EXTENSIONS of REMARKS March 21, 1975 EXTENSIONS of REMARKS TAXBILLHURTSTHE Cent of Color Tv Sets and 75 Per Cent of Hi-Tis, H.R
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
8264 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS March 21, 1975 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS TAXBILLHURTSTHE cent of color tv sets and 75 per cent of hi-tis, H.R. 4369, the Clean Air Act Amendments MIDDLE CLASS according to Business Week. of 1975. We felt it important to introduce It should be apparent that the practice of Democratic liberals in Congress of soaking this legislation at this time because of HON. BILL ARCHER the Middle Class, as well as the rich, is de the time schedule that the Subcommittee on Health and Environment of the Com OF TEXAS stroying the economy along with the fam ilies that are the bulkwark of our society. mittee on Interstate and Foreign Com IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES The $21.3 billion Emergency Tax Reduc merce is following on all Clean Air Act Thursday, March 20, 1975 tion bill recently approved by the House amendments. Our package addressed demonstrates that the liberals want to con some of the same issues that the admin Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, one of the tinue their war against the Middle Class. great successes of our economic system in It reeks of discrimination against middle istration's bill did, and ignored others. the United States has been the develop income taxpayers and bias favoring those Those provisions of the law that we did ment of a strong and durable middle earning less than $10,000. not seek to amend are ones that we class. If we are to continue to grow eco Under the guiding liberal hand of Rep. Al believe can be made to work, if the En nomically as a nation and to provide a Ullman, D.-Ore., the House voted to give vironmental Protection Agency exercised good life for our citizens, we need to pre about 56 per cent of the individual tax cuts good judgment and good faith in enforc and benefits to families earning less than ing those provisions of the law. serve our middle class and expand the $10,000. Taxpayers in the middle-income and number of Americans in this group. Yet, higher income brackets who paid far more I have been impressed with the depth under the influence of those individuals in taxes will get the short end of the stick. and scope of the House hearings, and more interested in redistributing our na Thus the blll is a.n outright fraud. It is while there are obviously areas that de tional income rather than providing the billed as a tax reduction when in reality it is serve greater studY by other committees, means for sound economic growth lead another gigantic tax transfer. Fainilies with such as the data base upon which the ing to an increase in national income, incomes over $10,000 simply wouldn't get EPA has been making decisions, and their greater and greater burdens have been back their fair share of taxes. Taxes that research capabilities in general, the should be given back to them would be Health and the Environment Subcom placed on the middle-class American handed over instead to families who paid far taxpayer. The tax bill recently passed by less in taxes. mittee has been doing an excellent job the U.S. House of Representatives is an Under this legislative atrocity a taxpayer of exploring, on the record, the main example of a measure which, in the words who paid $100 in taxes in 1974 would get back areas of conttict. I am also reassured of an editorial in the St. Louis Globe his $100. But a taxpayer who paid $1,000 also that the subcommittee is seriously con Democrat, March 8-9, 1975, "is inexor would get only $100. Most taxpayers with a sidering the legislation that I, and many ably grinding the American Middle Class liability over $1,000 would get only a 10 per of my colleagues, have introduced. cent rebate, up to a maximum refund of only Most of my colleagues have not had into oblivion." If we are going to stimu $200. Anyone earning over $30,000 would get late our economy and provide sound eco a. mere $100. sufficient time to consider the legislation nomic growth for the future, we need to In specifying about $8.1 billion in tax that Mr. OTTINGER and myself have intro devise a taxation policy which will not reductions on 1975 income taxes, the House duced, which is understandable under the penalize our industrious middle class. I also found another segment of the Middle existing time constraints on all of us. would like to enter this editorial in the Class to discriminate against-some 9.5 mil I know that many Members were inter CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: lion families who itemize their tax deduc ested in this legislation, and I thank tions. These 9.5 million families would be them for their interest and support. LIQUIDATING T H E M I DDLE CLASS virtually excluded from the 1975 tax cuts. However, the subcommittee is approach By steadily transferring t he income of House liberals believe that this maneuver families earning between $12,000 and $30,000 will force these middle-income taxpayers to ing the markup stage on all amendments to those who pay little or n o taxes, Con switch from itemized tax deductions to the to the Clean Air Act, and it was neces gress is inexorably grinding t he American standard deduction. They have bllled this as sary to act without delay. Middle Class into oblivion. a major accomplishment in tax simplication The Clean Air Act Amendments of Figures of the Joint Economic Committee when in reality it is another poorly concealed 1975 have now been introduced three of Congress prove this point. They show that way of denying Iniddle-income families tax times, as H.R. 4369, H.R. 4836, and H.R. the biggest cost increases to a.n "intermedi deductions to which they are entitled. 5220. Many of the public witnesses have ate" U.S. family last year came from a. 26.5 In addition to being another vicious in per cent increase in income taxes and a. 21.6 come redistribution vehicle, the $21.3 billion also testified on this bil!. I would like to per cent hike in Social Security taxes. sham passed by the House wouldn't stimu share with my colleagues what two of When the averages of inflation are added late the economy as it is supposed to do. the witnesses said about this legislation. to the fiscal gepredations of the Robin Hood Families earning less t~an $10,000, who would The National Clean Air Coalition Congress, the effect on Middle Americans is get the bulk of the tax breaks, are the least testified on both the administration bill, absolutely devastating. likely to purchase the durable goods that and the Brown-Ottinger bill. On the An average U.S. family of four with a. must be bought to get the wheels of the Brown-Ottinger b11l they said: $13,000 income actually LOST 6 per cent in economy moving. Middle-income families The Brown-Ottinger Bill, unlike the Ad purchasing power in 1974 even if its total who do up to 80 per cent of such buying ministration blll, addresses responsibly the income rose a.t the average national rate of 8 would be badly short-changed. public health and welfare problems that re per cent. This was because the 12 per cent It is up to the Senate to rewrite the me-as· sult from our increasing use of energy, espe inflation rate not only increased the cost of ure so that middle-income families get the cially energy generated from coal. It includes nearly everything it bought but also reduced tax rebates and tax cuts to which they are means for allowing flexibility in meeting the the value of exemptions and deductions on entitled. This is the only way to provide an Act's deadlines, while retaining significant its tax return. honest tax cut measure. It also happens to and workable measures to encourage the The continual squeezing of middle-income be the only way to give the economy the earliest possible compliance. Americans by a. deficit-spending, social wel stimulus that it so urgently needs. With respect to sulfates, the blll proposes fare happy, inflation-promoting Congress is a. device for forcing the rapid development one of the principal reasons why the nation of a National Ambient Air Quality Standard is in a deep recession. for suspended sulfates, while encouraging Under incessant pounding from Congress, CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS OF emitters to curtail their output of pollutants. families earning from $12,000 to $30,000 no 1975 Under the blll, the EPA Administrator would longer have money t o purchase new cars, have a. specified time period to make a choice major appliances or other durable goods. ot either promulgating a Standard, or ex The result has been a 34 per cent drop in plaining that certain gaps in his knowledge purchases of these "big ticket" iteinS and HON. GEORGE E. BROWN, JR. OF CALIFORNYA prevents promulgation of a. Standard a.t that massive layoffs at companies t hat manufac time. If he reaches the latter conclusion, he ture them. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES would by statute begin the application of a.n Famllies in middle income brackets nor Thursday, March 20, 1975 incremental emission charge, beginning a.t mally buy roughly 80 per cent of all cars, 70 5 cents per pound of sulfur oxides emitted per cent of all washing machines, 72 per cent Mr. BROWN of California.