STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONSBy Mr. MCCAIN:
S1909. A bill to repeal the telephone excise tax; to the Committee on Finance.
THE TELEPHONE EXCISE TAX REPEAL ACT OF 1998
Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to offer a bill to repeal the three percent federal excise tax that all Americans pay every time they use a telephone.
Under current law, the federal government taxes you three percent of your monthly phone bill for the so-called "privilege" of using your phone lines. This tax was first imposed one hundred years ago. To help finance the Spanish-American War, the federal government taxed telephone service, which in 1898 was a luxury service enjoyed by relatively few. The tax reappeared as a means of raising revenue for World War I, and continued as a revenue-raiser during the Great Depression, World War II, the Korean and Vietnam Wars, and the chronic federal budget deficits of the last twenty years.
Earlier this month, however, we received some long-overdue good news: thanks to the Balanced Budget Act enacted by the Congress in 1997, the Congressional Budget Office projected an $8 billion federal budget surplus for 1998. Mr. President, that announcement should mean the end of the federal phone excise tax.
Here's why. First of all, the telephone is a modern-day necessity, not like alcohol, or furs, or jewelry, or other items of the sort that the government taxes this way. The Congress specifically recognized the need for all Americans to have affordable telephone service when it enacted the 1996 Telecommunications Act. The universal service provisions of the Act are intended to assure that all Americans, regardless of where they live or how much money they make, have access to affordable telephone service. The telephone excise tax, which bears no relationship to any government service received by the consumer, is flatly inconsistent with the goal of universal telephone service.
It's also a highly regressive and unfair tax that hurts low-income and rural Americans even more than other Americans. Low-income families spend a higher percentage of their income than medium-or high-income families on telephone service, and that means the telephone tax hits low-income families much harder. For that reason the Congressional Budget Office has concluded that increases in the telephone tax would have a greater impact on low-income families than tax increases on alcohol or tobacco products. And a study by the American Agriculture Movement concluded that excise taxes like the telephone tax impose a disproportionately large tax burden on rural customers, too, who rely on telephone service in isolated areas.
But, in addition to being unfair and unnecessary, there is another reason why we should eliminate the telephone excise tax. Implementation of the Telecom Act of 1996 requires all telecommunications carriers-local, long-distance, and wireless-to incur new costs in order to produce a new, more competitive market for telecommunications services of all kinds.
Unfortunately, the cost increases are arriving far more quickly than the new, more competitive market. The Telecom Act created a new subsidy program for wiring schools and libraries to the Internet, and the cost of funding that subsidy has already increased bills for business users of long-distance telephone service and for consumers of wireless services. Because of more universal service subsidy requirements and other new Telecom Act mandates, more rate increases for all users will occur later this year and next year.
Mr. President, the fact that the Telecom Act is imposing new charges on consumers' bills makes it absolutely incumbent upon us to strip away any unnecessary old charges. And that means the telephone excise tax.
Mr. President, the telephone excise tax isn't a harmless artifact from bygone days. It collects money for wars that are already over, and for budget deficits that no longer exist, from people who can least afford to spend it now and from people who will have new bills to foot as the 1996 Telecom Act gets implemented. That's unfair, that's wrong, and that must be stopped.
San Juan Hill and Pork Chop Hill have now gone down in history, and so should this tax.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill appear in the RECORD.