Mr. Speaker, if this were a debate on the budget and the decision before the House was to bind every spending measure and every tax measure to a PAYGO rule, the debate might be more appropriate. But to assign to one particular tax cut, and only one, a rule that is not applied to any other decision in this House, whether spending or tax cuts, seems to me to point out that somebody does not like making sure that married people pay no more tax than any other two taxpayers. It took us a long time to reach this point. It seems to me the gentleman's points will be well taken during a debate on the budget. There are a lot of people anxious to find out whether or not they are going to be able to continue the current marriage tax structure that we have. The gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) and Rhonda Rohrabacher have diapers to change. Let us not leave them in suspense. Vote no on the motion to recommit and yes on the underlying bill.
David Thomas: “Mr. Speaker, if this were a debate on the budget and the decision before the House was to bind every spending measure…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing tax policy and the marriage tax structure during House debate.
Share
More from David Thomas
I want to make a comment or two about the distribution of funding for homeland security. Of course, there has been a great deal of discussion about it, but we haven't heard much from small States. I am from Wyoming and I suggest to my…
I yield myself briefly. All we have to do to provide an increase in the minimum wage is to vote ``yes.'' And I wonder how that person working for a minimum wage feels when you say, I couldn't vote ``yes'' for the increase in the minimum…
I have in high regard those Members who focus on issues which they are concerned about in the pension bill, and I know that there are a number of sections that people could focus on in terms of their concern about the bill. And I know it…
In many ways, through my foundation, my last mission is to bring awareness to IAWL and those who are suffering.





