[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 61 (Tuesday, May 14, 2002)]
[House]
[Page H2392]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page H2392]]
                          MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 23, 2002, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, this week we have an important piece of 
legislation which is coming to the floor, a product of the Committee on 
Ways and Means, legislation which is entitled H.R. 4626, Encouraging 
Work and Supporting Marriage Act of 2002. Essentially this legislation 
does two things: it expands and reforms the work opportunity tax 
credit, a hiring incentive to give those on welfare an opportunity to 
go to work.
  Yesterday, I stood with President Bush in Chicago at the United 
Parcel Service facility where he highlighted this very program which 
has provided opportunities for thousands and thousands of Chicago 
residents to go from welfare to work; and clearly the Work Opportunity 
Tax Credit, which was a creation of Ronald Reagan, is one of those 
provisions which is working as we see our Nation's welfare rolls cut in 
half and 9 million Americans move from welfare to work.
  The other key part of the Encouraging Work and Supporting Marriage 
Act of 2002 is legislation which much more quickly phases in the 
marriage tax relief provisions which are part of what we nicknamed the 
Bush tax cut signed into law last year.
  Over the last several years, I have had the opportunity to come to 
this floor and talk about the unfairness of our complicated Tax Code 
and how our current Tax Code historically has punished marriage, a very 
basic institution in our society. In fact, I believe the most important 
institution in our society is marriage. Unfortunately, up until 
President Bush's signature signing the Bush tax cut into law, our Tax 
Code punished marriage.
  Let me give an example of what the marriage tax penalty is and was. 
Under our Tax Code prior to the Bush tax cut, 43 million married 
working couples paid on average $1,700 more in higher taxes just 
because they were married. I do not believe that is right; I do not 
believe that is fair. And I am proud to say that House Republicans made 
it a priority to work with the President to eliminate the marriage tax 
penalty.
  I would also note what creates the marriage tax penalty is married 
couples file their taxes jointly. A single person files single and 
married couples file jointly, which means there is a combined income. 
If there are two incomes, that pushes the couple into a higher tax 
bracket and in most cases creates the marriage tax penalty.
  I have a couple here from my district I would like to introduce, Jose 
and Magdalena Castillo from Joliet, Illinois. They are both in the 
workforce. They have a son, Eduardo, as well as a daughter, Carolina. 
They paid about $1,200 in higher taxes just because they are married 
prior to the Bush tax cut.
  I think it is wrong. Thanks to the Bush tax cut, Jose and Magdalena 
Castillo of Joliet, Illinois, saw their marriage tax penalty 
eliminated. Of course, we are going to have legislation this week which 
is going to help low- and moderate-income married couples. It will more 
quickly phase in so married couples in the low- and moderate-income 
range will see much quicker marriage tax relief.
  But I would also note, unfortunately because of the arcane rules of 
Congress, not of the House but of the other body, that the Bush tax cut 
was forced to be temporary which means it expires at a certain point; 
and the 100 million American taxpayers who have seen their taxes 
lowered, which is everybody who pays income taxes has seen their income 
taxes lowered, and 3.9 million families with children have been totally 
removed from the income tax rolls, which means thanks to the Bush tax 
cut, they no longer pay income taxes, they will see those taxes 
reimposed unless we make permanent the Bush tax cut.
  Now for couples like Jose and Magdalena Castillo of Joliet, Illinois, 
they are going to see their marriage tax penalty reimposed; and they 
will be suffering it once again unless we make the Bush tax cut 
permanent.
  I am proud to say that this House under the leadership of the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert) and the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Thomas), the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, and the 
persistence and convictions of the House Republican majority, we have 
voted in the House to make the Bush tax cut permanent because we do not 
want to see couples such as Jose and Magdalena Castillo of Joliet, 
Illinois, have to pay that marriage tax penalty again. It is wrong; it 
is unfair. And it is wrong that under our Tax Code, married couples 
paid higher taxes just because they are married.
  My hope is before the end of this year that we will be able to obtain 
bipartisan support in both the House and Senate for adoption of a 
permanency for the Bush tax cut, for marriage tax penalty relief, for 
elimination of the death tax, for across-the-board rate reductions, for 
retirement savings as well as the opportunities to save for college 
education.
  Those are good things; but unfortunately, they are temporary. Unless 
we make the Bush tax cut permanent, all of those things, marriage tax 
penalty relief, death tax repeal, retirement savings opportunities by 
increased contributions to IRAs and 401(k)s, an opportunity to see 
taxes lowered overall because of rate reductions for everyone, those 
taxes are going to go back up. Let us make the Bush tax cut permanent. 
Let us help couples such as Jose and Magdalena Castillo see their 
marriage tax penalty eliminated permanently. Let us get the Senate and 
the House to make the Bush tax cut permanent.

                          ____________________