Search Form
First, enter a politician or zip code
Now, choose a category

Public Statements

3 Percent Withholding Repeal and Job Creation Act

Floor Speech

Location: Washington, DC


Mr. PASCRELL. Good morning.

I come to the floor today in support of H.R. 674, which will repeal a burden on government contractors, particularly small businesses.

I opposed the enactment of the 3 percent withholding when a Republican Congress and a Republican administration enacted it because I knew that it would hurt the economic engines of our economy.

The repeal of this requirement will free up small businesses' cash flow, increasing their ability to add jobs and bid on new projects. This is only a very small part of a jobs plan that could help to reduce unemployment and wage stagnation.

The majority has not allowed a vote on known job-creating measures such as the infrastructure bank or funding for our first responders and teachers, so I would imagine that that's not very important, those items. Rather, the majority has decided to promote their ``False Fifteen'' bills that attack clean air, safe water, and consumer safety. Be prepared, America, to eat poison.

Not only do independent economists state that these bills do not create jobs, a recent report found that the so-called ``economically stifling'' regulatory atmosphere is not as bad as they say. The report says this: ``Obama's White House has approved fewer regulations than George W. Bush at this same point in their tenures, and the costs of those rules haven't reached the annual peak set in fiscal 1992 under President Bush's father,'' President Bush I. You would never think that by listening to the propaganda on the other side of the aisle. We've overregulated--supposedly--and we've caused businesses to spend so much money on these regulations. But again, when we look at the facts, this is not true.

Eat your words. Even former Reagan Treasury official Bruce Bartlett quoted the Wall Street Journal saying, ``The main reason U.S. companies are reluctant to step up hiring is scant demand, rather than uncertainty over government policies.'' So you can grow as many horns as you want onto the President. Once again, look at the facts and the statistics: more regulations at this point when former President Bush was the President, Bush II.

It is ironic that the majority is adjusting health reform to pay for this legislation. You condemn the health act, and then you take the money from the health act to pay for this legislation. That is a Ponzi scheme if I've ever heard one. The majority already voted to repeal health reform, yet to pay for this legislation--which is a separate piece of legislation--health reform must be in place for 10 years. How do you do that? They get rid of the health care act--well, they're trying to anyway--and yet they use every dime for the first 10 years to pay for the bill.

How do you do that? I'm anxious to see how you do this.

Just as their 2012 budget was paid for by health reform savings, and we've discussed this in the budget committee, this bill is again paid for by the health reform which they want to annihilate. If the majority is against the health reform bill, perhaps they should stop making their agenda so dependent upon it.

While I support H.R. 674, we cannot pat ourselves on the back and claim victory that this is a victory for jobs. Congress must do much more.


Skip to top

Help us stay free for all your Fellow Americans

Just $5 from everyone reading this would do it.

Back to top