[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.

                          ____________________