Tax-Limit Amendment Fails in House Vote

Returning to work on the same day that most Americans had to file their federal tax forms, House Republicans on Monday staged a vote on a constitutional amendment designed to make it harder for Congress to raise taxes.

They failed to muster the two-thirds majority--or 290 votes, if all members had voted--needed to approve the amendment, but the debate provided a spirited preview of how the two parties plan to deploy the tax issue to their advantage in this year’s election campaigns.

The vote on the amendment, which Republicans brought to the floor despite the near certainty it would not pass, was 243 to 177.

Republicans used debate on the amendment--which would require a two-thirds majority in Congress to increase taxes--as an occasion to portray their party as a band of anti-tax crusaders tilting at tax-and-spend liberalism. For their part, Democrats scoffed at the amendment as a political gimmick being rammed through the House to distract attention from Republican tax policies that favor the rich.

The GOP theatrics on tax day marked the beginning of a concerted effort by Republican leaders to turn the House floor into an election-year sound stage, where the legislative schedule will be built around a handpicked political theme every week from now through the fall elections.

That plan, which also calls for votes this month on constitutional amendments to balance the budget and on congressional term limits, provoked Democratic complaints that the GOP legislative agenda is being shamelessly driven by politics, not substance. “This is bumper-sticker policy-making at its worst,” said Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.).

But Republicans say their strategy of putting key issues to a vote--even if they face a certain presidential veto--is a legitimate way to make plain what is at stake in the choice between Democrats and Republicans in the fall election.

“The president comes out and says the era of big government is over,” said one House GOP leadership aide, “and we say: ‘Prove it.’ ”

The tax-limitation amendment brought before the House on Monday--the first day Congress returned from a two-week recess--would require two-thirds of the House and Senate to approve any bill that would increase taxes by anything other than a token amount, although the amendment does not specify what that is. It would, however, allow a simple majority to pass legislation raising taxes for some people if the measure cuts taxes for others by an equal amount. And the whole super-majority requirement could be waived for up to two years in wartime.

*

House debate on the measure continued late into the night, as Democrats deployed delaying tactics to protest Republicans’ bringing the measure to the floor without approval by the House Judiciary Committee.

“It deserves better treatment in the House than a rush job to meet a politically sexy vote deadline that the majority admits is a matter of symbolism,” said Rep. David E. Skaggs (D-Colo.).

The Clinton administration opposes the measure, but has no veto power over it because constitutional amendments do not need a presidential signature. If approved by a two-thirds majority of both the House and Senate, a constitutional amendment has to be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

But even before the House vote on the amendment, its proponents conceded it was doomed to failure.

“It probably won’t be approved this year in the House and Senate,” said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). But he added: “Starting this debate on tax day--April 15--is a propitious time when people’s attentions are focused on the issue.”

Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), the presumptive GOP nominee for president, has said that he will bring the amendment to a vote this month in the Senate.

Proponents said the amendment was needed to rein in the growth of government, and argued that taxes should rise beyond current levels only when it is supported by a broad consensus. By making it more difficult to raise taxes, they argued, Congress would be more cautious in its spending decisions.

Advocates pointed to the experience of the 10 states that have similar super-majority requirements for raising taxes, where they said taxes and spending rose at slower rates than in other states.

Democrats accused the GOP of rank hypocrisy in pushing the amendment, noting that the Republicans three times have waived a more-lenient tax-limitation rule already in place. Under a House rule established in early 1995, the House is supposed to muster a three-fifths majority to increase taxes. But the House Rules Committee allowed that requirement to be waived during debate on three major GOP bills that had provisions affecting taxes: to overhaul Medicare, balance the budget and reform health insurance coverage.

House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said Republicans were bringing up the amendment to obscure their support for tax cuts that were skewed to benefit wealthy taxpayers.