[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 91 (Tuesday, July 9, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H4353-H4354]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY

  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to briefly 
address the House on an issue, I believe, of importance to 36 million 
married working couples. This past year the House of Representatives 
and President Bush had a great accomplishment, that was, that we cut 
taxes across the board, benefiting every taxpaying American. In fact, 
over 100 million households have seen their Federal taxes lowered as a 
result of what we call the Bush tax cut; 3.9 million American families 
with children no longer pay Federal income taxes as a result of the 
Bush tax cut. We eliminate the marriage tax penalty; we wipe out the 
death tax; we make it easier to save for retirement as well as for 
education. Unfortunately, because of a quirk or an arcane rule over in 
the other body, the Bush tax cut ended up being a temporary measure. 
That means if we fail to make permanent the Bush tax cut, taxes will go 
back up for over 100 million American taxpaying households.
  I want to draw attention to one of the provisions, a provision which 
many of us have worked on over the last several years that is a 
fundamental issue of fairness and something we call the marriage tax 
penalty. Unfortunately, prior to the Bush tax cut being signed into 
law, 36 million married working couples paid higher taxes just because 
they are married. They paid higher taxes because when both husband and 
wife are in the workforce and you combine your income and you file 
jointly, it pushes you into a higher tax bracket and that creates the 
marriage tax penalty. If we allow the Bush tax cut to expire, 36 
million married couples will pay about $1,700 more in higher taxes as a 
result of the marriage penalty being restored. That is a $42 billion 
tax increase.
  Let me introduce a couple from the district that I represent in the 
south suburbs of Chicago, from Joliet, Illinois, Jose and Magdalena 
Castillo, their son Eduardo, their daughter Carolina. They live in 
Joliet, Illinois, they are hard-working Americans, and they suffered 
the marriage tax penalty prior to the Bush tax cut being signed into 
law. The marriage tax penalty for Jose and Magdalena Castillo was about 
$1,150. There are some people here in Washington who think that we 
should allow the marriage tax penalty provision to expire because they 
want to spend that money here in Washington. For the, $1,150 is chump 
change here in Washington; but for a couple such as Jose and Magdalena 
Castillo of Joliet, Illinois, a hard-working couple that benefits from 
the marriage tax relief in the Bush tax cut, $1,150, that is several 
months' worth of child care for Eduardo and Carolina while they are at 
work. That is several months' worth of car payments. It is a 
significant amount of money they could set aside in their IRA or their 
education savings account for retirement or for their children's 
education.
  We need to make permanent the marriage tax penalty relief that this 
House passed this past year and was signed into law by President Bush. 
I am proud to say that just a few weeks ago the House of 
Representatives passed overwhelmingly, every House Republican voted 
``yes'' and I also want to note that 60 Democrats broke with their 
leadership and joined with the Republicans in voting to make permanent 
the marriage tax relief provisions that we passed and were signed into 
law this past year. As a result of making it permanent, we will see 
protection for Jose and Magdalena Castillo. We will also see that Jose 
and Magdalena Castillo and 36 million couples like them will no longer 
pay the marriage tax penalty ever. That is why we need to make it 
permanent.
  Again, during this year as we debate whether or not to make permanent 
the elimination of the marriage tax penalty, there will be those on the 
other side who argue they need to spend the money here in Washington, 
that $1,150 for Jose and Magdalena Castillo does not really matter 
because it is really not a lot of money. The bottom line is it is a 
fairness issue. Is it right or is it wrong that under our Tax Code that 
a couple who choose to get married should suffer higher taxes? I think 
it is wrong that we would want to punish society's most basic 
institution.
  The bottom line is, this House of Representatives has voted 
overwhelmingly to make permanent the elimination of the marriage tax 
penalty. My

[[Page H4354]]

hope is that the Senate and the House will join together, that we will 
have bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, and that we will 
send to the President this year legislation to permanently eliminate 
the marriage tax penalty. Because if we do not, couples such as Jose 
and Magdalena Castillo of Joliet, Illinois, will see a $1,150 tax 
increase just because they are married if we fail to make permanent the 
elimination of the marriage tax penalty. And if you add up all the 
couples across America who benefit from the elimination of the marriage 
tax penalty, 36 million married working couples, it would be a $42 
billion tax increase overall.
  Let us protect Jose and Magdalena Castillo. Let us permanently 
eliminate the marriage tax penalty. Let us work together and let us get 
it done this year.

                          ____________________