I rise in support of the original bill and against the substitute. But I would like to pose a question to both the author of the substitute as well as the author of the original bill. And that is, in 1993, when we had the largest tax increase in the history of mankind, we suddenly decided it was all right to retroactively tax people. So why does the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Archer) consider in each of their bills an amendment that would make this tax relief, under either provision, retroactive to January 1, 1999?
James T. Callahan: “I rise in support of the original bill and against the substitute. But I would like to pose a question to both the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing tax policy and retroactive tax relief during a debate on a bill.
Share
More from James T. Callahan
What my amendment would do would prohibit money from going to a terrorist that has been blowing up all of the people in Israel. It denies him the money to use for other things so he can have his money to blow up the people of Israel, and…
The fact is it costs $44,000 a minute to run this House. It would appear to me that every time they talk about reducing a bill by $10,000, if they are going to spend $44,000 of Social Security money, it looks to me like we are losing…
When I bring my amendment up, I will ask some of you that have been coming up to me telling me all day long, ``Sonny, you are doing exactly the right thing,'' I am going to have some handouts, and I want some of you to take these handouts…
Simplifying the compliance processes and procedures would provide the ability to differentiate between contractors who are intentionally underpaying workers from those who may be unintentionally non-compliant.





