[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 2]
[House]
[Page 2259]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             CONGRESS SET TO ELIMINATE MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY

  (Mr. WELLER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WELLER. Madam Speaker, I rise to really announce some good news, 
and that is we are ready to make progress on some unfinished business, 
and that is the issue of eliminating discrimination against married 
working couples.
  My colleagues, let us ask a few questions. Is it not time we 
eliminated the marriage tax penalty? Is it right--really, is it right--
that under our Tax Code married working couples pay higher taxes just 
because they are married? Is it fair that 21 million married working 
couples pay on average $1,400 more just because they are married than 
an identical couple living together outside of marriage? In Illinois 
$1,400 is one year's tuition at the local community college.
  It is simply wrong we are punishing married working couples. 
Yesterday, we introduced H.R. 6, the Marriage Tax Elimination Act, 
legislation that now has 224 cosponsors. Think about that; 224 
cosponsors. How often do we have a majority of the House as cosponsors 
of legislation on its first day? That is good news.
  I believe we can work together this year to eliminate the most unfair 
discrimination in the tax code. Let us work together, let us work in a 
bipartisan way, let us eliminate the marriage tax penalty.
  Madam Speaker, I include for the Record a letter from a constituent 
of mine and a press release from the Speaker of the House on the 
subject matter of my speech this morning.

                                                January 6, 1999.  
       Dear Congressman Weller: Over the past year or so, my 
     husband Shad and I have read with some surprise and some 
     relief about your efforts to eliminate the ``marriage tax 
     penalty.'' When we set out to marry, no one warned us such a 
     tax even existed on married couples. Our relief, of course, 
     came in knowing that our U.S. Representative is trying to do 
     something to right the wrong.
       Shad and I are both teachers in Will County. Shad teaches 
     11th grade English and I teach junior high reading. Neither 
     of us make a lot of money, but we are dedicated to our jobs 
     and the children we teach. You can imagine our surprise when 
     we realized how the marriage tax affects us. When we followed 
     up with tax preparers and your staff, we learned that our 
     1997 salaries are facing a $957.00 marriage tax penalty.
       We have actually read articles in the paper where scholars 
     have dismissed the marriage tax as inconsequential on a 
     working family's day to day struggle to made ends meet. 
     Instead, they argue that the amount of money lost to the 
     government by eliminating the marriage tax would be a great 
     ``tragedy.'' In fact, during last year's elections, I heard a 
     candidate suggest that if $1,400 plays such a large stake in 
     a couples decision to marry, perhaps they have no business 
     getting married in the first place. Although I am no economic 
     scholar, and Shad and I would be married despite the 
     financial consequences the government places on our marriage, 
     I take offense to that sort of thought process.
       Fourteen hundred dollars may not seem like a lot to some, 
     but as we prepare to bring our first child into the world, we 
     will face a penalty of $957. That $957 could buy 3000 diapers 
     or pay for a years worth of tuition for our graduate school 
     education. Aside from the poor message the marrige tax sends 
     to young couples like ourselves, the money it costs--no mater 
     how large or small the amount--could be used on things we 
     need now. It troubles me to know that as Shad and I continue 
     to teach and earn a little more money as time goes by, so too 
     will our ``marriage tax'' grow.
       It appears to me Congressman Weller, eliminating the 
     marriage tax seems to be the right choice. Shad and I will 
     continue to follow your efforts in Washington with great 
     interest (as will our married friends back home). Last year 
     it appeared that Washington was ready to eliminate the 
     marriage tax. What went wrong?
           Sincerely,
     Michelle and Shad Halklan.  
                                  ____


  Speaker's Statement on Reserving H.R. 6 for Repeal of Marriage Tax 
                                Penalty

       Washington, D.C.--House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) 
     today released the following statement on reserving H.R. 6 
     for the Marriage Tax Penalty Elimination Act:
       ``It's ridiculous that our onerous tax code makes it more 
     expensive to be married than to be single. The government 
     should not punish married working couples by taking more of 
     their hard-earned money in taxes than an identical couple 
     living outside of marriage. I am proud to reserve one of this 
     Congress' top bills, H.R. 6, for the Marriage Tax Penalty 
     Elimination Act.
       ``The Republican-led Congress has a strong commitment to 
     returning more of each American's hard-earned money to his or 
     her own pocket. The government often acts as if it owns the 
     earnings of all Americans, as if each American worked for the 
     government and not the other way around. This is wrong. We 
     believe that all Americans deserve to keep more of their own 
     money--after all, it's your money and you can save and spend 
     it more wisely than Washington can.''
                                                J. Dennis Hastert,
     Speaker of the House.

                          ____________________