Kenny Hulshof: “what an appropriate time for us to really continue this debate that we began a year ago last spring when we, this body…”

“what an appropriate time for us to really continue this debate that we began a year ago last spring when we, this body, voted in a bipartisan way to enact some significant tax relief. Mr. Speaker, yesterday was in fact tax day; and always there are jokes that sort of go around April 15. My favorite happens to be an old Farmer's Almanac saying if Patrick Henry thought taxation without representation was bad, he ought to see it with representation. As one of the members of the Committee on Ways and Means that insists on doing my own taxes, and I did not deny myself that enjoyment over the weekend, I was thinking what can we do to make the Tax Code simpler and fairer. As my seat mate on the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) has done so admirably, and over these months I feel as if I know quite well Shad and Michelle Hallihan because the gentleman tells their story so frequently on the House floor. As we set this debate up, Mr. Speaker, first of all, why is this vote necessary? Why is it that we are talking about permanence or the lack of permanence with what Congress did last summer? It is interesting to note, I think, that tax increases are always permanent. I think back, we had a debate recently about the Spanish-American war tax, a tax on luxury telephones back in 1898 to help pay for the war effort, and later the World War I effort. That tax still exists today.”