Build Back Better Agenda
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THUNE. Madam President, just in the last day or so, the ever- evolving reckless tax-and-spending spree bill proposed by the Democrats--it continues to change because they can't seem to figure out how to put together something that might pass in the House and the Senate, and finding it increasingly difficult, I think, to try and contain the cost of all the things they want to do, which is why they continue to build in gimmicks and phony math to try to accommodate all the crazy spending in this bill, and then also the massive run-up in the taxes.
This bill is the largest spending increase we have seen in history, largest tax increase in history, and we are finding out now it is also going to add significantly to the Federal debt because there is a recent study by Penn Wharton which suggests that the overall cost of the bill, when fully implemented, would be $3.9 trillion and that the revenues that are proposed to be raised to pay for it only generate about $1.5 trillion. So that leaves you with a $2.4 trillion delta that, obviously, would be added to the deficit and put on the debt.
So not only does this spend enormous amounts of money, unprecedented amounts of money, it raises an unprecedented amount of revenue. But even at that level, the revenue is totally inadequate and insufficient to cover that spending; therefore, it will add massively to the Federal debt--that is according to an economic analysis done by Penn Wharton here just in the last couple days.
But this is the most recent addition to that bill in the House of Representatives. They would raise the SALT cap-- the state and local tax deduction cap--from $10,000 to $72,500. And it would also extend that higher cap through 2031, beyond its scheduled expiration after 2025.
So they are still trying to come up with a way--if you can believe this. The massive amount of spending, massive amount of taxing, is now added to that a tax cut--a huge tax cut for rich people.
According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, if you look at how this distributes proportionately across income ranges, those making less than $100,000 would receive 2.5 percent of that tax cut--a tax cut that would cost $300 billion just through 2025. So if it is fully implemented for the full 10-year window, you are talking about hundreds of billions of dollars more in tax cuts to rich people.
So just think about that. From the side that always says that our side is looking out for rich people, trying to cut taxes for the rich, they are proposing and have included now in the House version of the reckless tax-and-spending spree bill a provision that would provide tax cuts to rich people. In fact, 80 percent of that tax cut--80 percent-- would go to people who are making more than $200,000 a year; 2.5 percent would go to people making less than $100,000 a year.
So much for looking out for the little guy in this bill.
This is a huge part of the bill. In fact, this is the most expensive provision in the bill, and that is up against all the other spending that the Democrats want to do on new government programs and expanding government--the biggest expansion in government in decades.
But included now in the bill not only is that massive expansion spending on lots of crazy new ideas and trillions of dollars in new taxes that will be imposed upon the economy, but now there is a provision in there that will cut taxes with 80 percent of that benefit going to people making more than $200,000 a year, and cutting taxes on a scale that makes this the largest, most expensive provision in the entire reckless tax-and-spending spree bill. That is what we are talking about with this particular provision.
So I just want to point that out because this is an evolving bill. We are seeing new language every day, new ideas every day. And, again, some really horrible ideas have come out in the last few weeks, some of which have gone away simply because there aren't even any Democrats who will vote for them; but this one, obviously, that is going to benefit rich people across this country on a level unlike anything else in the bill, as is suggested by the overall cost of the provision and the way it distributes among income categories.
Let me repeat: 80 percent of the benefit of this tax cut in the tax- and-spending spree is going to go to people making more than $200,000 a year, and 2.5 percent of this tax cut will go to people making less than $100,000 a year. Childcare Benefit
Mr. President, I think a lot of times when people think about the government paying for healthcare, childcare, college, or the like, they tend just to assume that they are going to be able to continue on with or get their preferred healthcare or childcare and the only difference would be the fact that the government is now picking up the tab.
If you listen to the Democrats talk about it, that is certainly what you would think. But the reality is a lot different, because with government money comes government control. Government money rarely comes without strings attached, and no more is that more obvious than with the childcare provisions of the so-called Build Back Better tax- and-spending spree Democrats are contemplating.
To hear Democrats talk about it, you might think that the childcare provisions amounted to nothing more than government cutting you a check to help with your daycare costs. The reality is a lot different.
Mr. President, a 2020 Bipartisan Policy Center survey found that 53 percent of working families who used center-based childcare used a faith-based childcare center--53 percent. Parents select faith-based childcare for a variety of reasons. Some choose it because they share the faith of the provider, but many choose it for other reasons, as the Bipartisan Policy Center study made clear.
Some opt for the faith-based center because they like the quality of the facilities and the quality of the instruction; others because they feel that the faith-based facility will provide a safe setting, and though they just don't share the belief system of the providers, they do like the values that the belief system represents.
Well, for many of those families, their days of choosing faith-based childcare may be numbered because Democrats' new childcare provisions are deliberately set up to put faith-based childcare providers at a disadvantage.
For starters, the language of the legislation would likely exclude many faith-based childcare providers from participating in the program. That means that even if you as a parent prefer to choose your local faith-based childcare center, you may not be able to do so.
On top of that, the bill provides funding to assist with renovation or remodeling at daycare facilities, but it specifically prevents these funds from going to childcare centers that share space with facilities for worship or religious instruction.
That means that the childcare program at your local Catholic church or local Lutheran church or your local mosque will most likely not be allowed to take advantage of the government assistance for renovations, although the secular provider down the street will.
These policies are likely to have profound consequences. Obviously, many parents are likely to find themselves prevented from choosing their preferred faith-based childcare provider.
But beyond that, this legislation can start crowding faith-based childcare providers out of the childcare market entirely. Childcare providers unable to participate in the government childcare program may find themselves struggling to stay in business or being forced to raise their fees to the point that only the most well-off families can afford faith-based care.
The result: a shrinking number of faith-based providers, which, I am afraid, is probably some Democrats' goal.
It is hard to imagine why else they would restrict parents' ability to choose a faith-based provider for their children or exclude religious childcare providers from receiving government renovation assistance.
The Democrats' legislation is representative of a growing tendency in the Democratic Party to treat religious people as second-class citizens--something that is completely out of step with the robust idea of religious freedom we traditionally have in this country.
The First Amendment is not intended to keep religion out of the public square, as many Democrats seem to think, nor was it intended to favor secular belief systems over religious ones, no. Its purpose was to prevent the government from establishing a national religion or infringing on the rights of religious individuals to live out their faith.
Today, however, it has become apparent that many Democrats think at least some forms of government discrimination against religious people are perfectly acceptable, and there is no question that their childcare program would place faith-based childcare providers at a disadvantage.
Steering parents away from faith-based childcare is not the only choice Democrats are going to be making for parents under this new childcare benefit. Democrats' childcare program will not only make it more difficult for parents to choose faith-based care, it will make it more difficult for parents to choose any private childcare provider.
Under the Democrats' legislation, only public--in other words, government-run--childcare providers will be guaranteed sufficient reimbursement to cover their operating costs. This is a deliberate choice that will make it much more difficult for private providers to stay in business, serving the Democrats' goal of pushing children into government-run childcare programs.
That is not the end of the childcare decisions Democrats will be making. The Democrats' legislation also gives the Federal Government full control over approving childcare curricula and performance standards. Providers will be measured not by how well parents are satisfied with the childcare they are providing, but by whatever Washington bureaucrats determine to be appropriate measures of performance.
I am not sure why Washington bureaucrats are better suited than parents to identify quality childcare providers, but as the Democrat candidate for the Governor of Virginia recently made clear, Democrats do not seem to think that parents are best suited to make decisions for their children.
Mr. President, I can go on. I can talk about the confusing government bureaucracy parents will have to navigate under the Democrats' new childcare program, or I can talk about the fact that this new childcare benefit could drive up childcare costs for middle-class families over the next 3 years by a staggering $13,000 a year, according to one estimate. Yeah, $13,000 a year.
But, today, what I really want to emphasize is something Democrats conveniently omit from discussions of their new government programs, and that is, as I said, that with government money comes government control. Democrats are setting the stage for a government takeover of childcare, where you can choose your provider only as long as Democrats agree with your choice. Abortion
Mr. President, before I close, I want to mention one other aspect of the Democratic bill, and that is the bill's commitment to taxpayer funding of abortion.
While the Democratic Party has long supported an abortion agenda, there has at least been bipartisan agreement when it comes to appropriations bills that we are not going to use taxpayer dollars to fund abortion.
For decades--decades, going back to the 1980s--the Hyde amendment and other riders have helped prevent taxpayer dollars from paying for abortions. No longer, if Democrats have their way.
In the Democrats' tax-and-spending spree, taxpayer funding of abortions is the order of the day. Restrictions on the use of taxpayer dollars for abortion funding are omitted, and in at least one case, Democrats actively require funding of abortion and would override State laws on insurance coverage of abortion.
Let's be very clear. This bill is a slap in the face to every American who believes in the sanctity of human life and doesn't want his or her tax dollars going to pay for killing unborn human beings.
You would think that if we can't agree that the human rights of unborn children should be protected, we could at least agree that taxpayers shouldn't be forced to pay for killing unborn children.
Well, apparently, even that is too much to ask for Democrats, even though nearly 60 percent of Americans oppose having their tax dollars go to abortion. That's right, almost 60 percent of Americans do not want their tax dollars going to pay for abortions.
But that doesn't seem to matter to the Democratic Party, which is squarely in the pocket of the radical abortion lobby. The Democrats' legislation contains a radical commitment to government funding of abortions against the wishes of the majority of the American people.
It is just one more reason why the Build Back Better plan is a bad deal for the American people.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source