Jack Kingston

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, on that point, I think it was Jesus who amazed the people by saying Nicodemus, the tax collector, would not be in fact going to hell after all. That was the first time that concept was introduced biblically, I believe.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, with the Fourth of July having just passed, I wanted to reflect on some of the thoughts I had and shared with people in Glynn, Wayne, and Pierce County, GA, this past week. I started out by saying, you know, one of the big thrills of Washington is to occasionally go up to the top of the dome, and when you do that it is kind of a special feeling. You duck into an unmarked and inconspicuous door, you climb up about a story, some spiral steps in an old roundhouse that used to contain some sort of a heating turbine, and then you go on an 1865 catwalk in between the skin of the new dome and the limestone of the old dome. You go up, round and round, for maybe 20 minutes on a set of steel concrete and cables, about 200 feet. Finally you get to the top, and on the top you see one of the best views of some of the most significant monuments in our country. You can see the Washington Monument, the reflecting pond, the Lincoln Memorial, the Jefferson Memorial, Robert E. Lee's home, and hidden in the trees, you know, the Korean and the Vietnam Memorials are also there. Each one of these monuments contains a special chapter in American history, and if you look beyond these monuments, you can see a glimpse of America herself. On the Fourth of July we celebrate our Nation's birthday. It is fitting that we reflect on these monuments and the great souls that they immortalize. We can think about from Concord and Lexington to Vietnam and Desert Storm we seek to understand more of our own history. We look inside ourselves, if you will. Standing on the balcony of the dome of the Capitol, Mr. Speaker, to the far left you see Thomas Jefferson's monument, the third President, founder of the University of Virginia, and author of the Declaration of Independence. His work formally began when Richard Henry Lee introduced a resolution for independence in the Continental Congress. Congress, even then being Congress, decided to form a committee, and a committee was formed consisting of Robert Livingston, Roger Sherman, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and the 34-year-old Thomas Jefferson. In the nearby drafthouse he worked late into the Philadelphia nights, these words: ``When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them to another'' and so forth. As he labored, surely he knew the death warrant that would become not just for him but for so many, the strife, the hardship and inevitably war. What guided Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Benjamin Franklin? They were smart, they were enlightened, they were visionaries, but did they also pray? I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that like so many of our great American leaders that they did indeed pray, because I think that our Founding Fathers were guiding them. I also believe that they were men who were ready as this whole Nation to sacrifice for this thing called freedom, and I think, third, that they knew that freedom is fragile. Let us talk about the godliness. We always hear about Thomas Jefferson being a deist, which seems almost a buzz word for atheist, yet on his monument Thomas Jefferson says: Can the liberties of a Nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. End of quote. Very explicit words, Mr. Speaker, and indeed a warning. Likewise, Benjamin Franklin admonished delegates at the Constitutional Convention to pray to break a deadlock. His words were in the beginning of our war with Britain, we prayed daily for guidance. Our prayers were heard and were answered. Have we now forgotten this powerful friend? The longer I live, this I know to be true. God governs the affairs of men. For if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable a Nation can rise without his aide? And George Washington on his tomb, rather than pontificating about the many, many achievements he has, he instead merely quotes the gospel of John. I submit to you that our Founding Fathers were great men and women of God, and they had divine guidance in that America was not just born by luck or by accident. Second, Mr. Speaker, we can rest assured that they had made many, many sacrifices and were willing to, just as millions of Americans have also done, follow in their example. Indeed Thomas Jefferson and George Washington would be much happier spending their time at Monticello and Mount Vernon. Robert E. Lee, as we look at his, the Custis mansion across the river, Robert E. Lee lost this to Arlington Cemetery; and adjoining him by way of Memorial Bridge, Abraham Lincoln lost his life because of the Civil War, as did 360,000 Union soldiers and 135,000 Confederate soldiers. Their examples were followed in every war. The Revolutionary War, 25,000 died; the War of 1812, 2,300 died; the Mexican War, 13,000; the Spanish American War, 2,300; World War I, 117,000; World War II, 408,000. And while their monuments cannot be seen from the top of the Capitol, Mr. Speaker, there are two very significant monuments. One consists of 19 life-sized figures. In the morning mist they seem to move. The wind catches their ponchos, their faces strained to the sky, their bodies bent in fatigues. They are American soldiers in the Korean conflict, a conflict that claimed 3 million Koreans and 1 million Chinese citizens. These soldiers are tired, hungry, cold. Their sunken eyes search for a sniper and surely for hope. They move slowly and eternally toward a black marble wall that merely says four words: Freedom is not free. They should know. Over 54,000 of them died. Their figures haunt us, but as we turn around through the trees across the reflecting pond and over the berm, there lies another wall. Here we face 58,211 names of other great Americans. This wall is still sober and forceful. Each name is a story. Brantley, David Watson: Born 1946, Kite, GA; graduated 1964, Glynn Academy; died June 7, 1968 from an exploding mine in the Huz Nghiz Province. Cameron, James Frederick: graduated Glynn Academy; shot down over the Tan Kieu Hamlet, September 13, 1969. Smith, Russell Lamar: Born March 26, 1948; graduated Glynn Academy 1966; married, one unborn son; killed by small arms fire; DaNang, November 28, 1968. Honaker, Raymond Kermit: Born February 16, 1949; graduated Glynn Academy 1967; helicopter shot down, August 31, 1968. Armstrong, Atwell Asbell: Born August 19, 1947; killed by small arms fire, October 25, 1968 at Song Be. Miller, Hebert: Killed April 21, 1971, near Quang Tri Province. Rabb, Robert of Darien, GA; his loving mother Doris Rabb is with us today. Grina, Thomas: Born November 16, 1949; killed December 19, 1967 by a ground explosion trying to rescue his fellow marines pinned in a killing field. From Brunswick alone: Leonard J. Peacock, Roger E. Mathis, Carlton Amerson, Larry Williams Bailey, John Devvin Bell, and Rayford H. King. The names go on and on and on from coastal Georgia, from the entire East Coast of the United States and all through the United States, each soldier a hero, each paying the highest price for this ideal we call freedom. And on this national birthday let us proudly and sincerely appreciate their lives and their family. Let us recognize the high and significant advancement they gave the cause of freedom. The Vietnam war was to stop the growth of communism so we can say loudly: Mission accomplished. Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia, all once in great peril of Communist rule, are now out of danger and democratic nations today, and 179 out of 192 or 93 percent of the world's countries have free elections. And in the last 10 years 69 nations for the first time in their history have had free elections, and that includes five from the former Soviet Union. Would this have happened without Vietnam? Hardly. Again I say: Mission accomplished. But, Mr. Speaker, as we go back and review these monuments, let me close with this: Last summer when the Olympic torch came through Washington I asked one of the Olympic leaders, what happens when the torch goes out? He said, we merely relight it. And I said, is that it, you just relight it? He said yes, that is it. What a shame that freedom's torch cannot be so easily relit. I believe that the torch of freedom that we pass down from generation to generation is more like a candle than a torch and it is a stormy night and the wind is blowing. Edmund Burke said this, Mr. Speaker. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and the name of the great soldiers whose names are on the monuments and the names who are not on monuments, let us never forget that Americans have sacrificed a lot for this ideal we call freedom. Freedom is indeed fragile. On the field of Gettysburg, Lincoln put it this way: It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion--that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. Let us remember that, and I will close with the words of Edmund Burke. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Let us remember that on this Nation's birthday.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I am certainly glad tonight to have an opportunity to discuss this tax bill with my Democrat colleagues and Republican colleagues. Tomorrow we are going to vote on the first tax relief bill in 16 years. It is a bill that gives capital gains tax relief and a $500 per child tax credit, it gives death tax relief, a college scholarship or deduction, the HOPE scholarship, and the American dream IRA. Make no mistake, this tax bill is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but it is the first tax bill that we have had in over 16 years. We are hearing a lot from the Democrats that this tax bill, or it is kind of interesting to hear it coming from some of the speakers, that for the first time they are saying, it is not a question of tax relief. I do not understand that. They have had this Chamber for 40 years. They have never passed tax relief until Ronald Reagan shoved it on them. But they have been passing lots of tax increases, and what they are saying is, well, we want tax relief, but not this. Does that sound familiar? If you are a watcher of politics, you will know this is the same thing they have always said on the budget: Of course we want to balance the budget, but not here, not now, not this bill. It is the same old thing. Let us talk, Mr. Speaker, let us talk about who benefits from this, because we keep hearing that this is a tax cut for the wealthy. If Members will look at this chart, I invite my colleagues to see, this is a chart with information by the nonpartisan Joint Economic Committee. It shows that the tax relief, the bulk of it, will go, and this is about 76 percent, to families with a combined household income of $20,000 to $75,000. Over here is the $75,000 to $100,000. This area right here on this chart is 91 percent of the tax relief. Now, will somebody who is wealthy get a little bit of tax relief? Yes, they will. I know that the Democrats hate folks who have succeeded. They just seem to love class warfare and they are not about to do it. So to keep their continuation of the debate on this rich, evil American, and it is interesting, sometime when you are working, maybe go out there and look at the person who is creating the jobs, and ask yourself, is this a mean, evil person? But to show the low degree to which they will stoop in order to prove their point, what they have done is they have taken a household that makes $49,000 a year. Then they charge you rent on your own house that you may or may not be paying a mortgage on, but let us just say it is a $100,000 house. What the Democrats do is say that is worth $1,000 a month in rent. To your $49,000 they are going to add $12,000 in rent. If you have a parking space at your job they are going to charge you $30 or $40 a month in rent, and they are saying that is what it is worth, and they are going to add that to your income, and also gains on your pension plan, anything that is a benefit. So when you are through with the Democratic tricks, the $49,000 income is worth $93,000. So if you are represented by a Democrat, I would invite you to write him or her and ask him, how did you come up with these numbers? And then ask yourself if you would really want somebody who understands math like that to represent you, and maybe you may want to think about qualifying for the job yourself. This is the reality of taxes, which Democrats hate. That is that 95 percent of the taxes in America are paid by the people in the top 50 percent bracket. Why do we give middle class tax relief? Because those are the folks who are paying the taxes. What the Democrats want to do, if you are middle class, they want to take your $500 per child tax credit that you as a taxpayer are paying and give it to somebody who does not pay taxes. Think about this. A single woman with a 14-year-old and a 16-year-old, under the Republican plan, will get $1,000 in tax relief. Under the Democrat plan she will get zero. Yes, that is compassion, to the middle class. Where will that money go? It will go to somebody who is not paying taxes. Does that make sense? Is that compassion? Is that what Members want? Just because this woman, this single mother of two is out there working and just because her children are over 12 years old, she is not going to get any tax relief, but the person who is not paying taxes will get that $500 per child tax relief. In my district there was a young man, he is 30 years old. He was bragging to the newspaper the other day that he has fathered 30 kids. He has 30 children. I want to say this to him, more power to you as long as you pay for them. But the fact is he is not paying for them, you are paying for them. Under the Democrat plan the tax relief will go to him as a non-taxpayer. I am telling the Members, it is a fraud. Vote for middle class tax relief. Vote for the Republican plan, and do not listen to the phony baloney that the Democrats are pushing.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, 1969: The Vietnam war, Woodstock, Neil Armstrong was on the Moon, Jimi Hendrix experience, Mod Squad, Walt Disney was not even controversial yet, Richard Nixon was President and the budget was balanced, but that was the last time. Today our national debt is over $5 trillion. That is an inconceivable amount of money. Let me illustrate. One million seconds equals 12 days. One billion seconds equals 32 years. One trillion seconds equals 32,000 years. This is not acceptable to America's children. If we balance the budget through this bill, we will lower interest rates. Lowering interest rates 2 percent on a $75,000 home mortgage over 30 years will mean middle-class taxpayers pay $37,000 less on their home mortgage. If we balance the budget with this bill, we can create more jobs because we will have more economic growth, more opportunities for Americans, minorities, and middle-class citizens. Finally, we can have lower taxes, because the burden of a huge Federal debt and interest on that debt will not be as great. Mr. Speaker, this bill is good for the middle class, it is good for the children, it is good for the United States of America, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the balanced budget.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, if Republicans were giving away chocolate candy, Democrats would accuse them of promoting cavities in America's children. They are masters of misrepresentation. They are totally against this tax cut. They do not want the middle class to have tax relief. But they are too clever to say, ``Hey, we hate giving tax relief,'' so what they do is say, ``Oh, this tax relief is only for the wealthy.'' That is very strange since the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation says that 76 percent of the tax relief goes to middle-class families earning between $20,000 and $75,000 a year. Indeed, 91 percent of the tax relief goes to families with a household income of $100,000 or less. This is solid middle-class stuff. This is not about tax relief for the wealthy. It is about couples like Debbie and Phil Spindle. Debbie makes $24,000 and Phil makes $40,000. They have a 14-year-old and an 11-year-old. They need the $500 per child tax credit. They need tax relief. They need a break. They do not need a wasteful government that year after year takes money out of their pocket and spends it on countless bureaucracies and bureaucrats. Let us vote for tax relief today.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, more confusion on the Democrat side of the aisle; it is no wonder that their President is reaching over to Republicans to try to work on a responsible tax bill. As my colleagues know, the interesting thing is in this tax debate we need to talk about tax responsibility and social responsibility. We need in America a tax system that is fair and honest, a Tax Code that is clear, one that encourages and rewards work ethics. And that is why Republicans are supporting a $500-per-child tax credit for middle-class working families. My wife called me yesterday about this gentleman in our district who is on welfare. He is 30 years old, and he has 16 kids at 30, and his quote was: The Lord said be fruitful and multiply. Now I am a father of four. I think the Lord speaks a little bit more broadly than that, such as ``You need to be paying for your kids.'' But under the Democrat proposal, if one does not pay taxes, they will still be able to get the $500-per-child tax credit that middle-class working families who pay taxes are eligible to get. Huge difference.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. So when you say this is a family issue, you know firsthand what a family issue is about.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, if the gentlewoman would yield, I want to point out for those who do not know you are a mother of 6 children; correct?

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to, on the subject of taxes, say two of the things we need in our tax code is we need responsibility to be encouraged and we need clarity. We need to have a tax system that encourages the work ethic and rewards it. Now, our welfare system, as my colleagues know, does not do that. Recently, in Savannah, there was a man who was on public assistance. He is 30 years old, and he bragged that he had 16 children. Now he has been very busy. But, of course, he has not been with the same woman for all 16 of these kids. But his comment on it was, ``Well, the Lord said be fruitful and multiply.'' That was his total explanation. But it is interesting that our tax system would reward that kind of irresponsibility through Government handouts. Right now the President wants to expand the proposed $500 child tax credit from working people who pay taxes to people who do not pay taxes, such as possibly this 30- year-old father of 16 kids. There is no reason in the world why he, who does not pay taxes, should get this credit for irresponsibly siring so many children. We are parents. I am a father of four. It is very, very difficult to raise kids. And I would say, economically looking after their needs is only the minimum bit; you have to do a lot more for these children emotionally and so forth. But our tax system should support middle- class parents economically for making responsible decisions, like having a job and having income and having a house, before you go out and have an untold number of children.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, I wanted to make sure folks understand that under President Clinton in 1993, we experienced the largest tax increase in the history of the country, which I believe was in the figure of somewhere about $250 billion. We are talking about only, unfortunately, an $85 billion decrease in taxes. It does not take us back to the pre-Clinton days, if you will. Now what is interesting is, as we hear the cries of those that oppose the tax relief, is you would think we are giving away the farm. And it is so important for people to realize it is not our money. The United States Congress does not own money. We, through the force of Government, confiscate money out of people's pocket and we take it. All we are saying is, hey, let us take less of the middle-class hard earned dollars. That is all we are talking about. And yet people, you would think, are about to give away their first born child the way some of the opponents are fighting this tax relief.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield a minute, I think it is real important what he just said and I want to slow up on it a minute. The gentleman just mentioned that the President and the Speaker are working together. One of the things that is important for us to realize is that the Republican majority in the House and Senate was reelected but, at the same time, the same American voters reelected President Clinton. What they want is results. People are independent ticket splitting and they want results. It is interesting that on issue after issue the gentleman is saying, race, taxes, balancing the budget, the Republican leadership is working with the President, and yet many detractors on the Democrat side, particularly in the House, cannot stand this; that President Clinton is working with Republicans. I think the President has heard the message of the American people: They want a balanced budget, they want a smaller government, they want tax relief. And the President realizes that, unfortunately, his party is not going to deliver that, so if he wants to move in the direction of the vision of the American people, he has to work with Republicans rather than Democrats. I think it is interesting the gentleman made this point one more time on race.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, the fraud that is being perpetuated by those who say this is a tax cut for the wealthy is just outrageous. They know better in their heart of hearts. How they can even look themselves in the mirror and say that this is a tax cut for the wealthy is beyond me.

Mr. KINGSTON. Absolutely.

Mr. KINGSTON. In terms of the hard-working middle class Americans, they do need tax relief. Their tax burden right now is about 38 percent per family. That is up 1 percent from what it was 2 years prior, but it is very important for us to realize that 75 percent of the tax relief proposed goes to families with household income of $75,000 or less. Ninety-one percent of it goes to families with household income of $100,000 or less. And for families with income of $200,000 or more, there is only 1.2 percent of the money for their tax relief.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. No death taxes.

Mr. KINGSTON. They do not.

Mr. KINGSTON. Essentially, Abraham Lincoln made this statement, ``that God must have loved the common man because he made so many of them.'' Unfortunately, Uncle Sam loves the common man, too, because that is who pays the taxes. It is not the poor, it is not the super rich. They get around it through foundations, through tax shelters, through whatever their lawyers and accountants can scheme up, but over and over again the common man pays the taxes and carries the whole load here. I hear the same thing the gentleman hears. An individual's mama and daddy died, left an estate over $600,000, and Uncle Sam came to the funeral first and got his share. Big dog sat down and he ate, and after he ate, what was left, these folks had to sell off whatever it was their parents had worked all their life for. Then they cannot operate that farm or family business any more because they had to sell a portion of it to pay the taxes. So Uncle Sam, in his greed, cuts out a revenue generating enterprise. Just one more example of short-term greed and, I think, a horrible punitive tax policy. We were all raised hearing that we should learn our lessons in school; go to school every day, do what is right and work, get that job, show up on time and do what our employer tell us to do, and one day we will be lucky enough to own something, own a house, own a farm, maybe own our own business. But now, because we do that, we get an organized group of say 150 liberals with the President of the United States saying that is bad, that is evil, these people are rich. Well, we know these people are not Rockefeller rich, but they still have enough money that they are not dependent on the Government. Therefore, they are going to be punished when they are living and when they are dying. I think people in America have had enough.

Mr. KINGSTON. Let us point out, too, there are more millionaires in the Clinton cabinet than there were in other cabinets. If we want to talk rich and we want to talk class warfare, let us start with the Clinton cabinet.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and knowing the interest of the gentleman from Mississippi in this death tax and the repeal of it, and I certainly appreciate his leadership, as do most taxpaying Americans, I wanted to bring an article sent to me by Dr. Bert Loftman of Atlanta, that was in the Human Events magazine on April 18 of this year, written by Terence Jeffrey, and in that he goes into the history of the death tax. The article points out that Lincoln imposed an emergency inheritance tax during the Civil War but that it was repealed in 1870, and the reason he did it was because of the national emergency of the Civil War. Also this article points out that in 1894 we had a temporary income tax, as well, but that was also repealed. I guess the crowning blow that made this permanent was under President Wilson in 1913 when he ratified the 16th amendment that, of course, started the income tax law, but it also gave Congress the power to lay and collect taxes on income. Wilson followed that by cutting U.S. tariffs in half; to pay for or offset the revenue lost by imposing progressive taxes on the incomes of rich Americans. So here we have historically how this tax came about, to give foreign traders a tax break, and how we increased the taxes on Americans. What I hear over and over again, and I do not get calls from, say, the Rockefellers and the Morgans or the Ted Turners and the Bill Gates, I do not get those calls, but I do get calls from people who do not have big corporations and big titles. They say they have worked their rear end off for the last 50, 60, 70 years, and they have built up this family farm that has 1,800 acres right now. It has a house on it, and it is now worth $1.5 million. Now, these people paid for that farm through sweat equity and they paid taxes every single year this farm has been in existence, and now their son or daughter wants to start out being a family farmer but they cannot pass it on to them. So they have to go out and get a fancy lawyer or an accountant or an estate planner to come up with some way around the tax law so that they can pass what is already theirs, what they have already paid taxes on, to their own children so that they can be independent and continue being taxpayers themselves. This is the fundamental American dream. For liberal colleagues of ours to sit over here with the President of the United States and say no to middle class America, to say ``We want your taxes when you are born, when you are living, when you are working and when you are dying,'' that is ridiculous. The middle class in America deserve better. While we are all mourning at the funeral, Uncle Sam is there counting his pennies. It is absolutely ridiculous. Let people die with dignity. Let them die knowing that their life and their labors have not been in vain but that they can pass it on to the next generation.

Mr. KINGSTON. The gentleman from Erie County [Mr. Paxon], where my dad is from, knows well that there are a whole lot of his friends who are probably now working and living in Canada, a lot of people he went to high school with. I went to school at Michigan State. A whole bunch of folks, brothers ended up over there for other reasons. But the reality is for people to move from border States in America to avoid taxes is a great one.

Mr. KINGSTON. If the gentleman will yield, I want to make a point. I am sorry the gentleman from New York [Mr. Paxon] left because he has this 1-year-old baby. I am sure that he and the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Molinari] will be fortunate enough to have other children and before they know it, they are going to be doing what we do in the Kingston household nearly every weekend, and, that is, we go down to the sports complex and watch one of our four children playing baseball, tee ball, or soccer. My wife Libby is the soccer mom. That is what we do. We drive station wagons, we have got two girls and two boys, and they are playing sports. Out there on the soccer field are tons and tons of other soccer moms. These are people who work real hard and they kind of cram all their recreation into a 48-hour period called the weekend. But during the week they are working hard, paying taxes, trying to raise their children right, working two jobs, doing homework, doing laundry, organizing school, PTA-type activities, volunteering at the hospital or the United Way and so forth. These are the people that this tax system is kicking in the face. Money Magazine this month has a great article on the profile of the millionaire. It says, if you think millionaires are the people who are living in these huge houses with brand new cars and beach or mountain houses or whatever, you are wrong. Most of those folks are simply in debt and in debt in a very, very big way. The typical millionaire, according to the Money Magazine survey, and it was a national survey, are the people who have worked in the same job 20 to 30 years, many school teachers, for example, they are people who own their own business, but not big, expensive businesses, dry cleaners, scrap metal, whatever, just what you would assume is maybe a modest business, if you will. They are folks who live under their means. They do not buy the house that they can afford, according to their real estate agent, they buy the house they feel comfortable with so they can pay it off. They work 60 hours a week, they work 50 hours a week, they save 15 percent of their income, they tend to stay married, they tend to not go on fancy vacations. They really have what we would call in psychology a dull, normal life-style. They are just regular folks. Yet those are the people who are paying for the whole $4.5 trillion budget that we have in Washington.

Mr. KINGSTON. Going back again to the middle class soccer moms and dads, one of the taxes that we Republicans are pushing is a $500 per child tax credit. In sophisticated boardrooms, folks do not want that. That is the least popular. However, that is the one that is going to benefit the most people. I support it for that reason. Number two, because it is the biggest cut in the size of the Federal Government. The less money middle class folks send to Washington, the less influence Uncle Sam is going to have on their lives and the less the bureaucracy in Washington is going to be able to grow. What is ironic is that the President of the United States now, instead of giving a $500 per child tax credit to working, let me repeat that, working middle-class taxpayers, he wants to make it a welfare payment to people who are not working enough to pay taxes. In other words, we have got the Jones family over here who is busting their tails working 50 or 60 hours a week, mom, 50, 60 hours a week, dad, and they are in line for a $500 per child tax credit, and we have got some other folks who are working through public assistance type programs but they are not paying taxes. The President wants to give them both a $500 per child tax credit, but the difference is this group right here, they are paying taxes, and the other group is not paying taxes, so it is just a gift to them. It is an expansion of welfare even though the welfare rolls are decreasing. I know we are talking death taxes, but again it goes back to the overtaxation of working, middle-class Americans. The harder you have to work, the less time you have at home. The less time you have at home, the less time you have to impart information and values to your children. One thing I have learned about children, I guess two things. Number one, it is the hardest thing in the world to try to get them on the right path. I do not know what I am doing wrong. If anybody has suggestions, let me know. I try my best. Anybody who has been a parent knows the feeling. Number two, you have got to spend lots of time with kids trying to teach them right from wrong, trying to teach them the work ethic. It is not any fun doing homework, it is not any fun memorizing multiplication tables, it is not any fun waking up 7 days a week and making your bed and picking up laundry, but I know this, that it is all tied into the big picture. As a father and Libby as their mother, if we do our part, then they will grow up one day to be independent, independent of government programs and government dependency. They will be taxpayers.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, we are in a very important debate right now over taxes. The Republican Party is working for middle-class tax relief, and the liberal Members of the Democrat Party and the President are working against middle-class tax relief. I think it is ironic that a President who ran in 1992 on a platform of supporting middle-class tax relief is now fighting middle-class tax relief. As my colleagues know, once the President was elected, his first act in 1993 was to pass the largest tax increase in the history of this country. Now, we are at another debate. For the first time in 16 years, because of a Republican majority in the House and Senate, we have an opportunity to give significant tax relief, and yet we are being accused of all kinds of things and we are having to fight for this. It is interesting, because 76 percent of the people who will benefit from the tax relief have a household income of $75,000 or less. Only 1 percent of those who are going to have a tax benefit have a household income of over $200,000, yet we are being accused of giving a tax break for the wealthy. Mr. Speaker, I do not know what it is with the liberal psyche that being wealthy is synonymous with being evil. It is interesting, because entrepreneurs and people who tend to be wealthy create jobs in this country, and yet liberals seem to hate the job-creator. I strongly believe that we need tax relief for the middle-class, and will the entrepreneurs also benefit from it? Yes, they will. Is it bad? Well, I always take the case of Ted Turner. I am from Georgia. Ted Turner has brought CNN to Atlanta. He has created hundreds and hundreds of jobs. Is it bad? No; it is not. Will Ted Turner get some tax relief? Yes; he will. Is that horrible? What is so bad about that, I ask my liberal colleagues? Yet, we do not hear from them about that. All we hear is well, we just do not want the rich to get tax breaks. As I said, Mr. Speaker, 76 percent of the tax relief goes to families with a household income of under $75,000. Now, what is it that the liberals and the President are backing away from? We seem to be in a gridlock right now on the $500-per-child tax credit, and the way the Republican bill is, is that middle-class families with children under 17 years of age and with household incomes of under $110,000 will get a $500-per-child tax credit. Now, what does the President want to do? Well, he wants to use that tax credit to give another welfare benefit to people who are not paying taxes. So what has happened with a President who has promised middle-class tax relief, and also, incidentally, promised welfare reform, and only reluctantly passed welfare reform last year, now is trying to go back on that? Welfare enrollment has decreased 15 percent. There are less people dependent on the U.S. Government now than there were 1 year ago, and yet the President wants to fly in the face of all of that, break the spirit of that bipartisan legislation, if you will, by giving people who are not working a $500-per-child tax credit on top of something that we are already doing called the earned income tax credit, which is a benefit from going from welfare to work, and it is something that has had bipartisan support, and yet the President wants to say, no, that is not good enough, we are going to give you one more giveaway program. We are going to give you $500-per-child for every child you have while you are not paying taxes. Common sense would tell us, Mr. Speaker, that is a ridiculous thing to do, particularly when we have at stake 11 million middle-class children whose parents desperately need tax relief for education needs, for medical needs, for shelter, for food, and so forth like that. I am a father of four small children. Most of my friends, Mr. Speaker, are in the sandwich generation, if you will. That is, their parents are dependent on them or close to being dependent on them, and their children are dependent on them. I can say as I line up in the carpool line and as I go out to the Tee-ball field and I go out to the soccer field, and my wife is a proud soccer mom, I will say that the parents out there desperately need tax relief. Now, they are not coming out here in Washington and protesting, they are not writing letters, they are not sending us faxes every minute, and the reason why, Mr. Speaker, is because they are out working. These are folks who work 8, 9, 10 hours a day, 5 days a week. They want tax relief, but they do not have paid professional lobbyists who can go out and campaign for it. We just have to do it on our own and we have to do the right thing. This is the good old American middle-class who is getting squeezed year after year, they need tax relief, they do not need the President expanding welfare, they do not need the fun and games of politics, they do not need more big liberal programs. They need tax relief, and I urge my colleagues to support in a bipartisan fashion the Republican tax bill passed by the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, the Democrats today seem to be characteristically void of facts and rich in rhetoric in their deliveries of one-minutes. Under the Republican tax bill, the income level of $75,000 per household or less than $75,0000 is going to get 76 percent of the tax relief. Families with incomes over $200,000 get 1.2 percent. I do not understand how they can say that is giving more taxes to the wealthy. Mr. Speaker, in 1992 the President ran on the platform of middle- class tax cuts but instead, as President, in 1993 passed the largest tax increase in history, including the largest-ever increase in welfare. But after a lot of debate, welfare was reformed. Today the number of dependents, people who are dependent on government, has decreased by 15 percent. Yet, the President wants to expand welfare and not give middle-class tax relief. What I am saying is he wants to give a $500-per-child tax credit to people who are on welfare and not give it to 11 million middle-class children who need the money very, very desperately for school and education and shelter. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record this information from the Committee on Ways and Means: The following table shows the amount of tax relief received by people of various income categories over a 5-year period, according to data provided by the Joint Committee on Taxation. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Percent Income level Tax relief of tax relief ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Under $75,000........................ -$89.0 billion......... 76.4 $75,000 to $100,000.................. -19.3 billion.......... 16.6 $100,000 to $200,000................. -6.7 billion........... 5.8 $200,000+............................ 1.4 billion............ 1.2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------