[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 7]
[House]
[Page 10246]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



           THE SIGNIFICANCE OF TODAY'S VOTE ON THE ESTATE TAX

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, might I take just a moment to 
add my appreciation and congratulations to this first class of Pages of 
the millennium. Clearly, the eloquence of the words said by my 
colleagues cannot be matched in the short period of time that I have to 
simply say thank you, thank you, thank you.
  Mr. Speaker, I appreciated hearing the words of my colleague, and 
enjoyed the fact that we have the opportunity to work on a number of 
issues together. I truly believe that when we debate an important issue 
that has gotten the attention of the American people, it is important 
to come forward and tell the truth.
  I campaigned and worked with constituents around my district on the 
issue of allowing them to retain the hard-earned dollars that they have 
worked for in their family farms and their small businesses. My 
district is an urban district, so I do not have that many small farms, 
but I have those beneficiaries who have small farms of their relatives 
in rural areas of Texas.
  So I likewise am concerned about those who would want to benefit from 
this Nation's recognizing their hard-earned dollars.
  I think that today's debate did not fully tell the truth. Death is 
final, and the suggestion that what we voted on today, the repeal of 
death taxes, is final is really untrue. It is untrue because unlike the 
suggestion that we have done this in a bipartisan manner, we have not. 
This bill that was passed today is destined to be vetoed by the 
President of the United States.
  Legislation only passes when this House passes it, when the Senate 
passes it, and when it goes to the President's desk.
  Many of us wanted to join in bipartisan legislation, but it was not 
to be heard of by the Republican majority. It seems that there was an 
effort to really play to the headlines the repeal of death taxes.
  But really, under current law, there is a $1.3 million exclusion from 
the estate tax for interest in farms and closely-held business. Did 
they not tell us that the substitute that was offered, that I did vote 
for, that would be supported by the President of the United States and 
the Senate, gave a $4 million exclusion per family for farms and 
closely-held businesses?
  I wanted to be sure that this would pass both Houses and be signed by 
the President of the United States, so I did not just take my 
impressions to the floor of the House when I voted, I spoke to the 
Secretary of the Treasury, representing the administration, and the 
Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, representing the administration. They 
fully appreciate the back-end balloon of burden that we will have with 
this bill that was passed today.
  Deputy Secretary Eisenstadt said the administration is committed to 
passing relief on death taxes for closely-held businesses and, as well, 
family farms. The legislation that the President will sign, that will 
go into law, was the vote that I made today to support the legislation 
that would give a $4 million benefit to those closely-held businesses 
and family farms.
  In fact, the substitute would provide a credit of $1.1 million right 
now, and in 2006 have a further increase of $1.2 million.
  Interestingly enough, Mr. Speaker, the repeal that the Republicans 
are talking about has to be phased in, whereas the vote that I made 
today, the $1.1 million exclusion, is effective in 2001.
  It is important to tell Americans the truth, and the fact that we 
take $28.5 billion in estate taxes now, over 5 years a repeal will 
result in $104 billion being taken out of the government's revenue 
source. That money will come just at the time that the baby boomers 
will be reaching the age of depending on social security, and how will 
we make the choice of the amount of money that we lose from the estate 
taxes and not being able to pay social security?
  Sometimes it sounds like a cycle that is being said over and over 
again, but the government does have its responsibilities. I am 
certainly someone who applauds the strength of the economy right now. I 
applaud that so many Americans have found their way to the Dow Jones 
and NASDAQ, but as we look at Wall Street, may I also suggest to those 
who are investing that we have watched the roller coaster go up and 
down and up and down.
  That means that the government still has its responsibility to deal 
with social security.
  Might I close, Mr. Speaker, to simply say that if anybody thinks that 
what we did was to help the bulk of the American people, this is the 
pie documented by the Joint Committee on Taxation and Treasury, and 
that pie says that for non-taxable estates that will be impacted by 
this bill today, it is 98 percent that will not be impacted.

                              {time}  1430

  Only 2 percent of those businesses and family farms, if even that, 
will be impacted. The Democratic alternative responds to all of those 
who need relief.
  In Texas, there would only be 1,900 businesses that would even be 
impacted. Why not give a responsible relief? And the Democratic 
alternative will be turned into law; this only creates headlines today. 
I am not willing to vote for headlines. I want to vote for Americans.

                          ____________________