[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 44 (Tuesday, April 15, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H1458-H1459]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        TAX LIMITATION AMENDMENT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Snowbarger). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 21, 1997 the gentleman from Washington [Mr. 
Metcalf] is recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. METCALF. Mr. Speaker, we are all very much aware that today is 
April 15: Tax day. Millions of Americans are feverishly working to 
complete and mail their tax returns by midnight tonight.
  With that in mind, it is very appropriate that today we will vote on 
the tax limitation amendment. I have joined with 118 colleagues from 
both parties to sponsor this amendment to the Constitution. It would 
require a two-thirds congressional appropriation for any new or higher 
taxes.
  Mr. Speaker, in 1950 about 3 percent of the average American family's 
income went to taxes. Three percent in

[[Page H1459]]

1950. Now, over 40 percent of the family's income goes for local, 
State, and Federal taxes. And, for what? Intrusive regulation on small 
business, tobacco subsidies, snooping into tax records by Internal 
Revenue Service agents, duplication in the Federal bureaucracy, and an 
ever increasing agency bureaucracy that hinders rather than helps our 
local schools teach our kids.
  According to a 1994 study by the National Taxpayer Union Foundation, 
the coming explosion in Federal entitlement spending could cause after-
tax incomes to fall by as much as 59 percent over the next 45 years. We 
cannot stand a 59-percent increase.
  The study shows that funding benefits and other Government services 
will require taxes of between 57 to 69 percent of our income. Mr. 
Speaker, the American family simply cannot survive and pay those kinds 
of taxes. At 40 percent we are close to the breaking point.
  For 124 years the U.S. Constitution protected the American people 
against the expansion of the Federal Government and against unlimited 
taxes. It prohibited the income tax, and constitutional scholars 
stressed that Congress had only 18 powers that were granted 
specifically in the Constitution.
  Ratification of the 16th amendment in 1913 authorized an income tax 
with no limitation. The result: With constitutional limits on taxes 
stripped away, Federal tax collections have climbed more than 175,000 
percent since 1913. Now, let us go over that again. My colleagues heard 
me right. It has increased 175,000 percent since 1913.
  It is time we restored constitutional limits on taxation. The tax 
limitation amendment is in the spirit of the Bill of Rights, which 
limits Government to preserving individual freedom. We must protect the 
people from excessive taxes.
  The fact is, Mr. Speaker, it is just too easy to increase taxes on 
the American people. During the past 30 years, of 16 votes to increase 
taxes, only 8 would have passed if the two-thirds supermajority 
requirement had been in place. In the 1980's and 1990's, more than $660 
billion in new taxes was passed by the slimmest of majorities. That is 
$660 billion that taxpayers would not have had to pay if the tax 
limitation amendment had been in effect.
  President Clinton's 1993 tax increase, the largest in our Nation's 
history, at $275 billion in one shot, passed by only one vote in the 
House. That hammered small businesses, millions of people on Social 
Security and anyone who drives a car.
  Opponents say that passage of the Tax Limitation Amendment would be 
fiscal disaster for our country. The facts just do not support that 
argument. Already 28 States have some form of limitation on taxes or 
government spending, and 13 of those States require supermajorities to 
increase taxes, including my own home State of Washington.
  In addition, Mr. Speaker, the tax limitation amendment will help 
check runaway Federal spending because it is tougher to pass taxes. 
Congress and the President will need to make the tough choices 
necessary to slow the growth of the bloated Federal bureaucracy. Under 
our current system it is not easy to cut spending. Every line item 
expenditure has a constituency or interest group fighting to keep their 
pet program in place.
  History has shown us that tax increases do not reduce the deficit, 
they make it worse by fueling more Federal spending. Example: In 1982, 
Congress passed $217 billion in higher taxes with the promise they 
would match every dollar in new taxes with $2 in spending cuts. In 
fact, spending skyrocketed and the national debt went through the roof.
  Mr. Speaker, we must pass the tax limitation amendment today.

                          ____________________