tv U.S. House of Representatives 11142017 CSPAN November 14, 2017 4:00pm-6:01pm EST
minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, a senior member of the transportation and infrastructure committee, and someone who has been working hard to try and have a bipartisan effort on this bill, mr. lobiondo. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for three minutes. mr. lobiondo: thank you, congresswoman waters. to my colleagues, mr. hensarling and mr. duffy, thank you for your work on this bill and especially to my good friend, steve scalise. i know there was an i know there was an effort to do this the right way. i rise in opposition for a couple of reasons. first, i'm disappointed. i'm disappointed because we in this body had an opportunity to have a bipartisan bill that would have probably generated more than 400 votes. we would have had a big high five moment and we could have moved forward, the senate would have taken it, the president would have taken it. now we have a situation that makes me angry. angry because we're picking
winners and losers. angry because the misery index for some members is more important for the misery index in my district or the northeast. five years ago, we were about a month of -- month after superstorm sandy. we had political hand-to-hand combat to get what the rest of the nation has gotten almost automatically with every natural disaster in the whole course of our nation's history. but no, superstorm sandy, there had to be an offset. we barely got the help we needed. and this is all tied in together because we still have people suffering in new jersey and new york and the northeast from the aftermath of sandy. it's tied to this, federal flood insurance. it's critically important. why should it be that the concerns of my district and the people that i represent have any less of an influence on what
happens here? i'm angry and i'm disappointed that i have to fight with my own party on these issues. i'm not at all sorry to stand up as strongly as i can for the constituent who deserve this, hard working people who are trying to stay in their homes. i know the program has problems. i know we have to do this in a different way. and we had an opportunity to do it in a bipartisan way. where all of our constituents should have been helped. instead of picking winners and losers. i'm sick and tired of having to defend the people in my district and the people inform northeast from policies that don't mean the right thing for us. please do the right thing. vote no. let's come back with a bill that makes sense. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey yields back. the gentlewoman from california. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: i'm pleased to yield one and a half minutes to the gentleman from georgia, another respected member of our committee, mr. lauder milk.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. loudermilk: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank mr. hensarling and mr. duffy for their work on this bill. they have labored endless hours to bring this to the floor and we are appreciative of that. the fact that we are here today show ours legislative process is working and we are doing the challenging work the american people sense us here to do, work that isn't always easy. quite often it's hard. but it is the right thing to do. after months of hard work, the financial services committee passed a package of bills in june to reform and re-authorize the national flood insurance program. mr. speaker, many of these bills in that package passed with unanimous support. you only have unanimous support with strong bipartisan support. now after lengthy negotiations, we are taking up this compromised bill that will significantly improve the nfip and protect america's taxpayers.
the 21st century flood reform act will make major strides to grow the private flood insurance market and start to put the nfip on a fiscally sustainable path. it will also implement flood mapping improvements and increased transparency andties closure so policy helders -- holders know the true risk of floods at their property. the bill also includes an amendment i introduced with my good colleague and dear friend from georgia, representative david scott. the nfip is far too complicated for policyholders, insurers and mortgage lend source this amendment that passed with unanimous support call farce g.a.o. study on how the program may be simplified and streamlined. the nfip authorization expires december 8. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this worthy program. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired this egentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: i yield one minute to the gentleman from new york a senior member of the financial service committees who has worked a long time for
bipartisanship on re-authorization of the national flood insurance program. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i thank the gentlelady. i asked my side for time, they had no time available, i thank the gentlelady for coming to my rescue on this i feel strongly about this and echo the comments of mr. lobiondo. mr. king: without grandfathering we could see premium skies rocket. when mr. lobiondo and i tried to ameliorate this by suggesting a compromise by putting a $5,000 cap on dream yums, we rejected it. when mr. lobiondo talked about the bias against the northeast, that bias continues. louisiana, texas, florida, puerto rico, all receive tax relief following their storms. to this day, voters in my district have not received that tax relief. mr. lobiondo's district is the
same. we in the northeasting get treated, we do not get a fair shake. maybe we don't -- they don't need our votes. i urge a vote in opposition. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from new jersey a hardworking member of the financial services committee, mr. mcarthur. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcarthur: i also am from the northeast and i'm from new jersey and i rise in support of this bill today. five years ago, superstorm sandy devastated by district. ocean county, my home, was the epicenter of the storm. you might remember the photographs of the iconic jetstar roller coaster sitting in the ocean. that was my district. even today i have thousands of constituents still out of their homes. now thousands more are experiencing the same thing because of hurricanes harvey, irma, and maria.
140 million americans live in coastal counties an the nfip has done a lot to help with zoning standards, building standards, floodplain management standards. it hasn't been run perfectly but this program is desperately needed by people in areas like mine. the nfip has fiscal issues than bill seeks to address them. it is the only federal disaster program that actually collects money in advance of a disaster. when i got on this committee, a year ago, i set out on this issue to do four things. a long-term re-authorization, improve affordability, increase accountability, and enhance mitigation efforts. this is a five-year re-authorization. it reduces the mandatory annual cap on premium increases. it brings more accountability including my language to forbid nfip from hiring disbarred lawyers, and it doubles the
mitigation coverage from $30,000 to $60,000. i urge my colleagues to support this bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey's time has expired this egentleman from texas reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts a senior member of the committee on financial services and a strong progress i leader, mr. capuano. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two mins. mr capuano: thank you, mr. speaker, i thank the gentlelady for yielding. i don't know if i need two minutes. this bill has some good things in it. everybody admits that. it does. like every bill i've ever voted on, there's some good, there's some bad. but this bill has more bad in it than good. it has some good flsfi i won't agree with the details, i agree we should do something about repet ty loss profits. i think everybody agrees with that. but not the draconian measures taken in this bill. we all agree that we need to help make it a stable fiscal platform. but not with this bill does.
that's the problem here. this is not a -- i've seen worse bills. i've seen worse flood insurance bills. so this i will have to admit, it is an improvement over the last horrendous flood insurance bill. but it's not even close yet. d this is a missed opportunity. flood insurance doesn't need to be partisan. it doesn't need to be based on philosophical purity. this is a necessity to many americans, many middle class americans, and there is no doubt without winning or losing any votes at home we could work this out if the majority wanted to. but you don't. you don't want any democratic votes. apparently you don't want all the republican votes. why? i don't know. maybe lighting candles at the altar of certain philosophies. when this bill, not if, but when
this bill fails in the senate you're going to find a lot of people who continue to want to work with you to come up with a bill we can all embrace. i know that will happen and i look forward to that day. this bill isn't it. and everybody here knows it. with that, i will thank the gentlelady for yielding and i will yield back the remainder of my timeful the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlelady from california reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer, as senior democrat and leader of environmental issues in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. blumenauer: i appreciate the gentleman's courtesy. i've enjoyed listening to the debate back and forth. there's no area in congress i've spent more time on over the course of the last 20 years than dealing with flood insurance. i was author of the last major piece with our former colleague. i agree with much of what was said on both sides there is
remaining significant problems. insurance is not priced properly. it's not that it's too expensive or too cheap. it's not priced properly. we have some winners and losers now. but too many people are subsidized by the majority. we're not doing all that we can. the federal government ends up holding the bag for billions of dollars for unnecessary flood damage with storm after storm after storm and by the way, there are more on the way. it doesn't have to be this way. part of the problem is that because inevitably, when we talk about reform, it costs money. and there are some people who end up paying more. and it's easy not to update the maps. it's easy not to have people pay actuarial rates. it's easy not to force local governments to do their job and not allow building in harm's way.
i strongly agree that in times past, low income and minority people were subjected to real problems and more flooding than one would -- than they should have. but now is the time to try and pivot and do something about it. mr. chairman, i'd like to submit a list of groups that are supporting this legislation and it's an interesting collection. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. blumenauer: it includes environmental groups, consumer group, housing advocates, business, fiscal watchdogs and taxpayer advocates. all of them don't agree with every detail. many of them would identify with some of the debates. but they agree this bill is a step in the right direction and we should use it. what we vote on today and i hope it pass, i'm going to vote for it, is not the last word. it wednesday its way through the legislative process. if we all do our job, making it better, we can have that high five moment that i think we all look forward to. thank you and i yield back.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from california reserves -- i'm sorry, the gentleman from texas reserves, the gentlelady from california. ms. waters: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: i'm pleased to yield three and a half minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin, the chairman of the housing and insurance subcommittee, and the sponsor of the legislation, the 21st century flood reform act, mr. duffy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 3 1/2 minutes. mr. duffy: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank chairman hensarling for all his good and relentless hard work on this bill. i appreciate his tenacity. i want to thank mr. blumenauer for the comment he is just made. now the two of us have not worked together on a lot of issues but this is one we saw eye-to-eye in. through flood, i think we've een a lot of common ground and worked together, i actually
promised i'd wear a bike today and i forgot, i'll wear it late . this has been an effort on bipartisanship. i've worked with graves and scalise and king and lobiondo and macarthur. on the democrat side i worked with mr. scott, mrs. maloney, ms. velazquez, all concerned about the northeast and the sandy reforms necessary to learn the lessons. we've included those reforms in this bill. i sat down countless hours with the ranking member, she shared her phone number with me, left me at the dance though because before this thing was done she walked away. we tried to get a bipartisan bill. we worked on this thing together. so to say something other than that is not fair, it's not right. we have tried you might not like the end product but we have gone a great distance to get a bill that everybody can agree on. and i think we're going to get that today. i want to talk about a few
things. we're $25 billion in debt. a deficit of $1.5 billion a year this program is not sustainable. we have people who are building homes in harm's way. they get flooded. multiple times. the chairman and i saw a homeowner that was flooded three times in 10 years. one homeowner let his house -- left his house to get his kids who were swept away in flood waters, we rebuild those homes and risk the lives of firefighters and first responders to save them. this policy is unacceptable, it's not compassionate. i hear my friends say you're going to hurt homeowners, rates are going to skyrocket. what? on average, for a year, the price of flood insurance, on average, will go up $20. less than $2 a month and they're screaming bloody murder about that? i got a list of 30 things of great reform we get in this
bill to help homeowners. yes, highly subsidized properties will pay a little more, a little higher escalator. but we spend $1 billion on mitigation, helping people flood-proof their homes, helping people get bought out of their home and get to higher ground so they don't have to live in a home that continuely is flooded. i don't know if you have lived in a flood home but it ain't fun. it's horrible. get them out. $1 billion for that program. we help communities with their mapping. we give them options to map, and we give them an appeals process in their mapping. great reform. we set up a private market. now, you don't have to take the private market, but you have an option to get a private plan that might have a better rate than the government offers you. you have a choice. a choice. god forbid a choice. that gives you a better price. and by the way, when we get the private market in, we all
flowed our risk to the private sector. when a disaster hits texas or florida, it's not just the taxpayers that bear all the burden. we have private companies in play. that's a great thing. this is a good bill. this is a bipartisan bill. let's stand together and reform a program to help the homeowner and our national debt. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: thank you very much. i have no further requests for time. and i am prepared to close and i yield myself the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. waters: and let me say to my colleagues on the opposite side of the aisle, my chairman, mr. hensarling and mr. duffy, we did work very hard to try to get a very bipartisan bill. as i negotiated with them, every time i reached an impasse i thought about sandy and how hard democrats had to work to provide support for an area
that should have gotten the support for every one -- everyone in the congress of the united states. however, there was a demand from the opposite side of the aisle that it had to be paid for. and so we worked very hard to give them assistance, and they still have not been made whole. and every time i reached an impasse, i thought about louisiana and the work that i had done after katrina and the visits i made there, the people that i got to know and what i really have learned to understand about affordability. and every time i reached an impasse, i thought about florida. i thought about texas and what has happened recently from these storms. and so having worked in this way and having been a co-author of biggert-waters, and having been the author of the
homeowner insurance flood affordability, i think i know something about storms, something about the devastation that had been caused to the families and communities and i insist on affordability. mr. chairman, as democrats and some republicans have made clear, this is a comprehensively bad bill that is harmful for families and businesses. in the wake of one of the most disastrous hurricane seasons in history, this bill will make flood insurance more expensive, less available for americans. i have repeatedly stated that affordability is my top priority which is made worse by this bill even with the slight reinvestigations that the chairman has made, coverage will still be less available and cherry-picking by the private sector will be encouraged. putting the government on the hook for the riskiest of policies. and it's important to note that the biggest challenge to the national flood insurance
program is its massive debt with the bill only addresses by charging hardworking americans more for their flood insurance. that's just not fair. and so we have comprehensive support for this bill from both the private sector and from our nonprofits. i don't know about any consumer organizations that supports this bill, but i do know this. i know that i worked very hard to talk about mitigation and how i thought it could be a program that the locals could be involved with with the federal government. i know i worked very hard dealing with the repetitive occurrences that the chairman was concerned about. but i also offered alternatives to what he's advocating. i talked about outreach and education to those about -- a buyout program that they may join with and accept voluntarily. i know that i tried everything
that i could. i listened to members from both sides of the aisle, and i know that we both wanted to have a comprehensive bill that was bipartisan. it's unfortunate that we end up with this bad bill. i ask for a no vote on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute to close. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, there are a lot of horrific images from hurricane harvey. we should never forget them. and we should look at this image and say never again, and yet i hear from my colleagues, let's preserve the status quo. let's again subsidize people to live in harm's way. i say, no, mr. speaker. it is time to get these people out of these neighborhoods. let's help them.
that's why this bill has more money for mitigation and relocation than has ever been in any flood insurance reform bill. i hear my ranking member say that she cares about affordability. then, let's give people options. i hear from people say nfip insurance would have cost me $2,700 a year, but i was able to find private coverage for $718. i benefited switching from private market flood insurance from fema. i save about $1,000 a year. let's save money. let's save premiums. let's save lives. let's vote aye on the 21st century reform act. the speaker pro tempore: all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 616, the previous question is ordered on the bill, as amended. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to achieve
reforms to improve the financial stability of the national flood insurance program, to enhance the development of more accurate estimates of flood risk through new technology and better maps, to increase the role of private management of flood insurance risks, and to provide for alternative methods to insure against flood peril, nd for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pascrell: i have a motion to recommit, mr. speaker, at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman opposed to the bill? mr. pascrell: under this form, yes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mr. pascrell of new jersey moves to recommit the bill h.r. -- mr. pascrell: i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to dispensing with the reading of the motion? without objection, the reading is suspended. pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for five minutes in support of his motion. mr. pascrell: thank you, mr. speaker. this is the final amendment to the bill which will not kill the bill or send it back to the committee. if adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final
passage, as amended. mr. speaker, this amendment would require fema administrator and the d.h.s. inspector general to certify that all claims for victims of superstorm sandy are addressed before this bill takes effect. many in this chamber should recall five years ago superstorm sandy caused widespread destruction throughout new jersey and many states in the northeast. superstorm sandy went up the east coast, bringing death and destruction. over 200 people in the united states and the caribbean died, and the storm caused more than $71 billion in damage. sandy swamped coastline communities. it knocked out power for millions of people and businesses, flooded public transit systems and set neighborhoods ablaze. many sandy victims have begun down the road of recovery, but five years later, many victims
and communities are still waiting for relief. they are still struggling to rebuild their homes and their businesses. it took years for the hardest hit communities in my district to receive the relief to build key pieces of public infrastructure. in new jersey, over 1,200 property owners are still moving through the recovery programs. approximately 900 are still not back in their homes. in all, sandy victims there are over 2,000 people still awaiting final review of their flood insurance claims. after victims faced delay after delay to start the claims process with fema, they then struggled with insurance companies which were and continue to be a major source of strive for sandy victims. many of the residents of new york and new jersey saw insurers intentionally paying out too little on their claims, which in many cases were not
enough to cover the cost of repairing the damage. we heard stories of insurance adjusters making significant errors on reports because they misunderstood technical definitions, underestimated the extent of the damage done or intentionally misrepresented the cause of the damage. this is all documented. the problems were so significant we had to force fema to reopen the claims process for thousands of homeowners. some ended up getting additional money. i heard from many who say that it is still not enough to cover their recovery costs. mr. speaker, on the heels of hurricanes harvey and maria, we are now tasked with re-authorizing the national flood insurance program. ensure these victims do not face the same troubles of those in my state. we need to apply the lessons learned from superstorm sandy in this re-authorization. tragically this bill does not. we should not allow companies who profited off supersandy
victims while committing widespread fraud and failed to meet their basic obligations under the national flood insurance program to sell their own flood insurance. we should not re-authorize the program without reforming the claims process, to ensure technical definitions of earth movement, basement, mold damage do not cause delay for victims in receiving their fair share. this bill should ensure victims have the time they need to file an appeal and require fema to respond so victims are able to move the claims process forward. i submitted several amendments to the rules committee with my colleague, representative frank pallone of new jersey, to address these issues and the lessons we learned from sandy. we were denied a vote. at the very least, mr. speaker, we must ensure that fema certifies that all victims from superstorm sandy have had action taken on their case before we make more changes to the national flood insurance
program. that is what a vote in favor of this recommit would do. simply put, it would delay the implementation of the bill until the fema administrator and the d.h.s. inspector general certify that all claims for superstorm sandy have been addressed. in order to support superstorm sandy victims, i encourage my colleagues to vote in support of this recommit because a no vote is a vote against the victims of superstorm sandy, no doubt about it, for five years still have not been made whole. i yield back to you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, i claim time in opposition. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes in opposition. mr. hensarling: thank you, mr. speaker. first, i have some good news for my friend on the other side of the aisle. i would have him pay very careful attention to title 6 of the 21st century flood reform act.
it has everything to do with the whole sandy appeals process. we have 25 pages of reforms dealing with what the gentleman was describing, including section 601 -- penalties for fraud and false statements in the national flood insurance program. and indeed, after sandy many of the policyholders were wrong, and there was much that we learned from that experience and we tried to listen very carefully to a number of our colleagues from new jersey and new york and indeed took many, many of the provisions which they have suggested. and so the gentleman from new jersey indeed has some very legitimate issues and concerns, many of them, many of them i hope in trust have been addressed in this bill and it's not too late, i would urge the gentleman to look at that title 6 of the bill, and perhaps he would be encouraged to support it. otherwise, mr. speaker, i must
urge rejection of the motion to recommit because as you heard from the gentleman from new jersey, he says all -- it's all about delay, delay, delay. well, we can't delay getting people out of harm's way. we can't delay getting people out of neighborhoods that have flooded four, five, six, seven times in the last eight years. for those who can't afford flood insurance, we can't delay getting them market alternatives. % of the market that exists today there are people that are not just saving hundreds of dollars, mr. speaker but even thousands of dollars. we can't delay. we know this is a program that is unsustainable. it is a bankrupt program that's being funded, regrettably, by a bankrupt nation. taxpayers on the hook for $1. trillion. annual deaf soist $1.5 billion
actuarial deficit a year. this thing isn't just broke, mr. speaker. it's bailout broke. we can't delay. we can't delay trying to put this back on a path of sustainability so the next time we have a serious or superstorm, we want there to be funds available to actually pay claims. so no, mr. speaker, we cannot delay. we cannot delay and we cannot continue to do what we've done in the past in these repetitive loss areas and have our hands unclean by putting people back in the exact same neighborhoods that haven't just caused the loss of their property, but one day may very well cost the loss of their lives. we cannot delay. i urge a rejection of the motion to recommit and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: all time having expired, without objection, the previous question
ised or thornede motion to recommit. the question is on the motion. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. the motion is not agreed to. mr. pascrell: can we have the yeas and nays on that vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman requests the yeas and nays. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this 15-minute bill will be followed by five minute votes on passage of the bill, if ordered, and a five-minute vote on passage of the conference report to acompmy h.r. 2810. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 190. the nays are 236. the motion is not adopted. the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the bill is passed. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the
yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2810 an act to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2018 for military activities of the department of defense, for military construction to prescribe military per song ell strengths for such fiscal year and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on adoption of the conference report. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the house will be in order. members are reminded to take their conversations off the floor. the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. carter: permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the house will be in order. members are reminded to take their conversations off the floor.
mr. carter: i rise today to recognize world series champion reddick and give back. baseball fans know him as the hube astros' right fielder. he is a friend and volunteer who works to improve every corner of the community. namely, he founded the foundation with his most recent project to build an artificial turf baseball field for children for special needs and donated $1 million for the project and it will have a dugout for easy access and first-class easy stadium seating and more. groundbreaking for the field will begin on november 18.
i'm proud that world series champion is from the 1st congressional district of georgia and i'm proud to see how this fine young man is giving back to his community. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new jersey eek recognition? without objection. mrs. watson coleman: each day the president and congressional republicans are trying to sell the american people a dream that will not become a reality. in addition to running up the deficit, lining the pockets of the very wealthy and eliminating critical deductions that new jerseyians rely on, this tax scheme dismantles the ladder of opportunity that allows americans to grow and thrive. eliminating the medical expenses deduction would
devastate households nationwide struggling to recover from high health care costs. removing the student loan interest deduction will cost recent college graduates hundreds of dollars a year, significant to young americans trying to get on their feet. our tax system works best when it is fair, responsible and supportive of the true drivers of our economy -- families, workers and small businesses. i refuse to let congressional republicans try to sell america a dream that never will be reality and definitely not on the backs of the most vulnerable. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? without objection. >> mr. speaker, i offer my congratulations to the wayzata girls and boys cross country teams who both one minnesota state high school championships this season. mr. paulsen: the wayzata girls team finished in third place.
three of the runners placed in the top 10 which helped them beat the second place team by two points. the coach did an outstanding job leading the trojan girls team. on the boys side, khalid led the boys to victory after coming in first place at state. six of wayzata's runners placed in the top 25. this was the trojans' 10th state championship in 25 years and head coach mark popp has led them to victory in two of the last three seasons coaching. cross country takes an immense amount of dedication. congratulations to the runners, the coaches and the families for your success this year. the wayzata cross country boys and girls teams for becoming state champs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition?
without objection. mr. payne: mr. speaker, yesterday i rose to honor our nation's public schools. today i rise to honor ms. evelyn, a lady who embodies the saying, it's never too late to learn. after graduating high school in 1943, she thought approximate going to college. but her mom told her that no man would marry a woman smarter than he is, so she found success elsewhere. she married, raised a family and had a career as a legal secretary. somewhere along the way, she concluded that she had made a mistake. she started taking college courses one semester.
a few years ago at the young ge of 84, she graduated from new jersey city university with a bachelors degree in creative writing. i ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating evelyn, a lady whose remarkable story proves how valuable the nation's public education system is to our people. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to express my support for the conference report on the national defense authorization act which passed the house of representatives today. in a great bipartisan moment, the ndaa received overwhelming support to authorize almost $700 billion in defense spending and set priorities for our military, including the largest pay raise for our
troops in eight years. the conference report kept funding important to georgia 12, including the earlier version of the f.y. 2018 ndaa such as $8 billion in funding for cyber operations and over $85 million in new military construction to prepare for our cyber warriors at fort gordon like new family housing and a new gate. mr. allen: ensuring our sailors, airmen are equipped with the facilities and resources they need to fight the battles of today and tomorrow is crucial to our nation's safety and security. days after celebrating the most -- one of the most important days of the year, honoring our veterans, i am happy to say that the passage of h.r. 2810, we have provided for the common defense, supported our service members and worked to close the critical readiness gap. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek nything?
without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. lowenthal: mr. speaker, my republican colleagues tell me that this tax plan will grow the economy and make american workers more competitive. but in reality, the plan would bankrupt our future. it threatens provisions that directly support our schools and our students. by eliminating the state and local tax deductions, it penalizes states and school district that have chosen to invest in our young people. in my home state of california, state eatens $750 in funding per public school student each and every year. and for americans with student loan debt, this plan eliminates the student loan interest deduction. in my district, over 21,000 people claim this deduction each year. as a former college professor,
i know the sacrifices that many of our students have to make to pursue an education. this tax plan asks them to pay even more. these priorities are out of sync. this is not tax reform that puts middle-class families first. we can do better. thank you and i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from georgia seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. handel: the last time we had real tax reform in this country was 1986. to achieve economic growth in the 21st century, we need a tax code designed for the 21st century. the status quo is simply not getting it done. it is not good enough. the tax cuts and jobs act is a bold, transformative step that simplifies our tax code and reduces the tax burden on working americans and
middle-income families. this bill reduces the federal tax rate for the majority of low and middle-income americans while doubling the standard deduction. more than 65% of filers in georgia's sixth congressional district use that standard deduction. what does it mean? it means that a married couple will pay not a dime of tax on their first $24,000 of income every year. the bill will also fuel economic growth and job creation. small businesses will be at the lowest tax rate since world war ii. the tax cuts and jobs act contains real tangible benefits for the majority of american taxpayers. i support this bill enthuse assically and urge -- enthusiastically and urge my colleagues to do the same. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker, this tax bill is not about the
future. it is about our past. millions of americans, middle-class families will have increased taxes under this tax scam. fact, in the state of texas 230,000-plus texans will pay an average of over $6,000 more in taxes. that's a tax scam. in addition, mr. speaker, this is not a futuristic tax bill. this is not a tax bill for our times. this is a tax bill that implodes higher education. for instance, it does not allow the deduction of student loans or interest payments on those loans or tuition or expenses. eliminating the opportunity for educational growth. it eliminates the tax credit for research and innovation. again, stymiing the growth of the united states as it relates to research and innovation. and then to the large university, the endowments that are used to help our students to build complexes to educate
the best and the brightest, that is eliminated. this is a tax scam. it's a tax scam on higher education. it's a tax scam on hardworking middle-class americans. it deserves a resounding no vote because we don't want to go back. we want to go toward the future. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, the only time i hear some of my colleagues express their concern about the deficit is when this body is considering policies to let hardworking american families keep more of their hard-earned money. this is not the government's money, it's the people's money. they earned it. and if tax revenues to the government are a concern, then certainly we should pass fax cuts. after president kennedy cut tax rates, revenues to the
government increased from $95 billion to $280 billion. after president reagan cut tax rates, revenues to the government increased from $600 billion to $1.35 trillion. furthermore, annual g.d.p. growth rates increased into the 4% to 5% range following these tax cuts and we are going to witness this increase in economic growth again under president trump with a tax bill this house will consider later this week. mr. blum: as ronald reagan said, we don't have a trillion dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough. we have a trillion dollar debt because we spend too much. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. johnson: thank you very much. mr. speaker, the republican tax reform bill coming to the floor this week raises serious
questions about the impact that this legislation will have on middle-class families. our ability to invest in our transportation and infrastructure and students' ability to attend college. my home town, dallas, texas, and every municipality in the region, has written objections to how they are affected. for one, the g.o.p. tax plan eliminates many tax deductions that are favorable to middle-class americans, such as the medical expense deduction and state and local income and sales tax deductions. these important deductions help middle-class families lower their tax liability and put more money in their pockets for everyday needs of hardworking americans. the plan also looks to an estimated $2.6 trillion stockpiled overseas for u.s. corporations. the plan seeks to allow repatriation of these funds for as little as 5% tax break --
brick and mortar assets. 12% on cash kept overseas. is it time, mr. speaker? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. ms. johnson: i ask that my entire statement be put in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i rise to support 76 years of celebrating god's word during national bible week. no other book has sold more copies or changed more lives than the bible. abraham lincoln said in regard for this great book i have this to say, it is the best gift god has given to man. all that the good savior gave to the world was communicated through this book.
mr. arrington: may we always remember the impact the bible has had on this country and on our democracy. may we govern according to its timeless percepts and principles, and may god bless these united states of america. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> i rise in objection to the g.o.p. tax bill h.r. 1, which considering who it really helps should be labeled h.r. 1%. as a member of ways and means i offered amendments to ensure the middle-class benefits but republicans rejected both proposals to give away tax proposals to the top 1%. instead h.r. 1% repeals the
deductions for estate and local taxes and raising taxes on california taxes who pay more to the federal government than we receive back. in fact, the average middle-class family who owns a me will see an increase of 26.4%. it is outrageous. the salt deduction enables communities to fund important services that improves our quality of life. but repealing it forces constituents in my state to either accept higher taxes or lower standard of living all to pay for tax cuts for corporations and the wealthiest few. i urge you to vote no on the g.o.p. tax scam. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new mexico seek recognition? >> permission to address the
ouse for one minute. mr. lujan: mr. speaker, i would love to vote for a bipartisan tax reform -- >> and ensures that they pay for their fair share and protects small businesses. however, i can't vote for egislation that would raise taxes for 13 million households or give the top one% of ericans of $23,000 while raising taxes. ms. lujan grisham: or provide more tax benefits to the one% to the lower 5% of americans combined. sadly, the next generation with $1.7 trillion in debt while
privatizing millionaires at the expense of everybody else is irresponsible and cruel. mr. speaker, i could spend countless hours describing how this bill harms everyone in my home state of new mexico. but since i only have a minute to address the floor today i will be back tomorrow to how this bill deficient states job creation in the renewable energy in any home state of new mexico. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. are there any further requests for one-minute speeches? under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2017, the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
mr. garamendi: mr. speaker, a moment ago, you heard from my colleague from california, judy chu, about the tax bill. d she put this first page of h.r. 1 up and she added this little percentage, h.r. 1%. i thought that was not only accurate, but it really does reflect what i was going to show a moment ago and then i decided to use hers. 1%. 1 is really about the e top 1% wealthy americans will get 50% of our $1.5 trillion gift from the american
people, which really amounts to an enormous transfer of wealth from the working men and women in america who depends on program in education, depend upon medical services from medicare, medicaid and in california we call it medical. but what is going to happen with is $1.5 trillion tax cut and basically $2.3 trillion bogus field that our republican colleagues are putting forth. it's what i call the texan two-step. mr. brady and his program to do a two-step together with the speaker of the house, mr. ryan. it was laid out in the budget bill. and the two-step is this.
make a monumental tax cut that really is for the superwealthy and then as soon as you get that signed by president trump, you then do the second step, which is to do massive cuts so that you can deal with the deficit. so why i bring up the issue of the deficit for just a moment. and i don't expect you to really look at all these numbers, but this is the structural deficit that exists today. $563 billion structural deficit, every year this year and in the past years, we are running a serious deficit. 10 years from now it's going to be over a trillion dollar a year structural deficit.
what does the 1% bill do for you? it adds to the structural deficit this year. $115 billion and in 2027, it .ill add $155 billion look at it this way and perhaps it's easier to understand. it's about the deficit and this is why the two-step is going to happen. oh, by the way, the deficit hawks that once occupied that entire array on the right side of this congressional house of representatives, they disappeared. this.igrated south of % t as soon as this h.r. 1 passes, the deficit hawks will
return. the mighty force to make cuts. here's what happens to the deficit. starts down here, not the total deficit and rises to this in 2027. this little orange across the top is what will be added. we don't deal with the deficit directly. here's the deal, folks. cut taxes now so the superwealthy, five of which are in president trump's administration, boom. yes, eliminate the estate tax. do you know what that means to the trump family? if his wealthiest $10 billion, what it means is somewhere around $4 billion tax avoidance. eliminate the estate tax, the trump family immediately saves $4 billion. maybe his net worth is only $4
billion and maybe just a billion in tax savings and that is just in the estate tax alone. this is a bad deal for americans. it will increase the deficit and two-step. the texas let me introduce a couple of my colleagues from the state of new york and if you would like tore comment on this piece of legislation. >> i point out the unfairness of the republican tax bill that is devastating to middle-class families. the u.s. conference of catholic bishops have said, quote, this proposal appears to be the first federal income tax modification
in american history that will raise income taxes on the working poor while at the same time providing a large tax cut to the wealthy, closed quote. his bill is flawed on many levels. mr. suozzi: how very different the regions of this country are. it's different from state to state and different from place to place. and the amount of money they make. the cost of living is different, property tax bills are different and state income taxes are different as night and day. there are 105 million full-time jobs. 105 million full-time jobs. 5 million of those jobs pay less than $50,000 a year. 86 million of those 105 million jobs pay less than $75,000 per year.
my district, the average salary is higher than that, but so are their property taxes and income taxes, so is their cost of living. while this bill could be a net positive for some americans in many regions, in my region and in many other regions and in my state and my district specifically, this bill is a huge net negative for middle-class families. one particularly devastating element of this proposal is the elimination of the local and state tax deduction. and would be unfair that 250,000 families in my district rely on on that deduction. they claim that deduction more than any other state. and in my district we have more than any to claim that deduction. let's look at some of the specifics of what happens in my
district. people making between 50,000 and $70,000 in my hometown of glen cove will see a 36% increase. a family who makes between $100,000 and 200,000 will pay more in taxes under this play. in huntington, every single family making over $50,000 a year will see a tax increase. every family making between $75,000 and 100,000 a year will what they increase on pay. every family making between $100,000 and $200,000. in whitestone every individual tax filer making $50,000 or more will see a tax increase regardless of their income. the evidence is clear, it's
crystal clear for people in my district and in many places throughout this country. this tax reform plan as it's called is a punch in the gut for middle-class players. they need to be lifted up and not slapped down. how could anyone support a bill that targets our middle class in such a way is unfathomable. i came here ready and willing to work and still to work to get things done. even tax reform. i want to see tax reform in this country, but i can't compromise my values or the families that are going to be hurt from this plan. i'm urging my colleagues to try and do what's right. protect the hard working americans who play by the rules
and ask for little in return against this ill conceived legislation and protect the state and local deductions for the middle class. mr. garamendi: thank you for bringing to our attention, salt tax, state and local tax. the republicans are putting salt onto the wound and causing an enormous amount of pain for americans, certainly in california and illinois, new jersey, massachusetts. so this is a problem in about 50% of the population of this nation that are going to see it. my own state, 120,000, not 250,000 as in your state. but 120,000 looking at a loss deduction. >> in the state of new york, there are many republicans that have come out against this tax
bill because of the fact that it ll hurt so many middle class families. this is completely and patently unfair. this salt deduction has been in place for over 100 years. why should someone pay taxes on taxes they have already paid on their state and local governments? . . in our state of california we pay far more taxes, even with this deduction, far more tax revenue flowing to the federal government and federal government revenue coming back to the state of california. it's probably in the 15% to 20% net loss to the state of california and i think in new york it's similar. mr. suozzi: thank you for bringing that up, john. in the state of new york we send $48 billion to the federal
government more. we are the largest net donor to the federal government. and we are contributing this money to subsidize many programs that our colleagues don't want to support but we are' also supporting their states. we're supporting many of the blue states in america, quite frankly, are huge net donors to the federal government. and many of the red states are huge net takers from the federal government. this is just another slap in the face to states like ours. mr. garamendi: we could probably spend a couple hours back and forth. jayapal yield to ms. from washington state if she can join us in this conversation. ms. jayapal: thank you for your leadership on so many critical issues like jobs and infrastructure and of course for pulling together the special order hour tonight on this very important subject because i think that the american people should understand that republicans in
congress are trying to literally rewrite the u.s. economy with no hearings, a couple of markups but those are not hearings. we only just have been receiving some of the information of what's even in the bill to be able to then see what the affects are. and the reality is that we owe it to the american people to share how this bill will affect their wall etc., their housing, -- wallets, their housing, their education, their health care. and, you know, contrary to what the majority would have you believe, this tax bill is yet another vehicle for republicans to raise taxes on millions of middle-class families. and reward the wealthiest and the largest corporations by handing them trillions of dollars worth of taxes. you know, i think democrats certainly would love to see as my colleagues said, real tax reform and by that i mean tax reform that benefits the middle
class and tax reform that would allow us dollars to invest in jobs, in infrastructure, in education and health care. but the twist this time that i find interesting is that the republican majority has mysteriously jettison its dog matic fidelity to reducing deficits. because this bill, make no mistake about it, however you slice it, this republican tax bill will explode the budget deficits. now, you talked about the two step earlier, representative garamendi. that's right. we are all going to be dancing a two-step because what the congressional budget office literally just released is an analysis that said this tax bill will lead to an immediate $25 billion cut in medicare. $25 billion cut in medicare. now, this bill has many provisions in it and we have been talking about the state
and local tax deduction elimination and that is very important to my home state of washington. we have about 800,000 people who were able to utilize that deduction and were able to reduce their tax liability by more than $2,600. and republican and democratic districts -- in republican and democratic districts across this state, this deduction is significant to our communities because really it guards against double taxation. now, the fraternal order of police just came out against what i'm calling the republican tax scam and the salt deduction elimination in particular, state and local tax deduction elimination in particular. and why did the fraternal order of police come out against this? because they understand the two step that we're going to be dancing. they know that this tax bill and those kinds of deductions are ultimately going to lead to -- and this is their words -- endanger the ability to fund
these essential and law enforcement agencies that actually keep our communities safe. now, another crucial mistake that republican tax bill makes is eliminating tax-exempt bonds. and for folks who are out there who are listening, the way to think about this, if you have an affordable housing problem in your community, if you have a shortage of housing which is happening across the country, then these tax-exempt bonds are the way that we help encourage and leverage local and state dollars for affordable housing with these tax-exempt bonds. they advance also vital transportation projects and they support infrastructure projects and hospitals and colleges and charities. so for example, in my district, seattle pacific university has been able to use these private activity bonds to finance nearly $42 million in construction and renovations to the library and to the school of law and similarly the u.w.
medical center has been able to use these bonds to finance critical medical research that has been beneficial across the country. now, in eliminating several education-related tax deductions, the republican tax bill is also cutting off valuable pass -- to join a work force that depends on 21st century skills. i know, mr. garamendi, you spent a lot of time on this, but repealing the student loan interest deduction is in this bill, it would repeal the student loan interest deduction. let me just remind people that we have $1.4 trillion in student loan debt across the country. that's actually more than credit card debt in this country, but this bill, in order to get tax cuts to the largest corporations and wealthiest 1% of individuals, it would repeal that interest deduction for student loans. now, in washington state, that
uld harm more than 275,000 taxpayers in washington state who claim that benefit and it would raise their yearly taxes by more than $1,000 a year on average. and this bill also hurts our responsible employers who provide tuition assistance to help workers continue their studies at associates or undergraduate or graduate levels tens of thousands of students in washington state have benefited from this deduction and that's true across the country. nationwide, it's estimated that 70% of all companies offer tuition assistance. there's another provision in this bill that everyone should be concerned with and that is eliminating the medical expense deduction. that deduction basically says that if you are suffering from a long-term, very expensive disease, if you have somebody in a nursing home and if you have to pay for expensive long-term care for people or
maybe cancer, somebody who has cancer, that you can deduct medical expenses for those kinds of illnesses. and this bill says no more. so once again in order to provide, for example, repealing the estate tax which benefits 5,400 of the wealthiest families in this country, in order to provide that tax benefit we're actually going to take away this critical tax deduction from regular working families around medical expenses. and finally, mr. speaker, the republican tax bill repeals the new markets tax credit which, again, was created really to incentivize investment in low-income and rural areas. and that tax credit is responsible for creating more than 12,000 construction jobs and additional 11,500 jobs in related industries across my state, just as an example. so extremely shortsighted to repeal that, especially for an administration and a party that
says that they care about investing in jobs and infrastructure. we haven't seen any package for jobs in infrastructure. i don't know if you have but i certainly haven't, and the reality is this bill, because of this two step that you described, which let me just remind people what that is -- transfer trillions of dollars in wealth from the middle class to the largest corporations and the top 1%, and then through exploding the deficit, which this bill does, suddenly trigger automatic cuts as well as the rationale for cutting more from medicare, from health care, from all -- from education, from transportation. that is what we're looking at. and early word on the senate republican tax bill seems to be just as bad because i just heard before coming onto the floor that senate republicans are now saying that once guenther going to try to strip health care -- once again they
are going to try to strip health care, the affordable care act individual mandate. we had a situation like that about a decade ago and we had to dig our way out of that because what it meant is essentially health care became way too expensive for everybody. there was -- there were too many people who were not buying health care so you were stuck with all the people who needed health care, who were very sick, it exploded costs, and literally americans across the country ended up suffering because of that. and now they weren't able to get rid of health care three times we have beaten back, the american people, republicans and democrats in urban and rural districts across the country said, no, we want our health care. do not take our health care away from us. once again, the republicans' plan to incorporate this provision and try to once again strip health care. so mr. speaker, insanity is said to be doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. and i really fear for the threshold that we're crossing.
i fear for our economy. i fear for our middle-class families. i fear for our low-income families. and i fear for the future of this country and for the future of our children because the reality is what we should be doing, if we were going to raise money through tax cuts -- or through, you know, taxing people more, we should be investing that money into infrastructure, jobs, health care. but not only are we not taxing -- not cutting the taxes for people who need it the most, we're increasing their taxes to give a tax break to the wealiest and we're destroying all -- wealthiest and we're destroying all of the investments we need to make into the u.s. economy and into our communities and into our middle-class families. so this is i think an incredibly important issue. i don't think people realize that the republicans are trying to push through a vote on this bill this thursday, as early as
this thursday, and i really believe that there are some republicans across the aisle who have come out already and said that this is not a bill that helps our families, that helps our middle-class families and our communities, and they've been courageous to say that and i want to thank them for doing that and i want to urge other republican colleagues across the aisle to do the same thing so that we can protect the livelihoods of our children and our families into the future. and i thank you so much for your leadership, representative garamendi, and for your constant speaking out on the need to invest in infrastructure and jobs and i yield back. mr. garamendi: thank you very much, representative jayapal. you brought to our attention the inconsistencies that are in this piece of legislation. everyone where i go and people talk about this they say, i don't understand why they want to do that. i don't understand why with a growing economy and the economy actually moving along pretty percent-plus
unemployment, why you want to turn the american economy upside down in a way thatent does not create growth. i want to bounce back across the continent and pick up once again new york, representative -- thank you very much for joining us, jerry. we look forward to your words and the wisdom that you bring us from manhattan. mr. nadler: let me thank by by esentative garamendi having this special order on the tax scam. this will line the wealthiest americans and corporations at the expense of the middle class. and for what? we are told the corporate and upper income tax cuts will result in more investment and greater economic growth which will yield more jobs and more revenue for the country and higher wages for the middle class but that is bull.
they have run this scam twice before. ronald reagan passed similar upper class tax cuts and told us they would generate such economic growth they would pay for themselves. george w. bush pulled the same scheme. what happened? reagan's cuts sent the national debt -- the national debt accumulated from george washington through jimmy carter, which was $800 -- little less than $800 billion in 1980. it sent that to $4.3 trillion 12 years later. bush's tax cuts turned a projected 10-year, $5.65 trillion surplus -- remember at the end of the clinton administration we were having surpluses. and the projected surplus over 10 years was $5.65 trillion. his tax cuts turned that in eight years into $10.63 trillion debt.
turned an $5.65 trillion surplus into $10.63 trillion debt. there is nothing in this -- so the argument these kinds of tax cuts for the upper -- for the upper income people and for corporations generate greater economic growth, generate more tax revenues has been tried twice. not to mention in kansas recently. it doesn't work. there's nothing in this bill to argue that this tax scam will have a different impact on the economy than reagan's or bush's. in fact, this scam is so skewed toward the rich and corporations it could actually be worse. . it would eliminate the alternative minimum tax. in 2005, the only year for which we have at least a summary page of donald trump's tax returns, in that year donald trump paid $38 million in taxes. of that $31 million was the alternative minimum tax. the republicans want to eliminate the only tax that we actually k