marriage penalty relief is an important issue, and I am glad that the House is considering the legislation today. Most of us have supported marriage penalty relief for many, many years. That being said, however, I do not think that the current version of H.R. 6 is helpful. The President's budget addresses the problem in a more fiscally responsible fashion, and I commend him for making his proposal. It would increase the standard deduction for two-earner households to double the amount of the standard deduction for single filers. Since most married couples claim the standard deduction and pay taxes at the 15 percent marginal rate, this provision would eliminate the marriage penalty for most families across the country. Like the President's proposal, the Democratic alternative that will be offered today would target marriage penalty relief to the families that need it most in the country. Unlike the version of H.R. 6 that was reported out of the Committee on Ways and Means, the Democratic alternative ensures that the alternative minimum tax will not prevent married couples from receiving marriage penalty relief. Consequently, we should support the Democratic alternative that will be offered later today.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing marriage penalty relief and comparing legislative proposals during House debate.
Share
More from JAMES K. COYNE
I oppose renewing most-favored-nation status [MFN] for China at this time. I have supported MFN for China in the past. My support has been predicated upon the assumption that there would be certain improvements in China's conduct as a…
too little is known about the effects that this legislation would have on the U.S. economy. This bill as amended would eliminate the Internal Revenue Code by December 31, 2002, except for Social Security, Medicare and Railroad Retirement…
I rise tonight to join in this special order on the recent rash of arson attacks on African-American churches throughout the South. It causes me great pain that such a special order is necessary today, 40 years after Brown v. Board of…
H.R. 3396, the Defense of Marriage Act, presently before the House is unnecessary, untimely, purports to solve a problem that does not exist, professes to defend an institution-- marriage--that is not under attack in the manner suggested…





