[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 2191-2193]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                ELIMINATION OF THE MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I rise today to address an issue I have 
raised several times on the floor. I am hopeful that this year, this 
body, will get a chance to deal with the marriage penalty tax 
elimination.
  Mr. President, Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison, John Ashcroft, and I 
have been pushing for some period of time for the elimination of the 
marriage penalty tax; and it is truly that--a penalty tax on marriage. 
This body will have a chance to address this issue shortly. The Finance 
Committee of the Senate will consider this issue in the near future. 
They will be marking up the bill to eliminate one area of the Internal 
Revenue Code where the marriage penalty tax occurs. It will then come 
before this body, I am told, I believe the leader wants it scheduled 
before April 15.
  There will be Members who will try to block this bill, with issues 
that are extraneous to the marriage penalty. They will be able to add 
things to it, or filibuster the marriage penalty tax elimination. I 
hope they think about what they would be doing in stopping the 
elimination of the marriage penalty tax. Before they take actions to 
block this important issue, I hope they just pause and say maybe I will 
try to amend my issue onto another bill; this one is too important. I 
don't think we need to be blocking it.
  Just in looking at the marriage penalty tax, I hope people recognize 
the

[[Page 2192]]

extent of its involvement and intrusion on married couples across the 
country. I have a chart up here to which I will refer a number of 
times. It shows the number of married couples affected by the marriage 
penalty tax across the United States. This is it. The chart represents 
married couples, and we don't know how many children are in these 
families who are also effected. We are talking about 25 million 
American families who are affected across the country by this penalty. 
In Kansas, we have 259,904 couples who are penalized by this marriage 
penalty tax.
  Again, for those who haven't been following the debate, all our 
proposal would do is level the playing field. It would say that if you 
are married, a two-wage-earner family, you will pay the same in taxes 
as if you were two independent people living together; we are not going 
to punish you, or fine you, or penalize you for being married.
  The average tax these 25 million American couples pay additionally 
for the privilege of being married is $1,480. That is a lot of money. 
That is a lot of money to a lot of people. I hope we cut the tax and 
send that back to the married couples across this country and say we 
are not going to penalize you anymore. That is what we are seeking for 
this body to pass.
  The House of Representatives has already done good work in this area. 
The House of Representatives has passed a bill to provide marriage tax 
penalty relief for America's families in the 15-percent marginal tax 
bracket and to eliminate the marriage penalty in the standard 
deduction.
  I think the House bill is a good starting point for our discussion of 
the marriage penalty reduction and elimination. Doubling the standard 
deduction, increasing the width of the 15-percent bracket, and fixing 
the earned-income tax credit where the marriage penalty exists will 
eliminate or reduce the marriage penalty for all families. It still 
doesn't get rid of it. The Marriage Penalty appears in over 60 
different places in the Tax Code.
  Down the road I hope we can get to a discussion of sunsetting the 
entire Tax Code and going to a flatter, fairer, and simpler system. I 
know the Presiding Officer has led the charge on doing precisely that. 
It is clearly something we need to do for the country, for the economy, 
and for the people, so many of whom, labor under this Tax Code in fear 
they are going to be found to have done something wrong when they are 
trying to be good, law-abiding citizens. But that is a debate for 
another day.
  Right now we are trying to get at one issue. The National Center for 
Policy Analysis says the highest proportion of marriage penalties 
occurred when the higher-earning spouse made between $20,000 and 
$75,000. Clearly, we need to make marriage penalty elimination a 
priority for all families, not only a few.
  Consider that--making between $20,000 and $75,000. You are looking at 
a two-wage-earner family, probably with a child, or two or three 
children, who can't afford to be penalized by this $1,480. They are 
currently being penalized under the Tax Code.
  We see the numbers up here. We know the full extent of this.
  I want to read--because I think these are so touching and important--
statements of people who are impacted by this. We continue to collect 
these statements and letters from people because now people are 
calculating their marriage penalty tax. I hope in the next week or so 
to have a chart saying: OK. As you are watching this on TV, figure your 
marriage penalty. Have this as one spouse's income; there is another 
spouse's income; and here is where it meets. That is your marriage 
penalty, the tax you pay. The average is $1,480. Some pay more, some 
less; letting people know this is what they are penalized and this is 
the tax they are paying.
  Listen to some of the stories from people around the country. This is 
Christopher from Fairfield, OH. This family said:

       One of the biggest shocks my wife and I had when deciding 
     to get married was how much more we would have to give to the 
     government because we decided to be married rather than live 
     together. It does not make sense that I was allowed to keep a 
     larger portion of my pay on a Friday and less of it on a 
     Monday with the only difference being that I was married that 
     weekend.

  That is to the point.
  This is from Andrew and Connie from Alexandria, VA.

       We grew up together and began dating when we were 18. After 
     dating for three years we decided that the next natural step 
     in our lives together would be to get married. I cannot tell 
     you the joy this has brought us. I must tell you that the tax 
     penalty that was inflicted on us has been the only real 
     source of pain that our marriage has suffered.

  I wish all marriages could be like that--that the only source of pain 
is the Tax Code. Is that a pain we should inflict on them? Is that 
something we should do to this married couple? They say: We are getting 
along pretty good. The only real pain is the Federal Tax Code and the 
tax penalty we are paying.
  I don't think that is a good signal to send.
  This is Andrew from Greenville, NC, who writes:

       It is unfortunate that the government makes a policy 
     against the noble and sacred institution of marriage. I also 
     feel it is unfortunate that it seems to hit young struggling 
     couples the hardest.

  That is probably the biggest point. If you have a combined income 
with the top wage earner making between $20,000 and $75,000--these are 
young married couples; they are struggling with a lot of issues, 
struggling with financial issues--and you lob on top of that a tax 
penalty, that really hits them, and particularly a lot of couples 
during the early years with young children.
  This is Thomas from Hilliard, OH, who says:

       No person who legitimately supports family values could be 
     against this bill. The marriage penalty is but another 
     example of how in the past 40 years the federal government 
     has enacted policies that have broken down the fundamental 
     institutions that were the strength of this country from the 
     start.

  This is Sean from Jefferson City, MO:

       I think the marriage penalty is a major cause of the 
     breakdown of the family here in the U.S. . . . [Ending it] 
     would do a lot to cut down on the incidence of cohabitation 
     by unmarried couples and give more children two-parent 
     families where there is a real commitment between the 
     parents.

  I don't know if I would go as far as what he said--that this has been 
the major cause of the breakdown of the family in the United States. I 
don't think that is the case. But it is the wrong signal for us to 
send. We send signals all the time across the country of what we think 
is good and what we think is wrong.
  Welfare reform: When we went through that fight--it was a very 
important fight--we decreased the welfare rolls in the country by 50 
percent. We sent a signal that we think it is good to work. That is a 
good signal.
  We should eliminate the marriage penalty tax. That is a statement 
about what we think is good. People are married and they shouldn't be 
taxed and penalized for that.
  According to a recent Rutgers University study, the institution of 
marriage is already having problems in the United States and is in a 
state of decline. From 1960 to 1996, the annual number of marriages per 
thousand adult women declined by almost 43 percent. That impacts and 
hurts a lot of children. Not that single parents don't struggle 
heroically to raise children; they do many times very successfully. But 
that family can have a bonded relationship. Studies are showing again 
and again that the most important place we can put that child is in a 
loving relationship between two married people.
  I am going to continue to come down to the floor regularly raising 
this issue because this body will have a chance to vote on this issue 
in dealing with the marriage penalty tax. I believe there are Members 
on both sides of the aisle of goodwill who want to see this marriage 
penalty tax eliminated. I don't think the penalty makes much sense to 
many Americans at all.
  I hope as we start to engage this debate, in this body, that Members 
on both sides of the aisle will stand up and say: Yes, this is an 
important issue. We are not going to load it down with a lot of 
amendments. We are not going to load it down with a lot of extraneous 
issues. It passed the House. If it passes

[[Page 2193]]

this body, we can get it to the President for his signature. It is an 
important signal to send across the country, and we are not going to 
block it.
  There are a lot of ways in this body that you can block something--
that you can put it forward and say you are for it but you are blocking 
it. I hope this would be one that we could say we are going to pass for 
the 25 million American married couples.
  For those in South Dakota, 75,114 are penalized, and for those in 
Nevada 146,142 are penalized--I see my colleagues from South Dakota and 
Nevada--I hope they can say to them: We shouldn't be penalizing you.
  We have the wherewithal to change this, and let's change it.
  Thank you very much, Mr. President. I hope we will have a vote on a 
true marriage penalty tax bill before April 15 comes and goes. There 
will be other of my colleagues on the floor later on to address this 
issue as well.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________