[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 72 (Friday, June 5, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H4167-H4188]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
USER FEE ACT OF 1998
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of June
4, 1998, I call up the bill (H.R. 3989) to provide for the enactment of
user fees proposed by the President in his budget submission under
section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, for fiscal year 1999,
and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill is considered read for amendment
and the amendment made in order, pursuant to the order of the House of
Thursday, June 4, 1998, is adopted.
The text of H.R. 3989, as amended, is as follows:
H.R. 3989
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 ``User Fee Act of 1998''.
TITLE I--FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION FEES
SEC. 101. REFERENCES IN THIS TITLE.
Whenever in this title an amendment or repeal is expressed
in terms of an amendment to, a repeal of, a section or other
provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a
section or other provision of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act.
PART A--USER FEES
SEC. 111. FEES RELATED TO FOOD ADDITIVE PETITIONS.
(a) Types of Fees.--Beginning in fiscal year 1999, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services (referred to in this
title as the ``Secretary'') shall establish, in accordance
with section 121, fees to cover activities of the Food and
Drug Administration in connection with--
(1) petitions for food additives submitted pursuant to
section 409(b) (21 U.S.C. 438(b));
(2) notifications to the Secretary for food contact
substances submitted pursuant to section 409(h) (21 U.S.C.
438(h));
(3) petitions for color additives submitted pursuant to
section 721 (21 U.S.C. 379e);
(4) petitions, submitted pursuant to sections 201(s), and
701(a) (21 U.S.C. 321(s), 371(a)) and regulations thereunder,
for affirmation that a substance that becomes, or may
reasonably be expected to become, a component of food is
generally recognized as safe; and
(5) notifications to the Secretary, submitted pursuant to
sections 201(s) and 701(a) and regulations thereunder
asserting that a substance that becomes, or may reasonably be
expected to become, a component of food is generally
recognized as safe.
The fees shall be payable at the time the petition or
notification is submitted to the Secretary.
(b) Fee Amounts and Availability.--Subject to section
121(a)(1)(A), fees for the activities specified in subsection
(a) shall be set for each fiscal year at amounts that the
Secretary reasonably estimates to be sufficient to generate
revenues totaling $10,335,000 for each of fiscal years 1999
[[Page H4168]]
through 2003, and shall remain available until expended, to
the extent provided in appropriations Acts, for the costs of
carrying out such activities.
SEC. 112. FEES RELATED TO GENERIC DRUGS.
(a) Types of Fees.--Beginning in fiscal year 1999, the
Secretary shall establish, in accordance with section 121,
fees to cover activities of the Food and Drug Administration
in connection with applications for approval for new drugs
submitted pursuant to section 505(j) (21 U.S.C. 355). The
fees shall be payable at the time the application for
approval is submitted to the Secretary.
(b) Fee Amounts and Availability.--Subject to section
121(a)(1)(A), fees for the activities specified in subsection
(a) shall be set for each fiscal year at amounts that the
Secretary reasonably estimates to be sufficient to generate
revenues totaling $12,377,000 for each of fiscal years 1999
through 2003, and shall remain available until expended, to
the extent provided in appropriations Acts, for the costs of
carrying out such activities.
SEC. 113. FEES RELATED TO ANIMAL DRUGS.
(a) Types of Fees.--Beginning in fiscal year 1999, the
Secretary shall establish, in accordance with section 121,
fees to cover activities of the Food and Drug Administration
in connection with--
(1) applications, including supplements, for new animal
drugs submitted pursuant to section 512(b)(1) (21 U.S.C.
360b(b)(1), including application and other submissions for
import tolerances, as described in section 512(a)(6) (21
U.S.C. 360b(a)(b));
(2) abbreviated applications, including supplements, for
new animal drugs submitted pursuant to section 512(b)(2) (21
U.S.C. 360b(b)(2)); and
(3) applications for licenses to manufacture animal feeds
bearing or containing new animal drugs, submitted pursuant to
section 512(m) (21 U.S.C. 360b(m)).
The fees shall be payable at the time the application for
approval is submitted to the Secretary.
(b) Fee Amounts and Availability.--Subject to section
121(a)(1)(A), fees for the activities specified in subsection
(a) shall be set for each fiscal year at amounts that the
Secretary reasonably estimates to be sufficient to generate
revenues totaling $10,100,000 for each of fiscal years 1999
through 2003, and shall remain available until expended, to
the extent provided in appropriations Acts, for the costs of
carrying out such activities.
SEC. 114. FEES RELATED TO MEDICAL DEVICES.
(a) Types of Fees.--Beginning in fiscal year 1999, the
Secretary shall establish, in accordance with section 121,
fees to cover activities of the Food and Drug Administration
in connection with applications for--
(1) premarket approval of devices (including proposed
product development protocols) submitted under section 515
(21 U.S.C. 360e);
(2) supplements to approved premarket approval applications
for which clinical data are required;
(3) supplements to approved premarket approval applications
for which clinical data are not required; and
(4) device premarket notification submissions under section
510(k) (21 U.S.C. 360(k)).
The fees shall be payable at the time the application is
submitted to the Secretary.
(b) Fee Amounts.--The fees required under subsection (a)
shall be as follows:
(1) $175,000 for applications described in subsection
(a)(1).
(2) $100,000 for supplements described in subsection
(a)(2).
(3) $6,000 for supplements described in subsection (a)(3).
(4) $4,500 for submissions described in subsection (a)(4).
(c) Fee Amounts and Availability.--Subject to section
121(a)(1)(A), fees for the activities specified in subsection
(a) shall be set each fiscal year in accordance with section
121 to amounts that the Secretary reasonably estimates to be
sufficient to generate revenues totaling $25,000,000 for each
of fiscal years 1999 through 2003, and shall remain available
until expended, to the extent provided in appropriations
Acts, for the costs of carrying out such activities.
SEC. 115. FEES RELATED TO IMPORT INSPECTIONS AND EXPORT
CERTIFICATES.
(a) Types of Fees.--Beginning in fiscal year 1999, the
Secretary shall establish, in accordance with section 121,
fees to cover activities of the Food and Drug Administration
in connection with the review of imported human and animal
drugs, medical devices, and food subject to regulation under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (including
activities relating to admission or detention of, refusal of
entry to, and the issuance of export certificates for such
items). The fees shall be payable at the time of each import
entry or request for export certificates for shipment of the
item.
(b) Fee Amounts and Availability.--Subject to section
121(a)(1)(A), fees for the activities specified in subsection
(a) shall be set for each fiscal year at amounts that the
Secretary reasonably estimates to be sufficient to generate
revenues totaling $12,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1999
through 2003, and shall remain available until expended, to
the extent provided in appropriations Acts, for the costs of
carrying out such activities.
(c) Collections.--The fees authorized by this section shall
be collected on behalf of the Secretary by the United States
Customs Service.
SEC. 116. FEES RELATED TO ENTITIES UNDER FDA'S OVERSIGHT.
(a) Types of Fees.--Beginning in fiscal year 1999, the
Secretary shall establish, in accordance with section 121,
fees to cover activities of the Food and Drug Administration
in connection with regulatory activities with respect to
regulated products approved for marketing. The Secretary
shall assess fees for monitoring establishments that are
subject to regulation (including inspections conducted
pursuant to section 704 (21 U.S.C. 374), and other regulatory
activities), as follows:
(1) Food establishments.--An establishment subject to
inspection under section 704 (21 U.S.C. 374) because it
manufactures, processes, packs, or holds food for (or after)
shipment in interstate commerce, is subject to assessment of
annual fees under this section. The Secretary may impose an
annual registration requirement on such an establishment to
facilitate assessment and collection of the fees.
(2) Drug and device establishments.--An establishment
subject to the annual registration requirement under section
510 (21 U.S.C. 360) (with respect to products other than
those for which such an establishment is subject to section
736 (21 U.S.C. 379h) is subject to assessment of annual fees
under this section at the time of registration.
(3) Cosmetic establishments.--An establishment subject to
inspection under section 704 (21 U.S.C. 374) because it
manufactures, processes, packs, or holds cosmetics for (or
after) shipment in interstate commerce is subject to
assessment of annual fees under this section. The Secretary
may impose an annual registration requirement on such an
establishment to facilitate assessment and collection of the
fees.
This section does not affect any other statutory or
regulatory requirements imposed on these entities.
(b) Fee Amounts and Availability.--Subject to section
121(a)(1)(A), fees for the activities specified in subsection
(a) shall be set for each fiscal year at amounts that the
Secretary reasonably estimates to be sufficient to generate
revenues totaling $57,905,000 for each of fiscal years 1999
through 2003, and shall remain available until expended, to
the extent provided in appropriations Acts, for the costs of
carrying out such activities.
PART B--GENERAL PROVISIONS
SEC. 121. GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATED TO USER FEES.
(a) Assessment of Fees.--
(1) Fee amounts.--
(A) Collections subject to appropriations.--The fees
authorized by this Act shall be collected in each fiscal year
as provided in appropriation Acts for such fiscal year.
(B) Relation to costs.--Fees assessed and collected under
part A shall not exceed amounts which the Secretary estimates
to be sufficient to cover costs of the Food and Drug
Administration associated with the activities for which the
fees are collected (including costs of assessments and
collection of the fees).
(C) Variation factors.--The amount of fees established may
vary to reflect the cost of those activities with respect to
different entities or groups of entities, including the type
and size of entity, volume of business, and other factors the
Secretary may find appropriate.
(2) Fee determination and publication.--The Secretary shall
annually establish fee amounts under part A, and shall
publish schedules of such fees in the Federal Register as an
interim final rule. The establishment and publication of such
fees shall be solely in the discretion of the Secretary and
shall not be subject to the requirements of sections 553 and
801 of title 5 of the United States Code and shall not be
reviewable.
(3) Reduction or waiver of fees.--The Secretary may provide
for reduction or waiver of the fees under part A in
exceptional circumstances in the public interest.
(b) Crediting and Availability of Fees.--
(1) In general.--Fees collected pursuant to part A shall be
credited to a special fund in the Treasury for user fees
collected by the Food and Drug Administration. The fees shall
be available in the amounts specified in appropriations Acts,
for salaries and expenses necessary to carry out the
responsibilities of the Food and Drug Administration in
connection with the activities for which such fees were
collected, including the conduct of scientific research,
development of methods of analysis, purchase of chemicals,
fixtures, furniture, and scientific equipment and apparatus,
development and acquisition of information technology and
information management systems, acquisition, maintenance, and
repair of real property, and expenses of advisory committees.
(2) Fees available only for the category of activity for
which assessed.--Fees collected for each category of
activities specified in part A shall be separately accounted
for, and shall be used only to finance the costs related to
carrying out responsibilities in connection with the same
category of activities for which the fees were collected.
(c) Collection of Unpaid Fees.--If the Secretary does not
receive payment of a fee assessed under subsection (a) within
30 days after it is due, that fee shall be treated as a claim
of the United States Government subject to the provisions of
subchapter II of chapter 37 of title 31 of the United States
Code.
SEC. 122. AGENCY PLAN AND ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
The agency plan for the Food and Drug Administration
required under section 903(f) (21
[[Page H4169]]
U.S.C. 393(f)) shall include objectives with respect to the
assessment, collection, and use of the fees authorized under
part A, and the annual report required by section 903(g) (21
U.S.C. (g)) shall describe the performance of the Secretary
with respect to such objectives.
TITLE II--MEDICARE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES
SEC. 201. COLLECTION OF FEES FROM MEDICARE+CHOICE
ORGANIZATIONS FOR CONTRACT INITIATION AND
RENEWAL.
Section 1857 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
27) is amended by adding after subsection (h) the following
new subsection:
``(i) Fees for Contract Issuance and Renewal and Ongoing
Monitoring.--
``(1) Authority to impose fees.--The Secretary shall
impose, to the extent provided in appropriation Acts--
``(A) fees for initial Medicare+Choice contracts under this
part; and
``(B) annual fees for renewal of such contracts and
monitoring of the ongoing operations of Medicare+Choice
organizations.
``(2) Assessment of fees.--
``(A) Types of fees.--
``(i) Initiation fees.--Fee amounts assessed against a
member of a class of organizations pursuant to paragraph
(1)(A) shall not exceed the Secretary's reasonable estimate
of the average cost of initiating a Medicare+Choice contract
for an organization in such class.
``(ii) Renewal and monitoring fees.--Fee amounts assessed
pursuant to paragraph (1)(B) against members of a class of
organizations shall not exceed the amount which the Secretary
reasonably estimates will generate total revenues sufficient
to cover total annual costs for renewing contracts and
performing ongoing monitoring with respect to such class.
``(B) Fee determination and publication.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall annually establish
fee amounts under this subsection, and shall annually publish
schedules of such fees in the Federal Register. The
establishment and publication of such fees shall be solely in
the discretion of the Secretary and shall not be subject to
the requirements of sections 553 and 801 of title 5, United
States Code, and shall not be reviewable. Previously
published fee schedules shall remain in effect until new
schedules are effective.
``(ii) Reduction or waiver of fees.--The Secretary may
provide for reduction or waiver of the fees under this
subsection in exceptional circumstances in the public
interest.
``(3) Collection and crediting of fees.--
``(A) Initial fees.--Fees assessed against an organization
pursuant to paragraph (1)(A) shall be payable upon submission
of the application to participate in the program under this
title as a Medicare+Choice organization (and shall apply
whether or not the Secretary approves such application) and
shall be credited to the Health Care Financing Administration
Program Management Account.
``(B) Renewal and monitoring fees.--Fees assessed against
an organization pursuant to paragraph (1)(B) shall be payable
annually and may be deducted from amounts otherwise payable
from a Trust Fund under this title to such organization. Such
fees shall be credited to the Health Care Financing
Administration Program Management Account.
``(C) Offset.--Any amount of fees collected in a fiscal
year under this subsection that exceeds the amount of such
fees available for expenditure in such fiscal year, as
specified in appropriation Acts, shall be credited to the
Health Care Financing Administration Program Management
Account, and shall be available for obligation in subsequent
fiscal years to the extent provided in subsequent
appropriations Acts.
``(4) Availability of fees.--Fees collected pursuant to
this subsection shall remain available until expended, in the
amounts provided in appropriation Acts, for the costs of the
activities for which they were assessed.''.
SEC. 202. FEES FOR SURVEY AND CERTIFICATION.
Section 1864(e) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1395aa(e)) is amended to read as follows:
``(e) Fees for Conducting Certification Surveys.--
``(1) Authority to impose fees.--Except as provided in
paragraph (6), to the extent provided in appropriation Acts,
the Secretary shall impose, or require States as a condition
of agreements under this section to impose--
``(A) fees for surveys for the purpose of making initial
determinations as to whether entities meet requirements under
this title; and
``(B) annual fees to cover the costs of periodic surveys to
determine whether entities participating in the program under
this title continue to meet such requirements.
``(2) Assessment of fees.--
``(A) Types of fees.--
``(i) Fees for initial surveys.--Fee amounts assessed
pursuant to paragraph (1)(A) against an entity in a class and
State shall not exceed the estimated average cost of an
initial survey and determination for an entity in such class
and State.
``(ii) Fees for recertification surveys.--
``(I) In general.--Fee amounts assessed pursuant to
paragraph (1)(B) against entities in a class in a State shall
not exceed the amount which the Secretary reasonably
estimates will generate total revenues sufficient to cover
the applicable percentage specified in subclause (II) of
total annual costs for such surveys and determinations with
respect to such class and State.
``(II) Applicable percentages.--For purposes of subclause
(I), the applicable percentage specified in this subclause
is--
``(aa) 33 percent for fiscal year 1999;
``(bb) 66 percent for fiscal year 2000; and
``(cc) 100 percent for fiscal year 2001 and each succeeding
fiscal year.
``(B) Fee determination and publication.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall annually establish
fee amounts under this subsection, and shall annually publish
schedules of such fees in the Federal Register. The
establishment and publication of such fees shall be solely in
the discretion of the Secretary and shall not be subject to
the requirements of sections 553 and 801 of title 5, United
States Code, and shall not be reviewable. Previously
published fee schedules shall remain in effect until new
schedules are effective.
``(ii) Reduction or waiver of fees.--The Secretary may
provide for reduction or waiver of the fees under this
subsection in exceptional circumstances in the public
interest.
``(3) Collection and crediting of fees.--
``(A) Fees for initial surveys.--
``(i) Collection of fees.--Fees assessed against an entity
in a State pursuant to paragraph (1)(A) shall be payable at
the time of the initial survey to the Secretary (or, in the
case of surveys performed by a State agency, to such agency).
``(ii) Remittance of fee amount to secretary where state
collects fees.--In the event a State agency collects a fee
pursuant to clause (i), such agency shall remit to the
Secretary an amount equal to the Secretary's share of the
cost of the activities described in paragraph (1)(A).
``(iii) Crediting of fees.--Fees paid to the Secretary
pursuant to clause (i) or remitted to the Secretary pursuant
to clause (ii) shall be credited to the Health Care Financing
Administration Program Management Account.
``(B) Fees for recertification surveys.--
``(i) Collection of fees.--Fees assessed against an entity
pursuant to paragraph (1)(B) shall be payable annually and
may be deducted from amounts otherwise payable from a Trust
Fund under this title to such entity.
``(ii) Reimbursement of state agency costs.--Of amounts
collected pursuant to clause (i), an amount equal to the
State's share of the cost of activities described in
paragraph (1)(B) shall be transferred to the appropriate
State agency.
``(iii) Reimbursement of secretary's costs.--The balance of
the amount collected pursuant to clause (i) that is not paid
to a State agency pursuant to clause (ii) shall be credited
to the Health Care Financing Administration Program
Management Account.
``(C) Offset.--Any amount of fees collected in a fiscal
year under this subsection that exceeds the amount of such
fees available for expenditure in such fiscal year, as
specified in appropriation Acts, shall be credited to the
Health Care Financing Administration Program Management
Account, and shall be available for obligation in subsequent
fiscal years to the extent provided in subsequent
appropriations Acts.
``(4) Availability of fees.--Fees collected pursuant to
this subsection shall remain available until expended, in the
amounts provided in appropriation Acts, for necessary
expenses related to the purposes for which the fees were
assessed.
``(5) Treatment of fees for purposes of cost reports.--An
entity may not include a fee assessed pursuant to this
subsection as an allowable item on a cost report under this
title or title XIX.
``(6) Certain entities not subject to fee.--The Secretary
shall not impose fees under this subsection against entities
subject to the requirements of the Clinical Laboratory
Improvement Amendments of 1988.''.
SEC. 203. FEES FOR REGISTRATION OF INDIVIDUALS AND ENTITIES
PROVIDING HEALTH CARE ITEMS OR SERVICES UNDER
MEDICARE.
Section 1866 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395cc)
is amended--
(1) in the heading, by adding ``and registration of other
persons furnishing services'' after ``providers of
services''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(j) Registration Procedures and Fees.--
``(1) Registration.--The Secretary shall establish a
procedure for initial registration and periodic renewal of
registration of individuals and entities that furnish items
or services for which payment may be made under this title
and that are not otherwise subject to provisions of this
title providing for such procedures.
``(2) Fees.--
``(A) Authority to impose fees.--The Secretary shall
impose, to the extent provided in appropriation Acts--
``(i) fees for initial agreements with providers of
services and initial registrations of other entities and
individuals that furnish items or services for which payment
may be made under this title, and
``(ii) annual fees to cover the costs of renewals of
agreements and registrations of such individuals and
entities.
``(B) Assessment of fees.--
``(i) Types of fees.--
``(I) Initial fees.--Fee amounts assessed pursuant to
subparagraph (A)(i) against a member of a class of
individuals or entities
[[Page H4170]]
shall not exceed the Secretary's reasonable estimate of the
average cost of initiating an agreement or performing an
initial registration for an individual or entity in such
class.
``(II) Renewal fees.--Fee amounts assessed pursuant to
subparagraph (A)(ii) against members of a class of
individuals or entities shall not exceed the amount which the
Secretary reasonably estimates will generate total revenues
sufficient to cover total annual costs of performing such
renewals with respect to such class.
``(ii) Fee determination and publication.--
``(I) In general.--The Secretary shall annually establish
fee amounts under this paragraph, and shall annually publish
schedules of such fees in the Federal Register. The
establishment and publication of such fees shall be solely in
the discretion of the Secretary and shall not be subject to
the requirements of sections 553 and 801 of title 5, United
States Code, and shall not be reviewable. Previously
published fee schedules shall remain in effect until new
schedules are effective.
``(II) Reduction or waiver of fees.--The Secretary may
provide for reduction or waiver of the fees under this
paragraph in exceptional circumstances in the public
interest.
``(C) Collection and crediting of fees.--
``(i) Initial fees.--Fees assessed pursuant to subparagraph
(A)(i) against an individual or entity shall be payable upon
application for billing privileges under the program under
this title (and shall apply whether or not the Secretary
approves such application) and shall be credited to the
Health Care Financing Administration Program Management
Account.
``(ii) Renewal fees.--Fees assessed pursuant to
subparagraph (A)(ii) against an individual or entity shall be
payable annually and may be deducted from amounts otherwise
payable from a Trust Fund under this title to such individual
or entity. Such fees shall be credited to the Health Care
Financing Administration Program Management Account.
``(iii) Offset.--Any amount of fees collected in a fiscal
year under this paragraph that exceeds the amount of such
fees available for expenditure in such fiscal year, as
specified in appropriation Acts, shall be credited to the
Health Care Financing Administration Program Management
Account, and shall be available for obligation in subsequent
fiscal years to the extent provided in subsequent
appropriations Acts.
``(D) Availability of fees.--Fees collected pursuant to
this paragraph shall remain available until expended, in the
amounts provided in appropriation Acts, for necessary
expenses related to initiating and renewing such agreements
and registrations, including costs of--
``(i) establishing and maintaining procedures and records
systems;
``(ii) processing applications;
``(iii) background investigations;
``(iv) renewal of billing privileges; and
``(v) reverification of eligibility.
``(E) Treatment of fees for purposes of cost reports.--An
entity may not include a fee assessed pursuant to this
paragraph as an allowable item on a cost report under this
title or title XIX.''.
SEC. 204. FEES TO COVER THE COST OF MEDICARE DESK REVIEW,
AUDIT, AND COST SETTLEMENT ACTIVITIES.
Section 1893 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ddd)
is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) Fees for Review, Audit, and Cost Settlement
Activities.--
``(1) Authority to impose fees.--The Secretary shall impose
fees on providers of services and other entities furnishing
items or services for which payment may be made under this
title for performance of review, audit, and cost settlement
activities in connection with the audit of cost reports under
subsection (b)(2).
``(2) Assessment of fees.--
``(A) In general.--Fee amounts assessed pursuant to
paragraph (1) against members of a class of entities shall
not exceed the amount which the Secretary reasonably
estimates will generate total revenues sufficient to cover
total annual costs for performing such activities with
respect to such class.
``(B) Fee determination and publication.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall annually establish
fee amounts under this subsection, and shall annually publish
schedules of such fees in the Federal Register. The
establishment and publication of such fees shall be solely in
the discretion of the Secretary and shall not be subject to
the requirements of sections 553 and 801 of title 5, United
States Code, and shall not be reviewable. Previously
published fee schedules shall remain in effect until new
schedules are effective.
``(ii) Reduction or waiver of fees.--The Secretary may
provide for reduction or waiver of the fees under this
subsection in exceptional circumstances in the public
interest.
``(3) Collection, crediting, and availability of fees.--
Fees assessed pursuant to paragraph (1) against an entity
shall be payable annually and may be deducted from amounts
otherwise payable from a Trust Fund under this title to such
entity. Such fees shall be credited to the Health Care Fraud
and Abuse Control Account. Fees collected pursuant to this
subsection shall remain available until expended, for
necessary expenses for the purposes for which the fees were
assessed.
``(4) Treatment of fees for purposes of cost reports.--An
entity may not include a fee assessed pursuant to this
subsection as an allowable item on a cost report under this
title or title XIX.''.
SEC. 205. FEES FOR PROCESSING CLAIMS.
(a) In General.--Part D of title XVIII of the Social
Security Act is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:
``SEC. 1897. FEES FOR PROCESSING CLAIMS.
``(a) Authority To Impose Fees.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (b), each claim
described in paragraph (2) submitted by an individual or
entity furnishing items or services for which payment may be
made under this title is subject to a processing fee of
$1.00.
``(2) Claims subject to fee.--A claim is subject to the fee
specified in paragraph (1) if it--
``(A) duplicates, in whole or in part, another claim
submitted by the same individual or entity;
``(B) is a claim that cannot be processed and must, in
accordance with the Secretary's instructions, be returned by
the fiscal intermediary or carrier to the individual or
entity for completion; or
``(C) is not submitted electronically by an individual or
entity or the authorized billing agent of such individual or
entity.
``(b) Collection, Crediting, and Availability of Fees.--
``(1) Appropriations required.--Fees shall be collected and
expended under this section to the extent provided in
appropriation Acts.
``(2) Deduction from trust fund.--The Secretary shall
deduct any fees assessed pursuant to subsection (a) against
an individual or entity from amounts otherwise payable from a
Trust Fund under this title to such individual or entity, and
shall transfer the amount so deducted from such Trust Fund to
the Health Care Financing Administration Program Management
Account.
``(3) Offset.--Any amount of fees collected in a fiscal
year under this section that exceeds the amount of such fees
available for expenditure in such fiscal year, as specified
in appropriation Acts, shall be credited to the Health Care
Financing Administration Program Management Account, and
shall be available for obligation in subsequent fiscal years
to the extent provided in subsequent appropriations Acts.
``(4) Availability.--Fees collected pursuant to this
section shall remain available until expended for the costs
of the activities for which they were assessed.
``(c) Waiver of Certain Fees.--The Secretary may provide
for waiver of fees for claims described in subsection
(a)(2)(C) in cases of such compelling circumstances as the
Secretary may determine.
``(d) Treatment of Fees for Purposes of Cost Reports.--An
entity may not include a fee assessed pursuant to this
section as an allowable item on a cost report under this
title or title XIX.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1842(c)(4) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 1395u(c)(4)) is amended by striking ``Neither a
carrier'' and inserting ``Except as provided in section 1897,
neither a carrier''.
SEC. 206. SECRETARY'S AUTHORITY TO ISSUE INTERIM FINAL
REGULATIONS.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to
issue any regulations needed to implement the amendments made
by this title as interim final regulations.
TITLE III--MISCELLANEOUS USER FEES
SEC. 301. AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE TO IMPOSE
USER FEES FOR CERTAIN SERVICES PROVIDED BY
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AGENCIES.
The Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 is
amended by inserting after section 219 (7 U.S.C. 6919) the
following new section:
``SEC. 220. USER FEES FOR CERTAIN SERVICES PROVIDED BY
DEPARTMENT AGENCIES, OFFICES, OFFICERS, AND
EMPLOYEES.
``(a) User Fees Authorized.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the Secretary may prescribe and collect
fees sufficient to cover all or some portion of the cost to
the Department, including administrative costs, of providing
services under the laws specified in subsection (b).
``(b) Covered Laws.--Subsection (a) applies to the
following laws, notwithstanding any provision prohibiting the
imposition of user fees in any such law:
``(1) Laws administered by the Animal and Plant Inspection
Service (or any successor agency), including the following
specific services:
``(A) Biotechnology testing services under the Federal
Plant Pest Act (7 U.S.C. 150aa et seq.).
``(B) Biotechnology testing services under the Act of
August 20, 1912 (commonly known as the Plant Quarantine Act;
7 U.S.C. 151 et seq.).
``(C) Animal welfare licensing services under the Animal
Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq).
``(D) Veterinary biologics services under the Act of March
4, 1913 (commonly known as the Virus-Serum-Toxin Act; 21
U.S.C. 151 et seq.).
``(E) Services under the Swine Health Protection Act (7
U.S.C. 3801 et seq.).
``(2) Laws administered by the Grain Inspection, Packers
and Stockyards Administration (or any successor agency),
including the following:
``(A) The Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921 (7 U.S.C. 181 et
seq.).
``(B) The United States Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 71 et
seq.).
[[Page H4171]]
``(3) Laws administered by the Food Safety and Inspection
Service (or any successor agency), including the following:
``(A) The Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.).
``(B) The Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et
seq.).
``(C) The Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1031 et
seq.).
``(4) Laws administered by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (or any successor agency), including
authorities regarding the provision of technical assistance
and products for natural resource conservation.
``(5) Laws administered by the Farm Service Agency (or any
successor agency), including the authorities regarding the
provision of information obtained from information
collections from persons participating in the programs
administered by the Agency.
``(c) Exceptions.--Subsection (b) does not include any law
or service for which a user fee is specifically required or
authorized under another provision of law.
``(d) Late Payment Penalties.--If a person subject to a fee
under this section fails to pay the fee when due, the
Secretary may assess a late payment penalty, and the overdue
fees shall accrue interest, as required by section 3717 of
title 31, United States Code.
``(e) Treatment of Fees.--Fees and other amounts collected
under this section shall be credited to the Department
accounts that incur the costs associated with the provision
of the services for which the fees are imposed. Funds so
credited shall be merged with the appropriations to which
credited and shall be available to the Secretary without
fiscal year limitation for the same purposes as the
appropriations with which merged.''.
SEC. 302. NOAA NAVIGATION ASSISTANCE FEES.
(a) Establishment and Collection.--
(1) In general.--For fiscal year 1999 and each fiscal year
thereafter, the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with
the Secretary of Transportation, shall establish, assess, and
collect under section 9701 of title 31, United States Code,
fees for the provision of navigation assistance services.
(2) Fee schedule.--The Secretary shall implement fees under
this section by establishment of a schedule for such fees.
The Secretary shall publish an interim final rule containing
an initial fee schedule not later than 150 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Crediting of Fees.--Fees collected under this section
shall be credited as offsetting collections of the Department
of Commerce.
(c) Availability.--
(1) In general.--Of amounts of offsetting collections
credited for fees under this section--
(A) not to exceed $2,500,000 shall be available to the
Secretary of Commerce for fiscal year 1999 for expenses of
providing services for which the fees are collected; and
(B) amounts in excess of $2,500,000 shall be available to
the Secretary of Commerce for fiscal years after fiscal year
1999 for expenses of providing those services.
(2) Available until expended.--Amounts available under this
section shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 303. FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT FEES.
(a) Establishment and Collection.--
(1) In general.--For fiscal year 1999 and each fiscal year
thereafter, the Secretary of Commerce shall establish,
assess, and collect under section 9701 of title 31, United
States Code, fees for the provision of fisheries management
and enforcement services.
(2) Manner of collection.--The Secretary may prescribe the
manner in which such fees are collected.
(b) Maximum Amount.--The maximum amount of any fee under
this section may not exceed one percent of the ex-vessel
value of harvested fish with respect to which the fee is
collected.
(c) Crediting of Fees.--Fees collected under this section
shall be credited as offsetting collections of the Department
of Commerce.
(d) Availability.--
(1) In general.--Of amounts of offsetting collections
credited for fees under this section--
(A) not to exceed $19,781,000 shall be available to the
Secretary of Commerce for fiscal year 1999 for expenses of
providing services for which the fees are collected; and
(B) amounts in excess of $19,781,000 shall be available to
the Secretary of Commerce for fiscal years after fiscal year
1999 for expenses of providing those services.
(2) Available until expended.--Amounts available under this
section shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 304. LEVEL OF FEES FOR PATENT SERVICES.
(a) General Patent Fees.--Section 41 of title 35, United
States Code, is amended by striking subsection (a) and
inserting the following:
``(a) The Commissioner shall charge the following fees:
``(1)(A) On filing each application for an original patent,
except in design or plant cases, $790.
``(B) In addition, on filing or on presentation at any
other time, $82 for each claim in independent form which is
in excess of 3, $22 for each claim (whether independent or
dependent) which is in excess of 20, and $270 for each
application containing a multiple dependent claim.
``(C) On filing each provisional application for an
original patent, $150.
``(2) For issuing each original or reissue patent, except
in design or plant cases, $1,320.
``(3) In design and plant cases--
``(A) on filing each design application, $330;
``(B) on filing each plant application, $540;
``(C) on issuing each design patent, $450; and
``(D) on issuing each plant patent, $670.
``(4)(A) On filing each application for the reissue of a
patent, $790.
``(B) In addition, on filing or on presentation at any
other time, $82 for each claim in independent form which is
in excess of the number of independent claims of the original
patent, and $22 for each claim (whether independent or
dependent) which is in excess of 20 and also in excess of the
number of claims of the original patent.
``(5) On filing each disclaimer, $110.
``(6)(A) On filing an appeal from the examiner to the Board
of Patent Appeals and Interferences, $310.
``(B) In addition, on filing a brief in support of the
appeal, $310, and on requesting an oral hearing in the appeal
before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, $270.
``(7) On filing each petition for the revival of an
unintentionally abandoned application for a patent or for the
unintentionally delayed payment of the fee for issuing each
patent, $1,320, unless the petition is filed under section
133 or 151 of this title, in which case the fee shall be
$110.
``(8) For petitions for 1-month extensions of time to take
actions required by the Commissioner in an application--
``(A) on filing a first petition, $110;
``(B) on filing a second petition, $290; and
``(C) on filing a third petition or subsequent petition,
$550.
``(9) Basic national fee for an international application
where the Patent and Trademark Office was the International
Preliminary Examining Authority and the International
Searching Authority, $720.
``(10) Basic national fee for an international application
where the Patent and Trademark Office was the International
Searching Authority but not the International Preliminary
Examining Authority, $790.
``(11) Basic national fee for an international application
where the Patent and Trademark Office was neither the
International Searching Authority nor the International
Preliminary Examining Authority, $1,070.
``(12) Basic national fee for an international application
where the international preliminary examination fee has been
paid to the Patent and Trademark Office, and the
international preliminary examination report states that the
provisions of Article 33 (2), (3), and (4) of the Patent
Cooperation Treaty have been satisfied for all claims in the
application entering the national stage, $98.
``(13) For filing or later presentation of each independent
claim in the national stage of an international application
in excess of 3, $82.
``(14) For filing or later presentation of each claim
(whether independent or dependent) in a national stage of an
international application in excess of 20, $22.
``(15) For each national stage of an international
application containing a multiple dependent claim, $270.
For the purpose of computing fees, a multiple dependent claim
referred to in section 112 of this title or any claim
depending therefrom shall be considered as separate dependent
claims in accordance with the number of claims to which
reference is made. Errors in payment of the additional fees
may be rectified in accordance with regulations of the
Commissioner.''.
(b) Patent Maintenance Fees.--Section 41 of title 35,
United States Code, is amended by striking subsection (b) and
inserting the following:
``(b) The Commissioner shall charge the following fees for
maintaining in force all patents based on applications filed
on or after December 12, 1980:
``(1) 3 years and 6 months after grant, $1,050.
``(2) 7 years and 6 months after grant, $2,100.
``(3) 11 years and 6 months after grant, $3,160.
Unless payment of the applicable maintenance fee is received
in the Patent and Trademark Office on or before the date the
fee is due or within a grace period of 6 months thereafter,
the patent will expire as of the end of such grace period.
The Commissioner may require the payment of a surcharge as a
condition of accepting within such 6-month grace period the
payment of an applicable maintenance fee. No fee may be
established for maintaining a design or plant patent in
force.''.
(b) Authorization of Collection and Expenditure.--Section
42(c) of title 35, United States Code, is amended by striking
the first sentence and inserting the following: ``To the
extent and in the amounts provided in advance in
appropriations Acts, fees authorized in this title or any
other Act to be charged or established by the Commissioner
shall be collected by and shall be available to the
Commissioner to carry out the activities of the Patent and
Trademark Office.''.
(c) Effective Date.--This section and the amendments made
by this section shall take effect on October 1, 1998.
SEC. 305. EXPORT PROMOTION FEES.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the International
Trade Administration of
[[Page H4172]]
the Department of Commerce $292,452,000, to remain available
until expended, of which $6,000,000 shall be derived from
fees to be collected and used, to the extent provided in
appropriation Acts, by the International Trade Administration
for the provision of export promotion services,
notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, United States Code.
Any such fees received in excess of $6,000,000 in fiscal year
1999 shall remain available until expended, but shall not be
made available until October 1, 1999.
SEC. 306. HARDROCK LOCATION AND MAINTENANCE FEES.
Title X of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993
(Public Law 103-66) is amended as follows:
(1) Section 10101(a) (30 U.S.C. 28f(a)) is amended by
striking the first sentence and inserting ``The holder of
each unpatented mining claim, mill or tunnel site, located
pursuant to the mining laws of the United States, whether
located before or after October 1, 1998, shall pay to the
Secretary of the Interior, on or before September 1 of each
year, for year 1999 and subsequent years, a claim maintenance
fee of $116 per claim or site.''.
(2) Section 10102 (30 U.S.C. 28g) is amended by striking
``and before September 30, 1998,'' and striking ``$25.00''
and inserting ``$28''.
(3) Section 10105 (30 U.S.C. 28j) is amended by adding the
following new subsection at the end:
``(d) Availability of Fees.--Fees collected under sections
10101 and 10102 (30 U.S.C. 28f and 28g) shall be available
without further appropriation for Mining Law Administration
program operations in the year following their collection.''.
SEC. 307. IMPOSITION AND USE OF DEPARTMENT OF LABOR EMPLOYER
FILING FEES UNDER THE IMMIGRATION AND
NATIONALITY ACT.
Section 286 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1356) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(s) Department of Labor Fees for Employer-Related
Filings.--
``(1) Beginning in fiscal year 2000, the Secretary of Labor
shall impose a fee on each person filing with the Secretary
an application for a labor certification, an employer
attestation, or any similar petition or application, in order
to meet a requirement or condition of a program under this
title or title I relating to the provision to an alien of an
immigrant, or nonimmigrant, employment-based status. The fee
with respect a filing under a program shall be in an amount
prescribed by the Secretary based on the costs of carrying
out the Secretary's duties (including enforcement-related
functions) with respect to the program.
``(2) Fees collected under this subsection shall be
deposited as an offsetting collection in a fund established
for this purpose in the Treasury of the United States.
``(3) No amount shall be collected or obligated for any
fiscal year under this subsection, except to the extent
provided in appropriations Acts.
``(4) The fees in the fund collected with respect to a
program shall remain available until expended to the
Secretary, to the extent and in such amounts as may be
provided in appropriations Acts, to cover the costs described
in paragraph (1) with respect to the program, in addition to
any other funds that are available to the Secretary to cover
such costs.''.
SEC. 308. COAST GUARD NAVIGATION ASSISTANCE FEES.
(a) Establishment and Collection.--
(1) In general.--For fiscal year 1999 and each fiscal year
thereafter, the Secretary of Transportation shall establish,
assess, and collect under section 9701 of title 31, United
States Code, fees for the provision of navigation assistance
services.
(2) Fee schedule.--The Secretary shall implement fees under
this section by establishment of a schedule for such fees.
The Secretary shall publish an interim final rule containing
an initial fee schedule not later than 150 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Crediting of Fees.--Fees collected under this section
shall be credited as offsetting collections of the Department
of Transportation.
(c) Availability.--
(1) In general.--Of amounts of offsetting collections
credited for fees under this section--
(A) not to exceed $35,000,000 shall be available to the
Secretary of Transportation for fiscal year 1999 for expenses
of providing services for which the fees are collected; and
(B) amounts in excess of $35,000,000 shall be available to
the Secretary of Transportation for fiscal years after fiscal
year 1999 for expenses of providing those services.
(2) Available until expended.--Amounts available under this
section shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 309. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD.
Section 721 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) User Fees.--
``(1) Schedule of fees.--The Board shall prescribe by
regulation a schedule of user fees for carriers subject to
the jurisdiction of the Board. The fees--
``(A) shall cover the costs incurred by the Board in
carrying out its functions; and
``(B) shall be assessed on each carrier in reasonable
relationship to the relative benefits received by the
carriers from the functions of the Board.
``(2) Collection of fees.--The Board shall prescribe
procedures for the collection of fees under this subsection.
The Board may use the services of a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the Federal Government or of a State or
local authority to collect the fees, and may reimburse the
department, agency, or instrumentality a reasonable amount
for its services.
``(3) Use of fees.--Fees collected under this subsection
may be used, to the extent provided in advance in
appropriation Acts, by the Board for the expenses of carrying
out its functions. Any amounts collected in a fiscal year in
excess of the amount required for carrying out the functions
of the Board for that fiscal year may be retained for use by
the Board in a subsequent fiscal year.''.
SEC. 310. WETLANDS PERMIT FEES.
(a) Establishment and Collection.--The Secretary of the
Army shall establish and collect fees, from applicants for
commercial permits under section 404 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, for evaluation of applications for
such permits, the preparation of environmental impact
statements under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 in connection with the issuance of such permits, and the
delineation of wetlands for major developments affecting
wetlands.
(b) Army Civil Works Regulatory Program.--
(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury of
the United States a special account to be known as the ``Army
Civil Works Regulatory Program Account'' into which fees
collected by the Secretary under subsection (a) shall be
deposited.
(2) Use of fees.--Amounts deposited into the Program
Account shall be available to the Secretary, as provided in
appropriation acts, to apply toward the costs incurred by the
Department of the Army in administering laws pertaining to
the regulation of navigable waters of the United States,
including wetlands. Such amounts shall be in addition to
appropriations otherwise available to the Secretary for
administering such laws.
SEC. 311. RADIOLOGICAL PREPAREDNESS FEES.
(a) Establishment of Radiological Emergency Preparedness
Fund.--There is established in the Treasury of the United
States a radiological emergency preparedness fund which shall
be available under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and
Executive Order No. 12657 for offsite radiological emergency
planning, preparedness, and response.
(b) Fees.--
(1) In general.--For fiscal year 1999 and each fiscal year
thereafter, the Director of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency shall establish (by regulation), assess, and collect
fees under this subsection from persons subject to the
radiological emergency preparedness regulations issued by the
Director.
(2) Aggregate amount.--The aggregate amount of fees
assessed and collected under this subsection during a fiscal
year shall not be less than the amounts anticipated by the
Director to be necessary to carry out the radiological
emergency preparedness program of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency for such fiscal year.
(3) Procedures.--The methodology for assessment and
collection of fees under this subsection shall be fair and
equitable. Such fees shall reflect the costs of providing
services, including administrative costs of collecting fees.
(4) Deposit.--Fees collected under this subsection shall be
deposited in the radiological emergency preparedness fund
established under subsection (a) as offsetting collections.
An amount equal to the amount of fees so deposited shall
become available for authorized purposes on October 1 of the
fiscal year in which the fees are collected and shall remain
available until expended.
SEC. 312. AVIATION ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION FEE.
(a) Establishment and Collection.--For fiscal year 1999 and
each fiscal year thereafter the Chairman of the National
Transportation Safety Board shall establish, assess, and
collect under section 9701 of title 31, United States Code,
fees from air carriers to partially cover the costs of
aviation accident investigations. Such fees shall be
established by publication of an initial proposed fee
schedule as an interim final rule in the Federal Register not
later than 150 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
(b) Maximum Amount.--The maximum amount of fees collected
under this section shall not exceed $6,000,000 in any fiscal
year.
(c) Use of Fees.--Fees collected under this subsection
shall be credited as offsetting collections to an account
established in the Treasury of the United States for such
purpose and shall be available until expended for necessary
expenses for the National Transportation Safety Board in
conducting aviation accident investigations, including the
hiring of passenger motor vehicles and aircraft and services
authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code,
but at rates for individuals not to exceed the per diem rate
equivalent to the rate as authorized by law under sections
5901 and 5902 of such title.
SEC. 313. MONETARY ASSESSMENT ON CLAIMANT REPRESENTATIVES
UTILIZING THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION'S
FEE APPROVAL AND DIRECT PAYMENT PROCESSES.
(a) Representatives of Title II Claimants.--
(1) In general.--Section 206 of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 406) is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
[[Page H4173]]
``(d)(1) In any case in which a fee (exceeding zero) of a
person who renders services for compensation in connection
with a claim for entitlement to benefits under this title
is--
``(A) fixed by the Commissioner pursuant to the last
sentence of subsection (a)(1),
``(B) approved by the Commissioner pursuant to subsection
(a)(2)(A), or
``(C) determined and allowed by a court pursuant to
subsection (b)(1)(A),
the Commissioner shall assess such person an amount
determined in accordance with paragraph (2).
``(2) The amount of the assessment under paragraph (1)
shall be--
``(A) $165 (or such different amount as the Commissioner
may prescribe by regulation), if the Commissioner certifies
payment of a fee to a person described in paragraph (1) out
of past-due benefits payable under this title pursuant to
subsection (a)(4)(A) or (b)(1)(A) (or would so certify such
payment but for a reduction to zero authorized by paragraph
(3)(A)), or
``(B) $40 (or such different amount as the Commissioner may
prescribe by regulation) in any other case.
``(3)(A) Notwithstanding section 3716 of title 31, United
States Code, and subsections (a)(4) and (b)(1)(A) of this
section, the Commissioner may reduce (to not below zero) the
amount otherwise subject to certification for payment as a
fee to an attorney from past-due benefits in order to recover
any assessment or assessments under this subsection owing by
such attorney (without regard to whether such assessments
derive from the claim giving rise to the past-due benefits in
connection with which the fee payment is subject to
certification).
``(B) The Commissioner shall establish by regulation
procedures for the collection of assessments under this
subsection not recoverable as provided in subparagraph (A).
``(4) Assessments collected under this subsection shall be
credited to a special trust fund receipt account established
in the Treasury of the United States for assessments on
representatives under this subsection. The amounts so
credited, to the extent and in the amounts provided in
advance in appropriations Acts, shall be available to defray
expenses incurred in carrying out this title and related
laws.
``(5) From amounts credited under paragraph (4) to the
special account established in the Treasury of the United
States for assessments on representatives under this
subsection, there is authorized to be appropriated an amount
not to exceed $19,000,000 for fiscal year 1999, $26,000,000
for fiscal year 2000, and such sums as may be necessary for
each fiscal year thereafter, for administrative expenses in
carrying out this title and related laws.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 206(a)(4)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
406(a)(4)(A)) is amended by striking the period and inserting
``, except that the amount otherwise subject to certification
may be reduced (to not less than zero) pursuant to subsection
(d)(3)(A).''.
(B) Section 206(b)(1)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
406(b)(1)(A)) is amended by striking the period at the end of
the first sentence and inserting ``, except that the amount
otherwise subject to certification may be reduced (to not
less than zero) pursuant to subsection (d)(3)(A).''.
(b) Representatives of Title XVI Claimants.--Section
1631(d)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1383(d)(2)) is amended by
redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C) and by
inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new
subparagraph:
``(B) The provisions of section 206(d) shall apply to this
part to the same extent as they apply in the case of title
II, except that--
``(i) references therein to title II shall be deemed to be
references to title XVI;
``(ii) references to entitlement to benefits under title II
shall be deemed to be references to eligibility for benefits
under this title;
``(iii) such provisions shall apply only with respect to
assessments applicable to cases other than cases involving
certification of payment of a fee to a representative out of
past-due benefits; and
``(iv) the total amount of the appropriations authorized in
paragraph (5) thereof for carrying out this title and title
II may not exceed $19,000,000 for fiscal year 1999 and
$26,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to any person who, for a fee, represents or
otherwise assists a claimant with a claim arising under title
II or title XVI of the Social Security Act, and whose
representation of such claimant in connection with such claim
commences on or after the 60th day following the date of the
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 314. RAILROAD SAFETY.
Section 20115(e) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``1995'' and inserting ``2003''.
SEC. 315. INCREASE IN CUSTOMS MERCHANDISE PROCESSING FEE.
Section 13031 of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c) is amended as
follows:
(1) Subsection (a)(9)(B)(i) is amended by striking ``0.21
percent nor less than 0.15 percent'' and inserting ``0.25 nor
less than 0.15 percent''.
(2) Subsection (f) is amended--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs
(5) and (6), respectively;
(B) in paragraph (5), as so redesignated, by striking
``paragraph (5)'' and inserting ``paragraph (6)'';
(C) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
``(4) Fees collected under subsection (a)(9) in excess of
.21 percent ad valorem shall be available until expended for
necessary expenses incurred by the Secretary of the Treasury
for the National Customs Automation Program established under
section 411 of the Tariff Act of 1930, in addition to amounts
otherwise available for such purpose.''; and
(D) in paragraph (1)(B) by striking ``paragraph (5)'' and
inserting ``paragraph (6)''.
SEC. 316. PESTICIDE REGISTRATION FEES.
Section 4(i) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136a-1(i)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (6), by striking ``(5)'' and inserting
``(6)'';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (6) and (7) as paragraphs
(7) and (8), respectively; and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following:
``(6) Registration fees.--
``(A) Authority to levy fee.--The Administrator may levy
fees upon applicants for registration and amendments to
registration under section 3 of this Act and applicants for
experimental use permits under section 5 of this Act,
pursuant to regulations similar to sections 152.410(b),
152.412, and 152.414 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations
(as in effect as of July 1, 1997), in amounts sufficient to
cover costs associated with the review of such applications.
``(B) Time of payment.--An applicant upon whom a fee is
levied under this paragraph shall pay the fee at the time of
application, unless otherwise specified by the Administrator.
``(C) Effect of failure to pay by time prescribed.--The
Administrator may, by order and without a hearing, deny the
application of any applicant who fails to pay, within such
time as the Administrator has prescribed, any fee levied on
the applicant under this paragraph.
``(D) Authority to reduce or waive fee.--The Administrator
may reduce or waive any fee that would otherwise be assessed
under this paragraph--
``(i) in connection with an application for an active
ingredient that is contained only in pesticides for which
registration is sought solely for agricultural or
nonagricultural minor use; and
``(ii) in such other circumstances as the Administrator
determines to be in the public interest.
``(E) Use of fees.--The Administrator shall deposit in a
special fund in the Treasury of the United States all fees
collected under this paragraph, and the amount of such fees
shall be available, subject to appropriation, to carry out
the activities of the Environmental Protection Agency in the
issuance of the registrations under sections 3 and 5 in
respect of which the fees were paid.''.
SEC. 317. CHEMICAL PRE-MANUFACTURING NOTIFICATION FEES.
Notwithstanding section 26(b)(1) of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2625(b)(1)), the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency is authorized to assess, in
fiscal year 1999 and thereafter, fees from any person
required to submit data under section 4 or 5 of such Act (15
U.S.C. 2603, 2604) without regard to the dollar limitations
established in section 26(b)(1) of such Act. Such fees shall
be calculated to cover costs associated with administering
those sections of such Act, and shall be paid at the time of
data submission, unless otherwise specified by the
Administrator. The Administrator may take into account the
ability to pay of the person required to submit the data and
the cost to the Administrator of reviewing such data. The
Administrator shall promulgate rules to implement this
section. Such rules may provide for allocating the fee in any
case in which the expenses of data submission under section 4
or 5 of such Act are shared. Increased fees collected under
this section shall be deposited in a special fund in the
United States Treasury, which thereafter will be available,
subject to appropriation, to carry out the Administration's
activities for which such fees are collected.
SEC. 318. NRC USER FEES AND ANNUAL CHARGES.
Section 6101(a)(3) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act
of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 2214(a)(3)) is amended by striking
``September 30, 1998'' and inserting ``September 30, 2003''.
SEC. 318. BANK EXAMINATION FEES.
(a) FDIC Examination Fees.--Section 10(e)(1) of the Federal
Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1820(e)(1)) is amended to
read as follows:
``(1) In general.--
``(A) Regulatory examinations.--Subject to paragraph (6),
the cost of conducting any examination under subsection
(b)(2) of an insured depository institution described in
subparagraph (A) of such subsection shall be assessed by the
Corporation against the institution in an amount sufficient
to meet the Corporation's expenses in carrying out the
examination.
``(B) Insurance examinations.--The cost of conducting any
examination of a depository institution under subsection
(b)(2) or (b)(3), other than an examination to which
subparagraph (A) applies, may be assessed by the Corporation
against the institution to meet the Corporation's expenses in
carrying out the examination.''.
[[Page H4174]]
(b) Federal Reserve Board Examination Fees.--The 2d
sentence of the 8th undesignated paragraph of section 9 of
the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 326) is amended--
(1) by striking ``may, in the discretion of the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System, be assessed'' and
inserting ``shall be assessed, subject to section 10(e)(6) of
the Federal Deposit Insurance Act,''; and
(2) by striking ``and, when so assessed, shall be paid''
and inserting ``and shall be paid''.
(c) Reasonable Reduction in Examination Fees for State
Banks and Savings Associations.--Section 10(e) of the Federal
Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1820(e)) is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(6) Reductions and Exemptions.--
``(A) Reduction for depository institutions subject to dual
supervision.--
``(i) In general.--The amount of any assessment or other
fee imposed on any State depository institution for an annual
regular examination--
``(I) by the Corporation under paragraph (1)(A);
``(II) by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System under the 8th undesignated paragraph of section 9 of
the Federal Reserve Act; or
``(III) by the Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision
under section 9(a) of the Home Owners' Loan Act,
during any 12-month period may be reduced to the extent the
agency determines to be appropriate to reflect the fact that
the supervision of such State depository institution by an
appropriate State bank supervisor has reduced the need for
Federal supervision.
``(ii) Limit on amount of reduction.--The amount of any
reduction under clause (i) with respect to any State
depository institution shall not exceed the amount of an
assessment or fee imposed on such institution by the State
bank supervisor for the most recent examination of the
institution by the supervisor before January 1, 1998 (or, in
the case of an institution which was not subject to an
examination by the State bank supervisor before such date,
the amount which the appropriate Federal banking agency
reasonably determines would have been imposed by such
supervisor for an examination of the institution as of such
date).
``(iii) Adjustment for inflation.--For purposes of clause
(ii), the amount described in such clause shall be adjusted
annually after December 31, 1998, by the annual percentage
increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners
and Clerical Workers published by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
``(B) Exemption for state depository institutions with
assets of less than $100,000,000.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, no assessment or other fee for an annual
regular examination may be imposed on any State depository
institution which has total assets of less than
$100,000,000--
``(i) by the Corporation under paragraph (1)(A);
``(ii) by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System under the 8th undesignated paragraph of section 9 of
the Federal Reserve Act; or
``(iii) by the Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision
under section 9(a) of the Home Owners' Loan Act.''.
(d) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 10(b)(2) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act
(12 U.S.C. 1820(b)(2) is amended by inserting ``an
examination is required under subsection (d)(1) or'' after
``whenever''.
(2) Section 10(d)(4) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act
(12 U.S.C. 1820(d)(4)) is amended by inserting ``and
subsection (e)(6)'' after ``(1), (2), and (3)''.
(e) Report on Fees Required to Be Imposed on Bank Holding
Companies.--Before January 31 of each calendar year which
begins after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Board
of Governors of the Federal Reserve System shall submit a
report to the Congress containing--
(1) the total costs incurred by the Board during the year
preceding the year of such report which are attributable to
each examination of a bank holding company conducted during
such year pursuant to section 5(c) of the Bank Holding
Company Act of 1956; and
(2) the total amount assessed against, and paid by, each
bank holding company under such section for the examination.
SEC. 319. EXTENSION OF THE RECREATIONAL FEE DEMONSTRATION
PROGRAM.
(a) Authority.--The authority provided to the National Park
Service under the recreational fee demonstration program
authorized by section 315 of Public Law 104-134 (16 U.S.C.
460l-6a note)--
(1) is extended through September 30, 2005; and
(2) shall be available for all units of the National Park
System, except that no recreational admission fee may be
charged at Great Smoky Mountains National Park and Lincoln
Home National Historic Site.
(b) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than September 30, 2000, the
Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the Committee on
Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report
detailing the status of the recreational fee demonstration
program conducted in national parks under section 315 of
Public Law 104-134 (16 U.S.C. 460l-6a note).
(2) Contents.--The report under paragraph (1) shall
contain--
(A) an evaluation of the fee demonstration program
conducted at each national park;
(B) with respect to each national park, a description of
the criteria that were used to determine whether a
recreational fee should or should not be charged at the
national park; and
(C) a description of the manner in which the amount of the
fee at each national park was established.
SEC. 320. CONCESSIONS REFORM.
(a) Findings.--In furtherance of the Act of August 25, 1916
(39 Stat. 535), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1, 2-4), which directs
the Secretary of the Interior to administer areas of the
National Park System in accordance with the fundamental
purpose of preserving their scenery, wildlife, natural and
historic objects, and providing for their enjoyment in a
manner that will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of
future generations, the Congress finds that the preservation
and conservation of park resources and values requires that
such public accommodations, facilities, and services as the
Secretary determines are necessary and appropriate in
accordance with this Act--
(1) should be provided only under carefully controlled
safeguards against unregulated and indiscriminate use so that
visitation will not unduly impair these values; and
(2) should be limited to locations and designs consistent
to the highest practicable degree with the preservation and
conservation of park resources and values.
(b) Policy.--It is the policy of the Congress that--
(1) development on Federal lands within a park shall be
limited to those facilities and services that the Secretary
determines are necessary and appropriate for public use and
enjoyment of the park in which such facilities and services
are located;
(2) development of such facilities and services within a
park should be consistent to the highest practicable degree
with the preservation and conservation of the park's
resources and values;
(3) such facilities and services should be provided by
private persons, corporations, or other entities, except when
no qualified private interest is willing to provide such
facilities and services;
(4) if the Secretary determines that development should be
provided within a park, such development shall be designed,
located, and operated in a manner that is consistent with the
purposes for which such park was established;
(5) the right to provide such services and to develop or
utilize such facilities should be awarded to the person,
corporation, or entity submitting the best proposal through a
competitive selection process; and
(6) such facilities or services should be provided to the
public at reasonable rates.
(c) Definitions.--As used in this section:
(1) The term ``concessioner'' means a person, corporation,
or other entity to whom a concession contract has been
awarded.
(2) The term ``concession contract'' means a contract or
permit (but not a commercial use authorization issued
pursuant to section 6) to provide facilities or services, or
both, at a park.
(3) The term ``facilities'' means improvements to real
property within parks used to provide accommodations,
facilities, or services to park visitors.
(4) The term ``park'' means a unit of the National Park
System.
(5) The term ``proposal'' means the complete proposal for a
concession contract offered by a potential or existing
concessioner in response to the minimum requirements for the
contract established by the Secretary.
(6) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the
Interior.
(d) Repeal of Concession Policy Act of 1965.--
(1) Repeal.--The Act of October 9, 1965, Public Law 89-249
(79 Stat. 969, 16 U.S.C. 20-20g), entitled ``An Act relating
to the establishment of concession policies administered in
the areas administered by the National Park Service and for
other purposes'', is hereby repealed. The repeal of such
section shall not affect the validity of any contract entered
into under such Act, but the provisions of this Act shall
apply to any such contract except to the extent such
provisions are inconsistent with the express terms and
conditions of the contract.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The fourth sentence of section 3
of the Act of August 25, 1916 (16 U.S.C. 3; 39 Stat. 535) is
amended by striking all through ``no natural'' and inserting
in lieu thereof, ``No natural''.
(e) Concession Policy.--Subject to the findings and policy
stated in subsections (a) and (b), and upon a determination
by the Secretary that facilities or services are necessary
and appropriate for the accommodation of visitors at a park,
the Secretary shall, consistent with the provisions of this
section, laws relating generally to the administration and
management of units of the National Park System, and the
park's general management plan, concession plan, and other
applicable plans, authorize private persons, corporations, or
other entities to provide and operate such facilities or
services as the Secretary deems necessary and appropriate.
(f) Commercial Use Authorizations.--
(1) In general.--To the extent specified in this section,
the Secretary, upon request, may authorize a private person,
corporation,
[[Page H4175]]
or other entity to provide services to park visitors through
a commercial use authorization.
(2) Criteria for issuance of authorization.--(A) The
authority of this subsection may be used only to authorize
provision of services that the Secretary determines will have
minimal impact on park resources and values and which are
consistent with the purposes for which the park was
established and with all applicable management plans for such
park.
(B) The Secretary--
(i) shall require payment of a reasonable fee for issuance
for an authorization under this subsection, such fees to
remain available without further appropriation to be used, at
a minimum, to recover associated management and
administration costs;
(ii) shall require that the provision of services under
such an authorization be accomplished in a manner consistent
to the highest practicable degree with the preservation and
conservation of park resources and values;
(iii) shall take appropriate steps to limit the liability
of the United States arising from the provision of services
under such an authorization; and
(iv) shall have no authority under this subsection to issue
more authorizations than are consistent with the preservation
and proper management of park resources and values, and shall
establish such other conditions for issuance of such an
authorization as the Secretary determines appropriate for the
protection of visitors, provision of adequate and appropriate
visitor services, and protection and proper management of the
resources and values of the park.
(3) Limitations.--Any authorization issued under this
subsection shall be limited to--
(A) commercial operations with annual gross revenues of not
more than $25,000 resulting from services originating and
provided solely within a park pursuant to such authorization;
or
(B) the incidental use of park resources by commercial
operations which provide services originating outside of the
park's boundaries: Provided, That such authorization shall
not provide for the construction of any structure, fixture,
or improvement on Federal lands within the park.
(4) Duration.--The term of any authorization issued under
this subsection shall not exceed 2 years.
(5) Other contracts.--A person, corporation, or other
entity seeking or obtaining an authorization pursuant to this
subsection shall not be precluded from also submitting
proposals for concession contracts.
(g) Competitive Selection Process.--
(1) In general.--(A) Except as provided in paragraph (2),
and consistent with the provisions of paragraph (7), any
concession contract entered into pursuant to this section
shall be awarded to the person, corporation, or other entity
submitting the best proposal as determined by the Secretary,
through a competitive selection process, as provided in this
section.
(B)(i) As soon as practicable after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Secretary shall promulgate appropriate
regulations establishing the competitive selection process.
(ii) The regulations shall include provisions for
establishing a procedure for the resolution of disputes
between the Secretary and a concessioner in those instances
where the Secretary has been unable to meet conditions or
requirements or provide such services, if any, as set forth
in a prospectus pursuant to paragraph (3).
(2) Temporary contract.--Notwithstanding the provisions of
paragraph (1), the Secretary may award a temporary concession
contract in order to avoid interruption of services to the
public at a park, except that prior to making such a
determination, the Secretary shall take all reasonable and
appropriate steps to consider alternatives to avoid such an
interruption.
(3) Prospectus.--(A)(i) Prior to soliciting proposals for a
concession contract at a park, the Secretary shall prepare a
prospectus soliciting proposals, and shall publish a notice
of its availability at least once in local or national
newspapers or trade publications, as appropriate, and shall
make such prospectus available upon request to all interested
parties.
(ii) A prospectus shall assign a weight to each factor
identified therein related to the importance of such factor
in the selection process. Points shall be awarded for each
such factor, based on the relative strength of the proposal
concerning that factor.
(B) The prospectus shall include, but need not be limited
to, the following information--
(i) the minimum requirements for such contract, as set
forth in subsection (d);
(ii) the terms and conditions of the existing concession
contract awarded for such park, if any, including all fees
and other forms of compensation provided to the United States
by the concessioner;
(iii) other authorized facilities or services which may be
provided in a proposal;
(iv) facilities and services to be provided by the
Secretary to the concessioner, if any, including but not
limited to, public access, utilities, and buildings;
(v) minimum public services to be offered within a park by
the Secretary, including but not limited to, interpretive
programs, campsites, and visitor centers; and
(vi) such other information related to the proposed
concession operation as is provided to the Secretary pursuant
to a concession contract or is otherwise available to the
Secretary, as the Secretary determines is necessary to allow
for the submission of competitive proposals.
(4) Minimum Proposal Requirements.--(A) No proposal shall
be considered which fails to meet the minimum requirements as
determined by the Secretary. Such minimum requirements shall
include, but need not be limited to--
(i) the minimum acceptable franchise fee;
(ii) any facilities, services, or capital investment
required to be provided by the concessioner; and
(iii) measures necessary to ensure the protection and
preservation of park resources.
(B) The Secretary shall reject any proposal,
notwithstanding the franchise fee offered, if the Secretary
determines that the person, corporation, or entity is not
qualified, is likely to provide unsatisfactory service, or
that the proposal is not responsive to the objectives of
protecting and preserving park resources and of providing
necessary and appropriate facilities or services to the
public at reasonable rates.
(C) If all proposals submitted to the Secretary either fail
to meet the minimum requirements or are rejected by the
Secretary, the Secretary shall establish new minimum contract
requirements and re-initiate the competitive selection
process pursuant to this section.
(5) Selection of Best Proposal.--(A) In selecting the best
proposal, the Secretary shall consider the following
principal factors:
(i) the responsiveness of the proposal to the objectives of
protecting and preserving park resources and of providing
necessary and appropriate facilities and services to the
public at reasonable rates;
(ii) the experience and related background of the person,
corporation, or entity submitting the proposal, including but
not limited to, the past performance and expertise of such
person, corporation, or entity in providing the same or
similar facilities or services;
(iii) the financial capability of the person, corporation,
or entity submitting the proposal; and
(iv) the proposed franchise fee: Provided, That
consideration of revenue to the United States shall be
subordinate to the objectives of protecting and preserving
park resources and of providing necessary and appropriate
facilities or services to the public at reasonable rates.
(B) The Secretary may also consider such secondary factors
as the Secretary deems appropriate.
(C) In developing regulations to implement this Act, the
Secretary shall consider the extent to which plans for
employment of Indians (including Native Alaskans) and
involvement of businesses owned by Indians, Indian tribes, or
Native Alaskans in the operation of concession contracts
should be identified as a factor in the selection of a best
proposal under this section.
(6) Congressional notification.--(A) The Secretary shall
submit any proposed concession contract with anticipated
annual gross receipts in excess of $5,000,000 or a duration
of 10 or more years to the Committee on Resources of the
United States House of Representatives and the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources of the United States Senate.
(B) The Secretary shall not award any such proposed
contract until at least 60 days subsequent to the
notification of both Committees.
(7) No preferential right of renewal.--(A) Except as
provided in subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall not grant a
preferential right to a concessioner to renew a concession
contract entered into pursuant to this section.
(B)(i) The Secretary shall grant a preferential right of
renewal with respect to a concession contract covered by
paragraphs (8) and (9), subject to the requirements of the
appropriate subsection.
(ii) As used in this paragraph, and paragraphs (8) and (9),
the term ``preferential right of renewal'' means that the
Secretary shall allow a concessioner satisfying the
requirements of this paragraph (and paragraphs (8) or (9), as
appropriate) the opportunity to match the terms and
conditions of any competing proposal which the Secretary
determines to be the best proposal.
(iii) A concessioner who exercises a preferential right of
renewal in accordance with the requirements of this
subparagraph shall be entitled to award of the new concession
contract with respect to which such right is exercised.
(8) Outfitting and guide contracts.--(A) The provisions of
paragraph (g)(2) shall apply only--
(i) to a concession contract--
(I) which solely authorizes a concessioner to provide
outfitting, guide, river running, or other substantially
similar services within a park; and
(II) which does not grant such concessioner any interest in
any structure, fixture, or improvement pursuant to subsection
(l); and
(ii) where the Secretary determines that the concessioner
has operated satisfactorily during the term of the contract
(including any extensions thereof); and
(iii) where the Secretary determines that the concessioner
has submitted a responsive proposal for a new contract which
satisfies the minimum requirements established by the
Secretary pursuant to paragraph (4).
(B) With respect to a concession contract (or extension
thereof) covered by this subsection which is in effect on the
date of enactment of this Act, the provisions of this
paragraph shall apply if the holder of such
[[Page H4176]]
contact, under the laws and policies in effect on the day
before the date of enactment of this Act, would have been
entitled to a preferential right to renew such contract upon
its expiration.
(9) Contracts with annual gross receipts under $500,000.--
(A) The provisions of paragraph (7)(B) shall also apply to a
concession contract--
(i) which the Secretary estimates will result in annual
gross receipts of less than $500,000;
(ii) where the Secretary has determined that the
concessioner has operated satisfactorily during the term of
the contract (including any extensions thereof); and
(iii) that the concessioner has submitted a responsive
proposal for a new concession contract which satisfies the
minimum requirements established by the Secretary pursuant to
paragraph (4).
(B) The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to a
concession contract which solely authorizes a concessioner to
provide outfitting, guide, river running, or other
substantially similar services within a park pursuant to
paragraph (8).
(10) No preferential right to additional services.--The
Secretary shall not grant a preferential right to a
concessioner to provide new or additional services at a park.
(h) Franchise Fees.--
(1) In general.--Franchise fees shall not be less than the
minimum fee established by the Secretary for each contract.
The minimum fee shall be determined in a manner that will
provide the concessioner with a reasonable opportunity to
realize a profit on the operation as a whole, commensurate
with the capital invested and the obligations assumed under
the contract.
(2) Multiple contracts within a park.--If multiple
concession contracts are awarded to authorize concessioners
to provide the same or similar outfitting, guide, river
running, or other similar services at the same approximate
location or resource within a specific park, the Secretary
shall establish an identical franchise fee for all such
contracts, subject to periodic review and revision by the
Secretary. Such fee shall reflect fair market value.
(e) Adjustment of franchise fees.--The amount of any
franchise fee for the term of the concession contract shall
be specified in the concession contract and may only be
modified to reflect substantial changes from the conditions
specified or anticipated in the contract.
(i) Use of Franchise Fees.--
(1) Deposits to treasury.--All receipts collected pursuant
to this section shall be covered into a special account
established in the Treasury of the United States. Except as
provided in paragraph (2), amounts covered into such account
in a fiscal year shall be available for expenditure, subject
to appropriation, solely as follows:
(A) 50 percent shall be allocated among the units of the
National Park System in the same proportion as franchise fees
collected from a specific unit bears to the total amount
covered into the account for each fiscal year, to be used for
resource management and protection, maintenance activities,
interpretation, and research.
(B) 50 percent shall be allocated among the units of the
National Park System on the basis of need, in a manner to be
determined by the Secretary, to be used for resource
management and protection, maintenance activities,
interpretation, and research.
(2) Special account.--Beginning in fiscal year 1998, all
receipts collected in the previous year in excess of the
following amounts shall be made available from the special
account to the Secretary without further appropriation, to be
allocated among the units of the National Park System on the
basis of need, in a manner to be determined by the Secretary,
to be used for resource management and protection,
maintenance activities, interpretation, and research:
(A) $17,000,000 for fiscal year 1998.
(B) $18,000,000 for fiscal year 1999.
(C) $18,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.
(D) $18,000,000 for fiscal year 2001.
(E) $18,000,000 for fiscal year 2002.
(3) Existing concessioner improvement funds.--Nothing in
this section shall affect or restrict the use of funds
maintained by a concessioner in an existing concessioner
improvement account pursuant to a concession contract in
effect as of the date of enactment of this Act. No new,
renewed, or extended contracts entered into after the date of
enactment of this Act shall provide for or authorize the use
of such concessioner improvement accounts.
(4) Inspector general audits.--Beginning in fiscal year
1998, the Inspector General of the Department of the Interior
shall conduct a biennial audit of the concession fees
generated pursuant to this section. The Inspector General
shall make a determination as to whether concession fees are
being collected and expended in accordance with this Act and
shall submit copies of each audit to the Committee on
Resources of the United States House of Representatives and
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the United
States Senate.
(j) Duration of Contract.--
(1) Maximum term.--A concession contract entered into
pursuant to this section shall be awarded for a term not to
exceed 10 years: Provided, however, That the Secretary may
award a contract for a term of up to 20 years if the
Secretary determines that the contract terms and conditions
necessitate a longer term.
(2) Temporary contract.--A temporary concession contract
awarded on a non-competitive basis pursuant to subsection
(f)(2) shall be for a term not to exceed 2 years.
(k) Transfer of Contract.--
(1) In General.--No concession contract may be transferred,
assigned, sold, or otherwise conveyed by a concessioner
without prior written notification to, and approval of the
Secretary.
(2) Approval of transfer.--The Secretary shall not
unreasonably withhold approval of a transfer, assignment,
sale, or conveyance of a concession contract, but shall not
approve the transfer, assignment, sale, or conveyance of a
concession contract to any individual, corporation or other
entity if the Secretary determines that--
(A) such individual, corporation or entity is, or is likely
to be, unable to completely satisfy all of the requirements,
terms, and conditions of the contract;
(B) such transfer, assignment, sale or conveyance is not
consistent with the objectives of protecting and preserving
park resources, and of providing necessary and appropriate
facilities or services to the public at reasonable rates;
(C) such transfer, assignment, sale, or conveyance relates
to a concession contract which does not provide to the United
States consideration commensurate with the probable value of
the privileges granted by the contract; or
(D) the terms of such transfer, assignment, sale, or
conveyance directly or indirectly attribute a significant
value to intangible assets or otherwise may so reduce the
opportunity for a reasonable profit over the remaining term
of the contract that the United States may be required to
make substantial additional expenditures in order to avoid
interruption of services to park visitors.
(l) Protection of Concessioner Investment.--
(1) Current contract.--(A) A concessioner who before the
date of the enactment of this Act has acquired or
constructed, or is required under an existing concession
contract to commence acquisition or construction of any
structure, fixture, or improvement upon land owned by the
United States within a park, pursuant to such contract, shall
have a possessory interest therein, to the extent provided by
such contract.
(B) Unless otherwise provided in such contract, said
possessory interest shall not be extinguished by the
expiration or termination of the contract and may not be
taken for public use without just compensation. Such
possessory interest may be assigned, transferred, encumbered,
or relinquished.
(C) Upon the termination of a concession contract in effect
before the date of enactment of this title, the Secretary
shall determine the value of any outstanding possesory
interest applicable to the contract, such value to be
determined for all purposes on the basis of applicable laws
and contracts in effect on the day before the date of
enactment of this Act.
(D) Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to grant a
possessory interest to a concessioner whose contract in
effect on the date of enactment of this Act does not include
recognition of a possessory interest.
(2) New contracts.--(A)(i) With respect to a concession
contract entered into on or after the date of enactment of
this Act, the value of any outstanding possessory interest
associated with such contract shall be set at the value
determined by the Secretary pursuant to paragraph (1)(C).
(ii) As a condition of entering into a concession contract,
the value of any outstanding possessory interest shall be
reduced on an annual basis, in equal portions, over the same
number of years as the time period associated with the
straight line depreciation of the structure, fixture, or
improvement associated with such possessory interest, as
provided by applicable Federal income tax laws and
regulations in effect on the day before the date of enactment
of this Act.
(iii) In the event that the contract expires or is
terminated prior to the elimination of any outstanding
possessory interest, the concessioner shall be entitled to
receive from the United States or the successor concessioner
payment equal to the remaining value of the possessory
interest.
(iv) A successor concessioner may not revalue any
outstanding possessory interest, nor the period of time over
which such interest is reduced.
(v) Title to any structure, fixture, or improvement
associated with any outstanding possessory interest shall be
vested in the United States.
(B)(i) If the Secretary determines during the competitive
selection process that all proposals submitted either fail to
meet the minimum requirements or are rejected (as provided in
subsection (g)), the Secretary may, solely with respect to
any outstanding possessory interest associated with the
contract and established pursuant to a concession contract
entered into prior to the date of enactment of this Act,
suspend the reduction provisions of paragraph (2)(A)(i) for
the duration of the contract, and re-initiate the competitive
selection process as provided in subsection (g).
(ii) The Secretary may suspend such reduction provisions
only if the Secretary determines that the establishment of
other new minimum contract requirements is not likely to
result in the submission of satisfactory
[[Page H4177]]
proposals, and that the suspension of the reduction
provisions is likely to result in the submission of
satisfactory proposals: Provided, however, That nothing in
this paragraph shall be construed to require the Secretary to
establish a minimum franchise fee at a level below the
franchise fee in effect for such contract on the day before
the expiration date of the previous contract.
(3) New structures.--(A) On or after the date of enactment
of this Act, a concessioner who constructs or acquires a new,
additional, or replacement structure, fixture, or improvement
upon land owned by the United States within a park, pursuant
to a concession contract, shall have an interest in such
structure, fixture, or improvement equivalent to the actual
original cost of acquiring or constructing such structure,
fixture, or improvement, less straight line depreciation over
the estimated useful life of the asset according to Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles: Provided, That in no event
shall the estimated useful life of such asset exceed the
depreciation period used for such asset for Federal income
tax purposes.
(B) In the event that the contract expires or is terminated
prior to the recovery of such costs, the concessioner shall
be entitled to receive from the United States or the
successor concessioner payment equal to the value of the
concessioner's interest in such structure, fixture, or
improvement. A successor concessioner may not revalue the
interest in such structure, fixture, or improvement, the
method of depreciation, or the estimated useful life of the
asset.
(C) Title to any such structure, fixture, or improvement
shall be vested in the United States.
(4) Insurance, maintenance, and repair.--Nothing in this
subsection shall affect the obligation of a concessioner to
insure, maintain, and repair any structure, fixture, or
improvement assigned to such concessioner and to insure that
such structure, fixture, or improvement fully complies with
applicable safety and health laws and regulations.
(m) Rates and Charges to Public.--The reasonableness of a
concessioner's rates and charges to the public shall, unless
otherwise provided in the bid specifications and contract, be
judged primarily by comparison with those rates and charges
for facilities and services of comparable character under
similar conditions, with due consideration for length of
season, seasonal variance, average percentage of occupancy,
accessibility, availability and costs of labor and materials,
type of patronage, and other factors deemed significant by
the Secretary.
(n) Concessioner Performance Evaluation.--
(1) Regulations.--As soon as practicable after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish, after an
appropriate period for public comment, regulations
establishing standards and criteria for evaluating the
performance of concessions operating within parks.
(2) Periodic Evaluation.--(A) The Secretary shall
periodically conduct an evaluation of each concessioner
operating under a concession contract pursuant to this Act,
as appropriate, to determine whether such concessioner has
performed satisfactorily. In evaluating a concessioner's
performance, the Secretary shall seek and consider applicable
reports and comments from appropriate Federal, State, and
local regulatory agencies, and shall seek and consider the
applicable views of park visitors and concession customers.
If the Secretary's performance evaluation results in an
unsatisfactory rating of the concessioner's overall
operation, the Secretary shall provide the concessioner with
a list of the minimum requirements necessary for the
operation to be rated satisfactory, and shall so notify the
concessioner in writing.
(B) The Secretary may terminate a concession contract if
the concessioner fails to meet the minimum operational
requirements identified by the Secretary within the time
limitations established by the Secretary at the time notice
of the unsatisfactory rating is provided to the concessioner.
(C) If the Secretary terminates a concession contract
pursuant to this section, the Secretary shall solicit
proposals for a new contract consistent with the provisions
of this Act.
(o) Recordkeeping Requirements.--
(1) In general.--Each concessioner shall keep such records
as the Secretary may prescribe to enable the Secretary to
determine that all terms of the concessioner's contract have
been, and are being faithfully performed, and the Secretary
or any of the Secretary's duly authorized representatives
shall, for the purpose of audit and examination, have access
to such records and to other books, documents, and papers of
the concessioner pertinent to the contract and all the terms
and conditions thereof as the Secretary deems necessary.
(2) General accounting office review.--The Comptroller
General of the United States or any of his or her duly
authorized representatives shall, until the expiration of
five calendar years after the close of the business year for
each concessioner, have access to and the right to examine
any pertinent books, documents, papers, and records of the
concessioner related to the contracts or contracts involved.
(p) Exemption From Certain Lease Requirements.--The
provisions of section 321 of the Act of June 30, 1932 (47
Stat. 412; 40 U.S.C. 303b), relating to the leasing of
buildings and properties of the United States, shall not
apply to contracts awarded by the Secretary pursuant to this
section.
(q) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out
this Act.
SEC. 321. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION USER FEES.
(a) User Funding of the Federal Aviation Administration.--
Section 48104(a) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a
semicolon;
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) any cost incurred by the Federal Aviation
Administration after September 30, 1999, that is authorized
by law.''.
(b) Cost Recovery for Foreign Aviation Services and
Clarification of Overflight Fee Authority.--Section 45301 of
title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(2), by inserting ``or to any entity
obtaining services outside the United States'' before the
period; and
(2) by striking the period after ``rendered'' and inserting
``, including both direct and indirect costs, as determined
by the Administrator, using generally accepted accounting
principles and internationally accepted economic
principles.''.
TITLE IV--TAX INCREASES
SEC. 401. TAX INCREASES.
It is the sense of the House of Representatives that the
following tax increases proposed by the President should be
enacted as soon as possible:
(1) Accounting provisions.--
(A) Repeal lower of cost or market inventory accounting
method.
(B) Repeal nonaccrual experience method of accounting and
make certain trade receivables ineligible for mark-to-market
treatment.
(2) Financial products and institutions.--
(A) Defer interest deduction on certain convertible debt.
(B) Extend pro rata disallowance of tax-exempt interest
expense that applies to banks to all financial
intermediaries.
(3) Corporate tax provisions.--
(A) Eliminate dividends received deduction for certain
preferred stock.
(B) Repeal tax-free conversion of large C corporations into
S corporations.
(C) Restrict special net operating loss carryback rules for
specified liability losses.
(D) Clarify the meaning of ``subject to'' liabilities under
section 357(c).
(4) Insurance provisions.--
(A) Increase the proration percentage for property and
casualty insurance companies.
(B) Capitalize net premiums for credit life insurance
contracts.
(C) Modify corporate-owned life insurance rules.
(D) Modify reserve rules for annuity contracts.
(E) Tax certain exchanges of insurance contracts and
reallocations of assets within variable insurance contracts.
(F) Modify computation of ``investment in the contract''
for mortality and expense charges on certain insurance
contracts.
(5) Estate and gift tax provisions.--
(A) Eliminate nonbusiness valuation discounts.
(B) Modify treatment of gifts of ``present interests'' in a
trust (repeal ``Crummey'' case rule).
(C) Eliminate gift tax exemption for personal residence
trusts.
(D) Include qualified terminable interest property trust
assets in surviving spouse's estate.
(6) Foreign tax provisions.--
(A) Replace sales source rules with activity-based rule.
(B) Modify rules relating to foreign oil and gas extraction
income.
(C) Apply ``80/20'' company rules on a group-wide basis.
(D) Prescribe regulations regarding foreign built-in
losses.
(E) Prescribe regulations regarding use of hybrids.
(F) Modify foreign office material participation exception
applicable to certain inventory sales.
(G) Modify controlled foreign corporation exception from
United States tax on transportation income.
(7) Administrative provisions.--
(A) Increase penalties for failure to file correct
information returns.
(B) Modify definition of substantial understatement penalty
for large corporations.
(C) Repeal exemption for withholding on gambling.
(D) Modify deposit requirement for FUTA.
(E) Clarify and expand math error procedures.
(8) Real estate investment company provisions.--
(A) Freeze grandfathered status of stapled or paired-share
REITs.
(B) Restrict impermissible businesses indirectly conducted
by REITs.
(C) Modify treatment of closely held REITs.
(9) Earned income tax compliance provisions.--
(A) Simplify foster child definition under the earned
income credit.
(B) Modify definition of qualifying child for purposes of
the earned income credit where more than one taxpayer
satisfies the requirements with respect to the same child.
(10) Other revenue-increase provisions.--
[[Page H4178]]
(A) Repeal percentage depletion for certain nonfuel
minerals mined on Federal and formerly Federal lands.
(B) Modify depreciation method for tax-exempt use property.
(C) Impose excise tax on purchase of structured
settlements.
(D) Reinstate Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund excise tax and
increase Trust Fund ceiling to $5,000,000,000 (through
September 30, 2008).
(11) Reinstate hazardous substance superfund excise tax and
environmental income tax.--
(A) Reinstate Superfund corporate environmental income tax.
(B) Reinstate Superfund excise taxes (through September 30,
2008).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon)
and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), as the designee for
the minority leader, each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon).
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing the bill but opposing the
bill. Is there a Member here in favor of the bill to claim the time?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Moakley) the designee of the minority leader?
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the bill. In fact, I cannot
find anybody in the Chamber that is in favor of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The answer to the gentleman's inquiry is no,
the gentleman need not be in favor of the bill.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, that does not show very much support for
the President of the United States wanting to increase taxes and fees.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request only requires
that the minority leader or his designee control the time. He does not
have to be in favor of the bill.
Mr. SOLOMON. So the Member claiming the time does not have to be in
favor of the President's tax and fee increases?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I know it is only 9:00 in the morning and unusual for us to start this
early. I know that we were here until the wee hours, I know I was, this
morning. I just hope Members are listening if they do not have the
opportunity to come to the floor.
Mr. Speaker, this is very, very important. In February of this year,
President Clinton sent the United States Congress his budget for fiscal
year 1999. In that budget the President proposed to increase spending
by $150 billion over the next 5 years, including an actual net increase
of $15 billion, that is 3.9 percent, in fiscal year 1999 alone.
Mr. Speaker, the President called for, and this is the thing that I
just could not believe, after we have gone through a bipartisan
compromise on bringing a balanced budget to this floor last year, the
President called for 85 new spending programs, in other words, creating
new programs, including, and this is the part that is so bad, 39 new
entitlement programs. And we have been trying to turn around this
myriad of entitlement programs that have been implemented in this
Congress under Democrat control for the past 40 years.
These entitlement programs alone add $53 billion to Federal spending
over the next 5 years in new entitlements. Not only is that for the
next 5 years but, because they are entitlement programs, they go on
forever and ever.
Clearly, Mr. Speaker, the President's declaration that the era of big
government is over somehow slipped his mind when he presented Congress
with this latest attempt to reach into the pockets of the American
people.
While the President's renewed commitment to big government is
alarming to America's families and businesses, his renewed affection
for tax increases, in my opinion, is just intolerable. Just 6 months
ago, the President proposed $130 billion in new tax increases and user
fees. From the President and his Democratic friends in Congress who
passed the largest tax increase, without my vote, in history in 1993,
$240 billion worth, as a matter of fact, new Democrat tax increases
should, I guess, come as no surprise.
When a liberal Democrat has the urge to tax and to spend in his
blood, not even a blood transfusion or a revolutionary election can
drain it out of him, I guess. Whenever the liberals need more money for
a new government idea, they just turn to the pockets of the American
people and American families to foot the bill.
Mr. Speaker, today the American people have the opportunity to speak
out on this return to the good old boy Democrat budgeting philosophy of
saying no to nobody and yes to everybody, no to nobody and yes to
everybody. That is how we got ourselves into this unconscionable sea of
red ink, saddling our children, our grandchildren, with $5.5 trillion
in debt, even though the Democrat-controlled Congress was reaching
deeper and deeper and deeper into the pockets of the American people.
I recall back in the years of Ronald Reagan when we cut taxes and we
put money back into the pockets of the American people. We actually
doubled the Federal revenues coming into this Congress. But guess what
happened? Congress spent every nickel of the amount, double, I think.
If I recall back then, it was like $600 million and it went up to a
trillion $100 million, and we managed to not only spend the new money
coming in but to spend about 2 percent more on top of that.
Mr. Speaker, for the past few days this House has been debating this
budget which will govern this Nation's finances for the coming year and
also set the tone for future years down the road, at least for the next
4 years. It should be pointed out that the missing participants in this
debate have been key portions of the President's budget. The
President's budget is not here. It is not on this floor. It is not
incorporated into even the Democrat substitute that is going to be on
the floor later today.
Mr. Speaker, to highlight the differences in the overall philosophy
and the overall vision between we Republicans who oppose tax increases
with all our heart and President Clinton and his liberal Democrats who,
every 5 minutes, it seems, try to sneak in another tax, try to reach
deeper and deeper into the pockets of the American people, today, and
that is why it is unusual for this Member of Congress, who has never
voted for a tax increase and who has never, certainly, sponsored a bill
with a tax increase, it is why I bring to the floor today President
Clinton's $130 billion of tax increases and user fees back into this
debate, because that needs to be here to show the differences between
our two parties.
The bill before us this morning, the Clinton Democrat User Fee Act of
1998, which contains over 100 pages of user fees and tax increases on
the American people proposed by the President, Members ought to come
down here and look at this, this is 100 pages of fee increases, 100
pages.
Listen to just a brief, I am not going to take the time to read 100
pages of these proposed fee increases, but listen to just this few of
some of the 36 discretionary and mandatory user fees worth $25 billion.
Federal Aviation Administration fees, who do Members think is going
to pay for that? It is going to be the American people. Bank
examination fees; patent and trademark fees going to increase the cost
of every product in America today; National Transportation Safety Board
fees; farm service fees, going to pile more costs on America's farmers;
grain inspection fees; administration licensing fees. I cannot figure
out even what those things are, but all I know is it takes money out of
the pockets of somebody.
Animal implant service fees; wetland permit fees. These are all
increases now that are going to take effect. Fishery management fees;
Social Security claimant fees. Here we are going to take more money
from senior citizens. National park interests and concession fees are
going to skyrocket. Pesticide registration fees, that is not even
specified so I cannot tell what that really is. And then, worst of all,
Medicare provider fees.
Mr. Speaker, the list goes on and on and on and on and on for 100
pages here.
If Members listened closely to what I have just been saying, they
would have seen that the President proposed to increase user fees
issued by eight different Cabinet departments, that is
[[Page H4179]]
practically all of them out there, and three other major government
agencies like the EPA and the Social Security Administration.
There are fee increases on farmers. There are fee increases on
landowners, on fishermen, on entrepreneurs who are small businessmen
with great ideas who start a business, and they are the ones that
create 75 percent of all the new jobs in America every single year, not
only for displaced Americans who have been caught up in downsizing, but
it also includes young girls and boys coming out of high school and
college today.
There are fees on physicians, on just plain employees, on emergency
personnel. These are voluntary emergency personnel, people that
volunteer their time, things that we Americans are noted for. There are
more fees on banks. And what do you think that does? That is going to
drive up the cost, again, of doing business with banks.
On national park users, I have got a series of national parks in my
district, including the Saratoga National Battlefield, which was the
turning point of the Revolutionary War.
Incidentally, while I am just speaking, we have got the Medal of
Honor, the Congressional Medal of Honor Society convention with about
100 Medal of Honor recipients coming up to Saratoga Battlefield this
weekend. We are going to give an award to a great American and his
wife, and those great Americans are former Senator Bob Dole and his
wife. I just hope we can get out of here in time for me to catch a
plane to go up there and enjoy that dinner and see it tonight.
Mr. Speaker, the last one I did not mention was senior citizens, who
just get socked with almost every one of these fees.
User fees are nothing more than a back-door hidden way to raise
taxes. As a result, taxpayers have less money in their pockets, and the
government has more money to spend. If Members believe in that, I guess
they want to come over here and vote for this bill. The American
people, in my opinion, contribute enough in taxes to the Federal
Government; and imposing user fees is just another way, again, a back-
door attempt to raise taxes to reach into their pockets.
{time} 0915
What makes President Clinton's user fees especially objectionable?
All of you, and I know you are all sincere, and you all were trying to
work for this balanced budget, but what makes it especially
objectionable is that he uses them as a budgetary gimmick to circumvent
the intended discipline of the discretionary spending caps that were an
essential part of the balanced budget agreement last year, that we all
worked so hard to put together so we could end this further
accumulation of this sea of red ink. The President had the opportunity
to reform or terminate thousands of Federal programs. Yet out of a $1.7
trillion budget, there are practically no cutbacks there at all in his
budget.
Without these fees and without these taxes, the President's
discretionary spending would be $5 billion over the discretionary
spending caps in fiscal year 1999, and it would be $42 billion over the
spending caps over the next 5 years. That is probably hard for the
average American person out there to understand when you start talking
about spending caps, but it is very, very important because it puts a
control on this Congress. It does not allow us to go and spend more.
Now we are just throwing that out the window. This means that the
President used these user fees as a way to avoid the spending caps
established in law, and he can do it. In my opinion it is legal
thievery, but he can do it. Mr. Speaker, this is not according to me.
This is according to the Congressional Budget Office. Sometime later on
today when we get back on the budget that we are debating, Members
ought to get the Congressional Budget Office report and they will
verify everything that I have just said.
Mr. Speaker, that is the bad news. Now, if you want to hear the worst
news, it is the second part of the bill that I just introduced.
Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SOLOMON. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, in the Republican budget, there are still $11
billion of user fees, flood insurance, homebuyers for FHA, air
travelers, barge traffic on inland waterways, veterans seeking housing,
health insurance for civil servants. Would the gentleman join with me
to remove those user fees that are in the Republican budget? I would
like to help him.
Mr. SOLOMON. I sure would. Let us talk about it.
Now, let us get on to the worst part of the news, because these are
real taxes. These are real tax increases. Mr. Speaker, for instance,
this bill before us, which I took from the President's budget, every
word, I have not added anything to it, so it is actually excerpts from
the President's budget, contains the 41 different tax increases
totaling $33 billion that was proposed by the President.
Let us just look at some of those. Eliminating the dividends received
for certain stock. What did we do? We just reduced the capital gains
stock which did more to spur this economy with people that have worked
all their lives working for Sears Roebuck, a couple with not much
salary all those years but they had some stock saved over that time.
Now they can sell that stock, without giving it all to the Federal
Government. They can keep 80 percent of it now and in some cases 90
percent and here we are fooling around with this thing again. Defer the
interest deduction on convertible debt. Change life insurance rules.
You ought to look at those, ladies and gentlemen. Changes in the estate
and gift taxes. In other words, stick it to the heirs of the deceased.
What did we just do? We just rewrote the laws so that people who have
worked all their lives, like I intend to do, and I want to leave a
little bit to my five children and my six grandchildren, and now you
are going to take it back away again? It gets upsetting.
Reduce the depreciation method for tax-exempt property. What does
that mean? That means churches, it means Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts,
philanthropies. Increased taxes on real estate. We have just about
ruined the real estate market in this country as it is. That hurts
jobs. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) sitting over there
represents a blue collar district. We need to do all we can to create
jobs, especially in the construction and building industries. Here we
are going to upset that.
Mr. Speaker, the list just goes on and on and on forever, like I
said, more than 100 pages. These proposals would have significant
impacts on real people, real American people. Take, for instance, one
of these tax increases, the President's proposal to raise taxes on
financial products which encourage long-term investment and savings.
That is terrible.
It is incredible that the President, who is fully aware, he is no
dummy, he is one of the most astute, smartest Presidents this country
has ever had, he is a Rhodes scholar or one of those guys over there,
sometimes they are too smart, but he is fully aware of the impending
crisis in Social Security, that it would propose to hike taxes on the
products that the American families and business use to plan their own
retirements. I see some of you Ways and Means types over here who are
grappling with that now. Here is one sitting over here. We need to do
all we can to encourage savings by the American people. Millions of
American families use these very life insurance products to save for
their retirement. Surveys show that many moderate-income families use
private sector retirement products such as annuities to plan for their
future. This is so important. In fact, many of the owners of annuities
are women, 55 percent of them are married, and 28 more percent of them
are widowed. Here we are going to take away their savings? The
President proposes to increase the tax burden on these same annuities,
annuities that 85 percent of the owners intend to use as a fundamental
source of their retirement savings. Why should the government
discourage these families from saving their money?
We have to remember that every time an American puts a dollar into
the bank or puts it into some kind of savings, that creates jobs,
because it makes more money available for the private sector to be able
to borrow in competition with all of these governments.
[[Page H4180]]
The Federal Government. We pay about $270 billion in interest on the
accumulated Federal debt today. Then when we look at the State
governments and we look at all the counties, towns, cities and villages
and their debt, they are all in competition with the private sector. We
should be doing everything we can to encourage the American people to
save not only for their retirement but because it stimulates the
economy.
Mr. Speaker, there is an old saying around this town, ``Don't tax me,
don't tax thee, tax that man behind the tree.'' President Clinton's
budget enhances his legacy of tax increases with $130 billion in new
user fees on taxes on everybody and everything, including that tree,
Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, with the President's mid-session budget report issued
just last week reporting that the tax burden as a percentage of the
economy will reach an historic peacetime high of 20.5 percent and
remain above 20 percent for as far as the eye can see, this House
should resoundingly vote down President Clinton's tax increases right
now, today, and shed the light on this President who cannot seem to
take enough of Americans' hard-earned money.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. MOAKLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I really think that some of my Republican
colleagues are very embarrassed because of the sham bill that is coming
to the floor. The person who brought it to the floor readily admitted
to everybody he is opposed to it. I am opposed to it. The President is
opposed to it. So what is it doing here? It is just another way to try
to embarrass the President.
Yesterday my colleague from New York introduced this bill which
includes an assortment of revenue raisers, but it omits the programs
from the President's budget. Under normal circumstances, Mr. Speaker,
this bill would have been referred to six different committees for the
consideration and, after research and hearings, possibly brought to the
House floor for a vote.
But, Mr. Speaker, that did not happen on this bill. That did not
happen because the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) really does
not want this bill to pass, and neither do I. In fact, my Republican
colleagues want this half-a-bill to lose, and lose badly. Why? In order
to deflect attention away from their heartless budget cuts.
My Republican colleagues are so embarrassed by their own budget that
they needed to create an even worse one to hide behind for the evening
news. My Republican colleagues do not want to stand behind their budget
cuts because, and we have heard the litany of cuts, of the increases
that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) talked about, their
budget cuts Medicaid, their budget cuts their very own welfare-to-work
program, their budget cuts Head Start, their budget cuts veterans'
health care once again, and it cuts Superfund cleanups, it cuts
children's health care and it cuts school lunches.
We do not talk about that. We just talk about what the President
talked about but did not bring to the floor.
Mr. Speaker, these are very serious cuts. These are very serious cuts
in the programs that the people of the United States of America really
want. I can understand why my Republican colleagues are embarrassed by
their budget, but today's bill is irresponsibility at its highest.
I would like to make something perfectly clear. President Clinton
does not want this bill. In fact, this bill is such a perversion that
President Clinton opposes this bill and quite truthfully, I would tell
him to veto it if it were to pass.
I have just received a letter from the acting director of the Office
of Management and Budget. The last paragraph, it says, ``H.R. 3989,''
that is the bill we are talking about, ``does not reflect the policies
of the President's budget, and the Administration opposes its
enactment. We regret that diversionary measures such as this one are
being presented for consideration at a time when so much more important
work remains for the Congress to complete.'' Signed Jack Lew, acting
director, Office of Management and Budget.
Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues are so opposed to revenue
raises, I wonder how they will bring themselves to support the
Republican budget which itself contains $10 billion in user fees. That
is right, Mr. Speaker, the Kasich budget imposes $10 billion in user
fees on the same American people that the gentleman from New York is so
concerned about.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, any budget that meets the requirements of last
year's balanced budget agreement must contain provisions to pay for
each program expansion.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is ridiculous. It is a sham. When the other
side is talking about we have only got so much time to go, why do they
bring these things to the floor? For one reason, to try to embarrass
the President. This is a political action at its very best. It is being
introduced to divert attention away from the Republican budget, not to
be passed into law.
I for one give the American people a lot more credit than that. I
urge my colleagues to give them more respect. I urge my colleagues to
vote against this mockery of a bill, and I am sure the American people
will see the diversion for what it really is, pure politics.
Executive Office of the President, Office of Management
and Budget,
Washington, DC, June 5, 1998.
Hon. Joe Moakley,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative Moakley: Thank you for requesting the
Administration's views on H.R. 3989, The User Fee Act of
1998. The President is serious about his commitment to fiscal
discipline, and he has proven his commitment by reducing the
deficit from $290 billion in 1992 to the first surplus in 29
years. Many Members of Congress have also shown their
commitment to fiscal discipline by voting to approve
comprehensive deficit reduction bills in 1993 and 1997.
H.R. 3989, however, does not represent serious fiscal
discipline. It is instead a cynical diversion from the
substantive debate about important budget issues, including
the merits of user fees. The Administration's user fee
proposal is based on the idea that user fees bring good
business practices to the Federal Government by ensuring that
the beneficiaries of Government services--not the general
taxpayer--pay for them. H.R. 3989 in many cases breaks this
link by raising fees without regard to resources for related
services.
H.R. 3989 does not reflect the policies in the President's
budget, and the Administration opposes its enactment. We
regret that diversionary measures such as this one are being
presented for consideration at a time when so much important
work remains for the Congress to complete.
Sincerely,
Jacob J. Lew,
Acting Director.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Stark).
Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for
yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, the Republicans this morning are doing a rather silly
exercise, I think. It is duplicitous, I guess, in its best light. They
are trying to take out the user fees and revenue raisers for a separate
vote, all except those which they have originated and left in. In other
words, they are being selective. They will harm children, health care
for the frail elderly, food for the poor. Their own user fees will pay
for flood insurance and some homebuyers and air travelers, health
insurance for civil servants. But not health insurance for people on
Medicare, not health insurance for the poor, not health insurance for
children.
It is the same duplicitousness that we heard yesterday, the right-
wing religious wackos who were talking about praying. Many of them made
a claim to be Christians. What kind of a Christian would harm small
children? What kind of a Christian would deny health care to the
indigent? What kind of a Christian would deny housing to the poor? I do
not know if that is ever mentioned.
For the people on the Republican side whose plan is to destroy
programs for the poor and to build their budget on the backs of the
poor and then try to convince the American people they are Christians
is a lie, it is duplicitous, and it is wrong.
[[Page H4181]]
{time} 0930
So as it is this morning, we are wasting our time and the public's
time with political posturing for a bankrupt program. Why are we not
spending the time this morning to talk about managed care reform? Why
not the Norwood bill which 90 Republicans have joined which would give
the American public what they want, and that is protection from the
unscrupulous insurance companies who are making huge profits by denying
managed care to the people paying for it?
Where are the Republicans when it comes to protecting what 80 or 90
percent of the American people want? They are hiding. They are scared.
They do not know what to do. They cannot organize to get the kinds of
programs that we need.
What about early buying at no cost to the government for those
seniors who retire early and will be without Medicare or without health
insurance? Why are the Republicans not bringing that part of the
President's program to the floor so we can vote on it? Because they do
not dare. Because they know that the American public wants programs
that will win.
Tobacco legislation; why are the Republicans burying tobacco
legislation while we prattle about this silly bill which nobody wants?
This is to distract the people from the fact that the Republican cuts
in their own budget are so severe that program after program will be
destroyed.
The Speaker's desire to see Medicare wither on the vine is being
helped by this plan to destroy all assistance to the people who,
through no reason of their own, need assistance for a job, for housing,
to feed their children. Those will be dismantled, as the Republicans
would like to do.
The Kasich budget does not provide the money to fight fraud and
abuse. There is about $20 billion in improper payments under the
Medicare program. Instead of providing us the funds to monitor that and
save them money and cut those bills; 265 million is what it would take
for the Medicare program to be able to save a good portion of that 20
billion; instead of cutting the error rate, we are cutting the budgets
to the law enforcement people who could save that money.
This Republican budget is pro-fraud. It is on the side of the
criminals. That is who the Republicans are coddling with this. Quality
will suffer. Nursing homes will go uninspected. So that those of us who
are retiring and may want to go to New York or California and seek
succor in a nursing home may find them dirty and poorly managed and of
low quality because the Republicans are cutting the budget for the
people who inspect those and ensure that our parents and our retiring
colleagues who will need care in their senior years will not get it.
The bills will be paid slower. Medicare beneficiaries will be unable
to get questions answered about the new proposals the Republicans are
sending out in the mail.
So that as we see a small amount of money being denied as a way to
obfuscate the bankruptcy of the Republican budget, the problems of this
country increase, and the leadership on the Republican side continues
to do nothing about it.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. SOLOMON. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefley). What is the gentleman's
inquiry?
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, in my opening remarks about President
Clinton I tried to not be disparaging, and I just want to inquire is it
appropriate in this House for a Member to accuse other Members, even
without mentioning a name, of being religious wackos?
I am looking at a list of Democrats who are good, sincere Democrats
that voted for that bill and participated in the debate and there are
names like: Baesler, Barcia, Berry, Bishop, Clement, Condit, Cramer,
and it goes on and on and on, and I just do not think that is
appropriate or proper, and I hope we can get this debate on a little
higher plain.
Is that appropriate or not?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members should avoid personalities in debate
directed against other Members.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Stark).
Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I am sure that if any wacko in the House
would like to raise to a point of personal privilege that the Speaker
would be glad to recognize him for that purpose.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
(Mr. TRAFICANT asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I think we should take ourselves out of
the fish bowl and think like everyone else. We talk about user fees,
service fees, excise taxes, sales taxes, income taxes, estate taxes,
capital gains taxes, property taxes, marriage taxes, school taxes, fuel
taxes, aviation taxes, old taxes, new taxes, surtaxes and retroactive
taxes, so it is no wonder the American people are, in fact, taxed off.
How many ways can we tax our country, Congress?
Let us look at the local level, how screwed up this whole situation
is:
If someone fixes up their home, they pay more taxes. If they let it
go to hell, they get a tax break.
Now let us look at the Federal level:
If someone is single, divorced or they abandon their kids, they get a
tax break. If they are married and live responsibly, they pay $1,400 a
year more and get hit over the head for being a good citizen.
As my colleagues know, this is unbelievable to me.
Now, to make it even worse, the American people are looking back and
reading the headlines today and saying, ``With our money Uncle Sam now
wants to give more MFN to China and another $10 billion, an additional
$10 billion in foreign aid to Russia even though the Russian top
financial officer says they stole the last American aid.
Beam me up here. I think it is time to make a common-sense statement
to the Congress and the people of the country.
An America that rewards even Communists at the expense of mom and dad
is an America that may seem to some to be politically correct but, to
me, I submit is downright stupid.
Now I am not voting for anybody's budget. There are more taxes in
both budgets than I am for.
I think it is time to dramatize this. I want to see some reasonable
trade policy in the country. I want to see a budget that starts
rewarding good citizens and stops penalizing achievement.
Mr. Speaker, I think we are all screwed up. So I am opposing the
Republican budget. I am opposing the Democrat budget. And in God's name
I am asking when will we get a common-sense budget that the American
people could all identify with, know where the money goes, why it is
going and has a trail that we could monitor and audit?
I think it is very simple, so I am going to support this. I am
against the taxes in the President's budget, but I am also going to
oppose the taxes and user fees in the Republican budget.
With that, I yield back any common sense left in Congress.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Rangel), the ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways
and Means.
(Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, all of us are going to miss my friend from
New York and the chairman of the Committee on Rules. He is leaving this
august body with his charm and his wisdom; certainly he is going to
leave a vacuum. But I hope he does not put out the legislative lights
before he leaves because since we have had a Republican majority the
rules of the game as to how we legislate have dramatically changed.
I can understand why the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) keeps
yielding to the Democrats: Because hardly any Republican is willing to
stand up to defend this thing that has come out of the Committee on
Rules.
But I would like to say this, that there used to be a time in the
olden, Democratic days where we had standing committees with chairmen
and we had senior Republicans. We used to have something, and I forgot
the name of it, but I think it was hearings? Yes, hearings. And we used
to have witnesses and experts, and they used to testify.
And then along came the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrich) and he
[[Page H4182]]
says, ``You don't need that. You only need one committee, the Committee
on Rules. As a matter of fact, we don't need that. All you have to do
is have a meeting in the Speaker's office, go upstairs in the middle of
the night, find the most complex tax matters that you want, and forget
the eight committees that have jurisdiction because, after all, no
committees are meeting unless it is to attack the President of the
United States. And then have the chairman of the committee introduce a
bill in the middle of the night on a Wednesday and make certain that it
comes on the floor when nobody is going to be awake in order to do
it.''
The only way that they can do this thing, the only way, the new
Republican legislative way, they can do this thing is, first, get a
budget, and the budget has to make certain that the first thing to do
is get a great tax cut for the wealthy people of the United States.
Once that is done, then the rest of it is easy.
What is the rest of it? The rest of it is that we will take $101
billion from the committees of jurisdiction. We will not tell them
where its coming from. We will let them have the blood on the floor.
But we will say, we will say that it should come from health, it should
come from education. And, for God's sake, make certain that we do not
miss the American veterans. Hit them, and if we miss them, make certain
we hit them twice.
Now the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) has indicated, what a
modest man, that the tax laws are complicated. Well, it does not take a
profile in courage to come to the floor and say that. As a matter of
fact, here is the gentleman from New York's list of complicated tax
laws. Did he ask the experts in tax laws on the Republican side to take
a look at this?
Oh, my chairman is not here, Mr. Archer.
Are there any senior Republicans on the Joint Committee on Taxation?
Yes, they are talking.
There are two of them there. There are two Members.
Are we going to have hearings on this, Mr. Solomon?
Oh, no, this will not go to hearings.
Why?
It is too complex for the Joint Committee on Taxation to have
hearings on it.
The wisdom in legislation is confined now to two areas; one to
Speaker, and, God knows, any chairman knows that: Do not have hearings
on anything that the Speaker does not want to have hearings on. And the
second thing is the Committee on Rules.
I really believe that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) was
not selected just because of his good looks and his wisdom but because
of his name. The wisdom of Solomon shall prevail on the budget and on
the taxes, and he will tell us estate taxes, real estate taxes,
financial property, Social Security, woe, woe, woe, this heavy tax
system. He figured it all out, my brothers and sisters, my Democrats
and Republicans:
Go home, worry not. There is no legislation, there is no hearings,
but, God knows, the Social Security of the United States, that, too,
shall rest in the wisdom of Solomon on the Committee on Rules after
this is over.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman, my best friend, yield?
Mr. RANGEL. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, first of all, this bill, everything in it
was before the gentleman's committee. He held hearings on it. He
personally spoke on it. I have read his remarks.
Secondly, this did not come out of the Committee on Rules. Now wait a
minute now. This came directly to the floor under unanimous consent
agreed to by the gentleman from New York's minority leadership.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Solomon) because, if this did not come out of the Committee on Rules,
what in God's name are we doing here in the first place?
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. RANGEL. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, the reason we did not go to the Committee
on Rules is because we knew it was just a dilatory tactic, and we did
not want to waste another hour on the rule so I gave the gentleman
unanimous consent.
Mr. RANGEL. And so now we have really reached the epic in legislation
without Members.
I made a mistake. I really thought it was just the Speaker and the
Committee on Rules. It is just the Speaker and the Speaker, as a matter
of fact. All that must be done is to tell the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Solomon) ``For God's sake don't let the members of the Committee
on Rules see this. Just come to the floor. Put your name on it. They'll
think it was a legitimate process, and we'll have some debate.''
Oh, no. Listen. First of all, we all know this: that these are
recommendations made by the President of the United States.
{time} 0945
In the olden days, it was the Committee on Ways and Means that would
really legislate and bring it to the floor because of the Constitution,
which says that all revenue raisers would emanate from the House of
Representatives, and not the Speaker's office and not the office of the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon).
Second, it does not surprise me that this is the way they would like
to deal with the President's budget as it relates to paying for
services because, God knows, we will never have hearings in talking
about what is in the President's budget.
But I understand it all. They are in the majority, and the further
away they can get from substantive legislation, the better they can
enjoy the comfort that the President's budget and the surpluses have
brought to us.
I am so glad to see that the distinguished chairman of the Committee
on Ways and Means, the man who possesses more knowledge on taxes than
any Member in the House, has come to the floor, and I hope he is
yielded to to explain this tax plan.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I just cannot believe what I just heard, because the
gentleman would indicate that this Congress never held hearings on the
President's budget. I think we held numerous hearings.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Archer), one of the finest, most-respected Members of this body, the
chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, to maybe enlighten us on
this.
Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Speaker, I remember over the years when we were in the minority
and we had a Republican President in the White House, the Democrat
leadership over and over again brought the Republican budget to the
floor so we could have a chance to vote on it. Now I see that the
leadership on the other side of the aisle does not seem to want us to
have an opportunity to vote on the President's proposals, which we are
going to give the House an opportunity to do today.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ARCHER. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, the chairman is exactly right. We did. But
he is not bringing the President's budget to floor, he is only bringing
one piece of it. He is bringing the user fees, not the programs. This
is not a fair presentation of the President's budget.
Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would say to the
gentleman that this could well be the first step, but it is an
important first step because no additional spending can occur unless
these taxes and fees are approved.
Today the House of Representatives has a chance to stand with the
taxpayers who want lower taxes, or with the Washington politicians who
want higher taxes. It seems to me our choice is simple. The budget that
President Clinton submitted to the Congress is a died-in-the-wool,
regular old-fashioned, tried-and-true, liberal tax-and-spend scheme.
Today we will be able to vote on 77 of the President's proposed tax
hikes and user fees. In total, they raise taxes and fees by more than
$51 billion. Think about it, $51 billion. If one believes in big
government and providing the means to make the government bigger, then
I would say Members should vote for this bill and vote for the
President's plan. If one believes in more
[[Page H4183]]
spending, then vote today for this and vote for the President's plan.
But if one is like I am, and believes that the government is too big
and spends too much, then join me in opposing the unnecessary
presidential tax hikes. His budget raises taxes on people who are
trying to save, especially women and widows who depend on life
insurance policies to make ends meet. It penalizes small businesses
that are struggling to get by, and it punishes companies that create
jobs. It works against our ability to compete overseas in the global
marketplace, which is an absolute essential to improving the standard
of living of the American workers.
In an era of surpluses as far as we can see, why on earth is
President Clinton proposing all these tax hikes? It is because the
President still believes that a big government that spends more and
does more is the best answer to the people's problems.
I remember the comments of Thomas Jefferson when he was in Paris
during the writing of the Constitution, and he wrote to his friend,
Madison, and he said, ``Europeans are bred to desire a government that
is energetic, that can be felt. Godsend that our Nation never have a
government it can feel.'' But apparently the President wants more
government that the people can feel.
I stand with Thomas Jefferson. President Clinton obviously believes
that a big government that spends more and does more is the best answer
to people's problems, a government that is energetic, a government the
people can feel. Not so Thomas Jefferson, and not so I.
Mr. Speaker, I would say to my friends, if ever there was a reason
for the Congress to be a different party than the President, this is
it. If we are not here to stop the President from raising taxes again,
who will be? We need to stop President Clinton before he taxes again.
Join with me. Show you are on the side of overtaxed workers of America
and vote ``no'' on Clinton's tax hikes.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I am a bit puzzled by this debate. If I
listened correctly to the other side, they are saying that all of the
fees in this resolution are unwarranted.
Now, I guess I would be puzzled that they are saying that with regard
to bank examination fees. Are they saying that the depositors who are
getting miserable rates of interest and paying exorbitant credit card
fees to the bank should also pay for the Federal regulation of the
banks, or are they saying there should be no Federal regulation of the
banks, like we tried with the savings and loan industry during the
Reagan era?
There is a fee for the registration of pesticides. Are they saying
that the American people, average taxpayers, should pay for the
evaluation of and the registration of the safety of pesticides, or are
they saying we should have a pesticide industry that is totally
unregulated by the Federal Government, creating and applying whatever
it wants, wherever it wants, however it wants, and putting it in our
water supply?
I do not believe even the Republicans want to repeal those fees, nor
do they believe average working Americans should pay fees for the
profits of the pesticide industry or should pay fees for the profits of
the banking industry.
But even beyond that, I am extraordinarily puzzled by the inclusion
of one of the most onerous fees to come out of Congress and the
administration, in my opinion, in the last five years, and that is the
fee for those of us who live in the West. Any time we want to drive on,
park on, or recreate in our federally owned forests and BLM lands, we
have to pay a fee.
Now, the gentleman from New York is always fond of calling us to our
consistency and talking about our past votes. I would like to know how
the gentleman from New York voted on the two bills that created this
fee, both passed by a Republican majority.
H.R. 3019, the balanced budget down payment act, April 25, 1996, I
believe the gentleman voted for it, although he would say perhaps he
opposed that part. And I believe again the gentleman in all probability
voted for H.R. 3610, the Interior appropriations conference report,
which I opposed.
Both of those bills created this onerous fee. They came from the
proposal of the honorable gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) in this
House of Representatives. This is an incredibly onerous fee on the
people of the western United States, created by a Republican Congress,
passed by a Republican Congress, never having been authorized by the
committee on which I sit. That is an outrageous fee. So let us have
some consistency around here.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume
to just say to the previous speaker, boy, do I agree with him. We are
going to defeat this bill that has got that fee in there.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the very distinguished Member from
Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman of the
Committee on Rules for yielding me time, and I welcome the remarks of
my friend from Oregon, to the extent that he stands opposed to user
fees in the parks. I very much appreciate that. Knowing his reputation
for more and more spending and more and more government control, I am
very grateful that he joins with me and others to share that concern
about fees.
Now, it is very interesting that we take a look at this.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield on that
mischaracterization of my record? The gentleman will not yield?
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefley). The gentleman will state it.
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, is it proper for a Member to come to the
well while one Member is addressing the House? He could also ask from
back there.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Arizona may decline to
yield.
Mr. HAYWORTH. I thank the Speaker. We will try to restore some order.
Mr. Speaker, perhaps the reason why we see such vociferous protests
is because, even in good conscience, my friends on the left cannot
abide the fear and smear they are offering this morning.
Now, some of my friends on the left wonder aloud, why this is brought
to the floor? Let me attempt to inform them. You see, friends, and Mr.
Speaker, it is because words mean something. When the President of the
United States came and spoke from the podium behind me here, he offered
a budgetary plan that really, in terms of oratory, was a wonderfully
crafted speech with all the poll data and all of the driven rhetorical
phrases to offer empathy and concern for the American people.
But, you see, we are compelled to go beyond words to check the costs.
And in the words of the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, my
friend from Louisiana, our President promised everything but stronger
shoelaces in that State of the Union message. So if he is going to
promise, he has got to follow through with a price tag.
Now my dear friend, the ranking member of the committee on which I
sit, the Committee on Ways and Means, lamented what he claimed was an
absence of hearings. I would direct his attention to an important date,
not only in the Hayworth household, but also in this august body,
February 25; not only our wedding anniversary at home, but the day we
invited the administration in to defend the budget plan of the
President.
I recall distinctly the fact that many of our colleagues on the left
joined with us. Indeed our colleagues on the left, Mr. Speaker, were
most vociferous in objecting to the revenue raisers that would have to
come with the President's budget. So I would remind my friend of
February 25.
It is just very interesting to take a look at the reality of what the
President offered, almost $52 billion in new taxes.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker I yield one minute to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Bentsen).
(Mr. BENTSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Speaker, about eight hours ago in the middle of the
night we debated the Republican budget resolution when nobody was
around.
[[Page H4184]]
I think people in Hawaii watched it, but every place else Americans
were probably sleeping. The reason we debated it then is because they
do not want to get up and defend it. They do not want to defend the $10
billion in user fees.
In my district they want to double insurance premiums on middle class
homeowners, just like they wanted to in 1995 and 1996. They want to
raise the user fees for the intercostal waterway, where working men and
women move barges and product along the Gulf Coast, by 500 percent.
That is a pretty big increase.
What is going on here? The process is broken. The Republican
leadership in the House has failed in the budget. It is two months
after we were supposed to have come up with a budget. We have ceded the
process to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. The
gentleman who just spoke in the well speaks about big budget Democrats.
{time} 1000
They were rushing to vote to spend $22 billion over the balanced
budget agreement and take out of the pockets of the veterans 2 weeks
ago. The process is broken. The Republican leadership has failed the
House once again.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the very
distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, very briefly, this debate is
important, because the White House spins the President's budget as a
glorious solution of how government can solve problems by spending
money. Nobody has talked about where the money comes from. That is the
purpose of this debate and vote. Everything in this bill is the
President's budget proposal for tax and fee increases.
I think it is important that we look at where the money comes from
because it comes out of the pockets of working families in this
country. In the President's budget, it takes $129 billion out of those
pockets.
I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Boyd).
(Mr. BOYD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BOYD. Mr. Speaker, I guess I just have not been here long enough
to be callous to this sort of shenanigans that is going on this
morning. But I have to say that I was shocked when I turned on the
television and saw that my Committee on Rules chairman, yes, my
Committee on Rules chairman, because he is the Committee on Rules
chairman of the United States House of Representatives, was bringing to
the floor a bill under his name that nobody would vote for, including
myself.
With leadership comes a certain amount of responsibility, and I do
not understand why, last night, we debated after midnight a piece of
legislation, a budget resolution brought to this floor that did not
include the highway spending bill that we passed just 2 weeks ago. Now
we have to find additional cuts.
Mr. Speaker, also, we were not allowed to work on the Blue Dog
budget. I am a Blue Dog, and I vote with the Republican majority on
many occasions when I think they are right. But absolutely they are
wrong on this case. They did not allow a reasonable Blue Dog budget to
be brought to the floor of this House, but today we are bringing this
piece of legislation, and I think it is wrong.
I wish my friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), who was
born and raised in Florida, well in his retirement; and I know he has a
very, very tough job running the floor of this House. I happened to
chair the Rules committee in the Florida House, and I think he has
failed on this account.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Levin).
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, we are supposed to be talking about the
budget this morning. The Republicans are afraid to bring it up and talk
about it. They ran into a problem. They were taking $10 billion from
Medicare. That was not working. They were afraid, so, instead, they
decided to take it out of Function 600 and aim it at welfare reform.
They were frantic. So they stabbed in the dark, grabbed for Function
600, but what they have done is to stab in the back welfare reform.
The National Conference of State Legislatures says this: This budget,
the Republican budget abrogates an agreement reached between State
Legislators, governors, and Congress in 1996 regarding welfare reform.
The National Governors Association, Governors Carper, Engler, Miller,
Beasley, Chiles, Leavitt, O'Bannon, Romer, Ridge and Thompson say this
about it: We urge you in the strongest terms possible to uphold the
historic welfare agreement reached in 1996 and reject any cuts in TANF,
Medicaid, or other welfare-related program as part of the budget
resolution.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield the remaining time, which I believe
is 4\1/4\ minutes, to the gentleman from California (Mr. Miller), my
final speaker.
(Mr. MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, it is very clear what is going
on here this morning. The Republican budget process has failed. They
cannot reach agreement among themselves, and they have now been forced
to cut tens of billions of dollars out of programs serving the most
vulnerable people in the United States.
They have chosen in their budget to protect every special interest in
the country. They have chosen to protect the chemical companies, the
drug companies, the western irrigator water users, the grazers, the oil
companies, the timber companies, and the mining companies.
The President thought it might be a better idea that the mining
companies in this country pay the American people something, something
for the use of their lands. They chose, rather, to cut nutrition
programs.
The President thought it made sense that the big timber companies
that cost the taxpayers millions of dollars to take the timber off of
the public lands pay a little something. They chose, rather, to cut
Medicaid.
The President thought it made sense that the oil companies that have
been underpaying the taxpayers billions of dollars and admitting to it
every day in court, he thought we ought to recover some of that money
for the taxpayers. They chose instead to go after Medicaid. They chose
instead to go after child nutrition. They chose instead to go after
Title I. That is what is going on here, ladies and gentlemen. They have
decided to protect the special interests.
The President thought maybe the concessionaires that have made
millions of dollars running the concessions in the national parks ought
to pay the taxpayers some fair rent for that right. The Republicans
have chosen not to do that. They have chosen not to do that. They have
chosen, instead, to cut education programs. They have chosen, instead,
to cut veterans programs.
That is what their budget is. This is an effort to camouflage the
vote that they will have to take later today on their budget that cuts
billions of dollars, billions of dollars to the most vulnerable people
in this country.
This is not about fees. This is not about the President's budget.
This is about trying to get some cover for the Republicans who they
have broken the arms to vote for a budget that is essentially bankrupt,
a budget where they refuse to put in hard numbers, a budget where they
change it in the middle of the night, a budget that is debated here at
midnight, covered up by a bill that was never sent to the committee,
never sent to the Committee on Rules, and was decided late last night
to be brought to this floor.
Why have they done that? Why have they done that? Because, in their
budget, they continue to protect the users of the FDA, the drug
companies, and the chemical companies, the mining companies, people who
are taking billions of dollars away from the taxpayers of this country,
off resources owned by you, the American people. They pay no rents for
billions of dollars in gold, billions of dollars in platinum, billions
of dollars in silver.
The President thought maybe, just maybe, we ought to run the
government like a business, and we are entitled to some rent. But the
Republicans have chosen, instead, to say, why do we not go after
Chapter 1, trying to help disadvantaged kids?
Republicans have said, instead, why do we not go after the income
security
[[Page H4185]]
in this country and have ways and means? Where are they going to take
it out of? Unemployment, Medicaid, Social Security. We will leave it up
to the Committee on Ways and Means.
This is about choices. This is about choices to be made.
Later today, the Republicans will have the glory of not only voting
for the user fees in this bill but voting for all of their cuts also on
the vulnerable populations in this country.
This bill ought to be rejected. It is a sham. It is a cheap attempt
to camouflage, because the Republicans know they have a very difficult
vote coming up this afternoon for their Members. They have been meeting
around the clock trying to get enough people together so they could
pass their budget. Maybe they have achieved that. Maybe that is why we
are on the floor.
But what they do know, they need some diversion so Members can go
home and say that somehow they engaged in some great scheme to protect
the American people from fees.
These fees are about fees on special interests and people who are
extracting wealth from the resources owned by the taxpayers. The fees
on the Forest Service were put there by the Republicans last year when
they decided every Tom, Dick, and Harry who wants to go out with his
family and use the forest is going to have to pay, but not the timber
companies. They have chosen the special interests.
The President chose to try to protect the people and make sure that
those people who are using America's resources should pay something for
that.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the question was raised by a number of the Committee on
Ways and Means Members, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and
the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) and others, about why did we
bring this bill to the floor.
We bring it to the floor for two reasons. One is that the President
of the United States, no matter who he is, cannot bring a budget or any
portion of it to the floor of this House. It has to be brought by a
Member of Congress representing a committee, and the Democrats have
failed to do that.
We are attempting to show the difference between we Republicans, who
are absolutely, with every fiber in our body, opposed to raising taxes
and taking more money out of the pockets of the people, and as opposed
to the Democrat view, as represented by President Clinton with more and
more and more taxes and fees. That is exactly what this bill does.
The President is proposing $130 billion in new taxes, not to mention
$150 billion in new spending. By focusing this debate on this issue
this morning before we go to final passage, it is going to show the
difference in division of our two parties. That is obvious to the
American people.
I know that there is going to be a motion to recommit, and we will
just have to wait and see what that is. But I would just hope that we
would defeat the motion to recommit at the appropriate time and then
defeat this bill.
Let us send a resounding message to the President that the American
people, as represented by this Congress, overwhelmingly oppose tax
increases and fee increases.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I am increasingly disappointed that
Members of the House are presented on an ongoing basis with false
legislative choices that distort problems rather than seek to solve
them. H.R. 3989 is the latest example of this approach to policy-
making, where serious policy questions are demoted to merely political
ones. This vote is meaningless when devoid of the larger context of a
budget resolution, and everyone here knows that. I refuse to
participate in this legislative charade, and I urge my colleagues to do
the same. Join me in voting ``present'' on H.R. 3989. The sooner we
stop the pointless political gambits, the sooner we can deal with the
people's business.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time has expired. Pursuant to the order
of the House of Thursday, June 4, 1998, the previous question is
ordered on the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit Offered By Mr. Moakley
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefley). Is the gentleman opposed to the
bill?
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the bill, as everyone in
the House is.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Moakley moves to recommit the bill, H.R. 3989, to the
Committee on Ways and Means to report back forthwith with an
amendment:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
``It is the sense of the House of Representatives that the
following user fees should be enacted as soon as possible:
(1) Housing.--
(A) Increase cost to Federal Housing Administration
borrowers by ending rebates after mortgage repayment.
(B) Increase National Flood Insurance premiums.
(C) Increase Federal Housing Administration premiums to
cover the cost of the multifamily mortgage program.
(2) Transportation.--
(A) Establish airport takeoff/landing slot charges.
(B) Increase Federal Inland Waterway System fees to fully
recover the costs of operations, maintenance, and new
construction.
(3) Veterans.--
Extend for one year the loan fee for Veterans' Affairs
housing loans.
(4) Federal Retirement.--
Raise Federal Employees Health Benefit premiums.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) for 5 minutes on his motion.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, my motion to recommit is very simple.
Instead of voting on the revenue provisions contained in the
President's budget, let us take a vote on the user fees contained in
the Kasich budget. We have heard our friends over there saying they are
opposed to these fees. Well, let us see.
The Kasich budget contains almost $10.5 billion in user fees, fees on
FHA homeowners, fees on airlines, fees on veterans housing loans, fees
on inland water users, fees on Federal employees health benefits. There
are fees on individuals who participate in the National Flood Insurance
Program and, Mr. Speaker, as well as fees on the multifamily mortgage
program at the FHA. All of these fees are contained in the Kasich
budget.
One thing I have noticed this morning is there has been a lot of talk
about revenue provisions that were ripped out of the President's
budget. But, Mr. Speaker, the President's budget is not going to be
voted on later this morning, the Kasich budget is.
Mr. Speaker, we should not be wasting Members' time by voting on
parts of a budget proposal that the House is not even going to
consider. The bill proposed by the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Solomon) is objected to by the President and probably everybody else in
the House. Instead, let us take a test vote on the user fees in the
Kasich budget, $10.5 billion worth.
I find that ironic that the Republicans are beating their chests
about the revenue raises in a bill that is not even going to be
considered and strangely silent on the revenue raises that are included
in the bill that will be voted on in a matter of hours.
Mr. Speaker, where is the righteous defense of the American taxpayers
from the intrusive reach of the Federal Government contained in the
Kasich budget? Where is the outrage over the $10.5 billion in user fees
being imposed by the Kasich budget on homeowners and veterans?
I suppose it is just too much to expect consistency from my
Republican colleagues on this. The desperate urge to score political
points is just too strong. My motion to recommit, simply stated,
substitutes the Kasich user fee for those proposed by the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Solomon).
{time} 1015
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of
the motion to recommit. I also rise in opposition to the Republican
budget.
Mr. Speaker, as my friend, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. John
Tanner) pointed out last night, the new Republican majority in 4 years
has
[[Page H4186]]
truly achieved the level of arrogance that it took the Democratic Party
40 years to have in this body. It did not even allow what is the most
important vote of the year, the conservative Democratic alternative to
be offered.
If Members have followed this session, they will know that every
Tuesday has been spent commending this or condemning that, resolutions
that have no effect whatsoever. One week out of every month we have not
even been in session. Yet, we cannot find the time to debate and have
an open amendment process for the most important thing, which is the
budget of the United States, so those of us who would rather spend
money getting soldiers off of food stamps can, say, maybe take it from
things we do not think are as important, like foreign aid, like the $3
billion that a relatively wealthy Nation called Israel will get of our
money, but we cannot find the money to get soldiers off of food stamps.
We will not even be given the opportunity to do so because the budget
process, first under the Democrats and now under the Republicans, we
cannot even offer an amendment on it. That is wrong.
This is still a democracy, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker may do what he
wants to keep that from happening, but every one of us represents the
same number of people. Every one of us was elected, and every one of us
deserves the opportunity to try to set some priorities for this Nation,
and not be handed a load of garbage by one side or the other and say
vote on it, take it or leave it.
So I am going to vote against the Democratic budget, I am going to
vote against the Republican budget, and I am going to hope for once
that we will stick together and provide for this Nation an American
budget.
But the only way we can do that is to first vote down the Republican
budget, vote down the Democratic budget, vote for the motion to
recommit, and let us try to get back to what the Founding Fathers truly
had in mind, which is making this body a deliberative body of free
expression, where the majority rules and not the lobbyists.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefley). Does the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Solomon) rise in opposition to the motion to recommit?
Mr. SOLOMON. I do, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, the Moakley recommittal would prevent this
House from casting a resounding vote against the President's tax and
fee increases.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrich),
the Speaker of the House, a man who personifies the Republican vision
of no more tax increases.
Mr. GINGRICH. Mr. Speaker, let me say, first of all, that I was
delighted to watch the impassioned pleas of my liberal friends for
higher taxes. There was an intensity, a passion, an emotional
commitment to higher taxes that I believe is sincere.
These are friends who voted for the 1993 tax increase, passed only
with Democratic votes. These are friends for whom higher taxes is a
legitimate moral cause, because the American people, in their judgment,
are not smart enough to solve their own problems, and only bigger
bureaucracy, more power in Washington, less take-home pay, will lead to
the liberal utopia they believe in.
But I have to say to my good friends, I just checked two of the last
three speakers on the gentleman's side. They voted against the welfare
reform bill. It is not fair to get up here and protect the welfare
reform bill we wrote, that we passed, working with our Governors, my
good friend, John Engler of Michigan, who was in on Tuesday, when we
chatted about what we can get done; my good friend, George Pataki,
Governor of New York, with whom I have been talking about what we can
get done; my dear friend, Tommy Thompson, Governor of Wisconsin, who
was the original leader in the welfare reform movement, talking about
what we can get done.
We have found that we on our side are the people who actually worked
with Governors to write the welfare reform bill. So to have liberals
who always vote for tax increases jump up in defense of a welfare
reform plan they opposed, and cite Republican Governors to the
Republican majority, is a wonderful piece of oratory, but it is not
historically very accurate.
Let us talk about why we brought this vote up today. This is,
frankly, a very important point. I would urge every Democrat, every
Democrat who wants higher spending----
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GINGRICH. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I was just wondering, because
I read in the paper this morning that those are the same Republican
Governors who will be writing a letter against the budget and are
concerned about the money coming out of TANF, the welfare reform
proposal I opposed.
Mr. GINGRICH. Let me say to my good friend that very often people
around the country, when they read the newspaper version of reality,
respond to it. But in a recent conference call with the very Governors
the gentleman was talking about, they are quite satisfied with where we
are going with welfare reform, and I think they will be quite happy
with it.
Mr. MILLER of California. They accept the cuts in TANF?
Mr. GINGRICH. I appreciate the gentleman allowing me to clarify that
inaccurate report.
Now that the gentleman knows they are not going to be worried about
what we are doing, let us go to the heart of why we have raised this
particular motion. I think this is a very important issue.
The President sent up $51.9 billion in higher taxes and fees, not
counting the tobacco taxes. We took out all the tobacco taxes he sent
up, so this is just a straightforward issue on everything else he
wanted to raise, $51.9 billion. Later on this year the President is
going to come to the Congress and say, I need higher spending. I know I
agreed to the budget deal, I know it was a 5-year deal, but I need
higher spending.
So I would urge every Democrat, if they want the President to get
higher spending later on this fall, they need to vote no on this
motion. They need to say, we want $51 billion in higher taxes. We are
for bigger government and more taxes.
But if every Democrat votes with us against $51 billion in higher
taxes, then I do not think President Clinton has a leg to stand on in
coming to a negotiation later and saying, well, I am really for a
balanced budget, but by the way, I need more government, I need more
programs.
There are 77 tax hikes and user fees in this particular package, 77
tax hikes and user fees. Why? Because President Clinton is calling for
85 new spending programs, including 39 new entitlement programs.
Mr. Speaker, liberals who had the courage in 1993 to raise taxes may
well want to vote with the President for higher taxes and bigger
government. So I would urge all of my Democratic colleagues who truly
want bigger government and higher taxes, vote no on this.
But for those who want to go home and join us and say the Federal
Government is too big, it wastes too much money, we can find 1 percent
waste, fraud, and error, we can find 1 percent mismanagement, we can
find 1 percent unnecessary programs out of an entire Federal Government
of $9 trillion, we can find 1 percent, vote with us.
Those who have a better idea, as our good friend, the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) suggested he did, then they get to vote
against the President. They do not have to vote with us. But do not
vote with us to kill these tax increases, and then come back later and
say you really want the money, you just did not want to tell the
American people.
We are opposed to tax increases. We think the Federal Government is
too big, it wastes too much, it has too much power in Washington. We
believe taxes are too high and take-home pay is too low.
I am very proud and very confident that the people who brought us
welfare reform, the people who brought us a balanced budget, the people
who brought us tax cuts, are in fact capable of finding 1 percent
waste.
I urge our colleagues, vote no on their motion to recommit, and stop
the Clinton tax increases from further burdening the American people.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time has expired.
[[Page H4187]]
Without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to
recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5 of rule XV, the Chair
announces that he will reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the period of
time within which the vote by electronic device, if ordered, will be
taken on the question of passage.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 0, nays
416, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 17, as follows:
[Roll No. 206]
NAYS--416
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baesler
Baker
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berman
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Cardin
Carson
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Christensen
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cook
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crapo
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Ensign
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Fawell
Fazio
Filner
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Fowler
Fox
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gingrich
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Hansen
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Hefner
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kim
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kleczka
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHale
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Metcalf
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (CA)
Miller (FL)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Neal
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pappas
Parker
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Paxon
Payne
Pease
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Poshard
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Redmond
Regula
Riggs
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryun
Sabo
Salmon
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (OR)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Adam
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Snyder
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Stokes
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Talent
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thompson
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Torres
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1
Blumenauer
NOT VOTING--17
Buyer
Cooksey
Furse
Gejdenson
Gonzalez
Harman
Houghton
Johnson, E. B.
Kennedy (MA)
Lewis (GA)
McDade
Mollohan
Pelosi
Reyes
Ros-Lehtinen
Schumer
Sessions
{time} 1042
Messrs. BROWN of California, ROTHMAN, LEWIS of Kentucky, WATT of
North Carolina, LARGENT, GUTKNECHT, HYDE, LANTOS and WATKINS changed
their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. HEFNER. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
Mr. HEFNER. Mr. Speaker, for those of us who sat up last night and
watched the interesting debate and slept late this morning on this, is
this a sense of the Congress or is this a bill?
{time} 1045
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefley). We are prepared for the
question on final passage of the bill.
Mr. HEFNER. I thank the Chair very much.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 15-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 0, nays
421, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 12, as follows:
[Roll No. 207]
NOES--421
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baesler
Baker
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berman
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Cardin
Carson
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Christensen
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cook
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crapo
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Ensign
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Fawell
Fazio
Filner
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Fowler
Fox
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
[[Page H4188]]
Gillmor
Gilman
Gingrich
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Hansen
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Hefner
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kim
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kleczka
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHale
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Metcalf
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (CA)
Miller (FL)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Neal
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pappas
Parker
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Paxon
Payne
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Poshard
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Redmond
Regula
Reyes
Riggs
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryun
Sabo
Salmon
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (OR)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Adam
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Snyder
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Stokes
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Talent
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thompson
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Torres
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1
Blumenauer
NOT VOTING--12
Furse
Gejdenson
Gonzalez
Houghton
Johnson, E. B.
Kennedy (MA)
Largent
Lewis (GA)
McDade
Mollohan
Ros-Lehtinen
Schumer
{time} 1104
Mr. RIGGS changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the bill was not passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________