[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 194 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 194

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the proposed 
 tax increase on social security benefits should not be enacted and if 
                      enacted should be repealed.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 10, 1993

  Mr. Smith of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. Canady, Mr. Bunning, Mr. 
 Dornan, Mr. Baker of Louisiana, Mr. Blute, Mr. Ballenger, Mr. Walsh, 
 Mrs. Vucanovich, Mr. Pombo, Mr. McHugh, Mr. Inglis of South Carolina, 
 Mr. Emerson, Mr. Zimmer, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Bachus of Alabama, Mr. King, 
  Mrs. Fowler, Mr. Roth, Mr. Franks of New Jersey, Mr. Goodlatte, Mr. 
   Royce, and Mr. Kyl) submitted the following resolution; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the proposed 
 tax increase on social security benefits should not be enacted and if 
                      enacted should be repealed.

Whereas the House of Representatives has narrowly passed President Clinton's 
        budget proposal;
Whereas a diverse of coalition of senior citizen groups, along with the vast 
        majority of grassroots seniors nationwide, are opposed to the social 
        security tax increase included in the budget;
Whereas over 9,000,000 social security recipients will be adversely affected by 
        a social security tax increase proposal;
Whereas those affected by this taxation will pay on average an extra $483 per 
        year;
Whereas without an inflation adjustment, the percentage of affected seniors who 
        are in effect taxed twice on the same income will rise significantly in 
        5 years;
Whereas the social security tax proposal is the only part of the President's 
        plan which concedes to be a targeted tax increase on a segment of the 
        middle class;
Whereas many fixed income senior citizens cannot be without these much-needed 
        benefits in this current economic climate;
Whereas senior citizens have historically shared a heavy burden and been the 
        target of numerous measures, such as a freeze in their cost-of-living 
        adjustment and the implementation of the social security tax; and
Whereas such a tax increase would affect not only current middle- and upper-
        class senior citizens but also millions of future social security 
        beneficiaries: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
the proposed increase in tax on social security benefits should not be 
enacted and if enacted should be repealed.

                                 <all>