[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 49 (Wednesday, April 23, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3550-S3559]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. TORRICELLI (for himself and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 631. A bill to provide for expanded research concerning the
environmental and genetic susceptibilities for breast cancer; to the
Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
the new jersey women's environmental health act
Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today, Senator Lautenberg and I are
introducing the New Jersey Women's Environmental Health Act. I rise to
draw this country's attention to breast cancer and the threat that it
faces to all American women. It is estimated that more than one in
eight women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in her lifetime. Over
46,000 women will die each year. The American Cancer Society estimates
6,400 new cases of breast
[[Page S3551]]
cancer in New Jersey in 1997--an estimated 1,800 deaths in this year
alone. It is for this reason that I speak today, in an effort to
heighten the awareness of breast cancer in our Nation and its possible
environmental causes.
Breast cancer in New Jersey is much worse than the rest of the
country. New Jersey has the highest breast cancer death rate of any
State in the Nation. Overall, New Jersey has an 11 percent higher
incidence rate of breast cancer than the national rate. Between 1988-92
New Jersey's rate was 110.8. For the United States the rate was only
105.6. The highest counties include: Warren, 34.8 percent; Morris, 20.7
percent; and Monmouth, 18.5 percent. During this time, 19 of New
Jersey's 21 counties had a higher incidence rate of breast cancer than
the national average and two-thirds of these counties had a 10 percent
or higher incidence rate of breast cancer than the national average.
Federal and national foundation funding is disproportionately low for
a State with a significant academic and research presence, and an
exceptionally high death rate from breast cancer. The per capita
expenditure on breast cancer funding in New Jersey is only $0.15.
Neighboring states with lower breast cancer rates have received
significantly more funding per capita. New York receives $1.11 and
Massachusetts receives $3.05. In general, New Jersey gets only $0.62
back for every tax dollar sent to Washington. We contribute $17 billion
more to the Federal Treasury than we get back--the lowest return in the
Nation.
I believe that behind our State's history of environmental problems
lies the reasons for our high breast cancer rates. It is not a
coincidence that New Jersey, the State with the most Superfund sites,
also has the highest breast cancer rates. The current breast cancer
research efforts are not being focused on epidemiological studies that
investigate the effect of environmental factors. The value of providing
expanded research concerning the environmental factors for breast
cancer in New Jersey is essential not only to New Jersey women, but to
all women across the country.
I am optimistic that not only will this study provides some answers
for women in New Jersey, but will provide groundbreaking research on
the impact of environmental conditions on breast cancer rates which
will benefit doctors across this country in their efforts to find a
cure for this tragic disease. I ask unanimous consent that this be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 631
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``New Jersey Women's
Environmental Health Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The American Cancer Society estimates 6,400 new cases
of breast cancer will be diagnosed in New Jersey in 1997 with
an estimated 1,800 deaths.
(2) In New Jersey, from 1989 to 1993, 8,378 women died from
breast cancer. The average mortality rate per 100,000 was
31.1 for white women and 34.4 for African American women.
(3) New Jersey has the second highest breast cancer
mortality rate (31.1) of any state in the United States. New
Jersey also has more superfund sites (107) than any other
State.
(4) During the period from 1988 to 1992--
(A) New Jersey's incidence rate (110.8) of breast cancer
was 11 percent higher than the national incidence rate
(105.6);
(B) 19 of New Jersey's 21 counties had a higher incidence
rate of breast cancer than the national average; and
(C) two-thirds of the counties described in subparagraph
(B) have a 10 percent or higher incidence rate of breast
cancer than the national average.
(5) The State's University of the Health Sciences is one of
only 7 joint centers in the United States, and the only such
center in New Jersey, that house a National Cancer Institute
designated research center and a National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences research center.
SEC. 3. RESEARCH CONCERNING BREAST CANCER.
(a) Grant.--The Secretary of Defense is authorized to award
one or more grants to the University of the Health Sciences
of New Jersey (hereafter referred to in this Act as the
``University'') to enable the University and affiliates of
the University to conduct research, in collaboration with the
New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services,
concerning environmental, lifestyle, and genetic
susceptibilities for breast cancer in the State of New
Jersey.
(b) Study and Report.--
(1) Study.--The University shall use amounts received under
the grant under subsection (a) to conduct a study to assess
biological markers, exposure to carcinogens, and other
potential risk factors contributing to the incidence of
breast cancer in the State of New Jersey.
(2) Epidemiological study.--The New Jersey Department of
Health and Senior Services shall be the co-investigator with
the University for any population based epidemiologic studies
under paragraph (1) that attempt to explore associations
between environmental and other risk factors and breast
cancer.
(3) Report.--Not later than 12 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the
University (and the affiliates of the University conducting
the study under this subsection) shall prepare and submit to
the appropriate committees of Congress a report describing
the findings and progress made as a result of the studies
conducted under paragraphs (1) and (2).
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated--
(1) $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1998; and
(2) $2,500,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 through 2001.
______
By Mr. KOHL (for himself and Mr. Wyden):
S. 632. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with
respect to the eligibility of veterans for mortgage revenue bond
financing, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
mortgage revenue bond financing legislation
Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation with
Senator Wyden that will help Wisconsin and several other States,
including Oregon, Texas, Alaska, and California, extend one of our most
successful veterans programs to Persian Gulf war participants and
others. This bill will amend the eligibility requirements for mortgage
revenue bond financing for State veterans housing programs.
Wisconsin uses this tax-exempt bond authority to assist veterans in
purchasing their first home. Under rules adopted by Congress in 1984,
this program excluded from eligibility veterans who served after 1977.
This bill would simply remove that restriction.
Wisconsin and the other eligible States simply want to maintain a
principle that we in the Senate have also strived to uphold--that
veterans of the Persian Gulf war should not be treated less generously
than those of past wars. This bill will make that possible.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in
the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 632
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ELIGIBILITY OF VETERANS FOR MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS
DETERMINED BY STATES.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (4) of section 143(l) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualified veteran) is
redesignated as paragraph (6) and amended to read as follows:
``(6) Qualified veterans.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term ``qualified veteran'' means any veteran--
``(A) who meets such requirements as may be imposed by the
State law pursuant to which qualified veterans' mortgage
bonds are issued,
``(B) who applied for the financing before the date 30
years after the last date on which such veteran left active
service, and
``(C) in the case of financing provided by the proceeds of
bonds issued during the period beginning July 19, 1984, and
ending June 30, 1997, who served on active duty at some time
before January 1, 1977.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall apply to bonds issued after the date of the enactment
of this Act.
SEC. 2. STATE CAP RESTRICTIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 143(l) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to additional requirements for
qualified veterans' mortgage bonds), as amended by section
1(a), is amended by inserting after paragraph (3) the
following new paragraph:
``(4) Subcap restrictions.--
``(A) In General.--An issue meets the requirements of this
paragraph only if the amount of bonds issued pursuant thereto
that is to be used to provide financing to mortgagors who
have not served on active duty at some time before January 1,
1977, when added to the amount of the aggregate qualified
veterans' mortgage bonds previously issued by the State
during the calendar year that is to be so used, does not
exceed the subcap amount.
[[Page S3552]]
``(B) Subcap amount.--
``(i) In general.--The subcap amount for any calendar year
is an amount equal to the applicable percentage of the State
veterans limit for such year.
``(ii) Applicable percentage.--For purposes of clause (i),
the applicable percentage shall be determined under the
following table:
Applicable
``Calendar year: Percentage:
1998.................................................................10
1999.................................................................20
2000.................................................................30
2001.................................................................40
2002 and thereafter...............................................50.''
(b) Restriction on Overall State Cap.--Paragraph (3)(B) of
section 143(l) of such Code (relating to State veterans
limit) is amended by adding at the end the following flush
sentence:
``But in no event shall the State veterans limit exceed
$340,000,000 for any calendar year after 1998.''
(c) Conforming Amendment.--The matter preceding paragraph
(1) of section 143(l) of such Code is amended by striking
``and (3)'' and inserting ``, (3), and (4)''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to bonds issued after December 31, 1997.
______
By Mr. DOMENICI:
S. 633. A bill to amend the Petroglyph Monument Establishment Act of
1990 to adjust the boundary of the monument, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
the petroglyph national monument boundary adjustment act of 1997
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that
for the past 6 years, I hoped would not be necessary. This legislation
is necessary, however, to ensure that the American people will continue
to be able to enjoy the natural and cultural resources of Petroglyph
National Monument.
For almost 10 years, I have worked to provide needed protection for
the invaluable cultural resources located throughout the 17-mile-long
escarpment on Albuquerque's west side. In 1990, New Mexico's
congressional delegation successfully enacted legislation which I
sponsored in the U.S. Senate to establish Petroglyph National Monument.
The bill was signed by President George Bush on June 27, 1990,
providing protection for prehistoric and historic artifacts from
looting, vandalism, and imminent development.
That legislation provided a unique management program for the new
monument, directly involving the National Park Service, the State of
New Mexico, and the city of Albuquerque. Cooperation was and remains
critical because, among other reasons, the State of New Mexico and the
city of Albuquerque hold title to almost 63 percent of the land within
the boundaries of the monument. Albuquerque alone holds title to about
3,800 acres of the 7,244 acres within the monument. In order to provide
protection of the petroglyphs and other artifacts along the escarpment,
a partnership between the three layers of government--Federal, State
and local--remains the most appropriate way of managing these important
resources.
Even before its introduction, I have already heard from several of my
colleagues that the Domenici bill regarding petroglyphs has begun to
generate controversy. I am sure that many more things will be said
about it following today's introduction. By introducing this
legislation, I want to reduced the debate to the basic essence of the
relevant issues. It is about resolving a problem for two growing
communities that encompass a national monument. That resolution
involves providing access to less than one-quarter mile of a right-of-
way that has been in the planning process for well over a decade. The
problem with that one-quarter mile stretch is that it falls on city-
owned land within the current boundaries of the national monument.
This legislation will adjust the monument boundary to exclude
approximately 8.5 acres, providing a corridor for the extension of
Paseo del Norte. This accounts for approximately one-tenth of 1 percent
of the 7,244 acres within the monument boundary. This is not an
authorization for the city of Albuquerque to begin construction on the
road. When passed, it will simply remove the Federal Government as a
barrier to the process of developing locally needed access to
Albuquerque's west side.
In order to maintain the local support needed to sustain a national
monument in an urban area, the city's needs must be acknowledged and
dealt with. The extension of Paseo del Norte is an important piece of
the planned transportation network for the west side. Access to much of
the area for emergency services, such as ambulance and fire equipment,
is currently inadequate. Albuquerque and Rio Rancho must have the
ability to deal with the needs of those who already live and work in
the area, and plan for needs of those who will live and work there in
the future. At this point, growth and development north and east of the
monument have eliminated any other reasonable alternatives that would
resolve the problems that the cities face. The need for a resolution is
indicated by demographic and traffic pattern projections provided by
the regional planning organization, the Middle Rio Grande Council of
Governments.
The extension of Paseo del Norte and the protection of the monument's
cultural resources are not mutually exclusive ideas. They have been
brought together before when a coalition was put together in 1989 to
address these very same issues. At that time, the transportation needs
and preservation concerns were coordinated to move forward with an idea
that all could support. That plan, which resulted in the creation of
Petroglyph National Monument, acknowledged the idea that neither the
Paseo del Norte or Unser boulevard extensions would detract from the
integrity of the monument, and the purposes for which it was created.
Since that time, the city of Albuquerque has gone to great lengths to
minimize any disturbance to the artifacts. In fact, the proposed road
alignment would not directly impact a single petroglyph as it ascends
the escarpment.
This legislation will once again commit us to the goal of a national
monument that benefits the Albuquerque area, the Pueblo people, and the
public, at large. The relationship between the city and the National
Park Service has deteriorated since all parties entered into a 1991
joint administrative agreement. The situation now goes beyond issues
surrounding the transportation planning of the city of Albuquerque,
centered around Paseo del Norte, and whether it should or shouldn't be
extended to the west side of the escarpment. As I mentioned earlier,
the city of Albuquerque owns well over half of the land within the
monument boundary. A breakdown of cohesive and coordinated management
of the monument and its natural and cultural resources continues, and
threatens to dissolve the support of the local communities and the
surrounding municipalities. As was the case when the monument was
established, a return to the intimate working relationship between the
National Park Service and the cities of Albuquerque and Rio Rancho is
required. This cannot happen, however, until the issues surrounding
transportation planning are resolved, just as they were when the
monument was established. Without a cooperative and productive
relationship between the cities and the Park Service, the monument will
never be what it was intended to be--a benefit to all Americans.
Throughout the ongoing debate, the urban development on Albuquerque's
west side has been a constant reminder that the monument does not exist
in a vacuum. Efforts to manage and protect the monument's natural and
cultural resources must be coordinated with the needs of New Mexico's
fastest growing cities--Albuquerque and Rio Rancho. That is to say that
neither altruistic protectionism, nor unmitigated growth can be
paramount in this relationship.
Both the city and the Park Service have made it clear that
legislation is required to reach the goal we all desire. Unfortunately,
there is no agreement on what the legislation should include. The city
sees its transportation and infrastructure needs as the most important
component. The Park Service believes that resource management and
protection need to be considered as the top priority. Both the Park
Service and the city have sound reasons for their respective positions.
I believe that this legislation is not only the right thing for the
city of Albuquerque or Rio Rancho, but the right thing for Petroglyph
National Monument.
In closing, Mr. President, I want to make it clear that neither the
Park Service, nor the city of Albuquerque
[[Page S3553]]
can continue to pursue its own agenda without considering the needs of
the other. We must all begin to refocus our efforts on our ultimate
goal, providing for Petroglyph National Monument in a way that we can
all be proud. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation that is
critical to the communities of the Albuquerque area. Just as important,
this legislation is vital to the continued enhancement and protection
of the national monument we created in that urban area to preserve
these invaluable cultural resources.
Without this, it seems to me the park will never again have
cooperation between the city, the State, and the Federal Government and
what could have been a marvelous example of government working together
will probably end up in shambles.
I send the bill to the desk and ask it be appropriately referred.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 633
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Petroglyph National Monument
Boundary Adjustment Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) the purposes for which Petroglyph National Monument was
established continue to be valid;
(2) the valued cultural and natural resources of Petroglyph
National Monument will be best preserved for the benefit and
enjoyment of present and future generations under a
cooperative management relationship between the City of
Albuquerque, New Mexico, the State of New Mexico, and the
National Park Service;
(3) the National Park Service has been unable to
accommodate harmoniously the transportation needs of the City
of Albuquerque in balance with the preservation of cultural
and natural resources of Petroglyph National Monument.
(4) corridors for the development of Paseo del Norte and
Unser Boulevard are indicated on the map referred to in
section 102(a) of the Petroglyph National Monument
Establishment Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-313; 16 U.S.C. 431
note), and the alignment of the roadways was anticipated by
Congress before the date of enactment of the Act;
(5) it was the intent of Congress in the passage of the
Petroglyph National Monument Establishment Act of 1990
(Public Law 101-313; 16 U.S.C. 431 note) to allow the City of
Albuquerque, New Mexico--
(A) to utilize the Paseo del Norte and Unser Boulevard
corridors through Petroglyph National Monument; and
(B) to coordinate the design and construction of the
corridors with the cultural and natural resources of
Petroglyph National Monument; and
(6) the city of Albuquerque, New Mexico, has not provided
for the establishment of rights-of-way for the Paseo del
Norte and Unser Boulevard corridors under the Joint Powers
Agreement (JPANO 78-521.81-277A), which expanded the boundary
of Petroglyph National Monument to include the Piedras
Marcadas and Boca Negra Units, pursuant to section 104 of the
Petroglyph National Monument Establishment Act of 1990
(Public Law 101-313; 16 U.S.C. 431 note).
SEC. 3. BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT.
Section 104(a) of the Petroglyph National Monument
Establishment Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-313; 16 U.S.C. 431
note) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as
subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively, and indenting
appropriately;
(2) by striking ``(a) Upon'' and inserting the following:
``(a) Piedras Marcadas and Boca Negra Units.--
``(1) In general.--Upon''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Boundary adjustment.--
``(A) Exclusion of paseo del norte corridor.--
Notwithstanding paragraph (1), effective as of the date of
enactment of this subparagraph--
``(i) the boundary of the monument is adjusted to exclude
the Paseo Del Norte corridor in the Piedras Marcadas Unit
described in Exhibit B of the document described in
subparagraph (B); and
``(ii) the Paseo Del Norte corridor shall be owned and
managed as if the corridor had never been within the boundary
of the monument.
``(B) Document.--The document described in this paragraph
is the document entitled ``Petroglyph National Monument Road-
way/Utility Corridors'', on file with the Secretary of the
Interior and the mayor of the City of Albuquerque, New
Mexico.
______
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Warner, and Mr. Byrd):
S. 634. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to deposit
in the highway trust fund the receipts of the 4.3-cent increase in the
fuel tax rates enacted by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1993, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
tax legislation
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to
transfer 4.3 cents of the Federal gas tax currently used for deficit
reduction to transportation purposes.
Specifically, this bill will transfer 3.8 cents to the highway
account of the highway trust fund and one-half penny to a new intercity
passenger rail account to be used for Amtrak or other intercity
passenger rail service.
Mr. President, this bill is important because it is time to give the
American taxpayers the confidence that the fuel taxes they pay will be
used for transportation purposes.
The 3.8 cents deposited in the highway account means over $5.5
billion in additional funds would be available each year for
transportation improvements. Those improvements could be for highway
maintenance or other infrastructure safety improvements; mass transit
projects; bikepaths; pedestrian walkways; or a variety of other
transportation projects that are eligible today under the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act.
This Nation is losing ground with regard to transportation
investments. Japan spends four times the United States on
transportation as a percentage of gross domestic product. And the
Europeans spend twice as much.
These and other countries envy our transportation system. We cannot
afford to allow our global competitors to outspend us on infrastructure
improvements. Our ability to remain competitive in the future is tied
to maintaining an efficient transportation system and highly mobile
workforce.
And Amtrak remains an important component of such a transportation
system. Every country that has a passenger rail system provides some
government financial assistance. It only makes sense that this country
do the same.
Amtrak is important to many communities around the country--it serves
over 530 cities and towns. These include 12 in my State of Montana--
Libby, Whitefish, West Glacier, Essex, East Glacier, Cut Bank, Malta,
Browning, Shelby, Havre, Wolf Point, and Glasgow. These Montana
communities rely upon Amtrak as a transportation option.
And Amtrak is an important economic lifeline. Not only for the jobs
directly related to Amtrak service, but Amtrak is an important tool in
Montana's tourism industry. Each year, Amtrak brings thousands of folks
to our State to ski, hike, or just enjoy the beauty of Montana.
But in order for Amtrak to remain a component of this Nation's
transportation system, it must have a dedicated revenue source. Such a
revenue source will give Amtrak the ability to do long-term
capitalization planning--planning and improvements that must be made in
order for Amtrak to remain viable.
While I do not agree that Amtrak should be funded off of the top of
the highway trust fund as has been suggested by the administration, I
do feel we need to financially support Amtrak into the next century.
My bill will do that. It will provide a substantial increase in
available funds for all modes of transportation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in
the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 634
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. RECEIPTS OF THE 4.3-CENT FUEL TAX RATE INCREASE
DEPOSITED IN THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND;
ESTABLISHMENT OF INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL
ACCOUNT.
(a) In General.--Section 9503(f) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (defining Highway Trust Fund financing rate) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``11.5 cents per
gallon (14 cents per gallon after September 30, 1995)'' and
inserting ``18.3 cents per gallon''; and
(2) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``17.5 cents per
gallon (20 cents per gallon after September 30, 1995)'' and
inserting ``24.3 cents per gallon''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 9503(f)(2) of such Code is amended--
[[Page S3554]]
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``3 cents'' and
inserting ``7.3 cents'';
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``zero'' and inserting
``4.3 cents per gallon'';
(C) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``zero'' and inserting
``48.54 cents per MCF (determined at standard temperature and
pressure)'';
(D) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``11.5 cents'' and
inserting ``15.8 cents''; and
(E) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``17.5 cents'' and
inserting ``21.8 cents''.
(2) Section 9503(f)(3)(A) of such Code is amended to read
as follows:
``(A) In general.--If the rate of tax on any fuel is
determined under section 4041(b)(2)(A), 4041(k), or 4081(c),
the Highway Trust Fund financing rate is the rate so
determined after September 30, 1997. In the case of a rate of
tax determined under section 4081(c), the preceding sentence
shall be applied by increasing the rate specified by 0.1
cent.''
(3) Section 9503(f)(3)(C) of such Code is amended to read
as follows:
``(C) Partially exempt methanol or ethanol fuel.--In the
case of a rate of tax determined under section 4041(m), the
Highway Trust Fund financing rate is the rate so determined
after September 30, 1995.''
(4) Section 9503(f)(4) of such Code is amended by striking
``zero'' and inserting ``4.3 cents per gallon''.
(c) Establishment of Intercity Passenger Rail Account.--
Section 9503 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating
to Highway Trust Fund) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(g) Establishment of Intercity Passenger Rail Account.--
``(1) Creation of account.--There is established in the
Highway Trust Fund a separate account to be known as the
`Intercity Passenger Rail Account', consisting of such
amounts as may be transferred or credited to the Intercity
Passenger Rail Account as provided in this subsection or
section 9602(b).
``(2) Transfers to intercity passenger rail account.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
transfer to the Intercity Passenger Rail Account the
intercity passenger rail portion of the amounts appropriated
to the Highway Trust Fund under subsection (b) which are
attributable to taxes under sections 4041 and 4081 imposed
after September 30, 1997, and before October 1, 2003.
``(B) Intercity passenger rail portion.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A), the term `intercity passenger rail portion'
means an amount determined at the rate of 0.5 cent for each
gallon with respect to which tax was imposed under section
4041 or 4081.
``(3) Expenditures from account.--
``(A) In general.--Amounts in the Intercity Passenger Rail
Account shall be available without fiscal year limitation to
finance qualified expenses of--
``(i) the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, and
``(ii) each non-Amtrak State, to the extent determined
under subparagraph (B).
``(B) Maximum amount of funds to non-Amtrak states.--Each
non-Amtrak State shall receive under this paragraph an amount
equal to the lesser of--
``(i) the State's qualified expenses for the fiscal year,
or
``(ii) the product of--
``(I) \1/12\ of 1 percent of the lesser of--
``(aa) the aggregate amounts transferred and credited to
the Intercity Passenger Rail Account under paragraph (1) for
such fiscal year, or
``(bb) the aggregate amounts appropriated from the
Intercity Passenger Rail Account for such fiscal year, and
``(II) the number of months such State is a non-Amtrak
State in such fiscal year.
If the amount determined under clause (ii) exceeds the amount
under clause (i) for any fiscal year, the amount under clause
(ii) for the following fiscal year shall be increased by the
amount of such excess.
``(4) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
``(A) Qualified expenses.--The term `qualified expenses'
means expenses incurred, with respect to obligations made,
after September 30, 1997, and before October 1, 2003--
``(i) for--
``(I) in the case of the National Railroad Passenger
Corporation, the acquisition of equipment, rolling stock, and
other capital improvements, the upgrading of maintenance
facilities, and the maintenance of existing equipment, in
intercity passenger rail service, and the payment of interest
and principal on obligations incurred for such acquisition,
upgrading, and maintenance, and
``(II) in the case of a non-Amtrak State, the acquisition
of equipment, rolling stock, and other capital improvements,
the upgrading of maintenance facilities, and the maintenance
of existing equipment, in intercity passenger rail or bus
service, and the payment of interest and principal on
obligations incurred for such acquisition, upgrading, and
maintenance, and
``(ii) certified by the Secretary of Transportation on
October 1 as meeting the requirements of clause (i) and as
qualified for payment under paragraph (5) for the fiscal year
beginning on such date.
``(B) Non-Amtrak state.--The term `non-Amtrak State' means
any State which does not receive intercity passenger rail
service from the National Railroad Passenger Corporation.
``(5) Contract authority.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the Secretary of Transportation shall
certify expenses as qualified for a fiscal year on October 1
of such year, in an amount not to exceed the amount of
receipts estimated by the Secretary of the Treasury to be
transferred to the Intercity Passenger Rail Account for such
fiscal year. Such certification shall result in a contractual
obligation of the United States for the payment of such
expenses.
``(6) Tax treatment of account expenditures.--With respect
to any payment of qualified expenses from the Intercity
Passenger Rail Account during any taxable year to a
taxpayer--
``(A) such payment shall not be included in the gross
income of the taxpayer for such taxable year,
``(B) no deduction shall be allowed to the taxpayer with
respect to any amount paid or incurred which is attributable
to such payment, and
``(C) the basis of any property shall be reduced by the
portion of the cost of such property which is attributable to
such payment.
``(7) Termination.--The Secretary shall determine and
retain, not later than October 1, 2003, the amount in the
Intercity Passenger Rail Account necessary to pay any
outstanding qualified expenses, and shall transfer any amount
not so retained to the Highway Trust Fund.''
(d) Effective Dates.--
(1) Transfer of taxes.--The amendments made by subsections
(a) and (b) apply to fuel removed after September 30, 1997.
(2) Account.--The amendment made by subsection (c) applies
with respect to taxes imposed on and after October 1, 1997.
______
By Mr. SPECTER:
S. 635. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
incentives for investments in disadvantaged and women-owned business
enterprises; to the Committee on Finance.
the minority and women capital formation act of 1997
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition for the purpose
of introducing legislation captioned the Minority and Women Capital
Formation Act of 1997.
I am introducing this legislation which is designed to be an economic
stimulus to promote jobs and economic opportunity. Unquestionably,
small minority and women-owned businesses can and must play an integral
role in expanding our economy, but they cannot do so unless we are able
to close the great capital gap facing these businesses.
This bill, captioned the Minority and Women Capital Formation Act of
1997, would close this gap by providing targeted tax incentives for
investors to invest equity capital in minority and women-owned small
businesses, as well as venture capital funds which are dedicated to
investing in minority and/or women-owned businesses.
As long as the Internal Revenue Code continues tax incentives to
promote specified business activities, then I believe this legislation
is warranted. If we were to adopt a flat or modified flat tax which I
favor, and have proposed, then I would be willing to forgo the tax
incentive because I believe sufficient additional capital would be
available for the purpose without the specific incentive.
Small businesses in general face limited access to capital. In many
instances, this lack of access amounts to a failure of many such
businesses to succeed. But unlike other small businesses owned by
minorities or women which have traditionally faced greater barriers in
addressing private capital for startups, these businesses have been
unable to achieve such funding.
Candidly, many of these barriers are founded in racism and sexism,
two subjects we do not like to talk about but two subjects which are
very important and really very pervasive in our society.
While the United States has benefited from civil rights laws, we have
not yet moved ahead on the business front to provide the kinds of
capitalization which we need. The ``capital gap'' is a phrase adopted
by the U.S. Commission on Minority Business Development. In its 1990
interim report, the Commission found that the availability of capital
is probably the single most important variable affecting minority
business. As stated by the Commission ``the problem is twofold: Lack of
access to capital and credit and the need for development of
alternatives to conventional financial instruments and
intermediaries.''
In its 1992 final report, the Commission said: ``Without timely
access to capital, you can't start or grow a business, particularly
growth firms being weaned off solely Government business.''
[[Page S3555]]
In 1988, the House Committee on Small Business, in its report, New
Economic Realties, The Rise of Women Entrepreneurs, also noted the
barriers which women face in accessing capital and the need for the
Federal Government to take into account alternative development
financing institutions and eliminating or circumventing such barriers.
Mr. President, this legislation is designed to focus our attention on
critical elements of a national strategy for providing access to
capital and credit from minorities and women in business. The bill
provides investors, and others who invest equity, capital in a small
minority or women-owned businesses or venture capital for minorities,
African-Americans, Hispanics, et cetera, will have tax breaks of,
first, the option to elect either a tax deduction or a tax credit
subject to certain annual and lifetime caps and, second, a partial
capital gains exclusion of limited deferral of the remaining capital
gain if it is reinvested in another minority or women-owned small
business.
Mr. Robert Johnson, president of Black Entertainment Holdings, a
minority-controlled enterprise publicly traded on the New York Stock
Exchange, testified in 1992 before the Banking Committee on the
availability of capital to minority businesses. He stated: ``The
urgency of the problem requires more adventuresome kinds of policies.
Policies that are designed to deal with a specific problem should be
problem specific in their solution.''
Mr. President, I note that in the 1981 to 1990 timeframe, the venture
capital resources increased from approximately $5.8 billion to some $36
billion but less than one-half of 1 percent of the capital raised by
the majority venture capital industry was invested in minority- or
women-operated businesses, which demonstrates the need for legislation
of this type and incentives.
I believe minority and women small business development is critical
to urban revitalization, job creation, and long-term economic growth.
No one denies the need for urban revitalization and job creation to
facilitate a sustained economic recovery. And no one should deny the
role that women and minority business owners must have in this effort.
During the 102d Congress as a member of the Banking Committee, I heard
many firsthand accounts concerning the lack of access to capital for
minority- and women-owned businesses. In some cases the cause is
outright discrimination; in other instances investor or lender
ignorance of the marketplace; in other fear. Whatever the cause, we are
facing an emergency that requires Congress' and the President's
immediate attention.
To avoid abuse, the bill also imposes minimum holding periods of 5
years for such investments and contains recapture provisions for
instances where the minority- or women-owned business or venture
capital fund fails to remain qualified within the meaning of the
legislation.
Admittedly, my proposal may not be inexpensive. To address the cost
issue, perhaps the bill should be limited to a tax credit, or perhaps
to the capital gains benefit. In any event, I am willing to work with
the estimators, my colleagues, and others to modify my bill as
necessary to achieve the ultimate goal of eliminating the capital gap
confronting minority- and women-owned businesses.
Some may question the use of tax policy in the manner I am proposing.
However, just as we use tax policy to foster development of housing,
jobs, and research and development, so too should we utilize tax policy
to foster economic empowerment of minority and women business owners
who will provide jobs and generate tax revenues.
Stated differently, this bill is really a Federal investment strategy
for such businesses. The proposed tax expenditures represent seed
capital to help develop greater self-sufficiency in the long term. In
this regard, the bill recognizes that capital targeted to women and
minority business is an essential, but often overlooked component of
economic development. In my judgment, it is a very creative tool to
spur business growth and job creation, particularly in distressed
communities.
Another very important feature of the bill is the provision of
similar tax incentives for those who invest in venture capital funds
dedicated to investing in minority- and/or women-owned businesses.
Prior to 1970, the Federal Government had no dedicated sources of
financing for disadvantaged businesses. In 1971, however, Congress
authorized the creation of the specialized small business investment
company [SSBIC] program administered by the Small Business
Administration. For the last 20 years SSBIC's have been the primary
source of capital for disadvantaged businesses. In the face of
tremendous obstacles SSBIC's and the minority venture capital industry
have made a real difference. For example, according to the National
Association of Investment Companies [NAIC], over the last decade they
have raised and invested nearly $1 billion in disadvantaged businesses.
In sum, Mr. President, there remains a need to facilitate the
development of minority- and women-owned small business. We cannot
allow the capital gap to grow. If we are to remain a productive and
competitive nation, we must eliminate it. Moreover, there is no
substitute for equity capital. Federal policies should not focus
exclusively on debt financing. With targeted tax incentives, such as
those that I am proposing, we can cause greater investment of equity in
businesses that traditionally have not been able to access it to any
significant degree. I believe this capital formation bill will take us
a long way toward achieving this goal. I, therefore, encourage my
colleagues to join my efforts to enact this much needed legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Minority and Women Capital
Formation Act of 1997''.
SEC. 2. INCENTIVES FOR INVESTMENTS IN DISADVANTAGED AND
WOMEN-OWNED ENTERPRISES.
(a) Subchapter P of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (relating to capital gains and losses) is amended by
adding at the end thereof the following new part:
``Part VI--Incentives for Investments in Disadvantaged and Women-Owned
Enterprises
``Subpart A--Initial investment incentives.
``Subpart B--Capital gain provisions.
``Subpart C--General provisions.
``Subpart A--Initial Investment Incentives
``Sec. 1301. Deduction for investment in minority and women
venture capital funds.
``Sec. 1302. Deduction for investment in small minority and
women's business corporations.
``Sec. 1303. Taxpayer may elect credit in lieu of
deduction.
``Sec. 1304. Recapture provisions.
``SEC. 1301. DEDUCTION FOR INVESTMENT IN MINORITY AND WOMEN
VENTURE CAPITAL FUNDS
``(a) General Rule.--There shall be allowed as a deduction
an amount equal to the sum of the aggregate bases of--
``(1) qualified minority fund interests, and
``(2) qualified women's fund interests,
which are acquired by the taxpayer during the taxable year at
their original issuance (directly or through an underwriter),
and which are held by the taxpayer as of the close of such
taxable year.
``(b) Limitations.--The amount allowable as a deduction
under subsection (a)(1) or (2), respectively, for any taxable
year shall not exceed $300,000 ($150,000 in the case of a
separate return by a married individual).
``(c) Qualified Minority Fund Interest.--For purposes of
this part, the term `qualified minority fund interest' means
any stock in a domestic corporation or partnership interest
in a domestic partnership if--
``(1) such stock or partnership interest (as the case may
be) is issued after the date of the enactment of this part
solely in exchange for money,
``(2) such corporation or partnership (as the case may be)
was formed exclusively for purposes of--
``(A) acquiring at original issuance equity interests in
qualified minority corporations, or
``(B) making loans to such corporations, and
``(3) at least 70 percent of the total bases of its assets
is represented by--
``(A) investments referred to in paragraph (2), and
``(B) cash and cash equivalents.
For purposes of paragraph (2), the term `equity interests'
means stock, warrants, and convertible securities.
``(d) Qualified Women's Fund Interest.--For purposes of
this part, the term `qualified women's fund interest' shall
be determined under subsection (c) by substituting `qualified
women's corporations' for `qualified minority corporations'
in paragraph (2)(B).
``SEC. 1302. DEDUCTION FOR INVESTMENT IN SMALL MINORITY AND
WOMEN'S BUSINESS CORPORATIONS.
``(a) General Rule.--There shall be allowed as a deduction
an amount equal to the sum of the aggregate bases of--
[[Page S3556]]
``(1) small minority business stock, and
``(2) small women's business corporations,
which are acquired by the taxpayer during the taxable year at
its original issuance (directly or through an underwriter),
and which are held by the taxpayer as of the close of such
taxable year.
``(b) Limitations.--
``(1) Noncorporate taxpayers.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of a taxpayer other than a
corporation, the amount allowable as a deduction under
subsection (a)(1) or (2), respectively, for any taxable year
shall not exceed the lesser of--
``(i) $50,000 ($25,000 in the case of a separate return by
a married individual), or
``(ii) $500,000 ($250,00 in the case of a separate return
by a married individual) reduced by the aggregate amount
allowable as a deduction under subsection (a)(1) or (2),
respectively, the taxpayer for prior taxable years.
``(B) Carryover.--If the amount otherwise deductible under
subsection (a) exceeds the limitation under subparagraph
(A)(1) for any taxable year, the amount of such excess shall
be treated as an amount described in subsection (a) which
is paid in the following taxable year.
``(C) Special rule.--The amount allowable as a deduction
under subparagraph (A)(i) or (ii) with respect to any joint
return shall be allocated equally between the spouses in
determining the limitation under subparagraph (A)(ii) for any
subsequent taxable year.
``(2) Corporate taxpayer.--In the case of a corporation,
the amount allowable as a deduction under subsection (a) (1)
or (2), respectively, for any taxable year shall not exceed
$100,000.
``(c) Small Minority Business Stock.--For purposes of this
part, the term `small minority business stock' means any
stock in a qualified minority corporation if--
``(1) as of the date of the issuance of such stock, the
total bases of property owned or leased by such corporation
does not exceed $12,000,000,
``(2) such stock is issued after the date of the enactment
of this part solely in exchange for money, and
``(3) such corporation elects to treat such stock as small
minority business stock for purposes of this section. An
election under paragraph (3), once made, shall be
irrevocable.
``(d) Small Women's Business Stock.--For purposes of this
part, the term `small women's business stock' means any stock
in a qualified women's corporation if--
``(1) as of the date of the issuance of such stock, the
total bases of property owned or leased by such corporation
does not exceed $12,000,000,
``(2) such stock is issued after the date of the enactment
of this part solely in exchange for money, and
``(3) such corporation elects to treat such stock as small
women's business stock for purposes of this section. An
election under paragraph (3), once made, shall be
irrevocable.
``(e) Issuer Limitation.--The aggregate amount of stock for
which an issuer may make an election under subsection (c)(3)
or (d)(3) shall not exceed $5,000,000.
``SEC. 1303. TAXPAYER MAY ELECT CREDIT IN LIEU OF DEDUCTION.
``(a) Minority and Women Venture Capital Funds.--
``(1) In general.--A taxpayer may elect, in lieu of the
deduction under section 1301, to take a credit against the
tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year in an amount
equal to 15 percent of the sum of the aggregate bases of--
``(A) qualified minority fund interests, and
``(B) qualified women's fund interest,
which are acquired by the taxpayer during the taxable year at
their original issuance (directly or through an underwriter),
and which are held by the taxpayer at the end of the taxable
year.
``(2) Limitations.--The amount allowable as a credit under
paragraph (1) for any taxable year shall not exceed the
lesser of--
``(A) $500,000 ($250,000 in the case of a separate return
by a married individual), or
``(B) $7,000,000, ($3,500,000 in the case of a separate
return by a married individual), reduced by the amount of the
credit allowed under paragraph (1) for all preceding taxable
years.
``(3) Carryover.--If the amount otherwise allowable as a
credit under paragraph (1) exceeds the limitation under
paragraph (2)(A) for any taxable year, the amount of such
excess shall, subject to the limitation of paragraph (2), be
treated as an amount which is allowable as a credit in the
following taxable year.
``(b) Small Minority and Women's Business Corporations.--
``(1) In general.--A taxpayer may elect, in lieu of the
deduction under section 1302, to take a credit against the
tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year in an amount
equal to 10 percent of the sum of the aggregate bases of--
``(A) small minority business stock
``(B) small women's business corporations,
which are acquired by the taxpayer during the taxable year at
their original issuance (directly or through an underwriter),
and which are held by the taxpayer at the end of the taxable
year.
``(2) Limitations.--The amount allowable as a credit under
paragraph (1) for any taxable year shall not exceed the
lesser of--
``(A) $250,000 ($125,000 in the case of a separate return
by a married individual), or
``(B) $5,000,000 ($2,500,000 in the case of the separate
return by a married individual), reduced by the amount of the
credit allowed under paragraph (1) for all preceding taxable
years.
``(3) Carryover.--If the amount otherwise allowable as
a credit under paragraph (1) exceeds the limitation under
paragraph (2)(A) for any taxable year, the amount of such
excess shall, subject to the limitation of paragraph (2),
be treated as an amount which is allowable as a credit in
the following taxable year.
``(c) Application With Other Provisions.--For purposes of
this title, any credit allowed under this section shall be
treated in the same manner as a credit allowed under subpart
B of part IV of subchapter A.
``(d) Election.--An election under this section for any
taxable year shall be made at such time and in such manner as
the Secretary may prescribe and shall apply with respect to
all acquisitions to which this subpart applies for such
taxable year.
``SEC. 1304. RECAPTURE PROVISIONS.
``(a) Basis Reduction.--For purposes of this title, the
basis of any qualified minority or women's fund interest or
small minority or women's business stock shall be reduced by
the amount of the deduction allowed under section 1301 or
1302, or the credit allowed under section 1303, with respect
to such property. In any case in which the deduction
allowable under subsection (a) of section 1301 or 1302 (as
the case may be) is limited by reason of subsection (b) of
such section, or in any case in which the credit allowable
under subsection (a)(1) or (b)(1) of section 1303 is limited
by reason of subsection (a)(2) or (b)(2) of section 1303, the
deduction of credit shall be allocated proportionately among
the qualified minority or women's fund interests or small
minority or women's business stock, whichever is applicable,
acquired during the taxable year on the basis of their
respective bases (as determined before any reduction under
this subsection).
``(b) Deduction Recaptured As Ordinary Income.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of section 1245--
``(A) any property the basis of which is reduced under
subsection (a) (and any other property the basis of which is
determined in whole or in part by reference to the adjusted
basis of such property) shall be treated as section 1245
property; and
``(B) any reduction under subsection (a) shall be treated
as a deduction allowed for depreciation. If an exchange of
any stock the basis of which is reduced under subsection (a)
qualifies under section 354(a), 355(a), or 356(a), the amount
of gain recognized under section 1245 by reason of this
paragraph shall not exceed the amount of gain recognized in
the exchange (determined without regard to this paragraph).
``(2) Certain events treated as dispositions.--For purposes
of this section, if--
``(A) a deduction was allowable under section 1301, or a
credit was allowable under section 1303, with respect to any
stock in a corporation or interest in a partnership and such
corporation or partnership, as the case may be, ceases to
meet the requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3) of section
1301(c), or
``(B) a deduction was allowable under section 1302, or a
credit was allowable under section 1303, with respect to any
stock in a corporation and such corporation ceases to be a
qualified minority corporation or qualified women's
corporation, whichever is applicable,
the taxpayer shall be treated as having disposed of such
property for an amount equal to its fair market value.
``(c) Interest Charged if Disposition Within 5 Years.--
``(1) In general.--If a taxpayer disposes of any property
the basis of which is reduced under subsection (a) before the
date 5 years after the date of its acquisition by the
taxpayer, the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable
year in which such disposition occurs shall be increased by
interest at the underpayment rate (established under section
6621(a)(2))--
``(A) on the additional tax which would have been imposed
under this chapter for the taxable year in which such
property was acquired if such property had not been taken
into account under section 1301, 1302, or 1303, whichever is
applicable;
``(B) for the period on the due date for the taxable year
in which the property was acquired and ending on the due date
for the taxable year in which the disposition occurs. For
purposes of the preceding sentence, the term `due date' means
the due date (determined without regard to extensions for
filing the return of the tax imposed by this chapter).
``(2) Special rule.--Any increase in tax under paragraph
(1) shall not be treated as a tax imposed by this chapter,
for purposes of determining the amount of any credit
allowable under this chapter or the amount of the minimum tax
imposed by section 55.
``Subpart B--Capital Gain Provisions
``Sec. 1311. Exclusion of gain on sale by qualified
minority or women's fund.
``Sec. 1312. Deferral of capital gain reinvested in certain
property.
``SEC. 1311. EXCLUSION OF GAIN ON SALE BY QUALIFIED MINORITY
OR WOMEN'S FUND.
``(a) General Rule.--Gross income shall not include 50
percent of any gain on the sale or exchange of any property
by a qualified minority or women's fund if such property
[[Page S3557]]
was acquired after the date of the enactment of this part and
was held by such fund for at least 5 years.
``(b) Qualified Minority Fund.--For purposes of this
section, the term `qualified minority fund' means any
domestic corporation or domestic partnership which meets the
requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 1301(c).
``(c) Qualified Women's Fund.--For purposes of this
section, the term `qualified women's fund' means any domestic
corporation or partnership meeting the requirements of
paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 1301(c) (as modified by
section 1301(d)).
``SEC. 1312. DEFERRAL OF CAPITAL GAIN REINVESTED IN CERTAIN
PROPERTY.
``(a) General Rule.--Except as otherwise provided in this
section, in the case of an individual, any qualified
reinvested capital gain shall be taken into account for
purposes of this title--
``(1) in the 9th taxable year following the taxable year of
the sale or exchange, or
``(2) in such earlier taxable year (or years) following the
taxable year of the sale or exchange as the taxpayer may
provide.
``(b) Limitations.--
``(1) Dollar Limitation.--
``(A) In general.--The amount of the gain to which
subsection (a) applies shall not exceed $500,000, reduced by
the aggregate amount of gain of the taxpayer to which
subsection (a) applied for prior taxable years. This
subparagraph shall be applied separately for property
described in subsections (c)(2)(A) and (B) and for property
described in subsection (c)(2)(C) and (D).
``(B) Special rule.--The amount of gain to which subsection
(a) applied on a joint return for any taxable year shall be
allocated equally between the spouses in determining the
limitation under subparagraph (A) for any subsequent taxable
year.
``(2) Ineligibility of certain taxpayers.--Subsection (a)
shall not apply to--
``(A) a married individual (as defined in section 7703) who
does not file a joint return for the taxable year, or
``(B) any estate or trust.
``(c) Qualified Reinvested Capital Gain.--For purposes of
this section--
``(1) Qualified reinvested capital gain.--The term
`qualified reinvested capital gain' means the amount of any
long-term capital gain (determined without regard to this
section) from any sale or exchange after the date of the
enactment of this part to which an election under this
section applies but only to the extent that the amount of
such gain exceeds the excess (if any) of--
``(A) the amount realized on such sale or exchange, over
``(B) the cost of any qualified property which the taxpayer
elects to take into account under this paragraph with respect
to such sale or exchange. For purposes of subparagraph (B),
the cost of any property shall be reduced by the portion of
such cost previously taken into account under this paragraph.
``(2) Qualified property.--The term `qualified property'
means--
``(A) any qualified minority fund interest acquired by the
taxpayer at its original issuance (directly or through an
underwriter),
``(B) any small minority business stock acquired by the
taxpayer at its original issuance (directly or through an
underwriter),
``(C) any qualified women's fund interest acquired by the
taxpayer at its original issuance (directly or through an
underwriter), and
``(D) any small women's business stock acquired by the
taxpayer at its original issuance (directly or through an
underwriter). Such term shall not include any property taken
into account by the taxpayer under section 1301, 1302, or
1303.
``(3) Reinvestment period.--The term `reinvestment period'
means, with respect to any sale or exchange, the period
beginning on the date of the sale or exchange and ending on
the day 1 year after the close of the taxable year in which
the sale or exchange occurs.
``(d) Termination of Deferral in Certain Cases.--
``(1) Certain dispositions, etc., of replacement
property.--
``(A) In general.--If the taxpayer disposes of any
qualified property before the date 5 years after the date of
its purchase--
``(i) any amount treated as a qualified reinvested capital
gain by reason of the purchase of such property (to the
extent not previously taken into account under subsection
(a)) shall be taken into account for the taxable year in
which such disposition or cessation occurs, and
``(ii) the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year
in which such disposition or cessation occurs shall be
increased by interest at the underpayment rate (established
under section 6621(a)(2))--
``(I) on the additional tax which would have been imposed
under this chapter (but for this section) for the taxable
year of the sale or exchange, and
``(II) for the period of the deferral under this section.
Any increase in tax under clause (ii) shall not be treated as
a tax imposed by this chapter for purposes of determining the
amount of any credit allowable under this chapter or the
amount of the minimum tax imposed by section 55.
``(B) Certain events treated as dispositions.--For purposes
of subparagraph (A), rules similar to the rules of section
1304(b)(2) shall apply.
``(2) Last taxable year.--In the case of the last taxable
year of any taxpayer, any qualified reinvestment capital gain
(to the extent not previously taken into account under
subsection (a)) shall be taken into account for such last
taxable year.
``(e) Coordination With Installment Method Reporting.--This
section shall not apply to any gain from any installment sale
(as defined in section 453(b)) if section 453(a) applies to
such sale.
``(f) Statute of Limitations.--If any gain is realized by
the taxpayer on any sale or exchange to which an election
under this section applies, then--
``(1) the statutory period for the assessment of any
deficiency with respect to such gain shall not expire before
the expiration of 3 years from the date the Secretary is
notified by the taxpayer (in such manner as the Secretary may
by regulations prescribe) of--
``(A) the taxpayer's cost of purchasing any qualified
property,
``(B) the taxpayer's intention not to purchase qualified
property within the reinvestment period, or
``(C) a failure to make such purchase within the
reinvestment period, and
``(2) such deficiency may be assessed before the expiration
of such 3-year period notwithstanding the provisions of any
law or rule of law which would otherwise prevent such
assessment.
``Subpart C--General Provisions
``Sec. 1321. Qualified minority corporation defined.
``Sec. 1322. Qualified women's corporation defined.
``Sec. 1323. Other definitions and special rules.
``SEC. 1321. QUALIFIED MINORITY CORPORATION DEFINED.
``For purposes of this part, the term `qualified minority
corporation' means any domestic corporation if--
``(1) 50 percent or more of the total value of the stock of
such corporation is held by individuals who are members of a
minority,
``(2) throughout the 5-year period ending on the date as of
which the determination is being made (or, if shorter,
throughout the period such corporation was in existence),
such corporation has been engaged in the active conduct of a
trade or business or in startup activities relating to a
trade or business, and
``(3) substantially all of the assets of such corporation
are used in the active conduct of a trade or business or in
startup activities related to a trade or business.
``SEC. 1322. QUALIFIED WOMEN'S CORPORATION.
``For purposes of this part, the term `qualified women's
corporation' means any domestic corporation if--
``(1) 50 percent or more of the total value of the stock of
such corporation is held by individuals who are women,
``(2) the management and daily business operations of the
corporation are controlled by one or more women, and
``(3) the requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3) of section
1301 are met with respect to the corporation.
``SEC. 1323. OTHER DEFINITIONS AND SPECIAL RULES.
``(a) Minority Individuals.--For purposes of this part,
individuals are members of a minority if the participation of
such individuals in the free enterprise system is hampered
because of social disadvantage within the meaning of section
301(d) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958.
``(b) Controlled Group Rules.--
``(1) In general.--All corporations which are members of
the same controlled groups shall be treated as 1 corporation
for purposes of this part.
``(2) Controlled group.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the
term `controlled group' has the meaning given such term by
section 179(d)(7).''
(b) The table or parts for subchapter P of chapter 1 of
such Code is amended by adding at the end thereof the
following item:
``Part VI. Incentives for investments in disadvantaged and women-owned
enterprises.''
(c) The amendments made by this section shall apply to
taxable years ending after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
______
By Mr. FRIST (for himself, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Dorgan, Mr.
Murkowski, Mr. Levin, Mr. Thurmond, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Warner, and Mr.
Gregg):
S. 636. A bill to establish a congressional commemorative medal for
organ donors and their families; to the Committee on Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs.
the gift of life congressional medal act of 1997
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I take great pleasure today in introducing
the Gift of Life Congressional Medal Act of 1997. With this
legislation, which doesn't cost taxpayers a penny, Congress has the
opportunity to recognize and encourage potential donors, and give hope
to over 52,000 Americans who have end-stage disease. As a heart and
lung transplant surgeon, I saw one in four of my patients die because
of the lack of available donors. Public awareness simply has not kept
up with the relatively new science of transplantation. As public
servants, we need to do all we can to raise awareness about the gift of
life.
[[Page S3558]]
Under this bill, each donor or donor family will be eligible to
receive a commemorative Congressional medal. It is not expected that
all families, many of whom wish to remain anonymous, will take
advantage of this opportunity. The program will be coordinated by the
regional organ procurement organizations [OPO's] and managed by the
entity administering the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network.
Upon request of the family or individual, a public official will
present the medal to the donor or the family. This creates a wonderful
opportunity to honor those sharing life through donation and increase
public awareness. Some researchers have estimated that it may be
possible to increase the number of organ donations by 80 percent
through incentive programs and public education.
As several recent experiences have proved, any one of us, or any
member of our families, could need a life saving transplant tomorrow.
We would then be placed on a waiting list to anxiously await our turn,
or our death. The number of people on the list has more than doubled
sine 1990--and a new name is added to the list every 18 minutes. In my
home State of Tennessee, 98 Tennesseans died while waiting last year,
and more than 900 people are in need in a transplant. Nationally,
because of a lack or organs, close to 4,000 individuals died who were
on the list in 1996.
However, the official waiting list reflects only those who have been
lucky enough to make it into the medical care system and to pass the
financial hurdles. If you include all those reaching end-stage disease,
the number of people potentially needing organs or bone marrow, very
likely over 120,000, becomes staggering. Only a small fraction of that
number would ever receive transplants, even if they had adequate
insurance. There simply are not enough organ and tissue donors, even to
meet present demand.
Federal policies surrounding the issue of organ transplantation are
difficult. Whenever you deal with whether someone lives or dies, there
are no easy answers. There are between 15,000 and 20,000 potential
donors each year, yet inexcusably, there are only some 5,400 actual
donors. That's why we need you to help us educate others about the
facts surrounding tissue and organ donation.
This year and last, Mr. President, there has been unprecedented
cooperation, on both sides of the aisle, and a growing commitment to
awaken public compassion on behalf of those who need organ transplants.
It is my very great pleasure to introduce this bill on behalf of a
group of Senators who have already contributed in extremely significant
ways to the cause of organ transplantation. And we are proud to ask you
to join us, in encouraging people to give life to others.
______
By Mr. DeWINE:
S. 637. A bill to amend title XVII of the Social Security Act to
continue full-time-equivalent resident reimbursement for an additional
one year under Medicare for direct graduate medical education for
residents enrolled in combined approved primary care medical residency
training programs; to the Committee on Finance.
The Primary Care Promotion Act of 1997
Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Primary Care
Promotion Act of 1997. This bill would restore full Federal funding
under Medicare for graduate medical education for physicians
specializing in approved combined primary care residency training
programs. This legislation is needed to refocus the recently issued
HCFA regulations that reduce the level of Federal funding to graduate
medical education paid by the Medicare program.
While HCFA's goals--reducing Medicare spending and placing sensible
limitations on the number of new specialists trained in this country--
are praiseworthy, we must not lose sight of the fact that we face a
shortage of primary care physicians, and particularly those who treat
children.
The Federal Government has used Medicare dollars effectively to
support physicians who specialize in care for our seniors. Now, in my
view, we must make a similar commitment to ensure that medical
professionals are prepared to meet the health needs of our children.
Despite what the bulk of our health policy would suggest, the health
needs of our children are very different from those of their parents
and grandparents. Children aren't miniature adults, and they need care
that is tailored to their special needs.
This legislation would greatly benefit children, because it would
enable physicians to complete advanced training in combined specialties
such as internal medicine and pediatrics or emergency medicine and
pediatrics. A recent survey by the American Boards of Internal Medicine
and Pediatrics demonstrates the wisdom of this investment: over 70
percent of the physicians who were trained in the combined specialties
of internal medicine and pediatrics between 1980 and 1995 currently
work as primary care providers. Because the health needs of children
are so varied and so different from those of adults, they often require
care by physicians who have received specialized training.
The Primary Care Promotion Act is supported by a wide variety of
professional medical associations, including pediatricians, specialists
in internal medicine, children's hospitals, and medical educators. This
legislation has received bipartisan support in the House of
Representatives, where it has been introduced by Representative Louise
Slaughter, and we expect similar support in the Senate.
______
By Ms. SNOWE (for herself and Mr. Rockefeller):
S. 639. A bill to require the same distribution of child support
arrearages collected by Federal tax intercept as collected directly by
the States, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
child support arrearages legislation
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill designed
to rectify an inequity in child support law which will enable families
to keep more of past-due support owed to them. I am extremely pleased
that my colleague from West Virginia, Mr. Rockefeller, has joined me
today in offering this bill, and that Representative Nancy Johnson is
offering a companion bill in the House.
Last year, my bill, the Child Support Improvement Act of 1996, was
enacted into law as part of the Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act (Welfare Reform Act). This bill
contained comprehensive reforms to ensure that deadbeat parents could
no longer renege on their responsibilities as parents to care for and
support their children. It included provisions to dramatically improve
States' ability to collect child support, particularly across State
lines, and to take maximum advantage of computer technology in order to
track down missing parents and ensure that child support gets paid
promptly. It also will help increase the rate of paternity
establishment, require the provision if health insurance coverage in
child support orders, and improve the process for modifying support
orders. In short, it promises to bring hope and financial stability to
the millions of children and their single parents who depend on support
from absent parents.
I am introducing a bill today which will close one small loophole
that remains outstanding. Prior to the enactment of the Welfare Reform
Act last year, a State that collected child support arrearages for a
family that had left welfare could choose to reimburse itself for
welfare expenditures with the arrears that accrued before the during
AFDC receipt, before it paid the family arrears that accrued after the
family left AFDC. Two-thirds of States chose to pay themselves back for
AFDC outlays before paying the family, leaving the family with little,
if any, of the money that accrued after they left the rolls. The
Welfare Act rightfully changes this to require States to first pay the
family the arrears collected when the family was not on welfare, before
it can reimburse itself for assistance outlays. This provision
increases the likelihood of a family's success in leaving welfare by
ensuring that the family receives more of the child support collected
on its behalf.
Unfortunately, a small provision inserted in conference creates an
inequity for families, whereby arrears collected via a tax intercept
(instead of wages garnished by the State) will not be affected by this
change. It does not make sense that whether or not a family receives
the funds depends on the method by which it is collected. This
provision also rewards those States
[[Page S3559]]
which do little to collect child support but rely instead on the
Federal tax system to intercept the funds. My bill corrects this
inequity by imposing the same distribution scheme on arrears collected
through the tax intercept as it does on arrears collected by the States
directly. This will ensure that families receive more of the past-due
support that is owed to them, helping them to remain economically
independent and to stay off welfare. I urge my colleagues to support
this bill, which not only promises to help families, but will further
our goals of keeping families off of public assistance.
______
By Mr. D'AMATO (for himself, Mr. Chafee, and Mr. DeWine):
S. 640. A bill to extend the transition period for aliens receiving
supplemental security income or food stamp benefits as of August 22,
1996; to the Committee on Finance.
implementation delay legislation
Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, on August 22, 1997, in nearly 100 days,
approximately half a million legal immigrants in this country,
currently receiving SSI, will lose their benefits. These recipients are
elderly or disabled--a vulnerable part of our population.
Of the 80,000 legal immigrants at risk of losing their SSI benefits
in New York State, more than 70,000 are in New York City. The city
estimates that there will also be 130,000 immigrants who will lose food
stamps.
According to New York City estimates, the loss of SSI and food stamps
to city immigrants is a loss of $442 million from the Federal
Government to immigrants in New York City in 1998.
On April 17, I joined with my colleagues Senators Chafee, Feinstein,
Moynihan, DeWine, Lieberman, and Mikulski to introduce legislation that
will allow immigrants who were in the United States legally and were
receiving SSI and food stamps on August 22, 1996 (the day the welfare
reform bill was enacted) to continue to receive those benefits.
Legal immigrants who were in this country and receiving benefits at
the time the welfare reform act was enacted should not have the rules
changed midstream.
The legislation introduced last Thursday also allows refugees who
were legally in the United States as of August 22, 1996 to receive SSI
or food stamps, without a 5-year limitation. Refugees who entered after
August 1996 will only be able to receive benefits for 5 years.
Congress needs time to enact legislation that will protect the most
vulnerable population--the elderly and the disabled who are relying on
these Federal benefits and refugees who are fleeing persecution.
Enacting a legislative fix will take time but the clock is ticking
closer to August 1997, when benefits are expected to be cut.
That is why Senator Chafee, DeWine, and I are introducing a bill that
will provide the necessary time for Congress to further examine options
and take action.
The bill will delay the cut-off period for legal immigrants who are
SSI and food stamp recipients until February 22, 1998.
A delay in implementation will also allow immigrants who are trying
to naturalize an additional 6 months to complete the citizenship
process. This is especially important, because under the Welfare Reform
Act, a legal immigrant who becomes an American citizen is eligible for
benefits as any other citizen.
The naturalization process can prove to be a bureaucratic nightmare--
especially for elderly and disabled poor immigrants. These people
should not be unfairly penalized for being caught in the bureaucracy.
Mr. President, I urge my colleagues review the merits of this bill,
as well as the Chafee-Feinstein-D'Amato bill to restore benefits to
certain categories of immigrants, and hope for their passage.
______
By Mr. WARNER:
S.J. Res. 27. A joint resolution designating the month of June 1997,
the 15th anniversary of the Marshall plan, as George C. Marshall month,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
marshall plan resolution
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, today the nations of Europe enjoy
historically unprecedented freedoms and economic success as democracy
flourishes across the continent. This was not the case a mere 50 years
ago.
I rise today to ask my colleagues and the American people to recall
the state of the European Continent at the end of World War II. Like
many of you, I will never forget the horrible devastation that the
world witnessed in Europe: the destruction of the world's most
remarkable cities; devastation of God's beautiful countryside; and the
despair of the people. Europeans endured not only the ravages of two
world wars, but also economic and political turmoil throughout the
first half of this century. As I recall, even the elements seemed to
plot against a post-World War II European recovery--one of the harshest
European winters on record was in 1946.
This situation might well have precipitated renewed divisions and
another war rather than a lasting peace. It was quite possible that we
may have never enjoyed, in our lifetime, a Europe such as it thrives
today, if it had not been for the foresight and wisdom of then-
Secretary of State, and former Army Chief of Staff, Gen. George Catlett
Marshall.
On behalf of the American people, George Marshall conceived and
implemented one of the most benevolent acts of charity in the history
of mankind. Under his stewardship, the European Recovery Program, or
Marshall plan, provided over $13 billion in economic relief to the
nations of Europe. Marshall's ingenuity and leadership restored hope
and pride to a disheartened people, helping them to rebuild their
cities and societies and again be positive contributors to the
international community.
With the economic recovery of Western Europe came political
stability. The Marshall plan, which Winston Churchill characterized as
``the most unsordid act in history,'' enabled the re-emergence of free,
democratic institutions. Today, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development are
successful institutions which can trace their origins to the Marshall
plan.
General Marshall outlined his visionary initiative during remarks
delivered at Harvard University in June 1947. That same month, he met
with representatives of European nations to encourage their
participation. Today, as we approach the 50th anniversary of that
month, I am proud to introduce this resolution to once again
acknowledge the integrity, vision, and benevolence of George Marshall,
statesman and soldier, and the unparalleled importance of the Marshall
plan in shaping the world of the 20th century. It is important that we
continue to foster the virtues embodied in the Marshall plan; virtues
which all the world continues to expect from the United States. I
invite the support of my colleagues to this important legislation.
____________________