[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 142 (Tuesday, October 21, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H8839-H8840]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1100
                H.R. 2564, MARRIAGE TAX ELIMINATION ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 21, 1997, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Weller] is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WELLER. Madam Speaker, today I stand here to speak in favor of 
H.R. 2564, legislation entitled the Marriage Tax Elimination Act, which 
many of us believe should be the centerpiece of next year's budget. And 
I am proud to report that the Marriage Tax Elimination Act today has 
222 cosponsors. Members of both parties have joined with us in this 
very important effort.
  Let me explain why elimination of the marriage tax is so important; 
why bipartisan support is needed and so necessary for the Marriage Tax 
Elimination Act, with some three very simple questions:
  Do Americans feel that it is fair that our Tax Code imposes a higher 
tax penalty on marriage? Do Americans feel that it is fair that 21 
million married working couples pay almost $1,400 more a year in taxes 
just because they are married; $1,400 more than an identical couple 
living together outside of marriage? Do Americans feel it is morally 
right that our Tax Code provides a financial incentive to divorce?
  I think the answer is pretty clear. The marriage tax is not only 
unfair, it is wrong, it is immoral. It is immoral that our Tax Code 
punishes our society's most basic institution, which is marriage. And, 
according to the Congressional Budget Office, this marriage tax is 
imposed on 21 million married working couples for an average of $1,400 
more in taxes just because they are married.
  Let me give my colleagues an example of a couple from my district in 
Illinois, a couple with the combined income of $61,000. This particular 
couple, and I will say the husband is a machinist at the Joliet 
Caterpillar plant, the wife is a schoolteacher at the Joliet public 
schools. They each have essentially identical incomes, right around 
$30,000.
  If this couple were two singles, say living together outside of 
marriage, they would each be in the 15-percent tax bracket, after 
considering the standard deductions and exemptions. But because as a 
married couple they file jointly, their combined income, which is 
almost $61,000, they are pushed into the 28-percent tax bracket.
  For this married couple, this machinist at the Joliet Caterpillar 
plant, this public schoolteacher at the Joliet public schools, they pay 
almost $1,400 more in higher taxes just because they got married. And 
do the American taxpayers believe that it is right that we impose a 
higher tax on this Joliet couple just because they are married?
  Think about it, what that $1,400 would mean for an average married 
working couple. Fourteen hundred dollars is several months worth of a 
car payment, tuition at the Joliet Junior College, or tuition at a 
local parochial or private or religious school for their child. Of 
course, even a portion of a downpayment on a home.
  Let me quote Mike Reading from Monee, IL, who many have talked with 
about the Marriage Tax Elimination Act, and Mike says, you know, ``You 
try and be honest and do things straight, and you get penalized for it. 
That's just not right.''
  Well, that is really what it is all about. This is an issue of right 
and wrong. The marriage tax is wrong. We proposed the Marriage Tax 
Elimination Act to do something about it, and we really want to provide 
an issue of fairness by giving working married couples the power to 
choose their filing status. Very simple.
  Under the Marriage Tax Elimination Act, this Joliet machinist and 
Joliet public schoolteacher would be able to choose to file each as 
single, even while they are married, to be able to enjoy the same tax 
rate as that couple who lives together outside of marriage. That would 
save this couple $1,400, money they could spend to meet their family's 
needs.
  And I am pleased that our efforts to eliminate the marriage tax 
penalty, which now has 222 cosponsors for the Marriage Tax Elimination 
Act, is gaining momentum. I am proud our efforts have been endorsed by 
the Joliet Herald News. The hometown newspaper for

[[Page H8840]]

this Joliet couple, this Joliet machinist and this Joliet public 
schoolteacher, has said that working families would welcome repeal of 
the marriage tax penalty.
  The Daily Journal, another paper in the 11th Congressional District, 
says: ``The marriage tax is an unfair imposition. The code should be 
rewritten to eliminate it.
  ``While we are all for simplicity in the Tax Code, the reality is 
that taxes drive social engineering.''
  The marriage tax should be eliminated and repealed today.
  I have a letter here from Robert Eckert of Jacksonville, FL, a tax 
preparer. He says, ``As a seasoned tax preparer and enrolled agent, I 
find the marriage penalty can be very significant, 12 percent of after 
tax income or 33-percent increase in tax liability.''
  My colleagues, group after group have endorsed the Marriage Tax 
Elimination Act. It should be the centerpiece. The bottom line is 
elimination of the marriage tax penalty should be the centerpiece of 
next year's budget agreement. I ask for bipartisan support and I ask 
for public support for our campaign to eliminate the marriage tax.

                          ____________________