[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 123 (Tuesday, September 21, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H8387-H8388]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  ELIMINATION OF MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY

  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege of representing a very 
diverse district. I represent the south side of Chicago, south suburbs, 
and Cook and Will counties, industrial communities like Joliet, a lot 
of corn fields and farm towns too.
  When one represents such a diverse constituency, cities, suburbs, and 
country, one learns to listen and listen for those common concerns and 
common questions that are brought forward, whether by suburbanites or 
city dwellers or our farm folk.
  I find that in the district that I have the privilege of representing 
in Illinois that the common concerns are pretty simple, that folks want 
us to work together, they want us to solve our challenges, they want us 
to find solutions, and they want us to change how Washington works.
  As I look back over the last 5 years, I am pleased that we have 
worked to find those solutions, solutions to the challenges today of 
balancing the budget, of cutting taxes, and reforming our welfare 
system and we did change how Washington works.
  As I look back over the last 5 years, I am proud to say that we 
balanced the budget for the first time in 28 years, 3 years ago. We are 
now working on our third balanced budget in a row. We did such a great 
job that now we have all this extra money of three trillion surplus 
dollars projected over the next 10 years.
  We cut taxes for the middle class for the first time in 16 years, and 
three million Illinois children are going to benefit from the $500 per 
child tax credit. We reformed welfare for the first time in a 
generation.
  I am proud to say that in Illinois the welfare roles have been cut in 
half. In my home county of Grundy, our welfare roles have dropped by 84 
percent. We also tamed the tax collector, shifting the burden of proof 
off the backs of the taxpayer and onto the IRS. Those are fundamental 
changes, balancing the budget, cutting taxes, reforming our welfare 
system, and taming the tax collector.
  People often say, well, what is next? What other solutions is 
Congress going to find to the challenges that we face? Our agenda is 
simple. We want to strengthen our local schools. We want to lower the 
tax burden and make it fair for working families. We want to strengthen 
Social Security and Medicare. And we also want to pay down the national 
debt that was run up over 30 years of deficit spending.
  I often hear common questions in the district I represent, whether at 
a union hall or the VFW or the Chamber of Commerce or a coffee shop or 
a grain elevator. People often say, when are you folks in Washington 
going to stop raiding the Social Security Trust Fund?
  I am proud to say this Republican Congress is putting a stop to that. 
In fact, this year we are walling off the Social Security Trust Fund, 
setting aside a hundred percent of Social Security for the first time 
in 30 years for Social Security only.
  The President says he wants to set aside 62 percent. We believe in a 
hundred percent of Social Security for Social Security. That means $200 
billion

[[Page H8388]]

more to strengthen Social Security and Medicare.
  I am often asked, people never also talk about that huge national 
debt that was built up over the 30 years of deficit spending beginning 
in the 1960s. I am proud to say that, under the Republican balanced 
budget, we pay down $2.2 trillion of the national debt, the public 
debt, over the next few years; and that is about $200 billion more than 
the President would under his proposal.
  The question that I am also often asked is when are we going to do 
something about the tax code. People of course are fed up that 40 
percent of the average family's income goes to Washington and the State 
capital and the county courthouse and the local government, and that 
tax burden is the highest in peacetime history. But they are also 
frustrated about the complexity of our tax code and the unfairness of 
our tax code.
  Over the last couple of years I have often asked this question in the 
well of the House, and that is, is it right, is it fair that under our 
tax code married working couples pay more in taxes? A husband and wife 
who are both in the workforce pay more in taxes than an identical 
couple that live outside of the marriage. Is it right, is it fair that 
under our tax code that 21 million married, working couples pay on 
average $1,400 more in higher taxes just because they are married? Of 
course not. It is wrong that under our tax code that 21 million 
married, working couples pay $1,400 more just because they are married.
  I have a photo here of a young couple in Joliet, Illinois, one of the 
communities that I represent, Michelle and Shad Hallihan. They are 
public school teachers in the Joliet public school system. They just 
had a baby. They are celebrating the birth of a child. They suffer the 
marriage tax penalty because they are both in the workforce. And under 
our tax code this young couple who just had a baby, who is just 
starting their life together as a family, pays higher taxes just 
because they chose to get married.
  Now, had they chose to live together outside of marriage they would 
not pay those higher taxes. I am proud to say the House and Senate 
passed legislation which will eliminate the marriage tax penalty for 
the majority of those who suffer it. It is a key part; it is an 
essential part of the Financial Freedom Act, legislation that will 
lower the tax burden as well as simplify the tax code and bring 
fairness to the tax code.
  The question of the day is, Mr. President, are you going to join with 
us eliminating the marriage tax penalty to help hard-working, young 
Americans, actually Americans of every age, because seniors suffer the 
marriage tax penalty, but people like Michelle and Shad Hallihan who 
suffer the marriage tax penalty?
  Our legislation eliminates the marriage tax penalty for a majority of 
those who suffer it. It should be a bipartisan effort. We ask the 
President to join with us, sign the tax cut, sign the Financial Freedom 
Act, and eliminate the marriage tax penalty.

                          ____________________