Thank you, sir. I appreciate the chart, first and foremost, because what I wanted to jump in and tell you is that we have been joined by some children in the chamber. This past weekend, I had the opportunity to go camping with my kids in…
Thank you, sir. I appreciate the chart, first and foremost, because what I wanted to jump in and tell you is that we have been joined by some children in the chamber. This past weekend, I had the opportunity to go camping with my kids in Central Florida, and it all sort of dawned on me and hit me at once, as we are now referred to as the party of ``no.''
When you see a chart like this and you see what these children are about to face and what my three young sons, who are 7, 5, and 2, are about to face, why we are the party of ``no.'' And we heard recently from the other side as they were here and how outraged they were at AIG and how outraged they are at some of the things that are going on, this is why we vote ``no.'' This is exactly the reason why. We have to stand by our children and not saddle them and put on their backs what you are displaying on that chart there, sir, so that we can keep our financial house in order and allow it to translate to them an America that is better than we inherited.
We are on the cusp, as one of my friends in Florida likes to say, of being the first generation of Americans that leaves to their children an America that is worse off than what we received. That is all on us.
So we can sit here all day and talk about how outraged we are at AIG and what has happened with these bonuses being paid out that was agreed to and voted on by this Congress, even though a lot of us on the Republican side voted ``no,'' to be called the party of ``no'' and to see this, and now to hear the Democrats say they are outraged by what has happened.
Sir, I appreciate your saying that, because as I stand here with my colleague, Dr. Cassidy, as a fellow freshman, I do believe that when we came up here after campaigning recently, what the American public, or at least my constituents, were expecting, was the bipartisanship that you are talking about. And I have to tell you, it is the biggest disappointment from taking the oath of office and starting as a congressman, that that is just not reality. I don't know if that is how it has worked. Obviously, it has worked in the past. But that is not what we are getting now in this Congress. And it is an extremely disappointing, eye-opening phenomenon that unfortunately we have to endure.
I just want to expand a little bit on what the gentleman was talking about with regard to the $250,000 on top of what you are talking about with cap-and-trade, or cap-and-tax, as some people like to call it, with the people that are going to have to pay the $3,000 per household to afford the energy costs that cap-and-trade will bring. But the $250,000 cannot be dismissed without first realizing you're talking about the small business owners. The people who in my district employ five, 10, 15 people, they have told me that if they have to incur more taxes, because they are doing their taxes right now, if they have to incur more taxes, they are going to have to lay people off. So even if you don't make $250,000, you are going to be affected by this tax increase because you might be one of those people that the people making $250,000 lays off.
So I think it is important that the spending, the taxing, and now obviously the borrowing that we are having to incur is just the wrong recipe, as I said before, for the future of our country.
If the gentleman will yield. And the question that you have to ask yourself, say that there are jobs created, and certainly there may be short-term jobs created. But what happens when the money runs out? You either have to pass another stimulus bill to keep those jobs or the small businesses are going to have to absorb those jobs. But if they have to incur increased taxes, they are not going to be able to do so. So whatever jobs are created through the current stimulus are a flash in the pan. And we are seeing there are a lot of things in that stimulus that we don't like so much, like bonuses for AIG. That is why we voted ``no.'' And we are criticized for doing that. But it was the right thing to do. I think that in the end, with what you're saying, Dr. Cassidy, is that there may be a short flash in the pan for jobs, but it is not the long-term jobs that this country needs.