HR 4646 & 1125 - 1% Financial Fees - Continued

Randy,
    

Thanks for your reply and the referenced article (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/54_61/-30466-1.html)
    

 I'm not sure why you desire that your e-mails be strictly off the record, since we are communicating on public business, but I will adhere to your wishes.

    

While the referenced article does not cover directly the point I was trying to make, it is related. The article says that two sessions ago, 14,000 bills were introduced into the House. Only 3% of these became law and one third of those involved things such as renaming a federal building.
    

As you know, both houses of Congress have a very poor reputation with the general public. There are probably a variety of reasons, but I suspect that inefficiency would be one.
    

My previous point concerned not how many of the proposals introduced in the House of Representatives actually became law, my suggestion was that 14,000 bills should not receive numbers implying that they are being realistically considered. Unless a proposal has at least some semblance of group support among House members, it should not be given a number nor referred to a committee, which would subsequently be burdened by having to at least carry the proposal on the committee's books.
    

How can we make the House operate more efficiently and hopefully obtain better support from the American voting public?

-----Original Message-----
From:  Randy Neugebauer

Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 4:01 PM
To: 'Arthur Sucsy'
Subject: RE: HR 4646 and 1125 - 1% Financial Fees

 (Confidential Reply) 

From: Arthur Sucsy [mailto:asucsy@suddenlink.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 4:22 PM
To: asucsy@suddenlink.net
Subject: FW: HR 4646 and 1125 - 1% Financial Fees

Randy,
    

Thank you for your reply. I am pleased to hear that you believe Rep. Fattah's proposal will go nowhere.

    

However, you have not replied to my other question concerning whether a House bill with a number indicates that it is a House- passed bill or just a proposal. If the latter, why are we cluttering up the House agenda and the public mind with such trash?

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Randy Neugebauer

Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 12:12 PM
To: 'Arthur Sucsy'
Subject: RE: HR 4646 and 1125 - 1% Financial Fees

As you know, I can’t respond to most of your emails but I wanted to make sure we got back to you on this one. We get so many people writing in about it but it isn’t going anywhere.

Thank you for writing me and expressing your concerns about the Debt Free America Act. Your input is appreciated, and it is an honor to represent you in Congress. 

As you may know, H.R. 4646, or the Debt Free America Act, was introduced during the 111^th Congress in Congress by Representative Chaka Fattah. This act would impose a transaction fee of 1% on the entire amount of specified intermediate and final transactions. Revenue raised from this fee would be sufficient to eliminate the national debt during a 10-year period and phase out the income tax on individuals. According to the bill, the term specified transaction means any transaction that uses a payment instrument, including any check, cash, credit card, transfer of stock, bonds, or other financial instrument. The fees would be collected by the seller or financial institution servicing the transaction and would be paid to the U.S. Treasury. The bill would also establish a Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action, which would identify factors affecting the long-term fiscal imbalance, analyze potential courses of action, and provide recommendations and legislative language to improve the long-term fiscal imbalance.

H.R. 4646 had no cosponsors, and was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means where it never received a hearing, even during a Democrat-controlled Congress. Representative Chaka Fattah reintroduced the Debt Free America Act in the 112^th Congress as H.R. 1125 on March 16, 2011. Again, this legislation does not have any cosponsors and no hearings have been held. With the current Republican majority in Congress, I do not foresee this bill being considered by the Ways and Means Committee. However, I will be sure to keep your concerns in mind should this legislation come before the full House of Representatives for a vote.

From: Arthur Sucsy [mailto:asucsy@suddenlink.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 11:07 AM
To: asucsy@suddenlink.net
Subject: HR 4646 and 1125 - 1% Financial Fees

Randy,
   

A businessman friend in Michigan called to my attention the existence of HR 4646, which is said to be a 1% fee on all financial transactions.
   

Independent further investigation shows that this bill was introduced by Rep. Fattah (PA) in 2010. It is said to be part of a line of similar bills, which Rep. Fattah introduced in prior years. The latest version is HR 1125 introduced in 2011.
    

The commonality of these later bills is a 1% fee on all financial transactions. However, it appears that while the financial institutions might be collecting 1% fees, the money actually would go to the government. We usually consider monies going to government as taxes rather than fees.
    

My first question to you is whether HR 1125 is a proposal or a bill which has been passed by the House? Secondly, if it is a proposal, what is the likelihood of passage in the House? Lastly, if it is a proposal without any general support from other House members, why does the House even allow its entrance, which existence confuses House Representatives and the general public?
    

Please comment on the above.