[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 4]
[House]
[Page 5367]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       ARMED FORCES TAX FAIRNESS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because it is critical that the 
Record be clear about what happened earlier today on the floor of the 
House, and that we learn the right lessons.
  The bill relating to Armed Forces Tax Fairness was supposed to be 
before us. The bill originally related exactly to that, tax fairness 
for those who are in the armed services. But it was decided before we 
met in committee, the Committee on Ways and Means, apparently by the 
leadership of that committee, that Members would be allowed to offer 
provisions totally unrelated to that important bill. A number of those 
in the majority decided to take that opportunity.
  No Democrat participated in presenting any special interest or 
particular interest legislation. So what we saw was a flood of special 
interest or particular interest proposals totally unrelated to the 
critical issue of armed services tax fairness. Provisions relating to 
makers of bows and arrows, those who make fishing tackle boxes, a 
provision relating to the taxation of people, foreigners who bet on 
American horse races.
  What happened? The majority leader earlier said on the floor that the 
result in the Committee on Ways and Means was a bipartisan one, as I 
heard his words. That is simply incorrect. We voted, Democrats, against 
a number of these particular provisions. We had roll calls. Republicans 
voted aye; Democrats by and large almost unanimously voted no. The 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), the ranking member, presented a 
substitute that would have stripped the bill of all of these particular 
interest provisions and, as I remember it, have adopted the Senate 
provision. That was voted down.
  So let the Record be clear as to what happened in the Committee on 
Ways and Means. The bill came out on a voice vote because Democrats did 
not want to vote against a bill relating truly to tax fairness for 
those in our armed services. However, we had made clear where we stood 
on those specific provisions.
  What is the lesson? At best, this bill, as it came out of the 
Committee on Ways and Means, reflected misguided priorities and the 
arrogance of power. Misguided priorities because they inserted several 
hundred millions in provisions totally unrelated to armed services tax 
fairness. Bows and arrows, money there when we are shortchanging 
education for our kids, fish tackle boxes when there is not enough 
money going for homeland security. And then horse races to help those 
who bet on horse races when there is not enough money for people who 
are short on prescription drugs.
  An arrogance of power that led some in the majority to decide to put 
on a bill relating to tax fairness for those who were abroad as well as 
at home, provisions that helped those who were here at home.
  So I come here because it is critical the Record be clear, it be 
critical we learn from this experience. I hope next week early on a 
bill will be presented here preferably the Senate bill that treats even 
more fairly than the House bill, without these provisions, those in the 
armed services.

                          ____________________