Jerry Weller

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the subject of the bill just passed, H.R. 4181.

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today we have before us an issue that we have debated in the past, an issue which has earned bipartisan support. I want to thank you for the opportunity to bring H.R. 4181 to the House floor today. This legislation makes the marriage tax relief provisions of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act permanent. Currently there are 36 million American working families that benefit from the elimination of the marriage tax penalty. However, without H.R. 4181, this relief will be reduced next year and expire in 2010. Frankly what that means in simple terms, if this legislation fails to become law, 36 million married working couples will suffer higher taxes and see much of their marriage tax penalty return in the coming calendar year. To make sure this does not happen, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gerlach) and I introduced H.R. 4181 last week. Overall, our efforts to eliminate the marriage tax penalty have taken more than 6 years. We have made great strides but we are not done yet. We are determined to bring this effort across the finish line and today's legislation achieves that goal. The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act, which President Bush signed into law on June 6, 2001, eliminates the marriage tax penalty in three steps. First, we double the standard deduction to twice that of singles. This helps families who do not itemize their income taxes. Additionally, it eliminates the marriage tax penalty for homeowners and others who itemize their taxes by widening the 15 percent tax bracket. Finally, it phases out the marriage penalty suffered by low-income couples when they utilize the earned income tax credit as a married couple. Much of the relief which became law in 2001 was accelerated last year when President Bush signed a second piece of legislation called the Jobs and Growth Tax Act into law. The accelerated relief included in what some call the Bush tax cut expires at the end of this year. Unless this marriage tax relief is extended, 27 million married couples will face an average tax increase of $300 and over 30 million American working couples will face an average tax increase of more than $700 starting in 2011. The Joint Committee on Taxation, a bipartisan agency of this Congress, estimates that these same couples will pay nearly $105 billion in higher taxes over the next decade in marriage tax penalty unless we pass H.R. 4181, making marriage tax penalty relief permanent today. Over the last several years, I have introduced my colleagues to some young couples from the district that I represent. One couple, Shad and Michelle Hallihan, was the first couple I shared. They are from Manhattan, Illinois, a married working couple, two schoolteachers. I explained how they suffered from the unfair marriage tax penalty. They benefited from the legislation that was signed into law by President Bush in 2001; they benefited even more in 2003; and we will protect them from the marriage tax penalty in this legislation we hope to send to the President this year. Two years ago I introduced to my colleagues another couple from my district, Jose and Magdelene Castillo, of Joliet, Illinois. In 2002, they earned combined salaries of $82,000 a year. Jose made $57,000 in 2002 and Magdelene earned $25,000. They suffered the marriage tax penalty. They have two children, Eduardo and Carolina. As a result of the tax law changes that we passed and President Bush signed into law, their marriage tax penalty was reduced by $1,125 a year. This represented a 12 percent overall reduction in taxes for the Castillo family. Imagine what this means for families like the Castillos, the Hallihans and other middle-income working Americans. With that $1,125, the Castillos could start saving for their children's college education. They could go back to school at Joliet Junior College and pay for a semester or two of college education. They could save for their retirement. They could put a small down payment on a car or a new home. The bottom line is $1,125 is real money for families like the Castillos. Overall in the State of Illinois, which I have the privilege of representing, 1,544,000 couples today benefit from the marriage tax relief passed by this Congress and signed into law by President Bush. What Congress must do now is to make sure that American families can be confident that this much-deserved tax relief will not be taken away. They want to be sure that we are committed to fairness in the Tax Code by ensuring the marriage tax penalty is gone and will stay away. We must make marriage tax relief permanent for the 36 million American couples that benefit from the tax law changes that we passed into law last year and were signed into law by President Bush. As unfair as the marriage tax penalty is, it seems even more unfair to consider telling couples like Shad and Michelle Hallihan of Manhattan, Illinois, or Jose and Magdelene Castillo of Joliet, Illinois, that in just a few short years the marriage tax penalty may return because Congress failed to extend and make permanent the elimination of the marriage tax penalty. Let us remember, this bill makes permanent the marriage tax penalty relief included in the Bush tax cut. We make permanent the elimination of the marriage tax penalty for those who use the earned income tax credit. We double the standard deduction for those who do not itemize to help provide those with marriage tax relief. And for many middle-class families who itemize, we eliminate the marriage tax penalty by permanently widening the 15 percent tax bracket so you can earn as a married couple twice that of a single person and stay in the 15 percent bracket. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4181 is a good bill. It encourages the values we hold most dear, marriage, family and hard work. My hope is this legislation will earn bipartisan support today. I think we can all agree that it is wrong to punish society's most basic institution, the center of every American family, and that is marriage. I encourage my colleagues to vote for H.R. 4181, making marriage tax relief a permanent part of our Tax Code, because it is the right thing to do, it is the fair thing to do for American families. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would note that this House will be considering in the next few weeks legislation for broad AMT relief. In fact, 11 million taxpaying families will benefit from the AMT relief that we will pass later on in the next few weeks. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gerlach), a distinguished leader in the effort to permanently eliminate the marriage tax penalty.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, as I prepare to yield to the gentleman from Illinois I would note that later during this debate we are going to be debating a Democratic alternative which, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, raises taxes on individuals and small business by $207 billion. Think what that will mean to our economy. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane), the ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I have a note that this House will be considering broad AMT relief in the next few weeks. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), a senior member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to claim the time in opposition, and I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me begin by, of course, thanking my good friend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) for these thoughtful and friendly comments, and as we begin this debate on the substitute he is offering, and of course, my criticism that I will have of course is being made in friendly terms, as he knows. Let me just explain why I urge my colleagues in the House to, in a bipartisan way, oppose the Rangel substitute to H.R. 4181. As my good friend from New York noted, it includes a $207 billion tax increase on individuals, on families and particularly on small business. To summarize the Rangel substitute, it reverses the tax relief that benefits many families that was included in the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. It creates a new tax on families and small business, and it even makes the existing alternative minimum tax, something that we all despise, even more complicated. The Rangel proposal, the Rangel alternative, creates a new tax on families and small business. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the substitute authored by my friend from New York raises taxes by $207 billion by creating a new tax on a group that is defined as the rich, but if we look at the fine print of that definition, the vast majority of the so-called rich are people on Main Street, entrepreneurs and small business people, the people who employ a lot of workers in Morris, Illinois, where I live. As I noted, it increases taxes on entrepreneurs and reverses the President's tax relief by raising the rate, and it makes the AMT even more complex. Although we share a bipartisan goal of fixing the AMT impacting the 2003 tax cut, we provided for AMT relief, and I expect in the next few weeks the House is going to vote on an extension of that which provides broad AMT relief for millions of families who would otherwise suffer the AMT. I would note under the Rangel substitute the Tax Code is made even more complicated by requiring families, believe this or not, to do three sets of tax calculations. People have got to figure out their taxes three times to determine whether or not they avoid the AMT under my good friend's proposal. Republicans are working to address the AMT and I would note the AMT, the alternative minimum tax, was made much worse in 1993 with what has been called the Clinton tax increase. No Republican supported what was then the biggest tax hike in the history of our Nation but most Democrats did, but the AMT was made much more complicated and actually of greater burden, targeted at middle class families. We are working to solve that burden, and this House will be voting on AMT relief sometime in the near future. We are working closely with the Bush administration towards that goal, and we believe that proposal will protect 11 million families who otherwise would pay the alternative minimum tax. So I ask bipartisan opposition to my good friend's proposal, which again is a $207 billion tax increase on individuals and small business. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murphy).

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Brown).

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller).

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Barrett).

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, as we bring this debate to a close on this legislation, I really believe we need to bring it back into focus. We have had a lot of peripheral issues that have been thrown out there, and this is really what this legislation does. It is a simple extension of existing law, existing law that eliminates the marriage tax penalty for 36 million married working couples. The example of a couple in the district that I represent who are those who face higher taxes if we fail to pass this legislation law is a couple by the name of Jose and Magdalena Castillo of Joliet, Illinois. They have a little boy and a little girl, Eduardo and Carolina. They are a hard working couple, and like 36 million married working couples, they could pay higher taxes unless this legislation becomes law. In 2001 and 2003 we worked with President Bush and we succeeded in essentially wiping out the marriage tax penalty for 36 million low income and middle class married working couples. For the Castillo family of Joliet, Illinois, it meant $1,125. Think about that. In Joliet, Illinois, that is a couple semesters worth of tuition at the community college. It pays several months of daycare. It is a down payment on a home. It is money they can put in their retirement account or their education savings account to help their children. The Castillos, like millions of married working couples, could face higher taxes. Now, it is estimated that if we fail to pass this legislation into law that next year millions of couples will receive a tax increase of about $300 million as a portion of that marriage tax penalty if reimposed. And then in 2010 if we fail to make permanent the elimination of the marriage tax penalty, they could see about a $1,000 increase in their taxes. And over that 10-year time, 36 million married working couples could receive about $100 billion in higher taxes, just because they are married, and that is what this is all about. We hear a lot of rhetoric but this is pretty simple legislation. We are doing a simple extension of existing law that is due to sunset this year, and if we fail to extend it 36 million married working couples will suffer higher taxes just because they are married. So I urge my colleagues to join with us. Let us work in a bipartisan fashion. Our efforts to eliminate the marriage tax penalty enjoyed bipartisan support. Let us focus on what this issue is, and that is bringing fairness to the Tax Code. So I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to think of the Castillo family when they vote to make permanent today the elimination of the marriage tax penalty. I urge a no vote on the substitute which contains a $207 billion tax increase on individuals and small business. I urge a no vote to reject that and I ask for an aye vote to make permanent the elimination of the marriage tax penalty. Who benefits? Thirty-six million hard working married couples where both the husband and wife are in the workforce. And it is just a common sense question. Why should they have to pay higher taxes just because they are married? We have made a commitment to eliminate the marriage tax penalty. Let us make it permanently eliminated so it never comes back.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We are learning a new definition today, ``pay for,'' which means ``tax increase.'' Again, the Democrat substitutes proposes a $207 billion tax increase on individuals and small businesses, those who create jobs all across America. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to note that we continue to debate the Democrat proposal to raise taxes by $207 billion on individuals and small businesses. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kennedy).

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, as we debate the Democrat proposal to increase taxes on individuals, families and small business by $207 billion, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Burns).

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, as we continue to debate the Democrat proposal to increase taxes by $207 billion on individuals, families and small business, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gerlach), one of our leaders in the effort to permanently eliminate the marriage tax penalty.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), a member of the House Republican leadership.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, today, Congressmen Neal, Upton, English, Tiahrt and I have introduced legislation to make bonus depreciation a permanent part of our tax code. I appreciate the opportunity to make a statement on this important legislation. As you know, the issue of bonus depreciation has been an important one over the past 2 years. On March 9, 2002, President Bush signed the Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002 into law. This law allows businesses to accelerate the depreciation of equipment they purchase between September 11, 2001 and December 31, 2004. All equipment with a depreciable life of 20 years and under qualifies for the bonus depreciation treatment. Originally they were entitled to get a bonus of 30 percent in the first year. Before this law, a $1000 computer would be depreciated equally over 5 years. $200 each year. With this change, businesses get $175 in the first year, plus a 30 percent bonus. So, they depreciate $475 in the first year and the remaining $520 over the next 4 years ($175 each year for 4 years). H.R. 2, the 2003 tax cut law, included a provision to increase bonus depreciation to 50 percent through December 31, 2004. This provision became law in June 2003. This has helped stimulate the economy and create new jobs for Americans that are out of work. Just today, the U.S. Department of Labor released statistics that prove that bonus depreciation and other tax cuts are working. Bonus depreciation is helping to bring jobs back to the U.S. economy and put American workers back to work. The Labor Department announcement indicates that the U.S. economy created 308,000 new jobs in March, this is the fastest monthly job growth since April 2000. The latest data show that more than 500,000 new jobs have been created in the first three months of 2004. In another example, the General Aviation Manufacturers Association recently told me that in the first 5 months after enactment of the bonus depreciation provision sales of general aviation airplanes increased 45 percent. Mr. Speaker, bonus depreciation and the other tax cuts are working. Our economy is rebounding. We need to make bonus depreciation and the other tax cuts permanent in our tax code. When making business decisions, companies need to know for sure that they can rely on these tax provisions. I ask my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this important legislation.

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the first anniversary of the Congressional Hispanic Conference. Formed just 1 year ago, the Conference promotes the interest of over 40 million Americans of Hispanic and Portuguese descent. As an associate member of this Conference, along with our founding members, we have provided a needed voice in Congress and in issues important to the Hispanic and Latino community. Hispanics, by principle, value moderate and conservative beliefs, and the Congressional Hispanic Conference's policy objectives mirror those beliefs. Mr. Speaker, I strongly believe ``Los valores le los Hispanos son los valores de los Republicanos,'' meaning ``Hispanic values are Republican values.'' When you address the issues, it is clear that the values of the Republican Party are the values of Hispanic and Latino Americans. In the 108th Congress, the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, known by most as the ``Bush tax cut,'' was passed and signed by George W. Bush. This legislation lowered taxes for every American taxpayer, and now several million working Americans of low income benefit from a new lower tax bracket of 10 percent, allowing them to keep more of what they earned. But also note, these hard- working Americans in the lowest tax bracket receive the largest percentage reduction in their tax burden. In fact, 3 million low-income families no longer have to pay Federal income taxes. Another benefit of the Bush tax cut to strengthen families is that we increased the child tax credit from $600 to $1,000 per child this year. An estimated 34 million families benefit from this provision to help them. And I would note that we also strengthen families and, particularly, the institution of marriage by eliminating the marriage tax penalty. The Congressional Hispanic Conference is committed to passing legislation which provides common-sense lower taxes for all Americans. With the No Child Left Behind Act designed to help our schools passed by this Congress, signed into law by President Bush, minority parents are empowered with the freedom to remove their children from unsafe and failing schools and enroll them into a more successful institution. Ensuring that Hispanics receive a quality education will assist bridging the wage and unemployment gap that exists here in America. We have all learned that with higher education workers can earn more income with their jobs; and I would also note, with our commitment to education in the Republican Congress, when we worked with the President over the last 3\1/2\ years, we have increased Federal funding for education by 45 percent over just 3 years ago. Mr. Speaker, these are just two examples of numerous legislative accomplishments of the Congressional Hispanic Conference, along with the Republican majority. The list continues, whether the issue is the Republican effort to increase the number of community health centers and access to health care, to lower taxes to strengthen and make our schools better, to support faith-based community organizations, or promote homeownership and develop a common market for all of the Americas. Republicans, under the leadership of the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert) and President Bush have worked hard to make our messages of support clear to our Latino and Hispanic communities and neighbors. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to serve as an associate member of the Congressional Hispanic Conference and commend the conference for a successful year in just 1 year. My colleagues and I will continue to promote the goals and aspirations of the Latino community and the opportunities for all Americans. Los valores de los Hispanos son los valores de los Republicanos. Compartimos los mismos valores. Somos todos Americanos. (English translation of the above statement is as follows:) Hispanic values are Republican values. We share common values. We are all Americans.

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the House has taken up and passed House Resolution 433, a resolution that honors and remembers the contributions of a great American and a revered figure on the island of Puerto Rico. On October 21, 2003, at the age of 99, Puerto Rico lost a hero in the passing of Luis Ferre. Perhaps the greatest political figure in the history of Puerto Rico, Luis Ferre spent his entire life working to make life better for the residents of Puerto Rico. Luis Ferre was a successful businessman and a human rights advocate for people on the small Caribbean island. He was elected to post as both Governor and Representative in Puerto Rico and also served as Chairman of the Puerto Rico Republican Party. Ferre loved America. One of his greatest hopes was to see his native Puerto Rico become an American State and he worked throughout his life to advance the cause of statehood for Puerto Rico. In 1917, at the age of 13 years old, Ferre along with the people of Puerto Rico were granted United States citizenship. Ferre often recounted that while he could not recall the day Puerto Ricans were granted U.S. Citizenship, that he was grateful to be alive to enjoy the privileges of living in the worlds greatest republic. In 1951, Ferre was elected delegate to the Puerto Rican Constitutional Convention and he was able to directly contribute to the island becoming an official United States Commonwealth in 1952. In 1968, Ferre was elected Governor and he continued to work toward Puerto Rican Statehood. He remained active in politics up to his death, most notably as the chairman of the Republican Party in Puerto Rico. Mr. Speaker, many people from across the United States and across the globe have taken note of the contributions of Luis Ferre and his life of public service on the islands of Puerto Rico. Most notably, former President George H.W. Bush awarded Ferre with the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1991, the highest government award a civilian can receive. Ferre is one of four Puerto Ricans to receive this Presidential honor. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support the people of Puerto Rico and I am pleased that this body is honoring a great American and a great Puerto Rican. I extend my condolences to Luis Ferre's family and to all the people of Puerto Rico who cherished this man and his contributions.

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution. Let us review and remember the history of Saddam Hussein, a history of torture, murder and massive abuse of human rights. Saddam was not only an aggressor against his neighbors, but he murdered his own people. This is an outrage against all humanity. Under Saddam Hussein, torture was widely used. Rape was a standard practice to intimidate and punish families, an outrage against women and all humanity. Murder was common. Truckloads of bodies took away victims. Ethnic cleansing was practiced with precision and effective organization, again an outrage against humanity. The mass graves he created could barely hide the devastation of Saddam Hussein. Let us remember that Saddam Hussein was known in his own neighborhood, the Middle East, as The Butcher of Baghdad. Back in 1998, Saddam Hussein made a poison cocktail for the town of Halabja, using a combination of nerve agents, mustard gas and conventional munitions to kill 5,000 innocent Iraqi civilians, again an outrage against humanity. And from 1983 to 1988, he went on an ethnic cleansing rampage against Iraqi Kurds, killing nearly 30,000 and wiping out 60 individual villages. If you were not marked for death, Saddam Hussein was a master at torture and these were his favorite tools of torture, electric shock, drip acid on victims' skin, gouging out eyes, pulling out fingernails, suspending individuals from rotating ceiling fans, and for those who spoke ill of Saddam Hussein, they ripped out those victims' tongues. This is all an outrage against humanity. There are over 400,000 unidentified bodies being unearthed in Iraq which call out for justice. I have a photo of a woman searching the remains of a mass grave for a loved one. Tell me this is not a just cause for freeing Iraq from Saddam Hussein. Mr. Speaker, this Congress, this President, and our American military men and women had the leadership, the courage, and made the sacrifice to liberate Iraq from the mad, mad man, Saddam Hussein. It was the right step to take for all humanity.