[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 139 (Wednesday, October 8, 1997)]
[House]
[Page H8697]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    GROUNDHOG DAY IN WASHINGTON, DC

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Paxon] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PAXON. Mr. Speaker, I do not know how many of my colleagues have 
had the chance to enjoy a great movie; it is called ``Groundhog Day.'' 
And in there, Bill Murray had the recurring problem of waking up and it 
was Groundhog Day again and again and again, and he had to live the 
same experiences over and over and over again.
  Well, we have our own version of Groundhog Day right here in 
Washington, D.C., because it was just 4 years ago, it seems like 
yesterday, that the Clinton administration proposed a Btu tax, and it 
was met with absolute outrage from across this country. Republicans and 
Democrats, people from all corners of America, rose up in indignation 
over a Congress, then controlled by the Democrats, that would move 
forward with such an onerous and burdensome tax that hits the elderly, 
the poor, the working middle class so unfairly, so regressively.
  Well, it is Groundhog Day all over again. And we wake up to find 
what? That the Clinton administration has not learned the lessons; they 
want to relive that day over again of proposing another Btu tax on the 
American people.
  Saturday, the Washington Times reported that the administration has 
an interagency analysis team that is looking at tax alternatives to 
fund the costs associated with the so-called global warming treaty that 
they are considering signing in Japan later this year. Of course, they 
want to keep this quiet. They did not want to let this get out. But out 
it has come.
  That information from the Washington Times, combined with information 
uncovered by the Committee on Commerce, on which I serve, indicates 
that the severity of the tax that they are talking about makes what 
happened in 1993 look like child's play.
  Let me just tell my colleagues about it. What they are talking about 
is, decreasing so-called greenhouse gases by just 20 percent by the 
year 2010 could require an increase in the Btu tax five times greater 
than that proposed by the Clinton administration in 1993.
  What would that mean? A tax of just $200 per ton on carbon could 
result in a 60 cent per gallon gasoline tax increase. I did not say the 
total tax would be 60 cents a gallon. The increase would be 60 cents a 
gallon. Thank you, Mr. President.
  They are also talking about, on top of that, a 50-percent increase in 
the cost of home heating fuel. For those of us who need to heat our 
homes in the winter, that is devastating. It harms older Americans 
disproportionately, the working poor, middle-class taxpayers. It will 
hit nursing homes, veterans' hospitals, right between the eyes.
  It will result in economic disaster, a 4.2 percent reduction, or $350 
billion reduction in our Nation's Gross Domestic Product in year one of 
this Btu tax, a loss of over a million jobs in the first year and 
600,000 jobs lost every year after the first year right through the 
year 2020.
  I just do not believe we can afford Groundhog Day, to live this 
nightmare all over again that we experienced in 1993. That is why I am 
filing a sense of Congress resolution putting us on record in 
opposition, making clear to the administration that we have no 
intention in this Congress, this Republican Congress, of passing any 
Btu taxes and putting that burden on the backs of the American people.
  I am very pleased that the National Taxpayers Union, the foremost 
organization fighting higher taxes, has come out in favor of this sense 
of Congress resolution and is going to join with us in this effort. But 
there is going to be a fight. I know there are a lot of people in this 
body who think this is a no-brainer, there is no chance this is going 
to move.
  Let me tell my colleagues, we have an administration official who was 
quoted, on background of course, or anonymously, in the Washington 
Times as saying, in regard to this, yeah, it is going to be tough, but 
``we have a lot of educating to do.''

                              {time}  1815

  I do not think there is enough educating to do to convince the 
American people that this Congress should take out of their pockets 
that kind of money, a 60-cent-a-gallon gas increase, or a doubling of 
home energy costs. That is just wrong. We cannot afford it, families 
cannot afford it, and it has to stop.
  This is particularly unfair when we consider the fact that the 
administration has already exempted countries like China and India, and 
of course they will not have to pay these energy costs to pay for the 
global treaty being put in effect, only American taxpayers. That is 
just wrong and it is going to harm us even more.
  My colleagues, I do not think there is any question that this 
excessive greenhouse tax appears to have all of the makings of a global 
group hug, leaving America's working poor, the middle class and the 
elderly flat out in the cold. We cannot afford it. I just hope for a 
change that Washington learns its lessons.
  Usually Washington, under this administration, learns lessons slowly. 
This time, I am hoping that the American people will contact their 
Congressmen and women and when we gather back here, I know we are going 
to hear about it from each other, that when folks at home find out 
about this they are going to be indignant. They are saying we cannot 
afford a 60-cent-a-gallon gas tax increase or anything close to that, 
or any increase in our home energy costs.
  Mr. Speaker, it is time to send a message loud and clear to the 
administration: We are not going to repeat the mistakes that they have 
tried to put on the backs of this country in the past.

                          ____________________