Congress is trying to figure out what to do about the dreaded Alternative Minimum Tax. President Bush said of the tax, Americans "have to calculate their tax burden twice, once under the regular tax rules, and once for the alternative minimum tax. And then when you're done figuring out both totals, you get to pay the higher amount."

The tax was originally created in the 1960s to target 154 people who weren't paying their "fair share". But since the income threshhold has never been increased, it will affect more than 20 million taxpayers in 2006, reports USA Today.

Even though it doesn't affect me (yet), I'm all for repealing the AMT or any other tax you want to repeal. But before they do anything, Congress wants to know how they are going to replace the lost tax revenue.

The panel did not determine how to recoup the $1.2 trillion that AMT repeal would cost in lost tax revenue over the next decade. . .

Former senator John Breaux of Louisiana, a Democrat and the panel's vice chairman, said the panel must ensure that wealthy taxpayers won't be able to evade taxation.

Congress has until early 2007, when Americans file their 2006 income taxes, to deal with the issue. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and other key lawmakers have called for abolishing the AMT.

The problem for the tax panel: replacing the lost revenue. "I don't think we were hired to raise rates," [Republican former congressman from Minnesota Bill Frenzel] said.

Notice that something they aren't even considering is cutting spending or growing their way out of it.