[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 102 (Monday, July 19, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H5753-H5754]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         THE REPUBLICAN AGENDA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 19, 1999, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege of representing a very, 
very diverse district. I represent the south side of Chicago, the south 
suburbs in Cook and Will Counties, industrial communities like 
Joliette, LaSalle, a lot of cornfields and farm towns. When one 
represents such a diverse district, city, suburbs and country, one 
listens for those comments and concerns, issues and problems and 
questions that link the city and the suburbs and the country.
  I have often heard, over the course of the last 4\1/2\ years that I 
have had the privilege of being in this House, a very common message, 
and that is the common message of working together and solving the 
challenges that we face; that they want us here in the Congress to work 
together, solve the challenges that we face, and I am pretty proud in 
the last 4 years how we have met that challenge that the folks back 
home have given me: balancing the budget for the first time in 28 
years, cutting taxes for the middle class for the first time in 16 
years, and, of course, reforming our failed welfare system for the 
first time in over a generation. Those are all big accomplishments, big 
accomplishments that came from a committed effort in this Congress over 
the last 4 years to change how Washington works to make Washington more 
responsive to the folks back home.
  As a result now, that success, particularly in balancing the budget 
and cutting taxes, we have an economy that is doing better than we 
anticipated. Nine years, since 1991, we have been enjoying economic 
growth. Tying that in with a balanced budget, we now have projected $3 
trillion surplus of extra money over the next 10 years. That is a lot 
of money when we think about it, because our Federal budget is only 
$1.7 billion.
  Well, as we work on the Republican agenda this year of good schools 
and low taxes and a secure retirement, we have the challenge before us 
of what to do with the extra money, what to do with the surplus; and of 
course, historically in Washington they always want to spend it on new 
government.
  But if we look at the markup of that money, most of it is Social 
Security. I am really proud that the Republican budget does something 
that the folks back home have told me that we should do for a long 
time, and that is the Republican budget stops the raid on Social 
Security that has gone on for 30 years. Republicans put a stop to it 
this year. In fact, in doing so, we set aside two-thirds of the surplus 
of extra tax revenue for retirement security, meaning we use those 
funds to shrink Social Security and Medicare so that they are there for 
3 generations from now, and that is the centerpiece and the purpose of 
the Social Security and Medicare lock box.
  But under our budget by doing that, we take the so-called surplus and 
we set aside two-thirds of the surplus for Medicare and Social 
Security, one-third for tax cuts, because we believe that if we look at 
the tax burden today on families, and I often hear whether I am at the 
union hall or the VFW or the local chamber or the coffee shop on Main 
Street or the grain elevator out in the country, folks are frustrated 
by the tax burden being so high.
  In fact, since 1985, the tax burden on individuals has gone up. In 
fact, it has doubled since 1985, and a portion of our economy, the 
gross domestic product that now goes to the Federal Government in taxes 
is the highest level ever in peacetime history. Mr. Speaker, 21 percent 
of our economy is now consumed by the Federal Government in the burden 
of taxes.
  Not only do people back home tell me that they feel taxes are too 
high, but they are frustrated with how complex and complicated and also 
how unfair our tax code is. They bring up real concerns about issues 
such as the marriage tax penalty.
  And I have Shad and Michelle Hallihan here, a young couple, two 
schoolteachers in Joliette, Illinois, who just got married. In fact, 
they are expecting a baby any day now. Well, because they are married 
and both work, their combined incomes when they file jointly as a 
married couple pushes them into a higher tax bracket. That is called 
the marriage tax penalty.

[[Page H5754]]

  For couples such as Shad and Michelle Hallihan, the marriage tax 
penalty, on average, is about $1,400 a year in higher taxes just 
because they are married. Had Shad and Michelle chose not to get 
married, they would have saved about $1,400 a year in taxes. That is 
wrong. Just one of the complications in our tax code.
  This is why I am so pleased as a member of the Committee on Ways and 
Means that we succeeded this past week in passing legislation which 
lowers the tax burden for families, addresses the need to simplify the 
tax code and the unfairness in the tax code, and also addresses the 
need through simplification and fairness, and particularly in treatment 
of small business, to help keep our economy growing, keeping this 9-
year period of economic growth continuing into the 21st century.
  Mr. Speaker, 42 million married working people will enjoy the 
marriage tax relief that is provided in the Committee on Ways and 
Means-produced tax cut, the Financial Freedom Act of 1999. We help 
married couples. We also address the need to help family farmers and 
family businesses, many of whom are put out of business when the 
founder passes on because of the so-called death tax which can consume 
up to 55 percent of the family farm or family business. That is just 
wrong. We eliminate the death tax in the Financial Freedom Act of 1999.
  I am often asked by folks back home, is there not a way we can make 
it easier and more affordable to go to college and send our kids to 
school; if I am an adult who wants to go back to school to do that as 
well, we provide education relief. We address the marriage tax relief, 
we eliminate the death tax, we help small business and family farmers, 
and we help families better afford education.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask for bipartisan support for this legislation, which 
I hope will be voted on later this week.

                          ____________________