[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 74 (Thursday, May 23, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E894]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  REPEALING THE 4.3 CENT GASOLINE TAX

                                 ______


                           HON. TOM A. COBURN

                              of oklahoma

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 23, 1996

  Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, due to circumstances beyond my control, I 
was not physically able to cast my vote for H.R. 3415, which repealed 
the 4.3 cent gasoline tax implemented in 1993. At this time, I would 
like to take this opportunity to submit my opinion on this issue for 
the record.
  Tax relief--in order to be truly effective--must do two things. 
First, it must be meaningful relief; people must be able to reap the 
benefits of Congress' actions. Second, it must be paid for with real 
dollars, not with creative bookkeeping or irresponsible offsets.
  I am committed to tax relief. The American people are overburdened 
with federal, state, and local taxes but don't see the returns for 
their investment. In fact, May 7, just two weeks ago, marked ``National 
Tax Freedom Day'' where people stopped handing over their paycheck to 
Uncle Sam and started working for themselves. Clearly, tax relief is 
important, necessary, and well deserved.
  I do not support the 1993 decision to raise gasoline taxes 4.3 cents 
a gallon to finance irresponsible government spending. Dollars 
collected from fuel taxes should be spent only on infrastructure, not 
on pet projects or wasteful, duplicative federal programs. It stand to 
reason that ideally, the gas tax should be repealed.
  But it troubles me that tax relief--in this case, repealing the gas 
tax--has become a political football. I do not believe people will 
truly benefit from this token gesture. I question the timing of the gas 
tax repeal: if gas taxes were too high, why didn't Congress attempt to 
repeal them six months ago, when the price of gasoline was at an all-
time low? I find it curious that this issue has only been addressed 
during an election year . . . and if repeal of the tax is truly 
necessary, then why is it temporary? Shouldn't tax relief last beyond 
the 1996 elections? And how are we planning to address the loss of 
revenue to the federal treasury? Auctioning the spectrum is neither a 
real nor a responsible option. The criteria for tax cuts--meaningful 
relief which is paid for--have not been met.
  While I disagree with H.R. 3415, I am also opposed to the 
Administration's ``solution.'' Selling 12 million barrels of oil from 
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve won't lower gasoline prices--in fact, 
it will COST the American taxpayers $144 million dollars. The 
President's response to rising gasoline prices is politically motivated 
as well. This is a superficial, cosmetic action which will do nothing 
to truly lower gasoline prices.
  Furthermore, I strongly believe that neither Congress nor the 
President should be in the business of regulating gasoline prices, just 
like the federal government should not regulate the price of other 
commodities like wheat, corn, or sugar. Instead, the market should be 
allowed to function. History shows that fuel prices traditionally rise 
in the spring but fall and level out after a few weeks. 1996 is no 
different. Already, consumers are watching prices go down, although not 
as quickly as they might like.
  Mr. Speaker, had I been able to cast my vote on this piece of 
legislation, I would have voted ``no.'' I cannot support a politically 
motivated tax cut which will not significantly aid the American 
consumer. This is a tax cut package tied up with pretty ribbons--but 
when the taxpayers open it, they see an empty box, not the true savings 
Congress has promised.
  I feel this is another example of election-year politics, not genuine 
reform. I want to tell the people of Oklahoma's second district that 
Congress reduced their tax burden, but I want them to be able to see 
the difference in their bankbook at the end of the month. I cannot vote 
for a gimmick which makes politicians look good but doesn't actually 
help the people who put them in office. I don't believe that 
temporarily repealing the 1993 gasoline tax will do much to lift the 
tax burden from the shoulders of the American people; therefore I 
cannot support it.