[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 15781-15782]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                      MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY RELIEF

  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I commend the distinguished chairman 
of the Finance Committee for not giving up on marriage tax penalty 
relief for hard-working American families. He deserves praise because 
there is no doubt this has been a rugged road.
  We passed marriage tax penalty relief last year and sent it to the 
President in a bill that had other tax relief measures. The President 
said: No, that is too much tax relief for the American people; send me 
smaller bills.
  Under the leadership of Senator Roth, and with the help of our 
distinguished assistant majority leader, Don Nickles, Sam Brownback, 
John Ashcroft, Spencer Abraham, Rod Grams, together as a team we said 
we were going to send the President a clean marriage tax penalty relief 
bill; we were going to make sure that hard-working American families 
who are paying a penalty for being married got relief this year. That 
is the result of what we have done today.
  Sixty percent of the Senate today is sending this bill to the 
President. Over 60 percent of the House passed the same bill this week. 
We say to the President: You asked us to send you a smaller bill, and 
we are doing it.
  Most of us wanted to give tax relief in a bigger way. We wanted to go 
all the way through the 28-percent bracket, but the President said no. 
We came back with 15 percent, doubling of the standard deduction 
through the 15-percent bracket. What that means is a couple earning 
between $43,000 and $52,000 combined will stay in the 15-percent 
bracket. If one person in a couple makes $25,000 a year and the other 
makes $35,000 a year, they will stay in the 15-percent bracket longer.
  It means tax relief for every American couple. Every American couple 
who uses the standard deduction is going to get relief because that 
standard deduction is doubled. Fifty million people in our country will 
get tax relief if the President signs the bill.
  We are increasing the amount of the earned-income tax credit because 
we believe married couples who have just come off welfare or who are 
the working poor deserve that earned-income tax credit so they know 
that working is better than being on welfare. We want them to have the 
incentive to do that. We want them to have the pride of going to work 
and contributing to their families every day because we know they think 
better of themselves when they do that.
  I do not see how President Clinton can use an excuse to veto the bill 
we are sending him today. I do not see what excuse remains. We have 
taken all of the excuses off the table.
  He said in his State of the Union Message to Congress and to the 
American people he favored marriage tax penalty relief. We sent him a 
bill last year; he vetoed it. He said there were too many other tax 
cuts in the bill. Today, we are sending him a plain, simple marriage 
tax penalty relief bill for hard-working Americans who earn in the 
$25,000 to $35,000 range of income. That is who will benefit.
  I have heard people on the other side say that this is a tax cut for 
the rich. There is no way anyone who has visited in the home of a 
couple, each of whom make $25,000 a year, can say that those people are 
rich. We say they have earned this money and we want them to keep more 
of the money they earn. The fundamental difference is we believe the 
money that people earn belongs to them. We do not believe it belongs to 
the Federal Government.
  We have a non-Social Security surplus. This is only letting them keep 
more of the money they earn rather than sending it to Washington 
because we are being good stewards of the taxpayers' dollars today. We 
are setting aside the Social Security surplus for Social Security only, 
we are paying down the debt, and we are giving back to the people part 
of the money they earned if the President will sign the bill.
  This week has been a good week for hard-working Americans, for small 
business people, and for people who own farms and ranches because we 
have given relief from the death tax to small businesses and family-
owned farms so their heirs will not have to sell that business and put 
people out of jobs, and we have given marriage tax penalty relief.
  This is the right thing to do, and I urge the President of the United 
States to hear 60 percent of the Senate and 63 percent of the House of 
Representatives who said they believe in marriage tax penalty relief, 
and we urge the President of the United States to sign this bill and 
give relief to Americans today because this will take effect 
immediately.
  I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, the Senate just passed the Marriage 
Penalty Tax Relief Reconciliation Act by 60 votes. Sixty percent of the 
Senate voted in favor of eliminating the marriage penalty tax. Now it 
is up to the President and the Vice President--President Clinton and Al 
Gore--whether or not we will continue to tax marriage in America. This 
relief is available now to more than 50 million Americans. The 
President and the Vice President decide whether this is going to become 
law. All that remains for this legislation to become law is the 
President's signature. He is the one who can decide. He is the one who 
will decide, along with the Vice President, whether or not the marriage 
penalty will be eliminated. It is on their desk. It is up to the 
President. He is the one who decides.
  He said he is for it. He said it during the State of the Union 
message. Now he will have a chance to go ahead and act and sign the 
bill. I say to the President yet again: Sign this into law.
  I congratulate the chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator Roth, 
who has done wonderful work, yeoman work on getting this bill passed. I 
congratulate the Senator from Texas, Mrs. Hutchison, who has waged a 
crusade for several years, seeing this was wrong in the Tax Code, and 
has fought diligently to get this done. I thank the Senator from 
Missouri, Mr. Ashcroft, for his work in pushing this over a period of 
time. Now we are close to getting it done. We are almost there. It is 
time to be able to do it. We have the wherewithal. It is time. The 
President and the Vice President will decide whether or not this 
becomes law.
  I want to cite what is in the bill so that people know what is there. 
I know we have been through this a number of times, but just to make 
sure people are clear what we are doing, we are doubling the standard 
deduction; we eliminate the penalty there. The current standard 
deduction is $4,400 for singles. For couples it is $7,350. We just 
double it. We make it $8,800 for married couples. It seems only fair 
that for two people you should have a standard deduction that would be 
double what it is for one person.

[[Page 15782]]

  In the 15-percent tax bracket, for a married couple filing, we double 
the income amount. Currently, a single taxpayer, hits the top of the 
15-percent bracket when they make over $26,250. If it is a couple, they 
hit the top when they earn $43,850. We say that is not fair. If it is 
two people, it should be double what it is for one, so we move it up to 
$52,500.
  Those are the two main features of this bill. That is the big end of 
the bill. It is taking a standard deduction from $4,400 for a single 
and that is now $7,350 for a married couple and saying we will make it 
$8,800. We are saying on the 15-percent bracket, which is the one we 
hit here, we are saying right now that if you are a couple, that you 
hit the top of that bracket at $43,850, even though it is $26,250 for a 
single person. We are saying if you are a married couple, we will move 
it up to $52,500. That is the guts of the bill.
  Then on the earned-income tax credit, we increase the phaseout by 
$2,000 for a married couple so that low-income individuals don't hit 
that same marriage penalty.
  Those are the three main features. That is what was passed. That is 
what 60 Senators and 63 percent of the House voted for. That is now 
what is in front of the President.
  Some people say it costs too much--$89 billion. This is a 5-year tax 
bill. It sunsets after 5 years--$89 billion. It is 5 percent of the on-
budget surplus. Setting the Social Security surplus aside, just leaving 
what is still the on-budget surplus, it is only 5 percent. That is all 
it is. Some people say we should be using it for debt reduction. This 
year, we will pay down the national debt--the debt, not the deficit--we 
will pay down the national debt about $200 billion. We will buy down 
the national debt this year by $200 billion, probably the most in the 
history of the United States. I haven't looked up the actual number, 
but it is probably the most in real terms, $200 billion of debt buy-
down.
  The simple point here is there are no excuses remaining for the 
President not to sign this into law. There is no excuse on debt 
reduction. There is no excuse that it is too expensive. There is no 
excuse that it is just for the wealthy. All of those are false 
statements. There is just no substance to them. There is no excuse for 
him to deny 25 million American families this tax cut. I wouldn't even 
call it a tax cut. I think the Senator from Texas has it right. It is a 
tax correction.
  Should we tax marriage more than we are taxing single people, when we 
are having so much trouble with the family in the country? We ought to 
give them a bonus to encourage family values.
  This is a big day for this body. This is a major piece of 
legislation. It has cleared Congress. It has cleared through the House; 
it has cleared through the Senate. It now sits on the desk of the 
President; for the President and Vice President of the United States to 
decide. They can be heroes. They can sign this bill into law or they 
can say, no, we are going to veto this piece of legislation.
  I hope they will say, no, we don't want to send a signal to the 
married people of America that we think they ought to be taxed.
  Democrats offered an alternative. It was a fine alternative, but it 
created a homemaker penalty that if you had one wage earner, but a 
second spouse who decided to stay home to take care of older parents 
and children, it actually taxed them more. So you had a homemaker 
penalty that was put into the Democratic alternative. It had a number 
of positive things about it, but the last thing we want to do is to say 
to people: Well, we really don't value somebody who stays at home to 
take care of family members, young or old, or other friends.
  I think we ought to say this is a critical thing. We don't want to 
send the signal that we are going to tax in that situation. That is why 
we have worked out over the years all the problems in this bill.
  I don't know what the President will come up with in vetoing it, but 
it has been a great bipartisan majority that has passed this bill; 
sixty votes, a number of our Democratic colleagues joining us on this 
bill that has now passed. It just awaits the signature of the person 
who sits in the Presidency of the United States. I hope he and Vice 
President Al Gore will decide: They have met most of the charges in the 
concerns we had and we are going to sign it into law.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.

                          ____________________