[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 137 (Monday, October 5, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11406-S11407]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        THE TAXPAYER RELIEF ACT

  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I rise in support of tax relief for 
the American people and in support of the House-passed legislation that 
will provide taxpayer relief today.
  Tax collections, it is estimated, will exceed over $8 trillion in the 
next 5 years. An $80 billion tax cut--that is what the House of 
Representatives cut--an $80 billion tax cut amounts to about one penny 
savings on every dollar paid in to the Federal Government. I don't 
believe that is too much out of this surplus that we are realizing 
because of a robust economy and because of restraints on spending, as 
much waste as therestill is. We have slowed the growth of Federal 
spending and, as a result of that, for the first time in 29 years, we 
have a balanced budget, we have a surplus, and it is only right and it 
is only proper that a portion of that be returned to the American 
people.
  I think the only problem with the House-passed tax cut is that it is 
too little, but we should at least bring it forward, and we should at 
least have that debate on the floor of the U.S. Senate.
  Under the Clinton administration, taxes have risen to the highest 
level in peacetime history. If Ben Franklin was right, that the only 
thing that is certain is death and taxes, this administration has made 
it equally true that nothing is as certain as spending and 
overtaxation. We have the highest tax rate in peacetime history. Taxes 
are at a historic high at a level of 21 percent of the gross domestic 
product.
  According to data from the OMB, total Federal receipts will amount to 
19.9 percent of the GDP in 1998 and 20.1 percent of the GDP in 1999. 
That tells me one thing. That tells me that even under a Republican-
controlled House and Senate, Government continues to grow and 
Government revenues continue to grow as well.
  In my home State of Arkansas, this amount of taxation translates into 
$7,352 in taxes per capita in 1998. That is an onerous burden to put on 
a low-income State. It is a heavy burden to place upon people anywhere.
  In Connecticut, the tax burden is $15,525 per capita.
  The typical American family sees 38 percent of its income going to 
pay for taxes, as opposed to 28 percent for food, for clothing, for 
housing and only 3.6 percent going to savings--38 percent for taxes--
Federal, State and local level--28 percent for food, clothing and 
housing.
  Mr. President, it is time to stop picking the pockets of American 
taxpayers, and it is time to put money back in their pockets and untie 
their hands. The Taxpayer Relief Act does just that by giving the 
American people a tax cut of $80.1 billion.
  Couples today who want to be responsibly married, to share their 
lives together, have a slap in the face immediately from the Federal 
Government. Twenty-one million couples pay an average of $1,400 extra 
in taxes for pursuing the right course of marriage.
  The Taxpayer Relief Act takes away this stinging insult by allowing 
married couples who file jointly to claim a standard deduction twice 
the amount of the standard deduction for a single taxpayer. It also 
increases the basic standard deduction for married taxpayers who file 
separately to equal the basic standard deduction for singles. Even as 
they try to raise a family with limited resources and increasing costs, 
parents strain under this very heavy burden of taxation.
  The House-passed bill protects important tax credits, including 
credits for children, the $500-per-child tax credit, new credits for 
adoption and education, and reduces the alternative minimum tax as 
well.
  All of these are important steps. They are, I believe, the right 
course for this Congress to take. I regret the President's commitment 
to veto any tax-cut legislation this year.
  American farmers and ranchers have had to face a terribly hard time 
with unpredictable and damaging weather trends that have destroyed 
their harvest and livelihood, only to face income erosion from 
unpredictable and damaging tax regulations as well. The House-passed 
bill would provide greater stability amidst this turmoil by income 
averaging, currently set to expire in the year 2000, and it would make 
that permanent. Farmers and ranchers would be able to benefit from the 
100 percent health insurance deductibility. All of these things would 
provide relief for the agricultural community.
  Men and women attempting to manage their money wisely find the 
Government chipping away at their savings, through taxation on interest 
and dividends, and the Taxpayer Relief Act will exclude the first $200 
in interest and dividends that they receive. We say we want the 
American people to save and invest, and yet we penalize them with our 
Tax Code. Some say the $200 exclusion is not very much. That exclusion 
will eliminate all taxation on interest and dividends for 32 million 
people in this country.
  When taxpayers become senior citizens, their Social Security earnings 
limit will be increased under this legislation, between full retirement 
age and age 70, from $17,000 in fiscal year 1999 to almost $40,000 in 
fiscal year 2008.
  These are important provisions, certainly not the least of which is 
the accelerated relief that will be provided from the death tax, a 
heinous provision

[[Page S11407]]

in our Tax Code that says if you work hard enough, save enough, invest 
well enough, Uncle Sam is going to reach into your grave, reach into 
your pocket and take 55 percent of what you own. The American dream is 
to work hard enough, invest enough, and pass them on to your children 
and give them a little better start than you had.
  The death tax is just the opposite. It is one of the most anti-
American dream provisions in the Tax Code. The bill passed from the 
House would accelerate raising that exclusion to 41 million. It would 
be a small step in providing relief from the death tax.
  There are those who say we can't cut taxes this year; we have to give 
it all to Social Security. It is interesting to me that those who argue 
that have yet to come forward with a save Social Security plan. They 
have yet to come forward with a Social Security reform plan, but they 
have advocated billions of dollars in new spending.
  Mr. President, I wish I had much longer to elaborate on this, but I 
quote the President when on May 26 of this year, he said:

       We can use these good times to honor those who've put in a 
     lifetime of work and prepare for the future retirement of the 
     baby boomers by saving the Social Security system for 
     generations to come. Or we can give in to the temptation in 
     this election year to squander our surpluses the moment they 
     start coming in.

  Do you get the picture? If you take the surplus and spend it on new 
spending programs, that is good, but if you return it to the American 
people in the form of tax relief, that is squandering. The very 
President who made that statement has advocated billions of dollars in 
additional spending--$5.8 billion already spent--and a request in 
supplemental funds for $14.148 billion, including almost $2 billion for 
Bosnia. That is coming out of this sacrosanct untouchable surplus.
  The Taxpayer Relief Act just says let's return $7 billion of that 
surplus in the first year, 1999, to the American people. I believe that 
is what we should do. Instead of enacting $150 billion in new spending 
programs, we should return one penny on the dollar, which is what the 
Taxpayer Relief Act does, out of what they are paying into the 
Government back to them in the form of tax relief.
  The debate hasn't changed: higher taxes and more Government; lower 
taxes and less Government. We were given that mandate by the American 
people, and we should enjoin that debate by passing the Taxpayer Relief 
Act this year, sending it to the President and letting him decide 
whether or not he will give the American people the relief they so much 
deserve.
  I thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kyl). The Chair, in his capacity as a 
Senator from the State of Arizona, suggests the absence of a quorum. 
The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MACK. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call 
be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I thank the Chair.
  (The remarks of Mr. Mack pertaining to the submission of S. Res. 286 
are located in today's Record under ``Submission of Concurrent and 
Senate Resolutions.'')
  Mr. MACK. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________