Date: 1981-07-29
Speaker: WILLIAM J. COYNE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I rise In support of the Ways and Means Committee bill. Mr. Chairman. I have been urged repeatedly In recent weeks to give my full and uncritical support to the President in his efforts to build a new economic order. I would like to state that I am fully and unequivocally in favor of what the administration says it stands for. The American people have made It clear that they want a balanced budget. reduced Inflation. and a smaller Federal presence In our national life. However. the administrations tax bill is a betrayal of these goals. The administration apparently believes that supplyside economics amount in practice to a new form of the old trickledown theorygive enough to the rich and the rest of us are bound to get what falls through the cracks. That 25 percent acrosstheboard tax cut. which sounds so fair and equitable. tosses a few dollars to the average taxpayer and thousands to the truly needy In the higher tax brackets. Then it adds subsidies. in the deceptive form of tax breaks. to a host of specialinterest groups. including the oil companies. To top It off. It mandates that we continue on this openhanded course for 3 years. In the face of huge predicted deficits. All this will cost the average taxpayer dearly. Tax breaks are as much Government spending as onbudget items. and just as Inflationary. The Presidents tax proposal. combined with his ambitious plans for defense spending. will require either the nearannihilation of all other programs. or a miracle. to avoid disastrous inflation. True supplyside believers may be confident of the miracle. But I cannot in good conscience accept a widening gap between rich and poor. while calling on the poor. the elderly. and the children of America to sacrifice their welfare for the sake of the economy. I might have more qualms about rejecting this bill if my district reflected the Presidents contention that he has the overwhelming support of the people. In fact. this is not the case. a KQV radio Poll shows that the people of Pittsburgh are evenly divided on the subject. I have studied all the available proposals carefully and I believe that my vote will be In the best interests of the people of Pittsburgh. The choice between the Republican and Democratic alternatives is an unattractive one for me. One of my deepest concerns as a Representative is the closing of tax loopholes which benefit the few while all taxpayers foot the bill. In this respect. both these proposals are a step backward. Both are loaded down with favors to small groups that will do little to Increase Investment or renew the economy. Both wIllfurther complicate our tax structure. My first choice among the tax bills presented is one the President failed to mention In his address. The UdallObeyReuss proposal limits the tax cut to 1 year. targets the bulk of the cuts to lower income taxpayers. and stimulates Investment by allowing accelerated depreciation for small business. the backbone of our economyrather than subsidizing large corporations to acquire other large corporations at taxpayer expense. Most Important. it balances the budget. and will even result in surpluses In 1982 and 1983. It does this in part by closing such notorious loopholes as the depletion allowance and the tax subsidy. for commodity speculators. The UdallObeyReuss substitue will take real steps to combat Inflation and lower the longterm tax burden on the public. I fully support this lean. wellthoughout bill. and I hope that the House will have the wisdom to pass it. If it comes to a choice between the Republican and Democratic bills. I intend to support the Democratic proposal. There are many features of this bill I find distasteful. but on balance I believe It Is more responsibleand more equitablethan the Presidents proposal. The Democratic bill targets tax cuts toward lower Income taxpayers most in need of this relief. rather than lavishing subsidies on those who are in the highest brackets. who are already protected by numerous tax shelters. and provides greater smallbusiness tax relief than the Republican alternative. Most Important. It makes the thirdyear tax cut dependent upon the economic growth the President promises. rather than lockIng us into increasingly more destructive deficits. Ninetyfive percent of American taxpayers earn less than $50.000 a year. It Is only fair that the bulk of the population should receive the bulk of the benefits from an expensive tax cut. and not the other way around. as the Republicans propose. The 3year tax cut will necessitate further budget cuts on an average of $41 billion a year starting in 1984. It is an open question where we will make these additional cuts. The administration for Its part has suggested that we consider cutting social security still further. I believe that we must face the real longterm consequences of the alternatives proposed. and I find the Implications of the Presidents proposal unacceptable. Therefore. I urge my colleagues to reject the Republican version and to support the Ways and Means Committees proposal.