HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

575

1995 T56.15

Callahan

Calvert

Camp

Canady

Cardin

Castle

Chabot

Chambliss

Chenoweth

Christensen

Chrysler

Clinger

Coble

Coburn

Collins (GA)

Combest

Cooley

Cox

Coyne

Crane

Crapo

Cremeans

Cubin

Cunningham

Davis

Deal

DeFazio

DeLay

Diaz-Balart

Dickey

Dooley

Doolittle

Dornan

Dreier

Duncan

Dunn

Ehlers

Ehrlich

Emerson

English

Ensign

Everett

Ewing

Fawell

Fields (TX)

Flanagan

Foley

Forbes

Fowler

Fox

Franks (CT)

Franks (NJ)

Frelinghuysen

Frisa

Funderburk

Gallegly

Gekas

Geren

Gibbons

Gilchrest

Gillmor

Gilman

Goodlatte

Goodling

Goss

Graham

Greenwood

Gunderson

Gutknecht

Hall (OH)

Hall (TX)

Hamilton

Hancock

Hansen

Hastert

Hastings (WA)

Hayworth

Hefley

Heineman

Herger

Hilleary

Hobson

Hoekstra

Hoke

Horn

Hostettler

Houghton

Hoyer

Hunter

Hutchinson

Hyde

Inglis

Istook

Johnson (CT)

Johnson, Sam

Jones

Kanjorski

Kaptur

Kasich

Kelly

Kim

King

Kingston

Kleczka

Klink

Klug

Knollenberg

Kolbe

LaHood

Largent

Latham

LaTourette

Laughlin

Lazio

Leach

Lewis (CA)

Lewis (KY)

Lightfoot

Linder

Lipinski

Livingston

LoBiondo

Longley

Lucas

Manzullo

Martini

McCollum

McCrery

McDade

McHugh

McInnis

McIntosh

McKeon

McNulty

Metcalf

Meyers

Mica

Miller (FL)

Molinari

Mollohan

Montgomery

Moorhead

Morella

Murtha

Myers

Myrick

Nethercutt

Neumann

Ney

Norwood

Nussle

Orton

Oxley

Packard

Parker

Paxon

Payne (VA)

Peterson (FL)

Petri

Pickett

Pombo

Porter

Portman

Pryce

Quillen

Quinn

Radanovich

Ramstad

Regula

Riggs

Roberts

Roemer

Rogers

Rohrabacher

Ros-Lehtinen

Roth

Roukema

Royce

Salmon

Sanford

Saxton

Scarborough

Schaefer

Schiff

Seastrand

Sensenbrenner

Shadegg

Shaw

Shays

Shuster

Sisisky

Skaggs

Skeen

Smith (MI)

Smith (NJ)

Smith (TX)

Smith (WA)

Solomon

Souder

Spence

Stark

Stearns

Stenholm

Stockman

Stump

Talent

Tate

Tauzin

Taylor (NC)

Thomas

Thornberry

Tiahrt

Torkildsen

Upton

Vucanovich

Waldholtz

Walker

Walsh

Wamp

Watts (OK)

Weldon (FL)

Weldon (PA)

Weller

White

Whitfield

Wicker

Wilson

Wolf

Young (AK)

Young (FL)

Zeliff

Zimmer

NOT VOTING—1

Reynolds

So the motion to recommit with instructions was not agreed to.

T56.15 POINT OF ORDER

Mr. MORAN, having previously cited

clause 5(c) of rule XXI in a parliamentary inquiry as being appliable to the

bill, made a point of order, and said:

‘‘Mr. Speaker, I made a parliamentary inquiry, but I would state a point

of order that any vote on this bill

should require a three-fifths vote. If it

does not require that, then I would appeal the ruling of the Chair.’’.

Mr. ARCHER was recognized to

speak to the point of order, and said:

‘‘Mr. Speaker, I would be pleased to

try to help the Chair to support his ruling.

‘‘First, as a result of the enactment

of the 50 percent exclusion applicable

generally, taxpayers, other than those

described in the following two paragraphs, would have a tax rate lower

than 28 percent. Thus, the 28 percent

maximum rate of section 1(h) of current law would not cause a reduction in

tax liability as compared with that

under current law; that is, as relates to

current law liability, the provision

would be inoperative.

‘‘No. 2, the 50 percent exclusion

would not apply to collectibles. Under

H.R. 1215, for this group of taxpayers

the maximum rate of 28 percent is retained in H.R. 1215.

‘‘No. 3, a question has been raised as

to the potential application of the 28

percent maximum rate under current

law for taxpayers currently qualifying

for the special rules of existing section

of the law, 1202. In light of the fact that

this provision would be repealed by

1215, the maximum rate of 28 percent

would have no further application.

Moreover, it should be noted that the

special rules in section 1202 are an exclusion provision rather than a rate

provision.

‘‘Further, it should be noted that

concerns as to whether repeal of current law, section 1202, in conjunction

with the repeal of current law, section

1(h), constitutes a rate increase, are focused on the effective rate impact

rather than the occurrence of any income tax rate increase.

‘‘The House rule in question is not

intended to apply to effective rate

changes.’’.

Mr. MORAN was recognized to speak

further to the point of order, and said:

‘‘Mr. Speaker, I would like to underscore the last comment that was made

by the distinguished chairman of the

Committee on Ways and Means that

the House rule in question is not intended to apply to effective tax rate

changes. There was never any reference

to effective rate changes. In fact, it

was any income tax rate increase. I

read the debate again that occurred on

the first day of this session. We are

now making a distinction between effective rate changes apparently and

statutory rate changes, although both

apply here. I do have a letter from the

Treasury Department explaining that

this is a tax rate increase.

‘‘How it occurred, Mr. Speaker, is in

the 1993 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act we did pass a capital gains

tax rate reduction. What it said is that

when people invest in small capitalized

firms for five years, their capital gains

tax is reduced by 50 percent. What this

bill did was to strike the capital gains

rate of 28 percent, raise it to 39.6 percent, and then apply the 50 percent

preference for capital gains investment. What that means is that the effective capital gains rate is 19.8 percent

if this bill were to pass, whereas today

there are investors getting a 14 percent

tax rate on capital gains investments.

‘‘Now, this is not an obscure provision. It is a $725 million capital gains

provision that was passed in the 1993

Budget Reconciliation Act. What we

have done is for some investors who

have invested hundreds of millions of

dollars in small capitalized firms, is increased their tax rate from 14 percent

to 19.8 percent. That is an increase in

the income tax rate. It is both a statutory increase, in that we remove the 28

percent level and put in 39.6 percent. It

is also an effective rate increase because it changes from 14 percent to 19.8

percent. That is what the letter from

both the Treasury Department and the

Small Business Administration underscores, that in fact investors would be

paying a higher capital gains rate.’’.

Mr. CARDIN was recognized to speak

to the point of order, and said:

‘‘Mr. Speaker, I do.

‘‘Mr. Speaker, this is a very important ruling. It is the first one that the

Chair has had to make on the new rule

XXI that requires an extraordinary

vote on a tax rate increase. The language, as I understand it, is when the

Federal tax rate increase applies we

need a three-fifths vote.

‘‘If I understand the potential ruling

of the Chair, if the Chair rules that

this bill does not raise a rate and

therefore does not need an extraordinary vote, what the Chair is saying is

that legislation which subjects a larger

percentage of a taxpayer’s income to

an existing tax rate would not be a tax

rate increase under the provisions of

rule XXI. That would mean that we

could effectively raise tax rates in this

country by just subjecting a larger

amount of a person’s income to the tax

rate, thereby accomplishing the effect

of a tax rate increase under the potential ruling of the Chair without raising

the rate.

‘‘I just really want to point that out

to the Chair before he makes his ruling, because effectively if he rules

against the gentleman from Virginia

[Mr. MORAN] rule XXI is meaningless.’’.

Mr. SKAGGS was recognized to speak

to the point of order, and said:

‘‘Mr. Speaker, one further point I

think needs to be made on this.

‘‘During the debate on opening day,

it was touted that this rules change

was remedial in nature. It was to be

viewed expansively as remedying a propensity of the House that needed to be

curtailed. A narrow reading such as is

advocated by the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means a few minutes ago flies in the face of all of the

advocacy, the legislative history, if

you will, of this rules change, which is

the only basis that the House has and

that the Chair has for informing a ruling.

‘‘To take a provision that was intended to be remedial, and therefore

viewed expansively, and interpret it

narrowly belies the absurdity of the

rules change to begin with.’’.
JOURNAL OF THE

576

T56.16 APRIL 5

Mr. MCDERMOTT was recognized to

speak to the point of order, and said:

‘‘Yes, Mr. Speaker.

‘‘Mr. Speaker, if I understand the ruling the Chair is about to make, you are

saying for those who do not understand

arcane tax law, if we raise taxes on

people but we do it in a sneaky, kind of

back-door way of doing it, that, Mr.

Speaker, if we do it in a legislatively,

carefully crafted way, we can get away

with it. If we do it straight out and say

to small business, your taxes go from

14 percent to 19 percent just like that,

that would require a 60-percent vote.

But if we can find some way

parliamentarily to swing around it,

whatever the effect on people is does

not make any difference.

‘‘Is that what the Chair is saying?’’.

Mr. LINDER was recognized to speak

to the point of order, and said:

‘‘Mr. Speaker, this does not seem all

that complicated. It does not change

any rates of taxation of capital gains.

It excludes 50 percent of the gain.

Therefore, you are taxed at the 39.6-

percent tax rate. Fifty percent of any

gain would be excluded, giving an effective rate of 19.8 percent, a lower effective rate.

‘‘If you happen to be taxed at a 35-

percent tax rate, 50 percent of the gain

would be excluded, giving you a 17.5-

percent tax. It lowers the effective rate

in every instance by excluding half of

the gain from any taxation at all.’’.

The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr.

DREIER, overruled the point of order,

and said:

‘‘The Chair is prepared to rule.

‘‘In deference to the specialized expertise that has been provided, the

Chair rules that this bill does not include a Federal income tax rate increase.’’.

Mr. MORAN appealed the ruling of

the Chair.

Mr. ARCHER moved to lay the appeal on the table.

The question being put, viva voce,

Will the House lay on the table the

appeal of the ruling of the Chair?

The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr.

DREIER, announced that the nays had

it.

Mr. MFUME demanded a recorded

vote on agreeing to said motion, which

demand was supported by one-fifth of a

quorum, so a recorded vote was ordered.

The vote was taken by electronic device.

It was decided in the Yeas ....... 228 ! affirmative ................... Nays ...... 204

T56.16 [Roll No. 294]

AYES—228

Allard

Archer

Armey

Bachus

Baker (CA)

Baker (LA)

Ballenger

Barr

Barrett (NE)

Bartlett

Barton

Bass

Bateman

Bereuter

Bilbray

Bilirakis

Bliley

Blute

Boehlert

Boehner

Bonilla

Bono

Brownback

Bryant (TN)

Bunn

Bunning

Burr

Burton

Buyer

Callahan

Calvert

Camp

Canady

Castle

Chabot

Chambliss

Chenoweth

Christensen

Chrysler

Clinger

Coble

Coburn

Collins (GA)

Combest

Cooley

Cox

Crane

Crapo

Cremeans

Cubin

Cunningham

Davis

DeLay

Diaz-Balart

Dickey

Doolittle

Dornan

Dreier

Duncan

Dunn

Ehlers

Ehrlich

Emerson

English

Ensign

Everett

Ewing

Fawell

Fields (TX)

Flanagan

Foley

Forbes

Fowler

Fox

Franks (CT)

Frelinghuysen

Frisa

Funderburk

Gallegly

Ganske

Gekas

Gilchrest

Gillmor

Gilman

Gingrich

Goodlatte

Goodling

Goss

Graham

Greenwood

Gunderson

Gutknecht

Hancock

Hansen

Hastert

Hastings (WA)

Hayworth

Hefley

Heineman

Herger

Hilleary

Hobson

Hoekstra

Hoke

Horn

Hostettler

Houghton

Hunter

Hutchinson

Hyde

Inglis

Istook

Johnson (CT)

Johnson, Sam

Jones

Kasich

Kelly

Kim

King

Kingston

Klug

Knollenberg

Kolbe

LaHood

Largent

Latham

LaTourette

Lazio

Leach

Lewis (CA)

Lewis (KY)

Lightfoot

Linder

Livingston

LoBiondo

Longley

Lucas

Manzullo

Martini

McCollum

McCrery

McDade

McHugh

McInnis

McIntosh

McKeon

Metcalf

Meyers

Mica

Miller (FL)

Molinari

Moorhead

Morella

Myers

Myrick

Nethercutt

Neumann

Ney

Norwood

Nussle

Oxley

Packard

Paxon

Petri

Pombo

Porter

Portman

Pryce

Quillen

Quinn

Radanovich

Ramstad

Regula

Riggs

Roberts

Rogers

Rohrabacher

Ros-Lehtinen

Roth

Roukema

Royce

Salmon

Sanford

Saxton

Scarborough

Schaefer

Schiff

Seastrand

Sensenbrenner

Shadegg

Shaw

Shays

Shuster

Skeen

Smith (MI)

Smith (NJ)

Smith (TX)

Smith (WA)

Solomon

Spence

Stearns

Stockman

Stump

Talent

Tate

Taylor (NC)

Thomas

Thornberry

Tiahrt

Torkildsen

Upton

Vucanovich

Waldholtz

Walker

Walsh

Wamp

Watts (OK)

Weldon (FL)

Weldon (PA)

Weller

White

Whitfield

Wicker

Wolf

Young (AK)

Young (FL)

Zeliff

Zimmer

NOES—204

Abercrombie

Ackerman

Andrews

Baesler

Baldacci

Barcia

Barrett (WI)

Becerra

Beilenson

Bentsen

Berman

Bevill

Bishop

Bonior

Borski

Boucher

Brewster

Browder

Brown (CA)

Brown (FL)

Brown (OH)

Bryant (TX)

Cardin

Chapman

Clay

Clayton

Clement

Clyburn

Coleman

Collins (IL)

Collins (MI)

Condit

Conyers

Costello

Coyne

Cramer

Danner

de la Garza

Deal

DeFazio

DeLauro

Dellums

Deutsch

Dicks

Dingell

Dixon

Doggett

Dooley

Doyle

Durbin

Edwards

Engel

Eshoo

Evans

Farr

Fattah

Fazio

Fields (LA)

Filner

Flake

Foglietta

Ford

Frank (MA)

Frost

Furse

Gejdenson

Gephardt

Geren

Gibbons

Gonzalez

Gordon

Green

Gutierrez

Hall (OH)

Hall (TX)

Hamilton

Harman

Hastings (FL)

Hayes

Hefner

Hilliard

Hinchey

Holden

Hoyer

Jackson-Lee

Jacobs

Jefferson

Johnson (SD)

Johnson, E.B.

Johnston

Kanjorski

Kaptur

Kennedy (MA)

Kennedy (RI)

Kennelly

Kildee

Kleczka

Klink

LaFalce

Lantos

Laughlin

Levin

Lewis (GA)

Lincoln

Lipinski

Lofgren

Lowey

Luther

Maloney

Manton

Markey

Martinez

Mascara

Matsui

McCarthy

McDermott

McHale

McKinney

McNulty

Meehan

Meek

Menendez

Mfume

Miller (CA)

Mineta

Minge

Mink

Moakley

Mollohan

Montgomery

Moran

Murtha

Nadler

Neal

Oberstar

Obey

Olver

Ortiz

Orton

Owens

Pallone

Parker

Pastor

Payne (NJ)

Payne (VA)

Pelosi

Peterson (FL)

Peterson (MN)

Pickett

Pomeroy

Poshard

Rahall

Rangel

Reed

Richardson

Rivers

Roemer

Rose

Roybal-Allard

Rush

Sabo

Sanders

Sawyer

Schroeder

Schumer

Scott

Serrano

Sisisky

Skaggs

Skelton

Slaughter

Spratt

Stark

Stenholm

Stokes

Studds

Stupak

Tanner

Tauzin

Taylor (MS)

Tejeda

Thompson

Thornton

Thurman

Torres

Torricelli

Towns

Traficant

Tucker

Velazquez

Vento

Visclosky

Volkmer

Ward

Waters

Watt (NC)

Waxman

Williams

Wilson

Wise

Woolsey

Wyden

Wynn

Yates

NOT VOTING—3

Franks (NJ) Reynolds Souder

So the motion to lay the appeal on

the table was agreed to.

A motion to reconsider the vote

whereby said motion was agreed to

was, by unanimous consent, laid on the

table.

The question being put, viva voce,

Will the House pass said bill?

The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr.

DREIER, announced that the yeas had

it.

Mr. GIBBONS demanded a recorded

vote on passage of said bill, which demand was supported by one-fifth of a

quorum, so a recorded vote was ordered.

The vote was taken by electronic device.

It was decided in the Yeas ....... 246 ! affirmative ................... Nays ...... 188

T56.17 [Roll No. 295]

AYES—246

Allard

Andrews

Archer

Armey

Bachus

Baker (CA)

Baker (LA)

Ballenger

Barr

Barrett (NE)

Bartlett

Barton

Bass

Bateman

Bereuter

Bevill

Bilbray

Bilirakis

Bliley

Boehlert

Boehner

Bonilla

Bono

Brewster

Browder

Brownback

Bryant (TN)

Bunn

Bunning

Burr

Burton

Buyer

Callahan

Calvert

Camp

Canady

Castle

Chabot

Chambliss

Chenoweth

Christensen

Chrysler

Clement

Clinger

Coble

Coburn

Collins (GA)

Combest

Condit

Cooley

Cox

Cramer

Crane

Crapo

Cremeans

Cubin

Cunningham

Danner

Deal

DeLay

Diaz-Balart

Dickey

Doolittle

Dornan

Dreier

Duncan

Dunn

Ehlers

Ehrlich

Emerson

English

Ensign

Everett

Ewing

Fawell

Fields (TX)

Flanagan

Foley

Forbes

Fowler

Fox

Franks (CT)

Franks (NJ)

Frelinghuysen

Frisa

Funderburk

Gallegly

Ganske

Gekas

Geren

Gilchrest

Gillmor

Gilman

Gingrich

Goodlatte

Goodling