Incoming Senate Republican Whip John Cornyn: “I believe we’re going to pass the $250,000 and below sooner or later, and we really don’t have much leverage there because those rates go up by operation of law Dec. 31.  I would focus on the areas where we do have more leverage.”  [Politico, 12/12/12]

Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV): “But as government leaders are negotiating in advance of a year-end deadline to avert at least $500 billion in automatic tax increases and across-the-board spending cuts – the so-called ‘fiscal cliff’ - Heller said he would ‘take a serious look at any proposal,’ including ones that might allow rates to increase on upper-income families while keeping them lower for others.” [Las Vegas Review Journal, 12/12/12]

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY): “Give in by voting present, let the Democrats pass an increase in the upper tax brackets, comes over to the Senate, Republicans vote no, and it becomes a Democrat tax increase but not a Republican/Democrat tax increase, which I think is a mistake for the Republicans.” [Fox News, 12/11/12]

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK): “Murkowski, in an interview this morning from Washington, said she had been among Republicans who have been saying that raising the tax rate on some of the nation’s wealthiest individuals should be a part of the solution to the national debt problem if it is coupled with a reduction in spending on entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security. An increasing number of Republicans have, following Obama’s re-election and Republican losses in Congress, been expressing such a view. ‘I have been suggesting for a period of time now that I think it is worth a discussion, consideration, to look at the highest earners,’ Murkowski said. ‘For us as party to draw a line in the sand, to say ‘Don’t ever touch tax rates,’ I think that became a problem for us.’” [Fairbanks Daily News-Miner,12/12/12]

GROWING NUMBER OF GOP LAWMAKERS AGREE

Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN): “So, and a lot of people are putting forth a theory and I actually think it has merit where you go ahead and give the president the 2 percent increase that he is talking about, the rate increase on the top 2 percent.”  [Fox News Sunday, 12/9/12]

Sen. Mike Johanns (R-NE): “Sen. Mike Johanns edged Friday toward willingness to consider an increase in the tax rate for the wealthiest Americans as part of a fiscal cliff agreement if it also includes ‘a good-faith down payment’ on reducing entitlement spending. ‘You know, I think there is an opportunity there,’ Johanns told Bloomberg TV anchor Al Hunt when he asked whether Republicans could go along with a Democratic plan that would restore the top tax rate to 39.6 percent with a promise that it could be revisited next year.” [Lincoln Journal Star, 12/7/12]

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK): “Personally, I know we have to raise revenue; I don’t really care which way we do it.  Actually, I would rather see the rates go up than do it the other way, because it gives us greater chance to reform the tax code and broaden the base in the future.” [The Hill, 12/5/12]

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME): “Representative (Tom) Cole’s (R-Okla.) proposal to proceed with an extension of tax relief for working families making $250,000 or less has merit because everyone agrees lower and middle-income families should not be subjected to higher taxes. I believe that very wealthy individuals — millionaires and billionaires — should pay a greater percentage of their income in taxes to help us reduce the soaring deficit.” [Portland Press Herald, 12/6/12]

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME): “Senator Olympia J. Snowe of Maine, who is retiring, joined a handful of other Republicans on Tuesday suggesting that Congress should pass the middle-class tax cut extensions now, then leave the fight over taxes and spending until later. Americans, she said, ‘should not even be questioning that we will ultimately raise taxes on low- to middle-income people.’ Congress could take that off the table‘while you’re grappling with tax cuts for the wealthy,’ she said.” [NY Times, 12/5/12]

Rep. Kay Granger (R-TX): “Separately, Representative Kay Granger of Texas is endorsing Oklahoma Republican Tom Cole’s call to extend all tax cuts for middle-class earners as ‘just the right thing to do.’” [Bloomberg, 12/5/12]

Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC): “I would probably vote for it at that point.” [Huffington Post, 12/4/12]

Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-OH): “Rate increase, if the package includes significant entitlement reform that gets you to $4 to $6 trillion (in deficit savings) over 10 years, I would vote for that.” [The Associated Press, 11/30/12]

Rep. Charles Bass (R-NH): “If it gets us past the fiscal cliff and the president is willing to consider meaningful savings in entitlements, it’s a legitimate solution.” [The Associated Press, 11/30/12]

Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK): “I think we ought to take the 98 percent deal right now.” [Politico, 11/27/12]

Rep. Mary Bono Mack (R-CA): “I have to say that if you’re going to sign me up with a camp, I like what Tom Cole has to say.” [CNN, 11/29/12]

Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID): “I wouldn’t have a problem with letting those tax rates go up.” [Reuters, 11/29/12]

Rep. Robert Dold (R-IL): “Tom Cole is talking about passing the ones that are out there so there could be more certainty, and I think that would be a positive step.” [NY Times, 11/29/12]

CONSERVATIVE OPINION MAKERS ALSO SEE WRITING ON WALL

Bill Kristol: “My view is, get the tax issue off the table. It’s the weakest one for Republicans right now.”  [Fox News Sunday, 12/9/12]

Anne Coulter:  Coulter: “OK fine, let’s do that, but in the end, at some point, if the Bush tax cuts are repealed and everyone’s taxes go up, I promise you Republicans will get blamed for it.  It doesn’t mean you cave on everything, but there are some things Republicans do that feed into what the media is telling America about Republicans.”  Hannity: “So are you saying that, for PR purposes, that they should give in to Obama on the tax rate?”  Coulter: “Not exactly, I–Well, yeah, I guess I am.”  [Huffington Post, 12/6/12]

NY Post Columnist John Podhoretz: “Republicans have a bad hand to play when it comes to the “fiscal cliff” coming up Jan. 1, when taxes will rise automatically on everyone and whopping defense cuts will be imposed automatically.  The truth is, every way you look at it, the GOP is trapped. Republican politicians will cave and give the president most of what he wants…The only real question is when. The answer is: Probably at the worst possible time, when they’ve done even more damage to the party’s‘brand.’”  [NY Post, 12/5/12]

Daily Caller Columnist Matt K. Lewis:  “Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t see how Republicans have anything but bad options regarding the fiscal cliff. At least, not in the short term… This hasn’t stopped some conservative pundits from acting as if Republicans hold all the cards. But the notion that Republicans have leverage is silly. It’s the same kind of happy thinking that led some to boldly predict a Romney victory.”  [Daily Caller, 11/30/12]

Washington Examiner Editorial Writer Conn Carroll: “But as a backup plan, passing a tax cut for 98 percent of Americans, while avoiding any of the additional new stimulus spending that Obama is asking for, may be the best Republicans can hope for right now.” [Conn Carroll Column, Washington Examiner, 12/5/12]

NY Times Columnist David Brooks: “So Republicans have to realize that they are going to cave on tax rates.” [New York Times, 12/4/12]

National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru: “The low-risk [option] is to pass an extension of the middle-class tax cuts, which presumably the Democrats would have to pass, and watch taxes for high earners rise. That way at least Republicans wouldn’t get blamed for middle-class tax increases. That second option isn’t great. But it’s better than some of the possible deals I’ve been reading and hearing about.” [National Review, 11/30/12]

Wall Street Journal Editorial: “This is where Mr. Norquist can give some ground. If taxes are going up anyway because the Bush rates expire, and Republicans can stop them from going up as much as they otherwise would, then pledge-takers deserve some credit for that.” [Wall Street Journal, 11/27/12]

Senate-Passed Bill is Only One With a Chance to Become Law

Washington, D.C. – Nevada Senator Harry Reid made the following remarks on the Senate floor today regarding the bipartisan compromise needed to avoid the fiscal cliff. Below are his remarks as prepared for delivery:

In the weeks since our country voted to return President Barack Obama to the White House and a Democratic majority to the Senate, I have spoken often about compromise.

And I remain optimistic that when it comes to our economy – when it comes to protecting middle-class families from a whopping tax hike come January 1 – Republicans and Democrats will be able to find common ground.

President Dwight Eisenhower, a Republican, once said, “People talk about the middle of the road as though it were unacceptable… There have to be compromises. The middle of the road is all of the usable surface.”

Too often Republicans and Democrats in Washington face off from our entrenched positions – never realizing the solutions to this country’s problems rest not on one side of the aisle or the other, but somewhere in the middle.

However, as we continue to negotiate a responsible path forward, I remind everyone within the sound of my voice of one fact: this Congress is already one vote away from avoiding the fiscal cliff for middle class families and small businesses.

We could solve the greatest economic emergency facing the nation today – if only the House would consider the Senate-passed bill freezing tax rates for 98 percent of American families and 97 percent of small businesses.

As Thomas Jefferson said, we should not put off for tomorrow what we can do today.

Our legislation would give economic certainty to the middle-class, protect important tax deductions for families and businesses and restore balance by asking the most fortunate among us to pay a little extra to reduce the deficit.

It’s also the only bill with a chance of being signed into law by President Obama.

I was dismayed to hear Speaker Boehner once again urge the Senate to take up the House-passed bill extending more tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.

The Senate has already considered that bill – and rejected it on a bipartisan basis.

The Senate has spoken.

And President Obama has spoken. He has promised he will not sign any bill that mortgages our future to pay for handouts to the wealthiest 2 percent.

I only hope House Republicans have been listening.

I also hope my colleagues – Republicans and Democrats, members of the House and of the Senate – used the Thanksgiving break not only to give thanks but also to reflect on the monumental tasks ahead.

And I hope they took time to reflect on the effort it will take to complete those tasks.

As President Eisenhower said, there will have to be compromises.

And seeking the middle of the road isn’t just acceptable – it’s the only way forward.

Washington Post/ABC Poll: 60% Say Romney Would Do More to Favor the Wealthy.Asked “as president do you think Romney would do more to favor the (middle class) or more to favor the (wealthy),” 60% said that Romney would do more to favor the wealthywhile only 30% said Romney would do more to favor the middle class. [Washington Post/ABC Poll, 8/27/12]

• Pew Research Center Poll: 71% Believe Romney Policies Benefit the Wealthy Over Middle Class And Poor. “More than six-in-ten Americans (63%) say the GOP favors the rich over the middle class and poor, and 71% believe the policies of a President Mitt Romney would be good for wealthy people. Much smaller shares say the same about the Democratic Party (20%) and the policies of President Barack Obama in a second term (37%).” [Pew, 8/27/12]

Washington Post/ABC Poll: Americans Prefer Roads and Bridges to Cutting Taxes.Asked “what do you think is a better way for the government to try to create jobs – (by cutting taxes); or (by spending money on projects like roads, bridges and technology development),” 52% supported spending on projects like roads, bridges and technology development while only 33% supported cutting taxes. [Washington Post/ABC Poll, 8/27/12]

Washington Post/ABC Poll: 56% See Unfairness as A Bigger Problem Than Over-Regulation.  Asked “what do you think is the bigger problem in this country – (unfairness in the economic system that favors the wealthy), or (over-regulation of the free market that interferes with growth and prosperity,” 56% said unfairness is the bigger problem while only 34% said over-regulation is a bigger problem. [Washington Post/ABC Poll, 8/27/12]

“The bill passed with the votes of a majority of House and Senate Republicans and the encouragement of — wait for it — Mitt Romney.”
[Milbank, Opinion, Washington Post, 7/25/12]

“The GOP refused to include automatic tax increases as part of this sequester. But automatic cuts to national defense? This Republicans were willing to risk.” [Thiessen, Opinion, Washington Post, 3/15/12]

Republicans Chose to Cut Defense Rather Than Cut Millionaire Tax Breaks

Republican Refusal to Consider Revenues Resulted in Sequestration. “To bridge the divide, McConnell and administration officials had been trying all week to design a mechanism to force the committee to act, giving Republicans their cuts and Obama his debt-limit increase. Republicans were opposed to a trigger that would force automatic tax increases; Democrats were opposed to a trigger with spending cuts only. On Saturday, Democrats appeared to have conceded the point in exchange for big automatic defense cuts, which they said would give Republicans a powerful incentive to work with Democrats toward a more palatable compromise.” [Washington Post, 7/31/11]

American Enterprise Institute Scholar March Thiessen: “The GOP Refused To Include Automatic Tax Increases As Part Of This Sequester. But Automatic Cuts To National Defense? This Republicans Were Willing To Risk.” “The GOP shares a large part of the blame for putting our military in this predicament. As part of last year’s Budget Control Act, Republicans agreed to $600 billion in automatic defense cuts (scheduled to begin in January 2013) if the congressional deficit-reduction supercommittee failed to reach agreement. The GOP refused to include automatic tax increases as part of this sequester. But automatic cuts to national defense? This Republicans were willing to risk.” [Washington Post, 3/15/12]

Majority of Republicans in Both Chambers Voted for Sequestration as Part of BCA

174 House Republicans Voted For the BCA—Including 106 from the Republican Study Committee:

Speaker Boehner Called the BCA “A Positive Step Forward.” “This is a positive step forward that begins to rein in federal spending…” [Press Release, 8/1/11]

Majority Leader Cantor Called the BCA “The First Significant Move” “To Turn Washington Around.” The agreement “…will finally begin to change the way Washington spends taxpayer dollars. As is the case with any major change, these things will take time and this is the first significant move – of many to come – to turn Washington around.” [Press Release,8/1/11]

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) Said The BCA “Takes The Critical First Steps Toward Bringing Fiscal Responsibility Back To Washington.” “This legislation … takes the critical first steps toward bringing fiscal responsibility back to Washington.” [Press Release, 8/1/11']

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) Called The BCA “A Bipartisan Compromise Providing At Least $2.1 Trillion In Deficit Reduction.” “I voted on August 1 for the Budget Control Act, a bipartisan compromise providing at least $2.1 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade forged by Speaker Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Reid, and President Obama …” [Press Release, 8/4/11]

28 Senate Republicans Voted for the BCA:

Sen. McConnell Praised The Budget Control Act As One Of The “Things We Agree On”, “Will Get Us A Trillion Dollars In Savings Over 10 Years.” McConnell said, “Well, regretfully, it never gets talked about, but there actually are things we agree on. We passed the Budget Control Act last August, this past August. It will get us a trillion dollars in savings over 10 years.” [Meet the Press, 9/18/11]

Sen. McConnell Said the BCA “Puts us on the Path to Recovery.” The deal “… puts us on the path to recovery. We’re nowhere near where we need to be in terms of restoring balance. But there should be absolutely no doubt about this: we have changed the debate. We’re headed in the right direction.” [Press Release, 8/2/11]

Sen. Alexander Said BCA Was “Welcome Change In Behavior That I am Glad to Support.” “Finally, Washington is taking some responsibility for years of spending money we don’t have. At a time when the federal government is borrowing 40 cents of every dollar it spends, this is a welcome change in behavior that I am glad to support. Make no mistake. This is a change in behavior—from spend, spend, spend to cut, cut, cut.” [Floor Remarks, 8/2/11]

Sen. Barrasso Called BCA “A Victory Over More Wasteful Washington Spending.”“… this agreement is a victory over more wasteful Washington spending…” [Press Release, 8/2/11]

Sen. Boozman Said BCA “Gives Us Some Direction Toward A Long-Term Solution To Our Financial Problems.” “This bill, while far from perfect, is certainly a step in the right direction.  It saves our nation from defaulting on our obligations while combining real spending cuts with a mandatory vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment.  It cuts deficit spending without raising taxes.  It gives us some direction toward a long-term solution to our financial problems.” [Press Release, 8/2/11]

Sen. Cochran Called BCA “a Significant Step Forward in the Long Process of Getting our Fiscal House in Order.” “I see this measure as a significant step forward in the long process of getting our fiscal house in order.” [Press Release, 8/1/11]

Sen. Crapo Said BCA “Requires Serious Reforms That Carry Weight” To Deficit Reduction. “For years, our country has been headed down the road to this unprecedented and unsustainable fiscal crisis.  It requires serious reforms that carry enforcement and weight beyond this Congress and into the future.  This legislation starts us on that path.” [Press Release, 8/2/11]

Sen. Hoeven. Called BCA “An Essential Step” Towards Growing Our Economy. “It is also an essential step toward addressing the most pressing long-range challenge our nation faces: creating jobs and growing our economy.” [Press Release, 8/2/11]

Sen. Hutchison Said BCA “Moves Us In the Right Direction.” “The Senate vote today endorsed an agreement that, while not perfect, makes serious spending cuts, with no tax increases, and moves us in the right direction.” [Press Release, 8/2/11]

Sen. Isakson Commended BCA Sequester “Enough Teeth and Enough Fear” to Force Action. “As far as the select committee, there was a fear among many that it would only be a paper tiger; that it would not have the claws or the teeth to actually do what it needs to do on the cuts. While I would have done a different type of sequestration, I commend those who negotiated this sequestration on putting one in that has enough teeth and enough fear to force this select committee to do what it needs to do.” [Floor Remarks, 8/2/11]

Sen. Lugar Called Mandatory Sequester Cuts “A Victory for Conservative Fiscal Responsibility.” “Additional deficit reductions will be determined by Congress and not an outside commission nor the President. If the Congress fails to find agreement, then mandatory cuts kick in. This is also a victory for conservative fiscal responsibility.” [Press Release, 8/2/11]

Sen. Murkowski Said the BCA Had “Real Teeth,” Including “Triggers Requiring Future Action.” “The deal has real teeth – serious reforms, significant spending cuts, future spending caps and triggers requiring future action … ” [Press Release, 8/2/11]

Sen. Portman Called BCA “A Step in the Right Direction.” “This is a step in the right direction because it begins to address Washington’s addiction to higher spending and dangerous levels of debt. It is only a first step and there is more to do, but I support the agreement because for the first time ever it begins to address Washington’s underlying spending problem while raising the debt ceiling and avoiding default.” [Press Release, 8/2/11]

Sen. Risch Called BCA “A Step in the Right Direction.” “This is a step in the right direction.  We are making actual cuts to government spending, putting spending controls in place and providing for a vote on a balanced budget amendment without raising taxes.” [Press Release,8/2/11]

Sen. Sessions Said BCA “Does Represent Fiscal Progress.” “This bill will reduce spending and does represent fiscal progress.” [Floor Remarks, 8/2/11]

Sen. Snowe Called BCA “The First Step” To Control Spending. “… It was the first step in what will be many to reclaim control over the U.S. Government’s out-of-control spending. This bill cuts current spending, it caps future spending, and it controls previously unrestrained government budgets over the next decade, while also protecting critical Social Security benefits.” [Press Release, 8/2/11]

Sen. Thune Called BCA “A Good First Step” “With the deck stacked that heavily against Republicans, we were able to negotiate a deal that is a good first step in the opposite direction President Obama and Congressional Democrats wanted to take this country.” [Press Release,8/2/11]

Sen. Wicker Said “The Budget Control Act Makes Real Spending Cuts and Represents a Change in Direction for Washington.” [Press Release, 8/1/11]

The Chamber of Commerce Championed the BCA Deal

U.S. Chamber Of Commerce On Debt Deal: “This Legislation Is The Right Thing To Do.” In a key vote letter supporting the Budget Control Act of 2011, the US Chamber of Commerce said: “… this legislation is the right thing to do, now. … The Chamber strongly supports the ‘Budget Control Act of 2011..’” [U.S. Chamber Of Commerce, Key Vote Letter, 8/1/11]

Chamber President Said “This Bill Begins The Process Of Getting America’s Fiscal House In Order And Was Necessary To Avoid A Default.” ‘While far from perfect, this bill begins the process of getting America’s fiscal house in order and was necessary to avoid a default that would have resulted in an economic catastrophe,’ said Tom Donohue, president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.” [Atlanta Business Chronicle, 8/2/11]

“The Senate passed a plan that will cut taxes for 98 percent of Americans and protect middle-class families in Nevada and across the country from the fiscal cliff. The Senate plan is the only solution that stands a chance of being signed into law to provide middle-class families security. Our colleagues in the House should take up our plan and pass it immediately. There is absolutely nothing stopping House Republicans from passing the Senate’s plan, if they possessed the courage to do the right thing for middle class families.

“To date, Republicans have insisted on holding middle-class families hostage to additional tax giveaways for millionaires and billionaires. Democrats believe we should focus on the middle class, but we have months to debate the right approach to tax policy. In the meantime, the responsible approach is for Republicans to stand up to the Tea Party, meet Democrats on common ground and pass these tax cuts for 98 percent of Americans.”

If you own a business in this country, your goal is to make a profit.

There’s nothing wrong with that. Millions of hard-working America entrepreneurs are the backbone of our economy.

And if your company boosts profits by sending jobs overseas, that’s your right as a business owner.

But American taxpayers shouldn’t subsidize your business decision to outsource jobs, especially when there are millions of people in this country looking for work.

Over the last 10 years, 2.4 million jobs in call centers and sales centers, in financial firm and factories were shipped overseas.

And American taxpayers helped foot the bill.

Every time U.S. companies ship jobs or facilities overseas, taxpayers help cover their moving costs.

The Bring Jobs Home Act would end these disgraceful subsidies for outsourcing. And it would give a 20% tax credit for the costs of moving production back to the United States.

But Republicans are filibustering this common-sense legislation.

It’s no surprise Republicans are on the side of corporations making big bucks sending American jobs to China and India.

After all, their presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, made a fortune outsourcing jobs, too.

So Republicans are once again putting tax breaks for big corporations and multi-millionaires ahead of the needs of ordinary Americans.

And what most Americans need is a good job here at home and the assurance their taxes won’t go up on January 1.

Yet Republicans in Congress are filibustering legislation to bring jobs home to America.

And they’ve twice blocked a vote on legislation to keep taxes low for 98 percent of American families.

It was Republicans who asked for a vote on their plan to raise taxes for 25 million families and a vote on our plan to keep taxes low for 135 million American taxpayers.

So we offered them what they wanted. We offered them up-or-down votes on both proposals.

No procedural hoops. No delay tactics. Just simple, majority votes on our plan and on theirs.

They refused.

Maybe they refused because they don’t have the votes for their plan to raise taxes on 25 million American families.

Or maybe they refused it because a majority of Americans support our plan to keep taxes low for 98 percent of families, while asking the top 2 percent to contribute a little bit more to reduce the deficit.

Even a majority of Republicans in America support our plan.

Yet still Republicans in Congress are holding hostage tax cuts for nearly every family in America to extort more budget-busting giveaways to millionaires and billionaires.

For a year, the budget deficit was all Republicans talked about.

They were willing to end Medicare as we know it, slash nursing home benefits for seniors, cut investments in education and raise taxes on the middle class – all in the name of deficit reduction.

But now that Democrats have a plan to reduce the deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars simply by ending wasteful tax breaks, Republicans have given up on fiscal responsibility.
So I say this to my Republican friends: you can’t have it both ways.

You can’t call yourself a deficit hawk, then fight for more tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.

And you can’t call yourself a fiscal conservative, then fight to protect tax breaks for companies that outsource jobs to India or China.

This week Republicans continued to make the case that millionaires and billionaires can’t afford to pay even a penny more in taxes.

Meanwhile, a new report shows average tax rates are at their lowest level in decades.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office reported this week that in 2009 rates fell to their lowest level in more than 30 years.

Much of that decline is thanks to President Obama – who has consistently fought to lower taxes for middle-class families over the last three and a half years.

The average tax rate in this country fell to the lowest rate since 1979 – 17.4 percent.

Of course, that’s still a higher rate than Mitt Romney pays.

But most Americans don’t have the benefit of Swiss bank accounts or tax shelters in the Cayman Islands and Bermuda.

As our economy continues to recover, it’s critical we keep tax rates low for the middle class.

They’re still struggling to pay the mortgage, send their kids to college and save for retirement.

That’s why President Obama and Democrats in Congress want to extend tax cuts for 98 percent of American families.

But there’s one group that’s not struggling – Mitt Romney and the rest of the top 2 percent of Americans.

They can afford to contribute a little bit more to get this country’s deficit under control.

Yet Republicans are prepared to block tax cuts for 98 percent of families unless Democrats agree to even more giveaways for the richest of the rich.

As Republicans continue to argue the wealthiest 2 percent can’t contribute even a little more, I urge them to talk to the three-quarters of Americans who disagree.

I urge them to talk to some of the almost 60 percent of Republicans who believe the wealthiest Americans should shoulder their fair share of the responsibility for getting the deficit under control.

And I urge them to talk to a few of the more than 135 million taxpayers who are waiting to see whether Republicans will continue holding their tax cuts hostage.

Washington, D.C. – Nevada Senator Harry Reid spoke on the Senate floor today regarding the Small Business Jobs and Tax Relief Act. Below are his remarks as prepared for delivery:

My Republican colleagues talk a good game on taxes.

But Democrats’ record of cutting taxes for small businesses speaks louder than Republican rhetoric.

Since President Obama took office, Democrats have cut taxes for small businesses 18 times.

And today we’ll advance a plan to cut taxes for small firms for the 19th time in just three and a half years.

The Small Business Jobs and Tax Relief Act would put money back in the coffers of true job creators.

Under our plan, business owners who hire new workers or give raises to current employees would get a 10 percent tax credit.

Our legislation would also cut taxes for firms that invest in new equipment, allowing more than 2 million businesses to grow faster.

These two proposals will create almost a million new jobs.

And economists from across the political spectrum agree this is the most efficient way to give the economy a badly-needed boost.

So if my Republican colleagues want their records to match their rhetoric, they’ll end their filibuster of this worthy measure.

And they’ll vote to support the real job creators – businesses that grow and hire.

Unfortunately, while Republicans agree we should cut taxes, their approach is completely different.

Congressional Republicans want to lavish huge, across-the-board tax breaks on billionaire hedge fund managers and mega-rich celebrities like Donald Trump.

Unlike our proposal, the Republican plan, which passed the House, wouldn’t do a thing to encourage hiring.

More than 99 percent of businesses in America would qualify for this extravagant tax break – even if they didn’t create a single new job or raise wages for one solitary employee.

In fact, fabulously rich so-called “small business owners” like Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton could qualify for these wasteful giveaways.

Even though three-quarters of Americans oppose more tax breaks for wealthiest few, nearly half the benefits of this $46 billion Republican proposal would go to millionaires and billionaires.

Democrats want to cut taxes for small businesses – but the Republican alternative is simply the wrong way to do it.

“I agree with President Obama that we should extend tax cuts for all American families up to the first $250,000 of income immediately. This will protect middle-class families and allow us to reduce our deficit in a responsible manner. Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree that protecting the middle class is the most important priority, so Republicans should stop holding these middle-class tax cuts hostage to extract more reckless giveaways for millionaires and billionaires.

“I will be discussing the next steps in the Senate with my caucus in the coming days. Republicans have claimed they want to reduce our deficit; in the weeks ahead, they will have a chance to do so by joining Democrats to vote to extend tax cuts for all middle class American families on the first $250,000 of their income.”

Fundamentally Skewed Priorities in Republican Budget Would Hand More Tax Breaks to Wealthy at Expense of Middle-Class Families

Washington, D.C. – Nevada Senator Harry Reid spoke on the Senate floor today regarding Republican attempts to go back on an August budget agreement in order to protect multi-millionaires and corporate defense contractors at the expense of ordinary Americans. Below are his remarks as prepared for delivery:

Yesterday Republicans continued to filibuster Democrats’ plan to protect 7 million students from skyrocketing interest rates on federal student loans.

What’s worse, they seem proud of it. Not a single Republican voted to allow the debate on this bill to go forward.

But this fight is not over. Democrats have not given up efforts to keep college affordable for almost 30,000 Nevadans and more than 7 million students nationwide.

I hope Republicans will come to their senses, and work with us toward a compromise.

As Democrats work to create jobs and make college affordable, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are operating under a different set of priorities.

In the House, Republican efforts are underway to undo a hard-fought August agreement to cut more than 2 trillion from the deficit over the next decade.

But the Republican budget and their so-called reconciliation bill don’t just renege on that bipartisan, bicameral agreement to reduce spending.

They reflect fundamentally skewed priorities. They hand out even more tax breaks to multi-millionaires and shield corporate defense contractors, all at the expense of hard-working, middle-class families, the elderly and those in greatest need.

They would slash investments that strengthen our economy and shred the social safety net.

President Dwight Eisenhower once said: “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.”

In a balanced world – one where a strong national defense and a strong social safety net are both valuable pillars of a successful society – that need not necessarily be true.

But the Republican plan would enshrine into law a set of truly unbalanced priorities – and ensure the kind of terrible math Eisenhower envisioned.

Unlike defense contractors and billionaires, ordinary Americans don’t have high-priced lobbyists to protect them. That’s our job.

But Republicans are going after those who can’t fight back – hard-working Americans and struggling families.

Let’s review a bit of history. The sequester isn’t the first bipartisan agreement to reduce the deficit.

Over the years there have been many efforts to reach comprehensive, bipartisan solutions to our deficit.

There was the Fiscal Commission, Bowles-Simpson, the Gang of Six and the Supercommittee. They all failed.

Although President Obama was willing to make difficult concessions to achieve meaningful deficit reduction, Republicans and Speaker Boehner could never go against Grover Norquist.

This is a Grover Norquist Congress.

So we’re left with the threat of almost $500 billion in cuts to domestic programs and almost $500 billion in cuts to defense programs.

Democrats agree the sequester – which includes across the board cuts both to domestic spending and the defense budget – is far from the ideal way to solve our nation’s fiscal problems.

It’s a tough pill to swallow. But that was the point.

Those cuts were designed to be tough enough to force lawmakers to compromise.  They were designed to be tough enough to force the two sides to reach to a balanced deal.

But Republicans refused to be reasonable. They refused to raise even a penny of new revenue, or ask millionaires to contribute their fair share to help reduce our deficit and our debt.

I’d like to read a short excerpt from a piece by Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein from the Washington Post.

They eloquently describe the GOP’s unwillingness to compromise here:

“We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.”

They went on to say:

“The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.”

Republicans insisted on balancing the budget on the backs of the middle class, seniors, students, single mothers and so many others who could least afford it.

And it is their intransigence – their refusal to compromise – that leaves us facing the threat of the sequester, and its difficult but balanced cuts.

Going back on the August budget agreement now in order to protect wealthy special interests is no solution.

Neither is refighting the battles of last year.

Democrats agree we must reduce our deficit and make hard choices.

But we believe in a balanced approach that shares the pain as well as the responsibility.

Is the sequester the best way to achieve that balance? Absolutely not.

But Republicans refuse to consider a more reasonable approach – one that asks every American to pay his fair share while making difficult choices to reduce spending.

And Democrats won’t agree to a one-sided solution that lets the super-wealthy off the hook while forcing the middle class, and those in greatest need, to bear all the hardship.

Democrats believe we can protect Americans’ access to health care, create jobs while investing in the future and protect the poor and elderly.

And we can do all that while reducing the deficit in a responsible, even-handed way.

But we can’t do it alone. It will take hard work and compromise.

And so far Republicans have been unwilling to make a serious effort to achieve that compromise.

Republicans have rejected our balanced approach. Their one-sided solution to across-the-board cuts would take from the many to give to the few.

So, here’s what their plan would do:

• Cut Medicaid benefits, increasing the number of uninsured children, parents, seniors and people with disabilities by 300,000. It would also put seniors in nursing homes at risk.
• Punish Americans who receive tax credits to purchase health insurance when their financial circumstances change – causing 350,000 Americans to forgo coverage.
• Weaken Wall Street reforms, protecting big banks at the expense of consumers.
• Once again target middle-class workers, including food inspectors, air traffic controllers and border patrol, drug enforcement and FBI agents.
• Cut funding for preventive health care programs that fight chronic illnesses – such as heart disease, cancer, stroke and diabetes – that cause 70 percent of deaths in America.
• Slash Block Grant funding that allows states to help 23 million children, seniors and disabled Americans live independently and out of poverty.

No segment of the population is immune from the pain of this Republican plan – except maybe millionaires, billionaires and wealthy corporations.

The Republican proposal cuts Meals on Wheels for seniors.

It reduces food assistance for 1.8 million needy people.

And it cuts off 280,000 kids from free school lunches at a time when one in five children lives in poverty.

That’s why the U.S. Conference of Catholic of Bishops said the Republican plan fails a “basic moral test.”

This budget sets very clear priorities. The problem is, they’re the wrong priorities.

President Franklin Roosevelt once said, “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.”

Republicans would do well to remember our nation is judged not only by the strength of its military, but also by the strength of its values.

Yesterday Senate Republicans once again rejected the idea that millionaires and billionaires should contribute their fair share to help this country prosper.

Republicans sent a message to millions of honest, hard-working Americans who will file their taxes today: it’s fair for Warren Buffett to pay a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Republicans said it’s fair for Mitt Romney to pay a lower tax rate than his cleaning lady or his chauffer.

They believe it’s fair for hedge fund managers and executives to pay a lower tax rate than school teachers and waitresses and bus drivers.

That’s just crazy.

But that’s not my word for it. That’s what President Ronald Reagan called a system of “unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share.”

In 1985, Ronald Reagan knocked the web of loopholes that allowed people making hundreds of millions of dollars each year to pay lower tax rates than construction workers or janitors. President Reagan called it “crazy.”

This broken system “made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary,” Reagan said.

But the same system is in place today. And, as that radical liberal Ronald Reagan said, “That’s just crazy.”

Yesterday my Republican colleagues used some strong words to oppose Democrats’ plan to right that inequality.

Republicans called our common-sense proposal to ensure no one making more than a $1 million a year pays a lower tax rate than a truck driver, a secretary or a police officer “class warfare.”

Republicans are pushing a budget that would end Medicare as we know it, slash nursing home coverage for the elderly, decimate Pell Grant funding and kick 200,000 kids out of the Head Start Program.

And they’re calling our proposal class warfare?

I wish that were the most ridiculous thing Republicans have said about our proposal to bring a measure of fairness to America’s tax system. Far from it.

One member of Senate Republican Leadership equated this measure to “shooting ourselves in the head.”

The Paying a Fair Share Act – also called the Buffettt Rule – would have ensured millionaires and billionaires paid at least as much as their secretaries, assistants and nannies.

Yet Republicans think asking those lucky millionaires and billionaires to contribute their fair share is just like shooting the country in the head.

Our legislation would have protected 99 percent of small business owners, and maintained deductions for charitable giving.

And it would have been a small but meaningful step to reduce our deficit at a time when every penny – or in this case, every billion – counts.

It doesn’t seem radical to me to ask Warren Buffett – who made almost $63 million in 2010 – to pay a higher tax rate than his secretary.

It didn’t seem radical to Ronald Reagan, either.

And it doesn’t seem radical to the three-quarters of Americans who support our legislation.

The wealthiest Americans take home a greater percentage of the nation’s income than at any time in nearly a century. Yet they enjoy the lowest tax rate in more than 50 years.

So it’s no surprise Americans believe millionaires should shoulder their fair share.

Even two-thirds of millionaires – and a majority of Republicans around the country – agree it’s time to fix a system rigged to favor of the richest of the rich.

Republicans in Congress are the only ones who aren’t on board.

If you need evidence that millionaires and billionaires can afford to contribute a little more, consider this fact: last year there were 7,000 people who made more than $1 million but didn’t pay a single penny in federal income taxes. Not one thin dime.

Thanks to Republicans, those lucky millionaires and billionaires can keep gaming the system, while middle-class workers keep picking up the tab.

“Today Senate Republicans again put millionaires ahead of the middle class. Currently, most hedge fund managers pay a lower tax rate than many of their middle-class employees – but while the incomes for the wealthy have ballooned in recent years, middle-class wages haven’t kept pace with the price of a college education or a secure retirement. The measure that Republicans blocked today would have restored fairness to our tax code and reduced the deficit without asking middle class families or seniors to sacrifice any more than they already have.

“Unfortunately, my Republican colleagues would rather end Medicare as we know it than build a stronger middle class or ask millionaires to contribute an extra penny. Democrats will not stop fighting to restore fairness to our tax code, and I hope that in the future, my Republican colleagues will think of the teacher and the mechanic before the wealthiest Americans.”

As millions of Americans prepare to file income tax returns, the Senate will consider the basic fairness of our country’s tax system.

Today the wealthiest one percent takes home the highest share of the nation’s income since the roaring ‘20s.

But while their bank accounts have grown, their tax bills have shrunk.

The wealthiest Americans now pay the lowest tax rates in 50 years.

And this unfair system has turned the gap between the richest few and everyone else into a gulf.

Over the last few decades, a small number of Americans have seen their incomes skyrocket – by almost 300 percent.

But for the rest of Americans, wages have barely crept up. They haven’t kept pace with the price of a modest home, a good college and a secure retirement.

So times are tough for many middle-class families. But millionaires and billionaires aren’t sharing the pain – or the sacrifices.

Last year, there were 7,000 millionaires who didn’t pay a single penny in federal income taxes. Instead, ordinary Americans footed the bill – and that’s not fair.

In recent years, some Americans earning north of $110 million a year paid a lower tax rate than millions of middle-class families – and that’s not fair.

That’s how someone like my friend Warren Buffett winds up paying a lower tax rate than his secretary – which is just not fair.

When the richest few are making more than ever before, they can afford to shoulder their fair share of the burden to make this country prosper.

And they shouldn’t be allowed to hide behind tax loopholes that rig the system in their favor.

The Paying a Fair Share Act – also known as the Buffett Rule – would restore fairness to a system that has favored the interests of the wealthy for too long.

This legislation would ensure Americans who earn more than $1 million a year pay at least 30 percent of their income in taxes.

The bill would hold harmless nearly every small business in America – more than 99 percent of small businesses, in fact.

It would maintain the deduction for charitable giving.

And it would be a small but important step toward restoring fiscal responsibility as our nation makes difficult choices about where to spend and what to cut.

Three-quarters of Americans believe millionaires and billionaires should contribute more.

Two-thirds of millionaires say it’s time to even the playing field.

And outside the Beltway, even a majority of Republicans agree.

But Republicans in Congress would rather end Medicare as we know it and slash education funding than ask the richest of the rich to contribute even a penny more.

As Senate Democrats work to make our tax system fair for all Americans, Republicans in the House continue to pursue a budget that would hand more tax breaks to the wealthiest few.

At its heart, this important debate – and the Buffett Rule – is about setting priorities.

America can build a world-class education system that will prepare our children and grandchildren to compete in the industries of tomorrow.

We can honor our commitment to a generation of young men and women who put their lives on the line to serve and protect our freedom.

And we can ensure seniors who worked hard all their lives look forward to a secure retirement and quality, affordable healthcare.

Or we can keep protecting special tax breaks for the richest of the rich. We can’t do both.

We must make smart choices.

President Franklin Roosevelt once said, “In our personal ambitions we are individualists. But in our seeking for economic and political progress as a nation, we all go up or else all go down as one people.”

I hope my Republican colleagues will join Democrats this evening as we choose a path toward economic fairness that allows all Americans to rise together as one people.

This week my Republican colleagues have railed against the Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act, Democrats’ latest proposal to create hundreds of thousands of American jobs.

They point to a similar program with a proven track record of keeping 422,000 teachers in the classroom for a year as evidence this legislation will be “a failure.” But that’s because they’re using a different benchmark for success than we are.

Democrats’ number one priority is to create jobs. So to us, putting hundreds of thousands of people back to work teaching children, patrolling our streets and fighting fires constitutes a success.

But Republicans’ number one priority is to defeat President Obama, and their strategy is to keep the economy weak as long as possible. So they oppose legislation we know beyond a shadow of a doubt will support 400,000 American jobs without adding a penny to the deficit.

Never mind that Republicans have yet to propose a single idea of their own to get 14 million people working again. Never mind that in the past they have supported every one of the job creation measures that we’ve proposed.

Republicans get up every day and come to work to oppose the policies that will turn our economy around for one reason and one reason only: politics.

To me – and to most Americans – putting politics ahead of this country’s economic future is so far outside the mainstream it’s barely on the map.

But Republicans have been very candid about their goal this Congress. My friend, the Minority Leader, said this: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

Defeating job-creating legislation, defeating the economy and defeating the President – that’s how Republicans measure success. But Americans don’t share those values.

Like Democrats, they believe there are some things more important than politics, even in an election year. Creating jobs is one of those things.

To Democrats – and to the vast majority of Americans – there is no goal more important than getting our economy humming once more.

That’s why Americans overwhelmingly support our plan to retain or rehire 400,000 teachers and put more cops on the beat nationwide.

In Nevada, this legislation will provide an additional $260 million to keep teachers in the classroom and maintain class sizes. It will support 3,600 education jobs in the state, and pump much-needed money back into the economy.

Seventy-five percent of Americans believe we should help state and local governments put teachers, police and firefighters back to work. And 76 percent of Americans agree the wealthiest people in this country should help get our economy back on track.

I repeat: three out of four Americans – including two-thirds of Republicans – support the Democrats’ Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act.

Republicans in Congress aren’t just out of touch with America – they’re out of touch with other Republicans.

Fifty-four percent of Republicans support Democrats’ plan to create jobs building modern roads, bridges and schools.

Fifty-eight percent of Republicans support our plan to extend the payroll tax for American workers and businesses.

Sixty-three percent of Republicans support our plan to put teachers in the classroom and police officers on the beat.

And 56 percent of Republicans even support our proposal to ask millionaires and billionaires to contribute their fair share to pull our nation out of this terrible recession.

The trend is clear: Americans overwhelmingly support Democrats’ plan to create jobs, with even Republicans supporting our ideas by a wide margin.

And yet my friend, the Republican leader, said this yesterday on the Senate floor: “There’s a growing bipartisan opposition to trying the same failed policies again. And there’s bipartisan opposition to raising taxes especially at a time when 14 million Americans are out of work.”

Well, I say to my friend, the Republican Leader, as the saying goes, you are entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts.

There is not bipartisan opposition to legislation that will create and save jobs for teachers and first responders. On the contrary, there is bipartisan support for the legislation.

Republicans, like the rest of Americans, do not oppose our proposal to ask millionaires to contribute their fair share. On the contrary, they support the proposal.

It is only here in Congress that Republicans oppose job-creating legislation and fair tax policy for the sake of politics.

In the rest of the country Republicans – like other Americans – are focused on where their next paycheck will come from and how they’ll make the mortgage.

And, like Democrats, they’re tired of Republicans in Congress rooting for the economy to fail instead of working with us to secure our economic future.

CNN Poll: 63 percent of Americans support raising taxes on millionaires. [CNN, 9/19/11]

INDEPENDENTS:
ABC News Washington Post Poll:  75 percent of independents support raising taxes millionaires. [ABC News/Washington Post, 10/5/11]

CBS News Poll: 65 percent of independents support raising taxes on millionaires.  [CBS News, 10/3/11]

CNN Poll: 62 percent of independents support raising taxes on millionaires. [CNN, 9/19/11]

REPUBLICANS:
ABC News Washington Post Poll:  57 percent of Republicans support raising taxes on millionaires. [ABC News/Washington Post, 10/5/11]

TEA PARTY:
ABC News Washington Post Poll:  55 percent of Tea Party supporters agree with raising taxes on millionaires. [ABC News/Washington Post, 10/5/11]