Small Business Tax Relief Act of 2007

Floor Speech

SMALL BUSINESS TAX RELIEF ACT OF 2007 -- (Senate - August 01, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

AMENDMENT NO. 2602

Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I will be very brief. I rise in support of the Kerry amendment. I do so for two reasons. No. 1, while I applaud Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley for their work on expanding health insurance to 3.2 million more children, we should be aware that expansion only increases coverage for one-third of children in this country who are uninsured. This is the United States of America, and we should not continue to be embarrassed by the fact that we remain the only country in the industrialized world that does not provide health insurance for all of our children. Going forward for 3.2 million children is undoubtedly a step forward. We have, however, a long way to go, and the Kerry amendment would take us closer.

The second point I wish to make deals with national priorities and the direction in which we believe our country should go.

I hear that a lot of my friends are talking about the expense involved in providing health insurance to our children. This particular bill would cost us $35 billion over a 5-year period. Is $35 billion a lot of money? It is. Is it worth spending that money to cover 3.2 million children? It is. Yet I find it ironic that the President of the United States and others are telling us we cannot afford this expenditure at the same time that many--the President, certainly--are telling us we need to repeal completely the estate tax, which only applies to the wealthiest two-tenths of 1 percent of our population. If we were to repeal the estate tax, one family, the Walton family who owns Wal-Mart, would receive tax breaks worth $32.7 billion for one family. So the debate today is whether we spend $35 billion to over, over a 5-year period, 3.2 million children or, as the President and others would have us do, give $32.7 billion in tax breaks to one family. This is an issue of national priorities.

Very briefly, because I see my friend from Iowa standing, it seems to me we have to move not only to provide health insurance for all our children, but, in fact, we need to move to a national health care program that guarantees health care for every man, woman, and child in this country, and we can.

I conclude on that note. This is a moral issue. We have to cover our children. This is an issue of national priorities. For all of those who think we are spending too much money, they may want to think twice about the hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks they have given to the wealthiest 1 percent and the ideas they have for the future.

I yield the floor.

Source