Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
415892624
label
[Economy-Taxes/Tax Reform, 1991]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
415892624
contentType
document
title
[Economy-Taxes/Tax Reform, 1991]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13894-004
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Tony Snow Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
415892624
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
2aaef35595852a68
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Snow, Tony, Files
Subseries:
Subject File, 1988-1993
OA/ID Number:
13894
Folder ID Number:
13894-004
Folder Title:
[Economy-Taxes/Tax Reform, 1991]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
18
29
2
2
FRANK R. WOLF
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
à
10TH DISTRICT, VIRGINIA
SUBCOMMITTEES:
TRANSPORTATION
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
TREASURY-POSTAL SERVICE-GENERAL
104 CANNON BUILDING
Congress of the United States
GOVERNMENT
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
(202) 225-5136
SELECT COMMITTEE
CONSTITUENT SERVICES OFFICES:
house of Representatibes
ON CHILDREN, YOUTH
AND FAMILIES
1651 OLD MEADOW ROAD
SUITE 115
Mashington, DC 20515
SELECT COMMITTEE
MCLEAN, VA 22102
ON HUNGER
(703) 734-1500
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND
COOPERATION IN EUROPE
19 EAST MARKET STREET
LEESBURG, VA 22075
(703) 777-4422
METRO NUMBER
(703) 478-1303
STATEMENT OF FRANK R. WOLF
ON
"MIDDLE CLASS TAX RELIEF: WHAT'S THE BEST APPROACH?"
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
October 2, 1991
Good Morning. I am happy to be here with Senator Rockefeller and all
of you at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities to discuss an issue which
has been one of my top priorities in Congress this year middle class tax relief
for families. Financially reinvigorating families should be a central budget and
policy priority this year. When families are better able to deal with their
financial picture this in turn impacts upon the time they can devote to their
families and children. Since today's parents spend 40 percent less time with
their children than did parents a generation ago, easing these twin deficits of
time and money is essential. I am encouraged that this is an issue where there
is growing bipartisan agreement.
1
THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE OF RECYCLED FIBERS
The release of the National Commission on Children's Report this
summer shows how far we have come in the past decade in addressing the
family debate. Ten years ago this report would not have looked the way it does
today: a chapter on the importance of the "moral climate" for children, the
emphasis on the family as the primary institution for raising children, and a
focus on putting money back in the hands of families. As Robert Frost once
wrote, "Most of the change we think we see in life is due to truths being in and
out of favor." Fortunately the truth that the family is the foundation of a free
society is now once again in favor. And now many across the ideological
spectrum are joining the ranks!
All understand that the family is under attack today like never before.
Most all of the indicators of family well-being are heading in the wrong
direction. Child abuse is up, spouse abuse is up, teenage suicide is up, and
families living with single parents continue to increase. Perhaps it is no
coincidence that a corresponding decline in family financial strength has
preceded these trends. As you can see from this graph ("Share of Family
Income Protected From Federal Income Tax By Personal Exemptions) the
percentage of non-taxable income has dramatically diminished over the past
2
decades to approximately one-quarter of what it was in 1948. However, I am
not here to sell you utopian policies in which all of these things can be turned
around through a government program. We are always hearing speeches from
many, admittedly of good will, who sincerely state, "No child should be
homeless, no child should be without a good education," etc. No one disagrees
with this; we would indeed be heartless and remiss if we thought and hoped for
anything less. But the fact is that as long as we are mere mortals we will not
be able to solve all of the problems of children and families. Utopian
government policies that claim to do so will always disappoint and perhaps
mislead us as to what government can actually do and what families themselves
can and should do.
We have turned a corner. We realize that the government, even under
the guidance of highly credentialed and lavishly funded experts, cannot do for
families what families can do for themselves. We also realize that the family
does matter, particularly for the well-being of children. No viable substitute has
been found. It is heartening that the family debate is no longer a right VS. left
debate or a right VS. wrong debate. It is rather a debate on what works and
what doesn't work. We know that the family - when allowed to - does work; it
3
is the best Department of Health and Human Services.
So what can we do? We can set our expectations high -- very high. As
the National Commission on Children's Report observed, "Many scholars and
advocates have noted that improving the economic well-being of American
families with children in the 1990s will require significant changes in both
personal behavior and economic policy." Therefore, we can demand government
policies that respect and recognize the family as an essential, vital unit of
society and make responsible demands on our citizens, particularly parents.
When we focus on these principles we can come to agreement on policy
initiatives. The expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is a good
example of a policy with bipartisan support that is based upon the principles of
work and responsibility. The EITC has doubled since 1986 and in 1990
benefitted 11.3 million families. The EITC will significantly increase under the
current budget agreement over the next few years to where the credit will
amount to 23 - 25 percent of earnings for eligible families by 1994.
As the National Commission on Children's Report highlighted, over the
past several decades the encroachment of government programs into the family
4
arena has "often unwittingly undermined the formation and maintenance of
stable nuclear families." To turn around some of these disincentives, I have
proposed two family tax relief bills which would provide significant tax relief to
families by allowing families to keep more of their own hard earned money to
take care of their own needs. Like the EITC, these measures reward work,
family and independence -- three fundamental principles set forth in the
Commission report.
H.R. 1277, "The Tax Fairness for Families Act of 1991" which would
increase the dependent deduction to $3,500 (from the present inflation-adjusted
level of $2,150) already has 251 cosponsors. This is the only family tax measure
that has the bipartisan support of a majority of members in the House. When
coupled with H.R. 2633, which would provide an additional $500 tax credit for
children under 5 in middle class families, these two measures would provide
families with young children approximately the same tax benefits as was
provided to families in the 1950s. For example, a family earning $30,000 with
two children under 5 would pay approximately $1400 less in taxes under these
combined measures. This would be approximately $116 a month for this family
to spend on whatever their needs may be -- child care, housing, or to enable a
5
parent to cut back on some work hours to spend more time with children.
These measures are simple means of providing middle class tax relief.
They build upon already existing tax measures and are targeted to the middle
class. And we should remember an important aspect of "middle class tax relief"
-- it should go to middle-class taxpayers. It is important to distinguish between
expanding welfare for families and middle class tax relief for families. If we are
going to expand welfare we should be forthright and make the affirmative case
for that and not try to hide this agenda under the family tax relief mantle and
threaten to destroy the consensus on middle class tax relief.
After we provide tax relief, perhaps equally as important we can demand
more of ourselves, our communities, our churches and our children. In this role
the Federal Government can also play an important leadership role by doing
what we are doing here today -- insisting that we focus on the family and pull
together in our communities to provide a healthier future for our children and
families. A member of the National Commission on Children, Nancy Rohrbach,
highlighted testimony from witnesses who pointed out that "government
programs were frequently lacking in meeting their objectives and the needs of
6
families and children. We found that increasingly, individuals in business and in
communities are filling the gaps and are successful where government
interventions could never succeed." And as President Bush recently pointed
out:
"When government tries to serve as a parent or a teacher or a moral
guide, individuals may be tempted to discard their own sense of
responsibility and to argue that only government must help people in
need."
We do need to seriously consider the cultural indifference that can be
generated by the increasing role of government in areas previously handled by
communities, schools, churches and neighborhoods. Over 100 years ago,
Abraham Lincoln wrote, "In all that the people can individually do as well for
themselves, government ought not to interfere." We should heed this advice
when it comes to families -- in all that families can do as well for themselves,
government ought not to interfere.
When we look to helping families it comes down to simple questions: Do
we think that the government or the family is better at helping and raising
children? Do we think that big government is too small? Do we want to add
billions to government agencies and hope that it trickles down to families or do
we want to give this money directly to the families -- the taxpayers --
7
themselves? The bipartisan consensus is on the side of helping families
themselves -- directly through tax relief. Today's families are not hurting
because big government is too small or because families are not taxed enough.
Families are hurting because their own personal budgets are too small and this
is for a simple reason -- Uncle Sam keeps taking a bigger and bigger bite out of
their paychecks.
But the $64,000 question or rather the $12-15 billion question is, "How
will we pay for this measure?" Unfortunately some have suggested raising taxes
to pay for this tax relief. As another Commission member, Wade Horn, pointed
out, "One of the major consensus items contained in this report is that families
with children are over-taxed. It would be ludicrous to recommend tax cuts for
families with children on the one hand, and then raise their taxes on the other
in order to 'pay for it." Even raising the top tax rate to 50 percent would only
produce $20 billion dollars -- and this is using a "static" estimate which assumes
that people would not change their behavior if you took away 20 percent more
of their money. Furthermore, raising taxes almost always fails to produce
expected revenues and instead increases the deficit.
8
We could provide the tax relief in these two measures if we limited the
rate of growth of domestic government programs to 6 to 6 1/2 percent. This
rate of growth is reasonable and well above inflation. Certainly in today's tough
economic times, many of today's hard-pressed families would find a 6 percent
rate of growth in their own personal budgets a welcome and substantial bonus!
Instead of automatically pushing the "higher tax" button and detonating any
chance for consensus on real family tax relief, we should seek such pro-family
and pro-growth policies instead. This proposal is workable under current
budget realities and is one that family advocates of all stripes can and already
have united behind.
Today's children and families need our help. With the growing consensus
on family tax relief, particularly reflected in the 251 cosponsors of H.R. 1277,
we can boldly act on behalf of children and families. We have an opportunity
to unite behind a strong bipartisan coalition dedicated to immediate family tax
relief. The strong current of public policy debate is clearly flowing toward
providing families with tax relief. With united bipartisan effort we can navigate
the stormy family seas and provide an essential lifeboat to American families.
9
Family Tax Relief
Increasing the Dependent Deduction (H.R. 1277)
and
Expanding the Young Child Tax Credit (H.R. 2633)
Value of 1991
Value Under
Value Under H.R. 1277 +
Dependent Deduction
H.R. 1277
In the
H.R. 2633 ($500 Credit)
15% Tax
$322
$525
$1025 ($525 + $500 credit)
Bracket
(most families in the 15% bracket would also be
able to take the full $500 credit for children under 5
once they reached an income threshold of $10,000.)
In the
28% Tax
$602
$980
$980
Bracket
(families in this tax bracket with an AGI of under $50,000
would be able to declare the additional $500 credit
while those over $50,000 would not.)**
In the
31% Tax
$666
$1,085
$1,085
Bracket
(families in this bracket would not be eligible for
additional credit and the exemption begins
to phase out for joint return filers at $150,000,
for head of household filers at $125,000.)
**
1991 tax brackets for joint returns:
1991 tax brackets for head of households:
15% bracket = $0 - $34,000
15% bracket = $0 - $27,300
28% bracket = $34,000 - 82,150
28% bracket = $27,300 - 70,450
31% bracket = over $82,150
31% bracket = over $70,450
FAMILY TAX FAIRNESS
INCREASING THE DEPENDENT DEDUCTION
AND EXPANDING THE YOUNG CHILD TAX CREDIT
INCREASING THE DEPENDENT DEDUCTION FOR CHILDREN TO
$3,500 (H.R. 1277)
*
The current value of the dependent deduction gives $322
dollars per child in tax relief to families in the 15% tax
bracket and $602 per child to families in the 28% bracket
and $666 per child to families in the 31% bracket. Under
H.R. 1277, these amounts would increase to $525, $980 and
$1085 respectively. (The deduction phases out for families
earning over approx. $150,000.)
*
H.R. 1277, "The Tax Fairness for Families Act of 1991" which
will increase the dependent deduction to $3,500 has obtained
over 250 cosponsors including over 100 Democrats.
EXPANDING THE YOUNG CHILD TAX CREDIT -
$500 FOR CHILDREN UNDER 5 IN FAMILIES EARNING UNDER $50,000
(H.R. 2633)
*
The new credit proposed is $500 per child for children under
5 in families earning under $50,000. This would provide
additional tax relief largely to families in the 15% tax
bracket.
*
Adding an additional credit for young children in middle
income families would have the effect of providing approx.
$1,000 in tax relief for all young children in working
families.
*
There are approximately 100 million people in the category
"married couples with children" (including approximately 50
million adults) and 21 million people in the category
"single mothers with children" (including 7 million adults).
(Green Book, p. 1188) Approximately 70% of families earn
under $50,000 a year. (House Republican Study Committee,
1991)
*
Currently 84% of all poor and near-poor families with pre-
schoolers do not use market child care at all. About 60% of
all families with incomes under $15,000 use unpaid relatives
for child care. (American Enterprise Institute, 1989))
These families would greatly benefit by this additional
young child tax benefit.
*
The full amount of $500 per child is available once a family
has earned income of $10,000. This credit would be
refundable and as such would be a substantial incentive for
the working poor.
The credit starts to phase out at $50,000 and is unavailable
after $60,000. This is a substantial credit for working and
middle class families who too often become "America's
forgotten families" in the policy arena.
*
This credit is available to all families with young children
regardless of whether they use paid child care or not. Even
among families with both parents working, many do not use
paid child care.
*
This tax credit would complement the $3,500 dependent
deduction by providing additional tax relief to families in
the middle income range. For example, a family earning
$30,00 with two children under 5 would pay approximately
$1400 less in taxes under the combined measures of
increasing the dependent deduction and increasing the young
child tax credit. ($1000 tax credit for 2 children + $405
increased dependent deduction for two children.)
Share of Family Income Protected From
Federal Income Tax By Personal Exemptions
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1948
1954
1960
1966
1972
1978
1984
1989
Source: Heritage DataChart.
SHARE OF FAMILY INCOME PROTECTED FROM
FEDERAL INCOME TAX BY
PERSONAL EXEMPTIONS
In 1948 close to 80% of family income was protected from
federal income tax by personal exemptions and dependent
deductions.
In 1989, only 20% of family income was protected from
federal income tax by personal exemptions and dependent
deductions.
This chart demonstrates that the only times the percentage
of family income protected by the personal exemption
improved were after the 1979 and 1986 increases in the
personal exemption and the indexing in 1984.
The indexing method currently used round downs to the
nearest $50 in determining each year's new level. Under
H.R. 1277 the inflation adjusting would be done by rounding
to the nearest $10. For example, in 1990, the personal
exemption would have been $2090 instead of $2050 if the
amount had been rounded to the nearest $10 instead of the
nearest $50.
Child Care Arrangements for Children
Under Five
Center Based Care
14%
Babysitter 3%
Family Day Care
12%
Other Relative
11%
"Doubletime" Mother 5%
"Tag-Team" Parents 8%
Mother at Home
47%
CHILD CARE ARRANGEMENTS FOR CHILDREN UNDER FIVE
The Young Child Tax Credit will provide a $500 tax credit
for all working families earning under $50,000 with children
under 5 regardless of whether the family uses paid child
care or not.
The current child care related provisions of the tax code
only provide relief for those who use paid child care.
These provisions are only used by a minority of families
with young children.
*
Two parent families in which the wife does not work have
average incomes equal to 67-87% of that of married couples
in which both did work. (Robert Shapiro, Progressive Policy
Institute, 1990)
This chart demonstrates that the majority - 71% - of
children under five are cared for by their mothers, fathers
or other relatives:
47% cared for by mothers at home
8% cared for by "tag team" parents
5% cared for by mother while she works
11% cared for by other relative
The American Enterprise Institute has found that 84% of all
poor and near-poor families with pre-schoolers do not use
market child care at all. About 60% of all families with
incomes under $15,000 use unpaid relatives for child care.
Only 23% of children under 6 have mothers who work full-time
year round. (Select Committee on Children, Youth and
Families Report, "U.S. Children and their Families: Current
Conditions and Recent Trends, p. 85)
In a national sample of young married dual-earner families,
30% of full-time workers and nearly 40% of part-time workers
worked some kind of shift schedule enabling the parents to
share the care of their children between them. ("The Child
Care Market: Supply, Demand, Price and Expenditures,"
January 13, 1989, Family Impact Seminars, p. 5)
In 1989, over $87 million dollars in tax credits (the
dependent care tax credit) went to families earning over
$100,00, but for the large majority of families with young
children who do not use market child care, no such tax
relief was available.
The Young Child Tax Credit will provide equity to both one
earner and two earner families and provide equitable tax
relief for most families with children under five.
The current tax code only provides tax relief for families
with young children, when both parents work for wages. For
example, a mother with a child in preschool who works during
her child's preschool hours could take a tax credit on the
cost of the preschool. If this same mother was instead an
unpaid volunteer at the preschool or volunteer for a
community charity, she would not be able to take a tax
credit. The Young Child Tax Credit would provide a tax
credit for both of these families.
Comparison of Family Tax Relief Proposals
National
Commission
Wolf
Gore-Downey
on Children
Credit and/or
exemption is
Yes
Only
No
tied to work
Partially
Equal treatment of
one-earner and
Yes
No
No
two-earner families
Provides the most
tax relief to the
working poor and
Yes
No
No
the middle class
Works within the
current tax and
Yes
No
No
welfare structure
COMPARISON OF
FAMILY TAX RELIEF PROPOSALS
CREDIT AND/OR EXEMPTION IS TIED TO WORK
The Wolf Proposals - both the dependent deduction and the
additional young child tax credit - are tied to work. The
bipartisan concensus over the past decade has been to tie
tax relief to the incentive of work.
Gore-Downey, on the other hand, converts the present
deduction to a credit that is only partially tied to work.
While families would have to be working to get the full $800
per child credit under Gore-Downey, there would still be a
$400 credit available to non-working welfare families - in
effect an average increase of 10% in welfare spending under
Gore-Downey.
The National Commission on Children proposal to convert the
current deduction into a $1,000 credit also results in
making tax relief a significant backdoor welfare increase by
failing to tie the credit to work or offset it by a
reduction in welfare. (In fact, the Urban Institute, which
provided the research on the $1,000 credit had tied the
$1,000 credit to an offset in AFDC.)
EQUAL TREATMENT OF ONE-EARNER AND TWO-EARNER FAMILIES
The Young Child Tax Credit (H.R. 2633) builds upon the "wee
tot" credit passed last fall which provided up to $355 to
families with a child under 1 in a family earning less than
$20,000. The credit is tied to earned income and is much
like the EITC.
Currently 84% of all poor and near-poor families with pre-
schoolers do not use market child care at all and therefore
are not eligible for the dependent care tax credit which is
only available to families who use paid child care.
The concept behind the Young Child Tax Credit (H.R. 2633) is
to provide an additional tax credit to all working families
with young children, instead of the current situation which
only provides an additional tax credit to those who use paid
child care in families with both parents working (or in the
case of a single parent family, with one parent working).
Gore-Downey, on the other hand, eliminates the "wee tot"
credit that was passed last year for low income families who
do not use paid child care.
The National Commission on Children proposal would provide
$1000 in tax relief for each child but fails to remedy the
inequity in providing additional child based tax relief for
families who use paid child care.
PROVIDES THE MOST TAX RELIEF TO THE WORKING POOR AND THE MIDDLE
CLASS
The Wolf bills target tax relief to working middle class
families. The bills would provide the most tax relief to
those families with children earning $15,000 - $50,000.
Seventy percent of families with children earn under
$50,000.
The combined impact of the Wolf bills would be to provide
approximately $1000 in tax relief per child to all families
with children under 5 while still providing a significant
amount of tax relief for all children.
The Gore-Downey proposal provides an additional $400 for
welfare families and concentrates a significant portion of
the expenditures in the lowest income families with the
benefits almost negligible for families earning over
$34,000. Also the increased taxes on families in the 28%
and 31% brackets would result in a net loss of child based
tax relief for families in these brackets.
The National Commission on Children proposal which would
provide a $1,000 credit for all children would result in
providing welfare families and millionaires an additional
$1,000 per child in tax relief while only providing a median
income family less than $400 per child in additional tax
relief.
WORKS WITHIN THE CURRENT TAX AND WELFARE STRUCTURE
The Wolf bills work within current tax and welfare structure
by increasing the amount of the dependent deduction and
expanding the amount, age and income level for which the
young child tax credit is available. Major tax reform is
not necessary to pass these measures.
Gore-Downey and the National Commission proposal require
conversion of the dependent deduction into a credit and
therefore involves a considerable tax policy change. In
addition, the increase in dollars going to welfare families
results in a significant increase in welfare expenditures
without tying these expenditures to work or improved
behavior.
Cosponsors for H.R. 1277
Gary Ackerman
Hamilton Fish
William Lipinski
Robert Roe
Bill Alexander
Gary Franks
Bob Livingston
Marge Roukema
Wayne Allard
Elton Gallegly
Marilyn Lloyd
Roy Rowland
Glenn Anderson
Dean Gallo
Bill Lowery
George Sangmeister
Frank Annunzio
Joseph Gaydos
Nita Lowey
Rick Santorum
Dick Armey
George Gekas
Charles Luken
Bill Sarpalius
Chet Atkins
Ben Gilman
Ronald Machtley
Jim Saxton
Jim Bacchus
Wayne Gilchrest
Ron Marlenee
Dan Schaefer
Richard Baker
Paul Gillmor
David O'B. Martin
Steven Schiff
Cass Ballenger
Newt Gingrich
Matthew Martinez
Patricia Schroeder
Bill Barrett
Dan Glickman
Romano Mazzoli
James Sensenbrenner
Joe Barton
Bill Goodling
Al McCandless
Bud Shuster
Charles Bennett
Bart Gordon
Bill McCollum
Gerry Sikorski
Helen Bentley
Porter Goss
Jim McCrery
Joe Skeen
Doug Bereuter
Fred Grandy
Joe McDade
French Slaughter
James Bilbray
Steve Gunderson
Bob McEwen
Bob Smith
Michael Bilirakis
Ralph Hall
Ray McGrath
Chris Smith
Ben Blaz
Tony Hall
Clarence Miller
Lamar Smith
Tom Bliley
John Paul Hammerschmidt
John Miller
Larry Smith
Sherwood Boehlert
Mel Hancock
Patsy Mink
Jerry Solomon
John Boehner
James Hansen
Susan Molinari
Floyd Spence
William Broomfield
Claude Harris
Sonny Montgomery
Richard Stallings
John Bryant
Dennis Hastert
Carlos Moorhead
Cliff Stearns
Jim Bunning
James Hayes
Jim Moran
Charles Stenholm
Dan Burton
Joel Hefley
Connie Morella
Bob Stump
Albert Bustamante
Bill Hefner
Sid Morrison
Dick Swett
Beverly Byron
Paul Henry
Austin Murphy
Robin Tallon
Dave Camp
Wally Herger
John Murtha
John Tanner
Ben Nighthorse Campbell
Dennis Hertel
John Myers
Billy Tauzin
Tom Campbell
David Hobson
Richard Neal
Charles Taylor
Sonny Callahan
George Hochbrueckner
Dick Nichols
Gene Taylor
Bob Carr
Clyde Holloway
Eleanor Holmes Norton
Bill Thomas
Rod Chandler
Larry Hopkins
Jim Nussle
Craig Thomas
Jim Chapman
Joan Kelly Horn
Solomon Ortiz
Esteban Torres
William Clinger
Frank Horton
Bill Orton
Robert Torricelli
Howard Coble
Carroll Hubbard
Major Owens
Jim Traficant
Barbara-Rose Collins
Duncan Hunter
Wayne Owens
Fred Upton
Larry Combest
Earl Hutto
Mike Oxley
Tim Valentine
Gary Condit
Henry Hyde
Ron Packard
Guy Vander Jagt
John Conyers
James Inhofe
Frank Pallone
Barbara Vucanovich
Bud Cramer
Andy Ireland
Mike Parker
Bob Walker
Phil Crane
Craig James
Liz Patterson
James Walsh
Christopher Cox
William Jefferson
Bill Paxon
Vin Weber
Duke Cunningham
Nancy Johnson
Nancy Pelosi
Ted Weiss
Bill Dannemeyer
Sam Johnson
Carl Perkins
Curt Weldon
Buddy Darden
Tim Johnson
Pete Peterson
Charles Wilson
Bob Davis
Harry Johnston
Thomas Petri
Bob Wise
Tom DeLay
Ben Jones
Owen Pickett
Chalmers Wylie
Ron DeLugo
Walter Jones
John Porter
Sid Yates
William Dickinson
John Kasich
Glenn Poshard
Gus Yatron
Calvin Dooley
Joe Kennedy
Carl Pursell
Don Young
John Doolittle
Dale Kildee
James Quillen
C.W. Bill Young
Bob Dornan
Scott Klug
Nick Joe Rahall
Bill Zeliff
David Dreier
Jim Kolbe
Jim Ramstad
Dick Zimmer
John Duncan
Joe Kolter
Arthur Ravenel
Bernard Dwyer
Jon Kyl
Richard Ray
Mervyn Dymally
Bob Lagomarsino
Jack Reed
Dennis Eckart
Martin Lancaster
Jay Rhodes
Mickey Edwards
Greg Laughlin
Frank Riggs
Bill Emerson
Jim Leach
Matt Rinaldo
Eliot Engel
Richard Lehman
Don Ritter
Ben Erdreich
Bill Lehman
Pat Roberts
Mike Espy
Norman Lent
Hal Rogers
Tom Ewing
Tom Lewis
Dana Rohrabacher
Harris Fawell
Jerry Lewis
Charlie Rose
Ed Feighan
John Lewis
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
Jack Fields
Jim Lightfoot
Toby Roth
10/31/91 255