[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 18 (Thursday, February 8, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1224-S1225]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Dorgan, 
        and Mr. Kennedy):
  S. 293. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a refundable tax credit against increased residential energy costs and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Home Energy 
Assistance Tax Act with Senators Durbin, Clinton, Dorgan, and Kennedy.
  The rising cost of utility bills has reached near crisis proportions 
in my home state and in states across this country. Right now, millions 
of Americans are being buried by massive home heating bills. And if we 
don't do something soon, a lot of people are going to be left out in 
the cold.
  This winter has been an especially cold one. As a result, demand for 
natural gas is way up, and prices have skyrocketed.
  In the past few months, I've gotten phone calls and letters from 
people all across Iowa telling me about their outrageous heating bills. 
A man in West Des Moines told me that while his gas bill was $189.87 in 
December--it jumped to $601.67 in January.
  A couple in Duncombe said that their $79 gas bill in December was 
followed by a $330 gas bill in January--even though they never paid 
more than $120 a month last year.
  And a man from Merrill told me that his bill was $575 this month and 
$475 last month, even though it was never higher than $280 last year.
  This man and his wife receive $1,300 a month for Social Security--
$100 of which goes for Medicare and $300 for Medicare supplement. After 
food and other expenses, they just don't have enough left to pay their 
utility bills.
  Heating bills this high force people to make the kind of sacrifices 
that no one should have to make. A recent survey showed that 20 percent 
of the Iowa residents who asked for LIHEAP assistance went without 
medical care because of high heating bills. 12.3 percent went without 
food. 7.4 percent didn't pay their rent or make their house payment.
  The bottom line here is that people are struggling, and they need our 
help to keep from freezing in their homes this winter.
  That's why I believe that we should take the following three steps 
immediately:
  First, we've got to provide more emergency funds for the Low Income 
Home Energy Assistance Program or LIHEAP. Many low income and elderly 
people simply cannot afford $300 and $400 and $500 heating bills. We 
also need to increase the income limits on who can receive LIHEAP 
assistance.
  Second, bills have gotten so high that even middle income Americans 
are struggling--we've got to find a way to help them pay their energy 
utility bills as well. That's why I am introducing the Home Energy 
Assistance Tax Act to give taxpayers a 50 percent tax credit for the 
difference between their utility bills this winter compared to last 
winter.

  This credit will also cover the estimated increased costs of heating 
a home from heating oil or propane. It will not cover the first $100 in 
increased costs. It will not benefit high-income tax-payers. The credit 
is phased out for those making more than $100,000. However, this credit 
will be refundable so that people with low incomes could still receive 
it.
  One key problem with using the tax code to provide assistance is that 
people do not normally see its benefit until after they file their next 
tax return and receive a refund. However, taxpayers can reduce their 
payroll withholding by the amount of this credit and get the money 
quickly. So this credit can provide quick and meaningful help.
  The bill--much like a measure introduced by Senator Bob Smith--will 
also propose tax credits for energy efficient new homes and energy 
efficient heating, air conditioning and water-heating appliances. It 
will also provide tax benefits for similar energy conservation by 
businesses.
  Energy efficiency is crucial for quelling our home heating crisis. By 
helping people conserve energy, we reduce consumption and help them 
lower their heating bills. And when we reduce the demand that has 
driven prices up, we restore balance to the market and lower prices for 
everyone. Also, when we use less fuel, we create less air pollution and 
reduce our dependence on foreign sources. So energy efficiency tax 
credits are a win-win-win solution.
  I am also joining Senator Kerry in introducing a separate bill today 
that will provide some relief for small business owners by allowing 
them to acquire low interest emergency.
  I am, of course, fully aware that high gas prices have spurred new 
drilling which should eventually increase supply and bring prices back 
down. But this could take years. People are being hammered by high 
heating bills right now, and we need to act now to help our 
constituents.
  No one should be left out in the cold this winter. I hope that we can 
come together in the next few weeks and pass important legislation to 
help keep America warm.
  I urge that the Senate consider and pass this measure.
  I ask unanimous consent that a fact sheet be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                 Home Energy Assistance Tax Act (HEAT)

     Exactly what is covered? Who is covered? What is covered?
       Provides a refundable 50 percent credit from the first 
     utility bill covering a period starting in November till the 
     one ending during March this year minus a similar period last 
     winter. This is a one time benefit.
       Who: All taxpayers who have a principal residence and who 
     have energy utility costs this winter that are more than $100 
     more than last year's costs. There is a phase out of benefits 
     for those with higher incomes stating at $75,000 adjusted 
     gross income. The benefit is completely phased out at 
     $100,000.
       What: All energy utility bills plus any fuel used to heat 
     the home like heating oil or propane.
       It covers bills that people are responsible for, not 
     including LIHEAP and other government payments. A renter 
     benefits if they are responsible for their bills.
     How easy is this going to be for people to figure out?
       Utilities can very easily supply customers with the total 
     bills for the period from a year ago. Then all they need to 
     do is subtract.
       For those who use a bulk purchased fuel such as heating oil 
     or propane to heat their homes: There will be an estimated 
     average cost for each county determined by: (1) The number of 
     degree days in the two years from November 15 to May 15; (2) 
     the difference in the price of the fuel used this winter and 
     last, and (3) the amount needed to heat an average home. That 
     figure would be used to cover the cost of that fuel in 
     addition to the other energy utility bills.
       The IRS would calculate this number, getting their numbers 
     from NOAA, DOE and HUD.
     What about those who just bought their home?
       They would be allowed to use a government estimate of the 
     average increase for their county.
                                   ____
                                 
      By Mr. SANTORUM (for himself and Mr. Kohl):
  S. 294. A bill to amend the Agricultural Market Transition Act to 
establish a program to provide dairy farmers

[[Page S1225]]

a price safety net for small- and medium-sized dairy producers; to the 
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
assist our nation's dairy farmers. I represent a state where 
agriculture is the number one industry--dairy being the leading sector, 
and ranks fourth in national dairy production. Agriculture has, and 
continues to be, the backbone of our rural communities and our social 
character. While heated debates and regional politics have eclipsed 
opportunities to pass meaningful dairy legislation, I feel strongly 
that we must forge consensus in order to assist our nation's dairy 
families.
  I am pleased to have joining me in this effort my colleague from 
Wisconsin Senator Herb Kohl. While I am grateful for the opportunity to 
work with Senator Kohl on an issue of great importance to both of our 
home states, it unfortunately signals that our nation's dairy industry 
continues to grapple with difficult economic times.
  Senator Kohl and I worked together over the past year to forge a 
consensus plan that addresses the concerns of dairy farmers nationwide. 
For far too long, regional politics have plagued efforts to achieve a 
fair and equitable national dairy policy. As a result, milk pricing has 
become increasingly complex and overly prescriptive. Given that dairy 
farmers have been receiving the lowest price for their milk in more 
than twenty years, I feel strongly that Congress needs to step to the 
plate and offer a fair and responsible solution.
  The National Dairy Farmers Fairness Act has two major goals: (1) 
Create a dairy policy that is equitable for farmers in all regions of 
the country; and (2) provide more certainty for farmers in the prices 
they receive for their milk. To accomplish these goals, this 
legislation creates a safety net for farmers by providing supplemental 
assistance when milk prices are low. Specifically, a sliding scale 
payment is made based upon the previous year's price for the national 
average of Class III milk. In short, the payment rate to farmers is 
highest when the prices they received were the lowest. In order to be 
eligible, a farmer must have produced milk for commercial sale in the 
previous year, and would be compensated on the first 26,000 
hundredweight of production. All dairy producers would be eligible to 
participate under this scenario.
  Without a doubt, our dairy pricing policy is flawed. Many solutions--
modest to sweeping--have been proposed, discussed, and debated on the 
Senate floor yet final agreement among interested parties has eluded us 
for years. Considering that we will begin laying the groundwork for 
reauthorization of the Farm Bill over the next year, the time for 
consensus is now.
  I am committed to preserving the viability of Pennsylvania's dairy 
farmers. This legislative proposal represents the strong concern and 
interest of mine to find a middle ground in the often heated debate on 
dairy policy. I am pleased to join with Senator Kohl in this effort, 
and I believe it sends a strong signal that compromise can be achieved 
even on the most contentious of issues.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 294

       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 ``National Dairy Farmers 
     Fairness Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) dairy farm families of the United States are enduring 
     an unprecedented financial crisis;
       (2) the price of raw milk sent to the market by the dairy 
     farm families has fallen to the levels received in 1978; and
       (3) the number of family-sized dairy operations has 
     decreased by almost 75 percent in the last 2 decades, with 
     some States losing nearly 10 percent of their dairy farmers 
     in recent months.

     SEC. 3. DAIRY FARMERS PROGRAM.

       Chapter 1 of subtitle D of the Agricultural Market 
     Transition Act (7 U.S.C. 7251 et seq.) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 153. DAIRY FARMERS PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Applicable fiscal year.--The term `applicable fiscal 
     year' means each of fiscal years 2001 through 2008.
       ``(2) Class III milk.--The term `Class III milk' means milk 
     classified as Class III milk under a Federal milk marketing 
     order issued under section 8c of the Agricultural Adjustment 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 608c), reenacted with amendments by the 
     Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937.
       ``(b) Payments.--For each applicable fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall make a payment to producers on a farm that, 
     during the applicable fiscal year, produced milk for 
     commercial sale, in the amount obtained by multiplying--
       ``(1) the payment rate for the applicable fiscal year 
     determined under subsection (c); by
       ``(2) the payment quantity for the applicable fiscal year 
     determined under subsection (d).
       ``(c) Payment Rate.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the payment 
     rate for a payment made to producers on a farm for an 
     applicable fiscal year under subsection (b) shall be 
     determined as follows:

``If the average price received by producers in the United States for 
    Class III milk during the preceding fiscal year was (per 
The payment rate for a payment made to producers on a farm for the 
    applicable fiscal year under subsection (b) shall be (per 
    hundredweight)--
  $10.50 or less................................................50 ....

  $10.51 through $11.00.........................................42 ....

  $11.01 through $11.50.........................................34 ....

  $11.51 through $12.00.........................................26 ....

  $12.01 through $12.50.........................................18.....

       ``(2) Increased payment rate.--If the producers on a farm 
     produce during an applicable fiscal year a quantity of all 
     milk that is not more than the quantity of all milk produced 
     by the producers on the farm during the preceding fiscal 
     year, the payment rate for a payment to the producers on the 
     farm for the applicable fiscal year under paragraph (1) shall 
     be increased as follows:

``If the average price received by producers in the United States for 
    Class III milk during the preceding fiscal year was (per 
The payment rate for a payment made to the producers on the farm for 
    the applicable fiscal year under paragraph (1) shall be increased 
    by (per hundredweight)--
  $10.50 or less................................................30 ....

  $10.51 through $11.00.........................................26 ....

  $11.01 through $11.50.........................................22 ....

  $11.51 through $12.00.........................................18 ....

  $12.01 through $12.50.........................................14.....

       ``(d) Payment Quantity.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the quantity 
     of all milk for which the producers on a farm shall receive a 
     payment for an applicable fiscal year under subsection (b) 
     shall be equal to the quantity of all milk produced by the 
     producers on the farm during the applicable fiscal year.
       ``(2) Maximum quantity.--The quantity of all milk for which 
     the producers on a farm shall receive a payment for an 
     applicable year under subsection (b) shall not exceed 26,000 
     hundredweight of all milk.
       ``(e) Commodity Credit Corporation.--The Secretary shall 
     carry out the program authorized by this section through the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation.''.
                                 ______