[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 51 (Tuesday, April 30, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H1689-H1690]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      PROVIDING PERMANENT TAX CUTS

  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today to draw attention 
to an issue that so many in this House have worked on over the last 
several years and that is an issue of fairness.
  Over the last several years we have asked a basic question. Is it 
right, is it fair, that under our tax code a married working couple, 
where both the husband and wife are in the workforce, pay higher taxes 
than if they chose not to get married? That is an issue I was so 
pleased and when this House under the gentleman from Illinois' (Mr. 
Hastert) leadership and with the leadership of the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Thomas) of the Ways and Means Committee, that we 
succeeded as part of what is now known as the Bush tax cut, succeeded 
in passing legislation which eliminated the marriage tax penalty for 
almost 43 million married working couples who on average paid $1,700 
more in higher taxes.
  Let me give my colleagues an example of a married couple from Joliet, 
Illinois. This is Jose and Magdalena Castillo. They are laborers in 
Joliet, Illinois. They have a combined income of about $85,000. Their 
marriage tax penalty prior to the Bush tax cut was about $1,125 that 
Jose and Magdalena paid in higher taxes just because they are married. 
I also want to introduce their children, Eduardo and Carolina Castillo, 
and their benefit of the Bush tax cut from the doubling of the $500 per 
child tax credit as well. Of course, that was $500. We raised that to 
$1,000.
  Here is the issue. Unfortunately, there are some arcane rules over in 
the other body which may require that the Bush tax cut sunset in the 
year 2011. What that means is in a few years, elimination of the 
marriage tax penalty and the $1,000 per child tax credit that the 
Castillo family benefits from will be eliminated, which means that 
their taxes will go up. Taxes go up $1,000 per child, as well as at 
least $1,125 a year when the marriage tax penalty elimination expires.
  We had a very, very important vote, an important vote that was 
important for families like Jose and Magdalena Castillo on this House 
floor 2 weeks ago, and that vote was on making the Bush tax cut 
permanent. What that vote was all about was whether or not to impose a 
tax increase on over 100 million American taxpayers who benefit from 
the Bush tax cut, because if we fail to make the Bush tax cut 
permanent, which lowered rates for all taxpayers, which provided 
opportunities to set aside more in an IRA and a 401(k) and an education 
savings account, eliminated the marriage tax penalty for 43 million 
company couples like Jose and Magdalena Castillo, and also wiped out 
the death tax so we can keep the family farm and the family business in 
the family and in business when the founder passes on.
  Unfortunately, as I said earlier, it is going to expire, and 
unfortunately, our friends on the other side of the aisle 
overwhelmingly on the Democratic side voted to increase taxes by 
opposing efforts to make permanent the Bush tax cut. That is why I 
think it is very, very important that we put a human face on those who 
would suffer and be hurt by Democratic efforts to raise taxes once 
again, by either suspending, eliminating or preventing the permanency 
of what we now call as the Bush tax cut.
  As I said earlier, there are 43 million couples like Jose and 
Magdalena Castillo who benefit from the marriage tax penalty relief in 
the Bush tax cut, and in this case, Jose and Magdalena also benefit 
from $1,000 per child tax credit which helps families with children. 
They would also lose that if we fail to make the Bush tax cut 
permanent.
  It is often said, and those who argue against cutting taxes always 
say, that if someone pays taxes they are rich. We know that over 100 
million Americans benefit from the Bush tax cut. Some of those who 
really truly benefited are 3.9 million Americans who no longer pay 
Federal income taxes because of the Bush tax cut that we moved through 
this House of Representatives, thanks to the leadership of the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), and if the Democrats succeed in 
rescinding or repealing or preventing the permanency of the Bush tax 
cut, 3.9 million Americans, including 3 million Americans with 
children, will once again be placed back on the tax rolls. Voting 
against permanency of the Bush tax cut is a tax increase.
  Let me go back to the issue which I first raised at the beginning of 
my remarks, and that is the whole issue of fairness. The tax code is 
complicated, and prior to the Bush tax cut, the complications of our 
Federal income tax forced 43 million Americans like Jose and Magdalena 
Castillo to pay higher taxes just because they are married.
  What caused that is Jose and Magdalena are each in the workforce, 
they each work as laborers, and when

[[Page H1690]]

someone gets married, they file their taxes jointly which pushes them 
into a higher tax bracket. We fixed that in the Bush tax cut. Let us 
make marriage tax elimination permanent.
  My hope is before the end of this year that our friends in the other 
body as well as our friends on the other side of the aisle will work 
with us to help couples like Jose and Magdalena Castillo.

                          ____________________