A picture of Representative Chris Van Hollen
Chris V.
Democrat MD 8

About Rep. Chris
  • Providing for Consideration of S. 47, Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013

    by Representative Chris Van Hollen

    Posted on 2013-02-27

    submit to reddit

    Read More about Providing for Consideration of S. 47, Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013

    VAN HOLLEN. I thank Ranking Member Slaughter.

    I hope tomorrow this House will finally have a chance to vote on the bipartisan Senate bill to prevent violence against women. I hope tomorrow we will also have a chance to vote on a proposal that we've now put forward three times this year to replace the sequester. Unfortunately, the rule reported out of the House Rules Committee denies us that opportunity. So let's just remind people what will happen starting March 1.

    Starting March 1, if this House does not take action to replace the sequester, we will lose 750,000 American jobs between March 1 and the end of this year. Those are not my numbers; those are not President Obama's numbers; those are the numbers from the nonpartisan, independent Congressional Budget Office--750,000 fewer American jobs by the end of this year if we don't replace the sequester.

    This majority in this House has not taken any action this year in this Congress to prevent that sequester from happening beginning Friday, not one step. We have now asked three times for the opportunity to vote on our alternative.

    So what's our alternative, Mr. Speaker? Our alternative would replace the sequester with a balanced mix of cuts and revenue generated by closing tax loopholes and tax preferences that benefit the very wealthy.

    So very specifically--because it's a concrete proposal--we would get rid of the direct payments that go to agribusinesses, something that used to have bipartisan support because that's an unnecessary subsidy that has outlived its purpose. So that's a cut.

    {time} 1310 We also say we no longer need taxpayer subsidies for the big oil companies. Guess what? That's an idea that was proposed by President Bush who said taxpayers should no longer be giving these big breaks to big oil companies; they don't need that extra taxpayer incentive in order to keep producing oil and making record profits. So we do that.

    Then we say to folks who are making $2 million a year that we're going to limit the number of preferences you can take. We're going to limit the number of tax breaks that you take that allow you to effectively pay a lower rate than the people who work for you. So if you're making $2 million or more per year, we say you should pay an effective tax rate of 30 percent.

    The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

  • submit to reddit
  • Register your constituent account to respond

    Constituent Register