and replenish the bereaved, and they remind us of the extraordinary selflessness our people are capable of. Nowhere has this been truer than in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech massacre.

We saw numerous examples of students and faculty risking and giving their lives to spare others of the murderer's wrath. We saw a shaken Hokie Nation come together to begin a long healing process. But we also were moved by the outpouring of support from a deeply sympathetic Nation. Donors from across the country pumped over $7 million into the Hokie Spirit Memorial Fund, which makes direct contributions to the victims and their families, as well as to scholarships in the victims' names.

Sadly, recipients have to pay taxes on their donations, an injustice that we hope this bill will promptly correct. There can be no denying that the kind folks who made contributions did not intend to enrich the Federal government's coffers.

For many of the families and victims still suffering from the tragedy, this funding is urgent. As the grisly images and unprecedented horror of the Virginia Tech massacre recede further from the public's view, we mustn't turn our backs on Hokie Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Democrats' approach to try and patch the AMT, on several grounds. First of all, I want to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from Wisconsin to the application of the Democrats' PAYGO rule because it has turned into ``we cannot do anything in this body without raising taxes.'' Someone has likened this approach to tax hikes on speed dial, and I heartily agree.

But I also rise in opposition because I believe that this particular bill in the context of the larger bill being proposed by the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee is nothing but a job-killer. One of the statements made by my colleague on the other side of the aisle was that somehow this tax hike targets only some of the wealthiest individuals in the world. You know, that is probably what the Congress said back in 1969 when they were passing the AMT: we only want to tax the wealthy.

But when you look at it, this provision, the provision of carried interest impacts not just those famed partnerships in the money centers of this country but it impacts the real estate partnerships, the ``mom and pop'' investment partnerships across this country that, frankly, fuel seven out of ten jobs across America. Where in the world do we think these small businesses are going to come up with the money to pay these taxes? They are going to come up with the money by not creating new jobs; they are going to come up with the money by not offering health benefits to their employees. Let's face it, money does not come out of thin air.

The next allegation is no one is going to stop investing in this economy, no one is going on economic strike if we raise the price of investment in this country. Well, have you looked at what is going on in our financial markets today? Look at the announcement from China, shifting $1.4 trillion of their reserves out of the U.S. dollar. Have you looked at the fact that people are not investing in housing any more, the subprime mortgage crunch?

Mr. Speaker, I would say it is an understatement to say that this is a job-killer.

I thank the gentleman.

Along with my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, I too rise with a very heavy heart today as we mourn the passing and reflect on the life of our dear friend and colleague, Jo Ann Davis. In life, Jo Ann amazed so many of us with her determination and her fighting spirit. In politics, as has been noted before, she made history, becoming the first Republican woman from Virginia to serve in this House. In fighting for everything she believed in up until the last day of her bout with cancer, Jo Ann taught us how to make every moment on this Earth count. Jo Ann was a true gentlelady from Virginia. She was a woman of faith and family who had an unshakable commitment to the principles of our Nation's Founders and of our Nation's military.

As was indicated by my colleagues before, Jo Ann was a true patriot. And though she spent only a mere 10 years in elected office, she left a profound imprint on national and State politics. The State of Virginia and our country will miss her greatly. All of us talk about the experiences and recall with much sadness, but yet appreciation, that we did have the time we did with Jo Ann Davis.

I, like many of my Virginia colleagues, served with Jo Ann in the Virginia legislature. I had 3 years with Jo Ann. We served together on the General Laws Committee in the Virginia House of Delegates. It was there that I first saw this incredibly strong woman with a will to make sure that she did the right thing regardless.

We had adjoining districts. We shared many of the same community interests. Jo Ann was a believer and a promoter of the James River. As was noted earlier by my colleague from Virginia (Mr. Scott), she cared greatly about the Ghost Fleet there as well as making sure that Virginia was no longer a dumping ground for out-of-state trash.

As has been noted, Jo Ann was a great person of faith. I had the tremendous fortune of visiting the Land of Israel with Jo Ann and Chuck and saw firsthand how much her faith meant to her. Regardless of what you say about Jo Ann Davis, I think we can all agree that Jo Ann Davis was never concerned about being politically correct. She carried the bill to make sure that we recognized the holiday of Christmas and that the issue of faith and God was not taken out of the public realm.

Jo Ann spoke her mind when she had opinions about this war in Iraq. When it came down to it, she cared about her troops, her constituents, her family, and her God. We all will miss Jo Ann tremendously. I want to, at this time, also extend to her family, to Chuck, to her two sons, her granddaughter, a great deal of sympathy. We will miss her.