[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 18 (Tuesday, February 2, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H313-H314]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           TIME FOR A TAX CUT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WELLER. Madam Speaker, I have the privilege of representing one 
of the most diverse districts in America. I represent the south side of 
Chicago and the south suburbs in Cook and Will Counties, industrial 
communities like Joliet, bedroom communities like Morris and New 
Lennox, farm towns like Tonica and Mazon.
  I hear one common message as I travel throughout this very diverse 
district and listen to the concerns of the people I have the privilege 
of representing. That message is fairly simple. That is, the American 
people want us to work together, they want us to come up with solutions 
to the challenges that we face.
  When I was elected in 1994, I was elected with that message of 
finding solutions and finding ways to change how Washington works, to 
make Washington more responsive to the folks back home.

[[Page H314]]

                              {time}  1745

  We were elected, of course, to bring those solutions to the 
challenges of balancing the budget, and raising take-home pay by 
lowering taxes, and reforming welfare and taming the IRS. But there 
were a lot of folks here in Washington who said, you know, those are 
challenges that you will never solve, that you will never be able to do 
that, and they said it just could not be done. And I am proud to say 
tonight that we did. We did do what we were told we could not do. I am 
proud that our accomplishments include the first balanced budget in 28 
years, the first middle class tax cut in 16 years, the first real 
welfare reform in a generation and the first ever reform of the IRS. 
Our efforts produced a balanced budget that has now generated a 
projected surplus of extra tax revenue of $2.3 trillion over the next 
10 years. We now have a $500 per child tax credit that is going to 
benefit 3 million children in my State of Illinois. Welfare reform that 
has succeeded in reducing welfare rolls by 25 percent, and taxpayers 
now enjoy the same rights with the IRS that they have in a courtroom. 
For the first time taxpayers are innocent until proven guilty.
  Madam Speaker, these are real accomplishments of this Congress, and I 
am proud to have been part of those accomplishments, but we also have 
greater challenges ahead of us.
  Because this Congress held the President's feet to the fire, we 
balanced the budget, and now we are collecting more in taxes than we 
are spending, something new here in Washington, and the question before 
this House and this Congress in Washington is: What do we do with that 
extra tax revenue, $2.3 trillion, an extra tax revenue? We are 
collecting more than we are spending.
  I think it is pretty clear. There was an agreement, a bipartisan 
agreement, that the first priority for this extra tax revenue is to 
save Social Security, to make sure that we keep Social Security on 
sound footing for our seniors and future generations, and I do want to 
note that last fall the Republican House passed and sent to the Senate 
legislation that would earmark 90 percent of the surplus of extra tax 
revenue for saving Social Security. Now this year President Clinton 
says he only needs 62 percent; we can save Social Security with 62 
percent. Well, we agreed that at a minimum we should set-aside 62 
percent of surplus tax revenues for saving Social Security.
  Of course the question is: What do we do with the rest? Bill Clinton 
says that we should save Social Security and then spend the rest, the 
remaining 38 percent of surplus tax revenues, on new government 
programs, on big government. I disagree and say that we should save 
Social Security and we should raise take-home pay by lowering taxes.
  The question is pretty simple before this House: Whose money is it to 
start with?
  You know, if you think about it, if you go to a restaurant, and you 
buy a meal, and you find that you overpay, the restaurant will usually 
say, wait a second, you have given us too much, you should take this 
back. You have paid too much, and that extra money they should get back 
to you. Well, it is clear today that this government is collecting too 
much, and it is time to give that too much back in a tax cut.
  There is a pretty simple question again. It is do we want to save 
Social Security and spend the rest of the surplus tax revenue, or do we 
save Social Security and give it back for working families, give it 
back by eliminating the marriage tax penalty and rewarding retirement 
savings?
  You know the Tax Foundation tells us that today's tax burden is too 
high. The average family in Illinois sends 40 percent of its annual 
income, its earnings, its salary, to government at local, State and 
Federal levels. Forty percent of your income goes to government at one 
level or another. And I also want to note that the IRS tells us that 
since Bill Clinton was elected President in 1992, taxes collected by 
the Federal Government from individuals and from families have gone up 
63 percent. The tax burden on America's families is the highest ever.
  My colleagues, we can save Social Security, we can eliminate the 
marriage tax penalty. Let us save Social Security, and let us lower 
taxes for working Americans.

                          ____________________