[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 14 (Thursday, February 14, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H477-H509]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1230
HOPE FOR CHILDREN ACT
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 347, I call up
the bill (H.R. 622), to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
expand the adoption credit, and for other purposes, with Senate
amendments thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration in the
House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
Motion Offered by Mr. Thomas
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Quinn). The Clerk will designate the
motion.
The text of the motion is as follows:
Mr. Thomas moves that the House concur in the Senate
amendments with respective amendments as follows:
[[Page H478]]
Senate Amendments:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Temporary
Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Federal-State agreements.
Sec. 3. Temporary extended unemployment compensation account.
Sec. 4. Payments to States having agreements under this Act.
Sec. 5. Financing provisions.
Sec. 6. Fraud and overpayments.
Sec. 7. Definitions.
Sec. 8. Applicability.
SEC. 2. FEDERAL-STATE AGREEMENTS.
(a) In General.--Any State which desires to do so may enter
into and participate in an agreement under this Act with the
Secretary of Labor (in this Act referred to as the
``Secretary''). Any State which is a party to an agreement
under this Act may, upon providing 30 days written notice to
the Secretary, terminate such agreement.
(b) Provisions of Agreement.--Any agreement under
subsection (a) shall provide that the State agency of the
State will make payments of temporary extended unemployment
compensation to individuals--
(1) who--
(A) first exhausted all rights to regular compensation
under the State law on or after the first day of the week
that includes September 11, 2001; or
(B) have their 26th week of regular compensation under the
State law end on or after the first day of the week that
includes September 11, 2001;
(2) who do not have any rights to regular compensation
under the State law of any other State; and
(3) who are not receiving compensation under the
unemployment compensation law of any other country.
(c) Coordination Rules.--
(1) Temporary extended unemployment compensation to serve
as second-tier benefits.--Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, neither regular compensation, extended compensation,
nor additional compensation under any Federal or State law
shall be payable to any individual for any week for which
temporary extended unemployment compensation is payable to
such individual.
(2) Treatment of other unemployment compensation.--After
the date on which a State enters into an agreement under this
Act, any regular compensation in excess of 26 weeks, any
extended compensation, and any additional compensation under
any Federal or State law shall be payable to an individual in
accordance with the State law after such individual has
exhausted any rights to temporary extended unemployment
compensation under the agreement.
(d) Exhaustion of Benefits.--For purposes of subsection
(b)(1)(A), an individual shall be deemed to have exhausted
such individual's rights to regular compensation under a
State law when--
(1) no payments of regular compensation can be made under
such law because the individual has received all regular
compensation available to the individual based on employment
or wages during the individual's base period; or
(2) the individual's rights to such compensation have been
terminated by reason of the expiration of the benefit year
with respect to which such rights existed.
(e) Weekly Benefit Amount, Terms and Conditions, Etc.
Relating to Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation.--
For purposes of any agreement under this Act--
(1) the amount of temporary extended unemployment
compensation which shall be payable to an individual for any
week of total unemployment shall be equal to the amount of
regular compensation (including dependents' allowances)
payable to such individual under the State law for a week for
total unemployment during such individual's benefit year;
(2) the terms and conditions of the State law which apply
to claims for regular compensation and to the payment thereof
shall apply to claims for temporary extended unemployment
compensation and the payment thereof, except where
inconsistent with the provisions of this Act or with the
regulations or operating instructions of the Secretary
promulgated to carry out this Act; and
(3) the maximum amount of temporary extended unemployment
compensation payable to any individual for whom a temporary
extended unemployment compensation account is established
under section 3 shall not exceed the amount established in
such account for such individual.
SEC. 3. TEMPORARY EXTENDED UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION ACCOUNT.
(a) In General.--Any agreement under this Act shall provide
that the State will establish, for each eligible individual
who files an application for temporary extended unemployment
compensation, a temporary extended unemployment compensation
account.
(b) Amount in Account.--
(1) In general.--The amount established in an account under
subsection (a) shall be equal to 13 times the individual's
weekly benefit amount.
(2) Weekly benefit amount.--For purposes of paragraph (1),
an individual's weekly benefit amount for any week is an
amount equal to the amount of regular compensation (including
dependents' allowances) under the State law payable to the
individual for such week for total unemployment.
SEC. 4. PAYMENTS TO STATES HAVING AGREEMENTS UNDER THIS ACT.
(a) General Rule.--There shall be paid to each State that
has entered into an agreement under this Act an amount equal
to 100 percent of the temporary extended unemployment
compensation paid to individuals by the State pursuant to
such agreement.
(b) Determination of Amount.--Sums under subsection (a)
payable to any State by reason of such State having an
agreement under this Act shall be payable, either in advance
or by way of reimbursement (as may be determined by the
Secretary), in such amounts as the Secretary estimates the
State will be entitled to receive under this Act for each
calendar month, reduced or increased, as the case may be, by
any amount by which the Secretary finds that the Secretary's
estimates for any prior calendar month were greater or less
than the amounts which should have been paid to the State.
Such estimates may be made on the basis of such statistical,
sampling, or other method as may be agreed upon by the
Secretary and the State agency of the State involved.
(c) Administrative Expenses.--There are appropriated out of
the employment security administration account (as
established by section 901(a) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1101(a))) of the Unemployment Trust Fund, without
fiscal year limitation, such funds as may be necessary for
purposes of assisting States (as provided in title III of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 501 et seq.)) in meeting the
costs of administration of agreements under this Act.
SEC. 5. FINANCING PROVISIONS.
(a) In General.--Funds in the extended unemployment
compensation account (as established by section 905(a) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1105(a))), and the Federal
unemployment account (as established by section 904(g) of
such Act (42 U.S.C. 1104(g))), of the Unemployment Trust Fund
(as established by section 904(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1104(a))) shall be used, in accordance with subsection (b),
for the making of payments (described in section 4(a)) to
States having agreements entered into under this Act.
(b) Certification.--The Secretary shall from time to time
certify to the Secretary of the Treasury for payment to each
State the sums described in section 4(a) which are payable to
such State under this Act. The Secretary of the Treasury,
prior to audit or settlement by the General Accounting
Office, shall make payments to the State in accordance with
such certification by transfers from the extended
unemployment compensation account, as so established (or, to
the extent that there are insufficient funds in that account,
from the Federal unemployment account, as so established) to
the account of such State in the Unemployment Trust Fund (as
so established).
SEC. 6. FRAUD AND OVERPAYMENTS.
(a) In General.--If an individual knowingly has made, or
caused to be made by another, a false statement or
representation of a material fact, or knowingly has failed,
or caused another to fail, to disclose a material fact, and
as a result of such false statement or representation or of
such nondisclosure such individual has received any temporary
extended unemployment compensation under this Act to which
such individual was not entitled, such individual--
(1) shall be ineligible for any further benefits under this
Act in accordance with the provisions of the applicable State
unemployment compensation law relating to fraud in connection
with a claim for unemployment compensation; and
(2) shall be subject to prosecution under section 1001 of
title 18, United States Code.
(b) Repayment.--In the case of individuals who have
received any temporary extended unemployment compensation
under this Act to which such individuals were not entitled,
the State shall require such individuals to repay those
benefits to the State agency, except that the State agency
may waive such repayment if it determines that--
(1) the payment of such benefits was without fault on the
part of any such individual; and
(2) such repayment would be contrary to equity and good
conscience.
(c) Recovery by State Agency.--
(1) In general.--The State agency may recover the amount to
be repaid, or any part thereof, by deductions from any
regular compensation or temporary extended unemployment
compensation payable to such individual under this Act or
from any unemployment compensation payable to such individual
under any Federal unemployment compensation law administered
by the State agency or under any other Federal law
administered by the State agency which provides for the
payment of any assistance or allowance with respect to any
week of unemployment, during the 3-year period after the date
such individuals received the payment of the temporary
extended unemployment compensation to which such individuals
were not entitled, except that no single deduction may exceed
50 percent of the weekly benefit amount from which such
deduction is made.
(2) Opportunity for hearing.--No repayment shall be
required, and no deduction shall be made, until a
determination has been made, notice thereof and an
opportunity for a fair hearing has been given to the
individual, and the determination has become final.
(d) Review.--Any determination by a State agency under this
section shall be subject to review in the same manner and to
the same extent as determinations under the State
unemployment compensation law, and only in that manner and to
that extent.
SEC. 7. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act, the terms ``compensation'', ``regular
compensation'', ``extended compensation'', ``additional
compensation'', ``benefit year'', ``base period'', ``State'',
``State agency'', ``State
[[Page H479]]
law'', and ``week'' have the respective meanings given such
terms under section 205 of the Federal-State Extended
Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note).
SEC. 8. APPLICABILITY.
An agreement entered into under this Act shall apply to
weeks of unemployment--
(1) beginning after the date on which such agreement is
entered into; and
(2) ending before January 6, 2003.
Amend the title so as to read: ``An Act to provide for
temporary unemployment compensation.''.
House Amendments to Senate Amendments:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the
amendment of the Senate to the text of the bill, insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; ETC.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Economic
Security and Worker Assistance Act of 2002''.
(b) References to Internal Revenue Code of 1986.--Except as
otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this Act an
amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an amendment to,
or repeal of, a section or other provision, the reference
shall be considered to be made to a section or other
provision of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(c) Table of Contents.--
Sec. 1. Short title; etc.
TITLE I--INDIVIDUAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 101. Supplemental stimulus payments.
Sec. 102. Acceleration of 25 percent individual income tax rate.
TITLE II--BUSINESS PROVISIONS
Sec. 201. Special depreciation allowance for certain property acquired
after September 10, 2001, and before September 11, 2004.
Sec. 202. Temporary increase in expensing under section 179.
Sec. 203. Alternative minimum tax reform.
Sec. 204. Carryback of certain net operating losses allowed for 5
years.
Sec. 205. Recovery period for depreciation of certain leasehold
improvements.
TITLE III--EXTENSIONS OF CERTAIN EXPIRING PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Extensions
Sec. 301. Allowance of nonrefundable personal credits against regular
and minimum tax liability.
Sec. 302. Credit for qualified electric vehicles.
Sec. 303. Credit for electricity produced from certain renewable
resources.
Sec. 304. Work opportunity credit.
Sec. 305. Welfare-to-work credit.
Sec. 306. Deduction for clean-fuel vehicles and certain refueling
property.
Sec. 307. Taxable income limit on percentage depletion for oil and
natural gas produced from marginal properties.
Sec. 308. Qualified zone academy bonds.
Sec. 309. Cover over of tax on distilled spirits.
Sec. 310. Parity in the application of certain limits to mental health
benefits.
Sec. 311. Temporary special rules for taxation of life insurance
companies.
Sec. 312. Availability of medical savings accounts.
Sec. 313. Incentives for Indian employment and property on Indian
reservations.
Sec. 314. Subpart F exemption for active financing.
Sec. 315. Repeal of requirement for approved diesel or kerosene
terminals.
Subtitle B--Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
Sec. 321. Reauthorization of TANF supplemental grants for population
increases for fiscal year 2002.
Sec. 322. 1-year extension of contingency fund under the TANF program.
TITLE IV--TAX INCENTIVES FOR NEW YORK CITY AND DISTRESSED AREAS
Sec. 401. Tax benefits for area of New York City damaged in terrorist
attacks on September 11, 2001.
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS AND TECHNICAL PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--General Miscellaneous Provisions
Sec. 501. Allowance of electronic 1099's.
Sec. 502. Excluded cancellation of indebtedness income of S corporation
not to result in adjustment to basis of stock of
shareholders.
Sec. 503. Limitation on use of nonaccrual experience method of
accounting.
Sec. 504. Exclusion for foster care payments to apply to payments by
qualified placement agencies.
Sec. 505. Interest rate range for additional funding requirements.
Sec. 506. Adjusted gross income determined by taking into account
certain expenses of elementary and secondary school
teachers.
Subtitle B--Technical Corrections
Sec. 511. Amendments related to Economic Growth and Tax Relief
Reconciliation Act of 2001.
Sec. 512. Amendments related to Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of
2000.
Sec. 513. Amendments related to the Tax Relief Extension Act of 1999.
Sec. 514. Amendments related to the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997.
Sec. 515. Amendment related to the Balanced Budget Act of 1997.
Sec. 516. Other technical corrections.
Sec. 517. Clerical amendments.
Sec. 518. Additional corrections.
TITLE VI--UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE
Sec. 601. Short title.
Sec. 602. Federal-State agreements.
Sec. 603. Temporary extended unemployment compensation account.
Sec. 604. Payments to States having agreements for the payment of
temporary extended unemployment compensation.
Sec. 605. Financing provisions.
Sec. 606. Fraud and overpayments.
Sec. 607. Definitions.
Sec. 608. Applicability.
Sec. 609. Special Reed Act transfer in fiscal year 2002.
TITLE VII--DISPLACED WORKER HEALTH INSURANCE CREDIT
Sec. 701. Displaced worker health insurance credit.
Sec. 702. Advance payment of displaced worker health insurance credit.
TITLE VIII--EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ASSISTANCE AND TEMPORARY HEALTH
CARE COVERAGE ASSISTANCE
Sec. 801. Employment and training assistance and temporary health care
coverage assistance.
TITLE IX--TEMPORARY STATE HEALTH CARE ASSISTANCE
Sec. 901. Temporary State health care assistance.
TITLE X--SOCIAL SECURITY HELD HARMLESS; BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF ACT
Sec. 1001. No impact on social security trust funds.
Sec. 1002. Emergency designation.
TITLE I--INDIVIDUAL PROVISIONS
SEC. 101. SUPPLEMENTAL STIMULUS PAYMENTS.
(a) In General.--Section 6428 (relating to acceleration of
10 percent income tax rate bracket benefit for 2001) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) Supplemental Stimulus Payments.--
``(1) In general.--Each individual who was an eligible
individual for such individual's first taxable year beginning
in 2000 and who, before October 16, 2001, filed a return of
tax imposed by subtitle A for such taxable year shall be
treated as having made a payment against the tax imposed by
chapter 1 for such first taxable year in an amount equal to
the supplemental refund amount for such taxable year.
``(2) Supplemental refund amount.--For purposes of this
subsection, the supplemental refund amount is an amount equal
to the excess (if any) of--
``(A)(i) $600 in the case of taxpayers to whom section 1(a)
applies,
``(ii) $500 in the case of taxpayers to whom section 1(b)
applies, and
``(iii) $300 in the case of taxpayers to whom subsections
(c) or (d) of section 1 applies, over
``(B) the taxpayer's advance refund amount under subsection
(e).
``(3) Timing of payments.--In the case of any overpayment
attributable to this subsection, the Secretary shall, subject
to the provisions of this title, refund or credit such
overpayment as rapidly as possible.
``(4) No interest.--No interest shall be allowed on any
overpayment attributable to this subsection.''
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Subparagraph (A) of section 6428(d)(1) is amended by
striking ``subsection (e)'' and inserting ``subsections (e)
and (f)''.
(2) Subparagraph (B) of section 6428(d)(1) is amended by
striking ``subsection (e)'' and inserting ``subsection (e) or
(f)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 102. ACCELERATION OF 25 PERCENT INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX
RATE.
(a) In General.--The table contained in paragraph (2) of
section 1(i) (relating to reductions in rates after June 30,
2001) is amended--
(1) by striking ``27.0%'' and inserting ``25.0%'', and
(2) by striking ``26.0%'' and inserting ``25.0%''.
(b) Reduction Not To Increase Minimum Tax.--
(1) Subparagraph (A) of section 55(d)(1) is amended by
striking ``($49,000 in the case of taxable years beginning in
2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004)'' and inserting ``($49,000 in the
case of taxable years beginning in 2001, $52,200 in the case
of taxable years beginning in 2002 or 2003, and $50,700 in
the case of taxable years beginning in 2004)''.
(2) Subparagraph (B) of section 55(d)(1) is amended by
striking ``($35,750 in the case of taxable years beginning in
2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004)'' and inserting ``($35,750 in the
case of taxable years beginning in 2001, $37,350 in the case
of taxable years beginning in 2002 or 2003, and $36,600 in
the case of taxable years beginning in 2004)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.
(d) Section 15 Not To Apply.--No amendment made by this
section shall be treated as a change in a rate of tax for
purposes of section 15 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
[[Page H480]]
TITLE II--BUSINESS PROVISIONS
SEC. 201. SPECIAL DEPRECIATION ALLOWANCE FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY
ACQUIRED AFTER SEPTEMBER 10, 2001, AND BEFORE
SEPTEMBER 11, 2004.
(a) In General.--Section 168 (relating to accelerated cost
recovery system) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(k) Special Allowance for Certain Property Acquired After
September 10, 2001, and Before September 11, 2004.--
``(1) Additional allowance.--In the case of any qualified
property--
``(A) the depreciation deduction provided by section 167(a)
for the taxable year in which such property is placed in
service shall include an allowance equal to 30 percent of the
adjusted basis of the qualified property, and
``(B) the adjusted basis of the qualified property shall be
reduced by the amount of such deduction before computing the
amount otherwise allowable as a depreciation deduction under
this chapter for such taxable year and any subsequent taxable
year.
``(2) Qualified property.--For purposes of this
subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified property' means
property--
``(i)(I) to which this section applies which has a recovery
period of 20 years or less or which is water utility
property, or
``(II) which is computer software (as defined in section
167(f)(1)(B)) for which a deduction is allowable under
section 167(a) without regard to this subsection,
``(ii) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer after September 10, 2001,
``(iii) which is--
``(I) acquired by the taxpayer after September 10, 2001,
and before September 11, 2004, but only if no written binding
contract for the acquisition was in effect before September
11, 2001, or
``(II) acquired by the taxpayer pursuant to a written
binding contract which was entered into after September 10,
2001, and before September 11, 2004, and
``(iv) which is placed in service by the taxpayer before
January 1, 2005, or, in the case of property described in
subparagraph (B), before January 1, 2006.
``(B) Certain property having longer production periods
treated as qualified property.--
``(i) In general.--The term `qualified property' includes
property--
``(I) which meets the requirements of clauses (i), (ii),
and (iii) of subparagraph (A),
``(II) which has a recovery period of at least 10 years or
is transportation property, and
``(III) which is subject to section 263A by reason of
clause (ii) or (iii) of subsection (f)(1)(B) thereof.
``(ii) Only pre-september 11, 2004, basis eligible for
additional allowance.--In the case of property which is
qualified property solely by reason of clause (i), paragraph
(1) shall apply only to the extent of the adjusted basis
thereof attributable to manufacture, construction, or
production before September 11, 2004.
``(iii) Transportation property.--For purposes of this
subparagraph, the term `transportation property' means
tangible personal property used in the trade or business of
transporting persons or property.
``(C) Exceptions.--
``(i) Alternative depreciation property.--The term
`qualified property' shall not include any property to which
the alternative depreciation system under subsection (g)
applies, determined--
``(I) without regard to paragraph (7) of subsection (g)
(relating to election to have system apply), and
``(II) after application of section 280F(b) (relating to
listed property with limited business use).
``(ii) Election out.--If a taxpayer makes an election under
this clause with respect to any class of property for any
taxable year, this subsection shall not apply to all property
in such class placed in service during such taxable year.
``(iii) Qualified leasehold improvement property.--The term
`qualified property' shall not include any qualified
leasehold improvement property (as defined in section
168(e)(6)).
``(D) Special rules.--
``(i) Self-constructed property.--In the case of a taxpayer
manufacturing, constructing, or producing property for the
taxpayer's own use, the requirements of clause (iii) of
subparagraph (A) shall be treated as met if the taxpayer
begins manufacturing, constructing, or producing the property
after September 10, 2001, and before September 11, 2004.
``(ii) Sale-leasebacks.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A)(ii), if property--
``(I) is originally placed in service after September 10,
2001, by a person, and
``(II) sold and leased back by such person within 3 months
after the date such property was originally placed in
service,
such property shall be treated as originally placed in
service not earlier than the date on which such property is
used under the leaseback referred to in subclause (II).
``(E) Coordination with section 280f.--For purposes of
section 280F--
``(i) Automobiles.--In the case of a passenger automobile
(as defined in section 280F(d)(5)) which is qualified
property, the Secretary shall increase the limitation under
section 280F(a)(1)(A)(i) by $4,600.
``(ii) Listed property.--The deduction allowable under
paragraph (1) shall be taken into account in computing any
recapture amount under section 280F(b)(2).''
(b) Allowance Against Alternative Minimum Tax.--
(1) In general.--Section 56(a)(1)(A) (relating to
depreciation adjustment for alternative minimum tax) is
amended by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iii) Additional allowance for certain property acquired
after september 10, 2001, and before september 11, 2004.--The
deduction under section 168(k) shall be allowed.''
(2) Conforming amendment.--Clause (i) of section
56(a)(1)(A) is amended by striking ``clause (ii)'' both
places it appears and inserting ``clauses (ii) and (iii)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after September 10,
2001, in taxable years ending after such date.
SEC. 202. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN EXPENSING UNDER SECTION 179.
(a) In General.--The table contained in section 179(b)(1)
(relating to dollar limitation) is amended to read as
follows:
``If thThe applicable
amount is:
2001.....................................................$24,000
2002 or 2003.............................................$40,000
2004 or thereafter.....................................$25,000.''
(b) Temporary Increase in Amount of Property Triggering
Phaseout of Maximum Benefit.--Paragraph (2) of section 179(b)
is amended by inserting before the period ``($325,000 in the
case of taxable years beginning during 2002 or 2003)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.
SEC. 203. ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX REFORM.
(a) Repeal of Preference for Depreciation.--
(1) Paragraph (1) of section 56(a) is amended by adding at
the end the following new subparagraph:
``(E) Termination.--This paragraph shall not apply to
property placed in service in taxable years beginning after
December 31, 2001.''
(2) Paragraph (5) of section 56(a) is amended by adding at
the end: ``This paragraph shall not apply to property placed
in service in taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.''
(b) Repeal of 90 Percent Limitation on Foreign Tax
Credits.--
(1) Subsection (a) of section 59 is amended by striking
paragraph (2) and by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as
paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively.
(2) Subclause (II) of section 53(d)(1)(B)(i) is amended by
striking ``and if section 59(a)(2) did not apply''.
(c) Repeal of 90 Percent Limitation on Net Operating Loss
Deduction.--Subparagraph (A) of section 56(d)(1), as amended
by section 204, is amended to read as follows:
``(A) the amount of such deduction shall not exceed
alternative minimum taxable income determined without regard
to such deduction, and''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.
SEC. 204. CARRYBACK OF CERTAIN NET OPERATING LOSSES ALLOWED
FOR 5 YEARS.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 172(b) (relating
to years to which loss may be carried) is amended by adding
at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(H) In the case of a taxpayer which has a net operating
loss for any taxable year ending during 2001 or 2002,
subparagraph (A)(i) shall be applied by substituting `5' for
`2' and subparagraph (F) shall not apply.''
(b) Election To Disregard 5-Year Carryback.--Section 172
(relating to net operating loss deduction) is amended by
redesignating subsection (j) as subsection (k) and by
inserting after subjection (i) the following new subsection:
``(j) Election To Disregard 5-Year Carryback for Certain
Net Operating Losses.--Any taxpayer entitled to a 5-year
carryback under subsection (b)(1)(H) from any loss year may
elect to have the carryback period with respect to such loss
year determined without regard to subsection (b)(1)(H). Such
election shall be made in such manner as may be prescribed by
the Secretary and shall be made by the due date (including
extensions of time) for filing the taxpayer's return for the
taxable year of the net operating loss. Such election, once
made for any taxable year, shall be irrevocable for such
taxable year.''
(c) Temporary Suspension of 90 Percent Limit on Certain NOL
Carrybacks.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (A) of section 56(d)(1)
(relating to general rule defining alternative tax net
operating loss deduction) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) the amount of such deduction shall not exceed the sum
of--
``(i) the lesser of--
``(I) the amount of such deduction attributable to net
operating losses (other than the deduction attributable to
carrybacks described in clause (ii)(I)), or
``(II) 90 percent of alternative minimum taxable income
determined without regard to such deduction, plus
``(ii) the lesser of--
``(I) the amount of such deduction attributable to
carrybacks of net operating losses for taxable years ending
during 2001 or 2002, or
``(II) alternative minimum taxable income determined
without regard to such deduction
[[Page H481]]
reduced by the amount determined under clause (i), and''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall apply to taxable years beginning before January 1,
2002.
(d) Effective Date.--Except as provided in subsection (c),
the amendments made by this section shall apply to net
operating losses for taxable years ending after December 31,
2000.
SEC. 205. RECOVERY PERIOD FOR DEPRECIATION OF CERTAIN
LEASEHOLD IMPROVEMENTS.
(a) 15-Year Recovery Period.--Subparagraph (E) of section
168(e)(3) (relating to 15-year property) is amended by
striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii), by striking the
period at the end of clause (iii) and inserting ``, and'',
and by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iv) any qualified leasehold improvement property.''
(b) Qualified Leasehold Improvement Property.--Subsection
(e) of section 168 is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(6) Qualified leasehold improvement property.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified leasehold
improvement property' means any improvement to an interior
portion of a building which is nonresidential real property
if--
``(i) such improvement is made under or pursuant to a lease
(as defined in subsection (h)(7))--
``(I) by the lessee (or any sublessee) of such portion, or
``(II) by the lessor of such portion,
``(ii) such portion is to be occupied exclusively by the
lessee (or any sublessee) of such portion, and
``(iii) such improvement is placed in service more than 3
years after the date the building was first placed in
service.
``(B) Certain improvements not included.--Such term shall
not include any improvement for which the expenditure is
attributable to--
``(i) the enlargement of the building,
``(ii) any elevator or escalator,
``(iii) any structural component benefiting a common area,
and
``(iv) the internal structural framework of the building.
``(C) Definitions and special rules.--For purposes of this
paragraph--
``(i) Commitment to lease treated as lease.--A commitment
to enter into a lease shall be treated as a lease, and the
parties to such commitment shall be treated as lessor and
lessee, respectively.
``(ii) Related persons.--A lease between related persons
shall not be considered a lease. For purposes of the
preceding sentence, the term `related persons' means--
``(I) members of an affiliated group (as defined in section
1504), and
``(II) persons having a relationship described in
subsection (b) of section 267; except that, for purposes of
this clause, the phrase `80 percent or more' shall be
substituted for the phrase `more than 50 percent' each place
it appears in such subsection.
``(D) Improvements made by lessor.--
``(i) In general.--In the case of an improvement made by
the person who was the lessor of such improvement when such
improvement was placed in service, such improvement shall be
qualified leasehold improvement property (if at all) only so
long as such improvement is held by such person.
``(ii) Exception for changes in form of business.--Property
shall not cease to be qualified leasehold improvement
property under clause (i) by reason of--
``(I) death,
``(II) a transaction to which section 381(a) applies, or
``(III) a mere change in the form of conducting the trade
or business so long as the property is retained in such trade
or business as qualified leasehold improvement property and
the taxpayer retains a substantial interest in such trade or
business.
``(iii) Treatment of failures to maintain substantial
interest in trade or business.--In the case of property to
which clause (ii)(III) would apply but for the failure of the
taxpayer to retain a substantial interest in a trade or
business, the remaining adjusted basis of such property shall
be depreciated under this section over 39 years.''
(c) Requirement To Use Straight Line Method.--Paragraph (3)
of section 168(b) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subparagraph:
``(G) Qualified leasehold improvement property described in
subsection (e)(6).''
(d) Alternative System.--The table contained in section
168(g)(3)(B) is amended by adding at the end the following
new item:
``(E)(iv).......................................................15''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to qualified leasehold improvement property
placed in service after September 10, 2001.
TITLE III--EXTENSIONS OF CERTAIN EXPIRING PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Extensions
SEC. 301. ALLOWANCE OF NONREFUNDABLE PERSONAL CREDITS AGAINST
REGULAR AND MINIMUM TAX LIABILITY.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 26(a) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``rule for 2000 and 2001.--'' and inserting
``rule for 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003.--'', and
(2) by striking ``during 2000 or 2001,'' and inserting
``during 2000, 2001, 2002, or 2003,''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 904(h) is amended by striking ``during 2000 or
2001'' and inserting ``during 2000, 2001, 2002, or 2003''.
(2) The amendments made by sections 201(b), 202(f), and
618(b) of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation
Act of 2001 shall not apply to taxable years beginning during
2002 and 2003.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.
SEC. 302. CREDIT FOR QUALIFIED ELECTRIC VEHICLES.
(a) In General.--Section 30 is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(2)--
(A) by striking ``December 31, 2001,'' and inserting
``December 31, 2003,'', and
(B) in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), by striking
``2002'', ``2003'', and ``2004'', respectively, and inserting
``2004'', ``2005'', and ``2006'', respectively, and
(2) in subsection (e), by striking ``December 31, 2004''
and inserting ``December 31, 2006''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Subparagraph (C) of section 280F(a)(1) is amended by
adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iii) Application of subparagraph.--This subparagraph
shall apply to property placed in service after August 5,
1997, and before January 1, 2007.''
(2) Subsection (b) of section 971 of the Taxpayer Relief
Act of 1997 is amended by striking ``and before January 1,
2005''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after December 31,
2001.
SEC. 303. CREDIT FOR ELECTRICITY PRODUCED FROM CERTAIN
RENEWABLE RESOURCES.
(a) In General.--Subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of section
45(c)(3) are both amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting
``2004''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall apply to facilities placed in service after December
31, 2001.
SEC. 304. WORK OPPORTUNITY CREDIT.
(a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 51(c)(4) is
amended by striking ``2001'' and inserting ``2003''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to individuals who begin work for the employer
after December 31, 2001.
SEC. 305. WELFARE-TO-WORK CREDIT.
(a) In General.--Subsection (f) of section 51A is amended
by striking ``2001'' and inserting ``2003''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to individuals who begin work for the employer
after December 31, 2001.
SEC. 306. DEDUCTION FOR CLEAN-FUEL VEHICLES AND CERTAIN
REFUELING PROPERTY.
(a) In General.--Section 179A is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(1)(B)--
(A) by striking ``December 31, 2001,'' and inserting
``December 31, 2003,'', and
(B) in clauses (i), (ii), and (iii), by striking ``2002'',
``2003'', and ``2004'', respectively, and inserting ``2004'',
``2005'', and ``2006'', respectively, and
(2) in subsection (f), by striking ``December 31, 2004''
and inserting ``December 31, 2006''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall apply to property placed in service after December 31,
2001.
SEC. 307. TAXABLE INCOME LIMIT ON PERCENTAGE DEPLETION FOR
OIL AND NATURAL GAS PRODUCED FROM MARGINAL
PROPERTIES.
(a) In General.--Subparagraph (H) of section 613A(c)(6) is
amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2004''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.
SEC. 308. QUALIFIED ZONE ACADEMY BONDS.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 1397E(e) is
amended by striking ``2000, and 2001'' and inserting ``2000,
2001, 2002, and 2003''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to obligations issued after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 309. COVER OVER OF TAX ON DISTILLED SPIRITS.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 7652(f) is
amended by striking ``January 1, 2002'' and inserting
``January 1, 2004''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to articles brought into the United States after
December 31, 2001.
SEC. 310. PARITY IN THE APPLICATION OF CERTAIN LIMITS TO
MENTAL HEALTH BENEFITS.
(a) In General.--Subsection (f) of section 9812, as amended
by the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002, is
amended to read as follows:
``(f) Application of Section.--This section shall not apply
to benefits for services furnished--
``(1) on or after September 30, 2001, and before January
10, 2002, and
``(2) after December 31, 2003.''
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to plan years beginning after December 31, 2000.
[[Page H482]]
SEC. 311. TEMPORARY SPECIAL RULES FOR TAXATION OF LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANIES.
(a) Reduction in Mutual Life Insurance Company Deductions
Not To Apply in Certain Years.--Section 809 (relating to
reduction in certain deductions of material life insurance
companies) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(j) Differential Earnings Rate Treated as Zero for
Certain Years.--Notwithstanding subsection (c) or (f), the
differential earnings rate shall be treated as zero for
purposes of computing both the differential earnings amount
and the recomputed differential earnings amount for a mutual
life insurance company's taxable years beginning in 2001,
2002, or 2003.''
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2000.
SEC. 312. AVAILABILITY OF MEDICAL SAVINGS ACCOUNTS.
(a) In General.--Paragraphs (2) and (3)(B) of section
220(i) (defining cut-off year) are each amended by striking
``2002'' each place it appears and inserting ``2003''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Paragraph (2) of section 220(j) is amended by striking
``1998, 1999, or 2001'' each place it appears and inserting
``1998, 1999, 2001, or 2002''.
(2) Subparagraph (A) of section 220(j)(4) is amended by
striking ``and 2001'' and inserting ``2001, and 2002''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on January 1, 2002.
SEC. 313. INCENTIVES FOR INDIAN EMPLOYMENT AND PROPERTY ON
INDIAN RESERVATIONS.
(a) Employment.--Subsection (f) of section 45A is amended
by striking ``December 31, 2003'' and inserting ``December
31, 2004''.
(b) Property.--Paragraph (8) of section 168(j) is amended
by striking ``December 31, 2003'' and inserting ``December
31, 2004''.
SEC. 314. SUBPART F EXEMPTION FOR ACTIVE FINANCING.
(a) In General.--
(1) Section 953(e)(10) is amended--
(A) by striking ``January 1, 2002'' and inserting ``January
1, 2007'', and
(B) by striking ``December 31, 2001'' and inserting
``December 31, 2006''.
(2) Section 954(h)(9) is amended by striking ``January 1,
2002'' and inserting ``January 1, 2007''.
(b) Life Insurance and Annuity Contracts.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (B) of section 954(i)(4) is
amended to read as follows:
``(B) Life insurance and annuity contracts.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), the
amount of the reserve of a qualifying insurance company or
qualifying insurance company branch for any life insurance or
annuity contract shall be equal to the greater of--
``(I) the net surrender value of such contract (as defined
in section 807(e)(1)(A)), or
``(II) the reserve determined under paragraph (5).
``(ii) Ruling request, etc.--The amount of the reserve
under clause (i) shall be the foreign statement reserve for
the contract (less any catastrophe, deficiency, equalization,
or similar reserves), if, pursuant to a ruling request
submitted by the taxpayer or as provided in published
guidance, the Secretary determines that the factors taken
into account in determining the foreign statement reserve
provide an appropriate means of measuring income.''
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.
SEC. 315. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT FOR APPROVED DIESEL OR
KEROSENE TERMINALS.
(a) In General.--Subsection (e) of section 4101 is hereby
repealed.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on January 1, 2002.
Subtitle B--Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
SEC. 321. REAUTHORIZATION OF TANF SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS FOR
POPULATION INCREASES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002.
Section 403(a)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
603(a)(3)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(H) Reauthorization of grants for fiscal year 2002.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph--
``(i) any State that was a qualifying State under this
paragraph for fiscal year 2001 or any prior fiscal year shall
be entitled to receive from the Secretary for fiscal year
2002 a grant in an amount equal to the amount required to be
paid to the State under this paragraph for the most recent
fiscal year in which the State was a qualifying State;
``(ii) subparagraph (G) shall be applied as if `2002' were
substituted for `2001'; and
``(iii) out of any money in the Treasury of the United
States not otherwise appropriated, there are appropriated for
fiscal year 2002 such sums as are necessary for grants under
this subparagraph.''.
SEC. 322. 1-YEAR EXTENSION OF CONTINGENCY FUND UNDER THE TANF
PROGRAM.
Section 403(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
603(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and 2001'' and
inserting ``2001, and 2002''; and
(2) in paragraph (3)(C)(ii), by striking ``2001'' and
inserting ``2002''.
TITLE IV--TAX INCENTIVES FOR NEW YORK CITY AND DISTRESSED AREAS
SEC. 401. TAX BENEFITS FOR AREA OF NEW YORK CITY DAMAGED IN
TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001.
(a) In General.--Chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end
the following new subchapter:
``Subchapter Y--New York Liberty Zone Benefits
``Sec. 1400L. Tax benefits for New York Liberty Zone.
``SEC. 1400L. TAX BENEFITS FOR NEW YORK LIBERTY ZONE.
``(a) Expansion of Work Opportunity Tax Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of section 51, a New York
Liberty Zone business employee shall be treated as a member
of a targeted group.
``(2) New york liberty zone business employee.--For
purposes of this subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `New York Liberty Zone business
employee' means, with respect to any period, any employee of
a New York Liberty Zone business if substantially all the
services performed during such period by such employee for
such business are performed in the New York Liberty Zone.
``(B) Inclusion of certain employees outside the new york
liberty zone.--
``(i) In general.--In the case of a New York Liberty Zone
business described in subclause (II) of subparagraph (C)(i),
the term `New York Liberty Zone business employee' includes
any employee of such business (not described in subparagraph
(A)) if substantially all the services performed during such
period by such employee for such business are performed in
the City of New York, New York.
``(ii) Limitation.--The number of employees of such a
business that are treated as New York Liberty zone business
employees on any day by reason of clause (i) shall not exceed
the excess of--
``(I) the number of employees of such business on September
11, 2001, in the New York Liberty Zone, over
``(II) the number of New York Liberty Zone business
employees (determined without regard to this subparagraph) of
such business on the day to which the limitation is being
applied.
The Secretary may require any trade or business to have the
number determined under subclause (I) verified by the New
York State Department of Labor.
``(C) New york liberty zone business.--
``(i) In general.--The term `New York Liberty Zone
business' means any trade or business which is--
``(I) located in the New York Liberty Zone, or
``(II) located in the City of New York, New York, outside
the New York Liberty Zone, as a result of the physical
destruction or damage of such place of business by the
September 11, 2001, terrorist attack.
``(ii) Credit not allowed for large businesses.--The term
`New York Liberty Zone business' shall not include any trade
or business for any taxable year if such trade or business
employed an average of more than 200 employees on business
days during the taxable year.
``(D) Special rules for determining amount of credit.--For
purposes of applying subpart F of part IV of subchapter B of
this chapter to wages paid or incurred to any New York
Liberty Zone business employee--
``(i) section 51(a) shall be applied by substituting
`qualified wages' for `qualified first-year wages',
``(ii) the rules of section 52 shall apply for purposes of
determining the number of employees under subparagraph (B),
``(iii) subsections (c)(4) and (i)(2) of section 51 shall
not apply, and
``(iv) in determining qualified wages, the following shall
apply in lieu of section 51(b):
``(I) Qualified wages.--The term `qualified wages' means
wages paid or incurred by the employer to individuals who are
New York Liberty Zone business employees of such employer for
work performed during calendar year 2002 or 2003.
``(II) Only first $6,000 of wages per calendar year taken
into account.--The amount of the qualified wages which may be
taken into account with respect to any individual shall not
exceed $6,000 per calendar year.
``(b) Special Allowance for Certain Property Acquired After
September 10, 2001.--
``(1) Additional allowance.--In the case of any qualified
New York Liberty Zone property--
``(A) the depreciation deduction provided by section 167(a)
for the taxable year in which such property is placed in
service shall include an allowance equal to 30 percent of the
adjusted basis of such property, and
``(B) the adjusted basis of the qualified New York Liberty
Zone property shall be reduced by the amount of such
deduction before computing the amount otherwise allowable as
a depreciation deduction under this chapter for such taxable
year and any subsequent taxable year.
``(2) Qualified new york liberty zone property.--For
purposes of this subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified New York Liberty
Zone property' means property--
``(i)(I) to which section 168 applies which has a recovery
period of 20 years or less or which is water utility
property,
[[Page H483]]
``(II) which is computer software (as defined in section
167(f)(1)(B)) for which a deduction is allowable under
section 167(a) without regard to this subsection, or
``(III) which is nonresidential real property, or
residential rental property, which is described in
subparagraph (B),
``(ii) substantially all of the use of which is in the New
York Liberty Zone and is in the active conduct of a trade or
business by the taxpayer in such Zone,
``(iii) the original use of which in the New York Liberty
Zone commences with the taxpayer after September 10, 2001,
``(iv) which is acquired by the taxpayer by purchase (as
defined in section 179(d)) after September 10, 2001, but only
if no written binding contract for the acquisition was in
effect before September 11, 2001, and
``(v) which is placed in service by the taxpayer on or
before the termination date.
The term `termination date' means December 31, 2006 (December
31, 2009, in the case of nonresidential real property and
residential rental property).
``(B) Eligible real property.--Nonresidential real property
or residential rental property is described in this
subparagraph only to the extent it rehabilitates real
property damaged, or replaces real property destroyed or
condemned, as a result of the September 11, 2001, terrorist
attack. For purposes of the preceding sentence, property
shall be treated as replacing real property destroyed or
condemned if, as part of an integrated plan, such property
replaces real property which is included in a continuous area
which includes real property destroyed or condemned.
``(C) Exceptions.--
``(i) Alternative depreciation property.--The term
`qualified New York Liberty Zone property' shall not include
any property to which the alternative depreciation system
under section 168(g) applies, determined--
``(I) without regard to paragraph (7) of section 168(g)
(relating to election to have system apply), and
``(II) after application of section 280F(b) (relating to
listed property with limited business use).
``(ii) 30 percent additional allowance property.--Such term
shall not include property to which section 168(k) applies.
``(iii) Qualified leasehold improvement property.--Such
term shall not include any qualified leasehold improvement
property (as defined in section 168(e)(6)).
``(iv) Election out.--If a taxpayer makes an election under
this clause with respect to any class of property for any
taxable year, this subsection shall not apply to all property
in such class placed in service during such taxable year.
``(D) Special rules.--
``(i) Self-constructed property.--In the case of a taxpayer
manufacturing, constructing, or producing property for the
taxpayer's own use, the requirements of clause (iv) of
subparagraph (A) shall be treated as met if the taxpayer
begins manufacturing, constructing, or producing the property
after September 10, 2001.
``(ii) Sale-leasebacks.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A)(iii), if property--
``(I) is originally placed in service after September 10,
2001, by a person, and
``(II) is sold and leased back by such person within 3
months after the date such property was originally placed in
service,
such property shall be treated as originally placed in
service not earlier than the date on which such property is
used under the leaseback referred to in subclause (II).
``(E) Allowance against alternative minimum tax.--The
deduction allowed by this subsection shall be allowed in
determining alternative minimum taxable income under section
55.
``(c) 5-Year Recovery Period for Depreciation of Certain
Leasehold Improvements.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of section 168, the term
`5-year property' includes any qualified New York Liberty
Zone leasehold improvement property.
``(2) Qualified new york liberty zone leasehold improvement
property.--For purposes of this section, the term `qualified
New York Liberty Zone leasehold improvement property' means
qualified leasehold improvement property (as defined in
section 168(e)(6)) if--
``(A) such building is located in the New York Liberty
Zone,
``(B) such improvement is placed in service after September
10, 2001, and before January 1, 2007, and
``(C) no written binding contract for such improvement was
in effect before September 11, 2001.
``(3) Requirement to use straight line method.--The
applicable depreciation method under section 168 shall be the
straight line method in the case of qualified New York
Liberty Zone leasehold improvement property.
``(4) 9-year recovery period under alternative system.--For
purposes of section 168(g), the class life of qualified New
York Liberty Zone leasehold improvement property shall be 9
years.
``(d) Tax-Exempt Bond Financing.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this title, any
qualified New York Liberty Bond shall be treated as an exempt
facility bond.
``(2) Qualified new york liberty bond.--For purposes of
this subsection, the term `qualified New York Liberty Bond'
means any bond issued as part of an issue if--
``(A) 95 percent or more of the net proceeds (as defined in
section 150(a)(3)) of such issue are to be used for qualified
project costs,
``(B) such bond is issued by the State of New York or any
political subdivision thereof,
``(C) the Governor or the Mayor designates such bond for
purposes of this section, and
``(D) such bond is issued after the the date of the
enactment of this section and before January 1, 2005.
``(3) Limitations on amount of bonds.--
``(A) Aggregate amount designated.--The maximum aggregate
face amount of bonds which may be designated under this
subsection shall not exceed $8,000,000,000, of which not to
exceed $4,000,000,000 may be designated by the Governor and
not to exceed $4,000,000,000 may be designated by the Mayor.
``(B) Specific limitations.--The aggregate face amount of
bonds issued which are to be used for--
``(i) costs for property located outside the New York
Liberty Zone shall not exceed $2,000,000,000,
``(ii) residential rental property shall not exceed
$1,600,000,000, and
``(iii) costs with respect to property used for retail
sales of tangible property and functionally related and
subordinate property shall not exceed $800,000,000.
The limitations under clauses (i), (ii), and (iii) shall be
allocated proportionately between the bonds designated by the
Governor and the bonds designated by the Mayor in proportion
to the respective amounts of bonds designated by each.
``(C) Movable property.--No bonds shall be issued which are
to be used for movable fixtures and equipment.
``(4) Qualified project costs.--For purposes of this
subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified project costs' means
the cost of acquisition, construction, reconstruction, and
renovation of--
``(i) nonresidential real property and residential rental
property (including fixed tenant improvements associated with
such property) located in the New York Liberty Zone, and
``(ii) public utility property (as defined in section
168(i)(10)) located in the New York Liberty Zone.
``(B) Costs for certain property outside zone included.--
Such term includes the cost of acquisition, construction,
reconstruction, and renovation of nonresidential real
property (including fixed tenant improvements associated with
such property) located outside the New York Liberty Zone but
within the City of New York, New York, if such property is
part of a project which consists of at least 100,000 square
feet of usable office or other commercial space located in a
single building or multiple adjacent buildings.
``(5) Special rules.--In applying this title to any
qualified New York Liberty Bond, the following modifications
shall apply:
``(A) Section 146 (relating to volume cap) shall not apply.
``(B) Section 147(d) (relating to acquisition of existing
property not permitted) shall be applied by substituting `50
percent' for `15 percent' each place it appears.
``(C) Section 148(f)(4)(C) (relating to exception from
rebate for certain proceeds to be used to finance
construction expenditures) shall apply to the available
construction proceeds of bonds issued under this section.
``(D) Repayments of principal on financing provided by the
issue--
``(i) may not be used to provide financing, and
``(ii) must be used not later than the close of the 1st
semiannual period beginning after the date of the repayment
to redeem bonds which are part of such issue.
The requirement of clause (ii) shall be treated as met with
respect to amounts received within 10 years after the date of
issuance of the issue (or, in the case of a refunding bond,
the date of issuance of the original bond) if such amounts
are used by the close of such 10 years to redeem bonds which
are part of such issue.
``(E) Section 57(a)(5) shall not apply.
``(6) Separate issue treatment of portions of an issue.--
This subsection shall not apply to the portion of an issue
which (if issued as a separate issue) would be treated as a
qualified bond or as a bond that is not a private activity
bond (determined without regard to paragraph (1)), if the
issuer elects to so treat such portion.
``(e) Advance Refundings of Certain Tax-Exempt Bonds.--
``(1) In general.--With respect to a bond described in
paragraph (2) issued as part of an issue 90 percent (95
percent in the case of a bond described in paragraph (2)(C))
or more of the net proceeds (as defined in section 150(a)(3))
of which were used to finance facilities located within the
City of New York, New York (or property which is functionally
related and subordinate to facilities located within the City
of New York for the furnishing of water), one additional
advanced refunding after the date of the enactment of this
section and before January 1, 2005, shall be allowed under
the applicable rules of section 149(d) if--
``(A) the Governor or the Mayor designates the advance
refunding bond for purposes of this subsection, and
``(B) the requirements of paragraph (4) are met.
``(2) Bonds described.--A bond is described in this
paragraph if such bond was outstanding on September 11, 2001,
and is--
[[Page H484]]
``(A) a State or local bond (as defined in section
103(c)(1)) which is a general obligation of the City of New
York, New York,
``(B) a State or local bond (as so defined) other than a
private activity bond (as defined in section 141(a)) issued
by the New York Municipal Water Finance Authority or the
Metropolitan Transportation Authority of the State of New
York, or
``(C) a qualified 501(c)(3) bond (as defined in section
145(a)) which is a qualified hospital bond (as defined in
section 145(c)) issued by or on behalf of the State of New
York or the City of New York, New York.
``(3) Aggregate limit.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the
maximum aggregate face amount of bonds which may be
designated under this subsection by the Governor shall not
exceed $4,500,000,000 and the maximum aggregate face amount
of bonds which may be designated under this subsection by the
Mayor shall not exceed $4,500,000,000.
``(4) Additional requirements.--The requirements of this
paragraph are met with respect to any advance refunding of a
bond described in paragraph (2) if--
``(A) no advance refundings of such bond would be allowed
under any provision of law after September 11, 2001,
``(B) the advance refunding bond is the only other
outstanding bond with respect to the refunded bond, and
``(C) the requirements of section 148 are met with respect
to all bonds issued under this subsection.
``(f) Increase in Expensing Under Section 179.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of section 179--
``(A) the limitation under section 179(b)(1) shall be
increased by the lesser of--
``(i) $35,000, or
``(ii) the cost of section 179 property which is qualified
New York Liberty Zone property placed in service during the
taxable year, and
``(B) the amount taken into account under section 179(b)(2)
with respect to any section 179 property which is qualified
New York Liberty Zone property shall be 50 percent of the
cost thereof.
``(2) Qualified new york liberty zone property.--For
purposes of this subsection, the term `qualified New York
Liberty Zone property' has the meaning given such term by
subsection (b)(2).
``(3) Recapture.--Rules similar to the rules under section
179(d)(10) shall apply with respect to any qualified New York
Liberty Zone property which ceases to be used in the New York
Liberty Zone.
``(g) Extension of Replacement Period for Nonrecognition of
Gain.--Notwithstanding subsections (g) and (h) of section
1033, clause (i) of section 1033(a)(2)(B) shall be applied by
substituting `5 years' for `2 years' with respect to property
which is compulsorily or involuntarily converted as a result
of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, in the New
York Liberty Zone but only if substantially all of the use of
the replacement property is in the City of New York, New
York.
``(h) New York Liberty Zone.--For purposes of this section,
the term `New York Liberty Zone' means the area located on or
south of Canal Street, East Broadway (east of its
intersection with Canal Street), or Grand Street (east of its
intersection with East Broadway) in the Borough of Manhattan
in the City of New York, New York.
``(i) References to Governor and Mayor.--For purposes of
this section, the terms `Governor' and `Mayor' mean the
Governor of the State of New York and the Mayor of the City
of New York, New York, respectively.''
(b) Credit Allowed Against Regular and Minimum Tax.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (c) of section 38 (relating to
limitation based on amount of tax) is amended by
redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4) and by inserting
after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:
``(3) Special rules for new york liberty zone business
employee credit.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of the New York Liberty Zone
business employee credit--
``(i) this section and section 39 shall be applied
separately with respect to such credit, and
``(ii) in applying paragraph (1) to such credit--
``(I) the tentative minimum tax shall be treated as being
zero, and
``(II) the limitation under paragraph (1) (as modified by
subclause (I)) shall be reduced by the credit allowed under
subsection (a) for the taxable year (other than the New York
Liberty Zone business employee credit).
``(B) New york liberty zone business employee credit.--For
purposes of this subsection, the term `New York Liberty Zone
business employee credit' means the portion of work
opportunity credit under section 51 determined under section
1400L(a).''
(2) Conforming amendment.--Subclause (II) of section
38(c)(2)(A)(ii) is amended by inserting ``or the New York
Liberty Zone business employee credit'' after ``employment
credit''.
(3) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection
shall apply to taxable years ending after December 31, 2001.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of subchapters for
chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end the following new
item:
``Subchapter Y--New York Liberty Zone Benefits.''
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS AND TECHNICAL PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--General Miscellaneous Provisions
SEC. 501. ALLOWANCE OF ELECTRONIC 1099'S.
Any person required to furnish a statement under any
section of subpart B of part III of subchapter A of chapter
61 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for any taxable year
ending after the date of the enactment of this Act, may
electronically furnish such statement (without regard to any
first class mailing requirement) to any recipient who has
consented to the electronic provision of the statement in a
manner similar to the one permitted under regulations issued
under section 6051 of such Code or in such other manner as
provided by the Secretary.
SEC. 502. EXCLUDED CANCELLATION OF INDEBTEDNESS INCOME OF S
CORPORATION NOT TO RESULT IN ADJUSTMENT TO
BASIS OF STOCK OF SHAREHOLDERS.
(a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 108(d)(7)
(relating to certain provisions to be applied at corporate
level) is amended by inserting before the period ``,
including by not taking into account under section 1366(a)
any amount excluded under subsection (a) of this section''.
(b) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
amendment made by this section shall apply to discharges of
indebtedness after October 11, 2001, in taxable years ending
after such date.
(2) Exception.--The amendment made by this section shall
not apply to any discharge of indebtedness before March 1,
2002, pursuant to a plan of reorganization filed with a
bankruptcy court on or before October 11, 2001.
SEC. 503. LIMITATION ON USE OF NONACCRUAL EXPERIENCE METHOD
OF ACCOUNTING.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (5) of section 448(d) is amended
to read as follows:
``(5) Special rule for certain services.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of any person using an
accrual method of accounting with respect to amounts to be
received for the performance of services by such person, such
person shall not be required to accrue any portion of such
amounts which (on the basis of such person's experience) will
not be collected if--
``(i) such services are in fields referred to in paragraph
(2)(A), or
``(ii) such person meets the gross receipts test of
subsection (c) for all prior taxable years.
``(B) Exception.--This paragraph shall not apply to any
amount if interest is required to be paid on such amount or
there is any penalty for failure to timely pay such amount.
``(C) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe
regulations to permit taxpayers to determine amounts referred
to in subparagraph (A) using computations or formulas which,
based on experience, accurately reflect the amount of income
that will not be collected by such person. A taxpayer may
adopt, or request consent of the Secretary to change to, a
computation or formula that clearly reflects the taxpayer's
experience. A request under the preceding sentence shall be
approved if such computation or formula clearly reflects the
taxpayer's experience.''.
(b) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall
apply to taxable years ending after the date of the enactment
of this Act.
(2) Change in method of accounting.--In the case of any
taxpayer required by the amendments made by this section to
change its method of accounting for its first taxable year
ending after the date of the enactment of this Act--
(A) such change shall be treated as initiated by the
taxpayer,
(B) such change shall be treated as made with the consent
of the Secretary of the Treasury, and
(C) the net amount of the adjustments required to be taken
into account by the taxpayer under section 481 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be taken into account
over a period of 4 years (or if less, the number of taxable
years that the taxpayer used the method permitted under
section 448(d)(5) of such Code as in effect before the date
of the enactment of this Act) beginning with such first
taxable year.
SEC. 504. EXCLUSION FOR FOSTER CARE PAYMENTS TO APPLY TO
PAYMENTS BY QUALIFIED PLACEMENT AGENCIES.
(a) In General.--The matter preceding subparagraph (B) of
section 131(b)(1) (defining qualified foster care payment) is
amended to read as follows:
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified foster care payment'
means any payment made pursuant to a foster care program of a
State or political subdivision thereof--
``(A) which is paid by--
``(i) a State or political subdivision thereof, or
``(ii) a qualified foster care placement agency, and''.
(b) Qualified Foster Individuals To Include Individuals
Placed by Qualified Placement Agencies.--Subparagraph (B) of
section 131(b)(2) (defining qualified foster individual) is
amended to read as follows:
``(B) a qualified foster care placement agency.''
(c) Qualified Foster Care Placement Agency Defined.--
Subsection (b) of section 131 is amended by redesignating
paragraph (3) as paragraph (4) and by inserting after
paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:
``(3) Qualified foster care placement agency.--The term
`qualified foster care
[[Page H485]]
placement agency' means any placement agency which is
licensed or certified by--
``(A) a State or political subdivision thereof, or
``(B) an entity designated by a State or political
subdivision thereof,
for the foster care program of such State or political
subdivision to make foster care payments to providers of
foster care.''
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.
SEC. 505. INTEREST RATE RANGE FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING
REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Amendments to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.--
(1) Special rule.--Clause (i) of section 412(l)(7)(C)
(relating to interest rate) is amended by adding at the end
the following new subclause:
``(III) Special rule for 2002 and 2003.--For a plan year
beginning in 2002 or 2003, notwithstanding subclause (I), in
the case that the rate of interest used under subsection
(b)(5) exceeds the highest rate permitted under subclause
(I), the rate of interest used to determine current liability
under this subsection may exceed the rate of interest
otherwise permitted under subclause (I); except that such
rate of interest shall not exceed 120 percent of the weighted
average referred to in subsection (b)(5)(B)(ii).''
(2) Quarterly contributions.--Subsection (m) of section 412
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(7) Special rules for 2002 and 2004.--In any case in
which the interest rate used to determine current liability
is determined under subsection (l)(7)(C)(i)(III)--
``(A) 2002.--For purposes of applying paragraphs (1) and
(4)(B)(ii) for plan years beginning in 2002, the current
liability for the preceding plan year shall be redetermined
using 120 percent as the specified percentage determined
under subsection (l)(7)(C)(i)(II).
``(B) 2004.--For purposes of applying paragraphs (1) and
(4)(B)(ii) for plan years beginning in 2004, the current
liability for the preceding plan year shall be redetermined
using 105 percent as the specified percentage determined
under subsection (l)(7)(C)(i)(II).''
(b) Amendments to the Employee Retirement Income Security
Act of 1974.--
(1) Special rule.--Clause (i) of section 302(d)(7)(C) of
such Act (29 U.S.C. 1082(d)(7)(C)) is amended by adding at
the end the following new subclause:
``(III) Special rule for 2002 and 2003.--For a plan year
beginning in 2002 or 2003, notwithstanding subclause (I), in
the case that the rate of interest used under subsection
(b)(5) exceeds the highest rate permitted under subclause
(I), the rate of interest used to determine current liability
under this subsection may exceed the rate of interest
otherwise permitted under subclause (I); except that such
rate of interest shall not exceed 120 percent of the weighted
average referred to in subsection (b)(5)(B)(ii).''
(2) Quarterly contributions.--Subsection (e) of section 302
of such Act (29 U.S.C. 1082) is amended by adding at the end
the following new paragraph:
``(7) Special rules for 2002 and 2004.--In any case in
which the interest rate used to determine current liability
is determined under subsection (d)(7)(C)(i)(III)--
``(A) 2002.--For purposes of applying paragraphs (1) and
(4)(B)(ii) for plan years beginning in 2002, the current
liability for the preceding plan year shall be redetermined
using 120 percent as the specified percentage determined
under subsection (d)(7)(C)(i)(II).
``(B) 2004.--For purposes of applying paragraphs (1) and
(4)(B)(ii) for plan years beginning in 2004, the current
liability for the preceding plan year shall be redetermined
using 105 percent as the specified percentage determined
under subsection (d)(7)(C)(i)(II).''
(c) PBGC.--Clause (iii) of section 4006(a)(3)(E) of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C.
1306(a)(3)(E)) is amended by adding at the end the following
new subclause:
``(IV) In the case of plan years beginning after December
31, 2001, and before January 1, 2004, subclause (II) shall be
applied by substituting `100 percent' for `85 percent'.
Subclause (III) shall be applied for such years without
regard to the preceding sentence. Any reference to this
clause by any other sections or subsections shall be treated
as a reference to this clause without regard to this
subclause.''
SEC. 506. ADJUSTED GROSS INCOME DETERMINED BY TAKING INTO
ACCOUNT CERTAIN EXPENSES OF ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS.
(a) In General.--Section 62(a)(2) (relating to certain
trade and business deductions of employees) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(D) Certain expenses of elementary and secondary school
teachers.--In the case of taxable years beginning during 2002
or 2003, the deductions allowed by section 162 which consist
of expenses, not in excess of $250, paid or incurred by an
eligible educator in connection with books, supplies (other
than nonathletic supplies for courses of instruction in
health or physical education), computer equipment (including
related software and services) and other equipment, and
supplementary materials used by the eligible educator in the
classroom.''.
(b) Eligible Educator.--Section 62 is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(d) Definition; Special Rules.--
``(1) Eligible educator.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a)(2)(D),
the term `eligible educator' means, with respect to any
taxable year, an individual who is a kindergarten through
grade 12 teacher, instructor, counselor, principal, or aide
in a school for at least 900 hours during a school year.
``(B) School.--The term `school' means any school which
provides elementary education or secondary education
(kindergarten through grade 12), as determined under State
law.
``(2) Coordination with exclusions.--A deduction shall be
allowed under subsection (a)(2)(D) for expenses only to the
extent the amount of such expenses exceeds the amount
excludable under section 135, 529(c)(1), or 530(d)(2) for the
taxable year.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.
Subtitle B--Technical Corrections
SEC. 511. AMENDMENTS RELATED TO ECONOMIC GROWTH AND TAX
RELIEF RECONCILIATION ACT OF 2001.
(a) Amendments Related to Section 101 of the Act.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (b) of section 6428 is amended
to read as follows:
``(b) Credit Treated as Nonrefundable Personal Credit.--For
purposes of this title, the credit allowed under this section
shall be treated as a credit allowable under subpart A of
part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Subsection (d) of section 6428 is amended to read as
follows:
``(d) Coordination with Advance Refunds of Credit.--
``(1) In general.--The amount of credit which would (but
for this paragraph) be allowable under this section shall be
reduced (but not below zero) by the aggregate refunds and
credits made or allowed to the taxpayer under subsection (e).
Any failure to so reduce the credit shall be treated as
arising out of a mathematical or clerical error and assessed
according to section 6213(b)(1).
``(2) Joint returns.--In the case of a refund or credit
made or allowed under subsection (e) with respect to a joint
return, half of such refund or credit shall be treated as
having been made or allowed to each individual filing such
return.''.
(B) Paragraph (2) of section 6428(e) is amended to read as
follows:
``(2) Advance refund amount.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), the advance refund amount is the amount that would have
been allowed as a credit under this section for such first
taxable year if--
``(A) this section (other than subsections (b) and (d) and
this subsection) had applied to such taxable year, and
``(B) the credit for such taxable year were not allowed to
exceed the excess (if any) of--
``(i) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(ii) the sum of the credits allowable under part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 (other than the credits allowable
under subpart C thereof, relating to refundable credits).''
(b) Amendment Related to Section 201 of the Act.--
Subparagraph (B) of section 24(d)(1) is amended by striking
``amount of credit allowed by this section'' and inserting
``aggregate amount of credits allowed by this subpart''.
(c) Amendments Related to Section 202 of the Act.--
(1) Corrections to credit for adoption expenses.--
(A) Paragraph (1) of section 23(a) is amended to read as
follows:
``(1) In general.--In the case of an individual, there
shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this
chapter the amount of the qualified adoption expenses paid or
incurred by the taxpayer.''
(B) Subsection (a) of section 23 is amended by adding at
the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) $10,000 credit for adoption of child with special
needs regardless of expenses.--In the case of an adoption of
a child with special needs which becomes final during a
taxable year, the taxpayer shall be treated as having paid
during such year qualified adoption expenses with respect to
such adoption in an amount equal to the excess (if any) of
$10,000 over the aggregate qualified adoption expenses
actually paid or incurred by the taxpayer with respect to
such adoption during such taxable year and all prior taxable
years.''
(C) Paragraph (2) of section 23(a) is amended by striking
the last sentence.
(D) Paragraph (1) of section 23(b) is amended by striking
``subsection (a)(1)(A)'' and inserting ``subsection (a)''.
(E) Subsection (i) of section 23 is amended by striking
``the dollar limitation in subsection (b)(1)'' and inserting
``the dollar amounts in subsections (a)(3) and (b)(1)''.
(F) Expenses paid or incurred during any taxable year
beginning before January 1, 2002, may be taken into account
in determining the credit under section 23 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 only to the extent the aggregate of such
expenses does not exceed the applicable limitation under
section 23(b)(1) of such Code as in effect on the day before
the date of the enactment of the Economic Growth and Tax
Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001.
(2) Corrections to exclusion for employer-provided adoption
assistance.--
(A) Subsection (a) of section 137 is amended to read as
follows:
``(a) Exclusion.--
[[Page H486]]
``(1) In general.--Gross income of an employee does not
include amounts paid or expenses incurred by the employer for
qualified adoption expenses in connection with the adoption
of a child by an employee if such amounts are furnished
pursuant to an adoption assistance program.
``(2) $10,000 exclusion for adoption of child with special
needs regardless of expenses.--In the case of an adoption of
a child with special needs which becomes final during a
taxable year, the qualified adoption expenses with respect to
such adoption for such year shall be increased by an amount
equal to the excess (if any) of $10,000 over the actual
aggregate qualified adoption expenses with respect to such
adoption during such taxable year and all prior taxable
years.''
(B) Paragraph (2) of section 137(b) is amended by striking
``subsection (a)(1)'' and inserting ``subsection (a)''.
(3) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2002; except that the amendments made by paragraphs (1)(C),
(1)(D), and (2)(B) shall apply to taxable years beginning
after December 31, 2001.
(d) Amendments Related to Section 205 of the Act.--
(1) Section 45F(d)(4)(B) is amended by striking ``subpart
A, B, or D of this part'' and inserting ``this chapter or for
purposes of section 55''.
(2) Section 38(b)(15) is amended by striking ``45F'' and
inserting ``45F(a)''.
(e) Amendments Related to Section 301 of the Act.--
(1) Section 63(c)(2) is amended--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``subparagraph (C)''
and inserting ``subparagraph (D)'',
(B) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (B),
(C) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D),
(D) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new
subparagraph:
``(C) one-half of the amount allowable under subparagraph
(A) in the case of a married individual filing a separate
return, or'', and
(E) by inserting the following flush sentence at the end:
``If any amount determined under subparagraph (A) is not a
multiple of $50, such amount shall be rounded to the next
lowest multiple of $50.''
(2)(A) Section 63(c)(4) is amended by striking ``paragraph
(2) or (5)'' and inserting ``paragraph (2)(B), (2)(D), or
(5)''.
(B) Section 63(c)(4)(B)(i) is amended by striking
``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``paragraph (2)(B),
(2)(D),''.
(C) Section 63(c)(4) is amended by striking the flush
sentence at the end (as added by section 301(c)(2) of Public
Law 107-17).
(f) Amendment Related to Section 401 of the Act.--Section
530(d)(4)(B)(iv) is amended by striking ``because the
taxpayer elected under paragraph (2)(C) to waive the
application of paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``by application
of paragraph (2)(C)(i)(II)''.
(g) Amendments Related to Section 511 of the Act.--
(1) Section 2511(c) is amended by striking ``taxable gift
under section 2503,'' and inserting ``transfer of property by
gift,''.
(2) Section 2101(b) is amended by striking the last
sentence.
(h) Amendment Related to Section 532 of the Act.--Section
2016 is amended by striking ``any State, any possession of
the United States, or the District of Columbia,''.
(i) Amendments Relating to Section 602 of the Act.--
(1) Subparagraph (A) of section 408(q)(3) is amended to
read as follows:
``(A) Qualified employer plan.--The term `qualified
employer plan' has the meaning given such term by section
72(p)(4)(A)(i); except that such term shall also include an
eligible deferred compensation plan (as defined in section
457(b)) of an eligible employer described in section
457(e)(1)(A).''.
(2) Section 4(c) of Employee Retirement Income Security Act
of 1974 is amended--
(A) by inserting ``and part 5 (relating to administration
and enforcement)'' before the period at the end, and
(B) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``Such
provisions shall apply to such accounts and annuities in a
manner similar to their application to a simplified employee
pension under section 408(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986.''.
(j) Amendments Relating to Section 611 of the Act.--
(1) Section 408(k) is amended--
(A) in paragraph (2)(C) by striking ``$300'' and inserting
``$450'', and
(B) in paragraph (8) by striking ``$300'' both places it
appears and inserting ``$450''.
(2) Section 409(o)(1)(C)(ii) is amended--
(A) by striking ``$500,000'' both places it appears and
inserting ``$800,000'', and
(B) by striking ``$100,000'' and inserting ``$160,000''.
(3) Section 611(i) of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief
Reconciliation Act of 2001 is amended by adding at the end
the following new paragraph:
``(3) Special rule.--In the case of plan that, on June 7,
2001, incorporated by reference the limitation of section
415(b)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, section
411(d)(6) of such Code and section 204(g)(1) of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 do not apply to a plan
amendment that--
``(A) is adopted on or before June 30, 2002,
``(B) reduces benefits to the level that would have applied
without regard to the amendments made by subsection (a) of
this section, and
``(C) is effective no earlier than the years described in
paragraph (2).''.
(k) Amendments Relating to Section 613 of the Act.--
(1) Section 416(c)(1)(C)(iii) is amended by striking
``Exception for frozen plan'' and inserting ``Exception for
plan under which no key employee (or former key employee)
benefits for plan year''.
(2) Section 416(g)(3)(B) is amended by striking
``separation from service'' and inserting ``severance from
employment''.
(l) Amendments Relating to Sections 614 and 616 of the
Act.--
(1) Section 404(a)(12) is amended by striking ``(9),'' and
inserting ``(9) and subsection (h)(1)(C),''.
(2) Section 404(n) is amended by striking ``subsection
(a),'' and inserting ``subsection (a) or paragraph (1)(C) of
subsection (h)''.
(3) Section 402(h)(2)(A) is amended by striking ``15
percent'' and inserting ``25 percent''.
(4) Section 404(a)(7)(C) is amended to read as follows:
``(C) Paragraph not to apply in certain cases.--
``(i) Beneficiary test.--This paragraph shall not have the
effect of reducing the amount otherwise deductible under
paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), if no employee is a beneficiary
under more than 1 trust or under a trust and an annuity plan.
``(ii) Elective deferrals.--If, in connection with 1 or
more defined contribution plans and 1 or more defined benefit
plans, no amounts (other than elective deferrals (as defined
in section 402(g)(3))) are contributed to any of the defined
contribution plans for the taxable year, then subparagraph
(A) shall not apply with respect to any of such defined
contribution plans and defined benefit plans.''.
(m) Amendment Relating to Section 618 of the Act.--Section
25B(d)(2)(A) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) In general.--The qualified retirement savings
contributions determined under paragraph (1) shall be reduced
(but not below zero) by the aggregate distributions received
by the individual during the testing period from any entity
of a type to which contributions under paragraph (1) may be
made. The preceding sentence shall not apply to the portion
of any distribution which is not includible in gross income
by reason of a trustee-to-trustee transfer or a rollover
distribution.''.
(n) Amendments Relating to Section 619 of the Act.--
(1) Section 45E(e)(1) is amended by striking ``(n)'' and
inserting ``(m)''.
(2) Section 619(d) of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief
Reconciliation Act of 2001 is amended by striking
``established'' and inserting ``first effective''.
(o) Amendments Relating to Section 631 of the Act.--
(1) Section 402(g)(1) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(C) Catch-up contributions.--In addition to subparagraph
(A), in the case of an eligible participant (as defined in
section 414(v)), gross income shall not include elective
deferrals in excess of the applicable dollar amount under
subparagraph (B) to the extent that the amount of such
elective deferrals does not exceed the applicable dollar
amount under section 414(v)(2)(B)(i) for the taxable year
(without regard to the treatment of the elective deferrals by
an applicable employer plan under section 414(v)).''.
(2) Section 401(a)(30) is amended by striking ``402(g)(1)''
and inserting ``402(g)(1)(A)''.
(3) Section 414(v)(2) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(D) Aggregation of plans.--For purposes of this
paragraph, plans described in clauses (i), (ii), and (iv) of
paragraph (6)(A) that are maintained by the same employer (as
determined under subsection (b), (c), (m) or (o)) shall be
treated as a single plan, and plans described in clause (iii)
of paragraph (6)(A) that are maintained by the same employer
shall be treated as a single plan.''.
(4) Section 414(v)(3)(A)(i) is amended by striking
``section 402(g), 402(h), 403(b), 404(a), 404(h), 408(k),
408(p), 415, or 457'' and inserting ``section 401(a)(30),
402(h), 403(b), 408, 415(c), and 457(b)(2) (determined
without regard to section 457(b)(3))''.
(5) Section 414(v)(3)(B) is amended by striking ``section
401(a)(4), 401(a)(26), 401(k)(3), 401(k)(11), 401(k)(12),
403(b)(12), 408(k), 408(p), 408B, 410(b), or 416'' and
inserting ``section 401(a)(4), 401(k)(3), 401(k)(11),
403(b)(12), 408(k), 410(b), or 416''.
(6) Section 414(v)(4)(B) is amended by inserting before the
period at the end the following: ``, except that a plan
described in clause (i) of section 410(b)(6)(C) shall not be
treated as a plan of the employer until the expiration of the
transition period with respect to such plan (as determined
under clause (ii) of such section)''.
(7) Section 414(v)(5) is amended--
(A) by striking ``, with respect to any plan year,'' in the
matter preceding subparagraph (A),
(B) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
``(A) who would attain age 50 by the end of the taxable
year,'', and
(C) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``plan year'' and
inserting ``plan (or other applicable) year''.
(8) Section 414(v)(6)(C) is amended to read as follows:
[[Page H487]]
``(C) Exception for section 457 plans.--This subsection
shall not apply to a participant for any year for which a
higher limitation applies to the participant under section
457(b)(3).''.
(9) Section 457(e) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(18) Coordination with catch-up contributions for
individuals age 50 or older.-- In the case of an individual
who is an eligible participant (as defined by section 414(v))
and who is a participant in an eligible deferred compensation
plan of an employer described in paragraph (1)(A),
subsections (b)(3) and (c) shall be applied by substituting
for the amount otherwise determined under the applicable
subsection the greater of--
``(A) the sum of--
``(i) the plan ceiling established for purposes of
subsection (b)(2) (without regard to subsection (b)(3)), plus
``(ii) the applicable dollar amount for the taxable year
determined under section 414(v)(2)(B)(i), or
``(B) the amount determined under the applicable subsection
(without regard to this paragraph).''.
(p) Amendments Relating to Section 632 of the Act.--
(1) Section 403(b)(1) is amended in the matter following
subparagraph (E) by striking ``then amounts contributed'' and
all that follows and inserting the following:
``then contributions and other additions by such employer
for such annuity contract shall be excluded from the gross
income of the employee for the taxable year to the extent
that the aggregate of such contributions and additions (when
expressed as an annual addition (within the meaning of
section 415(c)(2))) does not exceed the applicable limit
under section 415. The amount actually distributed to any
distributee under such contract shall be taxable to the
distributee (in the year in which so distributed) under
section 72 (relating to annuities). For purposes of applying
the rules of this subsection to contributions and other
additions by an employer for a taxable year, amounts
transferred to a contract described in this paragraph by
reason of a rollover contribution described in paragraph (8)
of this subsection or section 408(d)(3)(A)(ii) shall not be
considered contributed by such employer.''.
(2) Section 403(b) is amended by striking paragraph (6).
(3) Section 403(b)(3) is amended--
(A) in the first sentence by inserting the following before
the period at the end: ``, and which precedes the taxable
year by no more than five years'', and
(B) in the second sentence by striking ``or any amount
received by a former employee after the fifth taxable year
following the taxable year in which such employee was
terminated''.
(4) Section 415(c)(7) is amended to read as follows:
``(7) Special rules relating to church plans.--
``(A) Alternative contribution limitation.--
``(i) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this subsection, at the election of a participant who is an
employee of a church or a convention or association of
churches, including an organization described in section
414(e)(3)(B)(ii), contributions and other additions for an
annuity contract or retirement income account described in
section 403(b) with respect to such participant, when
expressed as an annual addition to such participant's
account, shall be treated as not exceeding the limitation of
paragraph (1) if such annual addition is not in excess of
$10,000.
``(ii) $40,000 aggregate limitation.--The total amount of
additions with respect to any participant which may be taken
into account for purposes of this subparagraph for all years
may not exceed $40,000.
``(B) Number of years of service for duly ordained,
commissioned, or licensed ministers or lay employees.--For
purposes of this paragraph--
``(i) all years of service by--
``(I) a duly ordained, commissioned, or licensed minister
of a church, or
``(II) a lay person,
as an employee of a church, a convention or association of
churches, including an organization described in section
414(e)(3)(B)(ii), shall be considered as years of service for
1 employer, and
``(ii) all amounts contributed for annuity contracts by
each such church (or convention or association of churches)
or such organization during such years for such minister or
lay person shall be considered to have been contributed by 1
employer.
``(C) Foreign missionaries.--In the case of any individual
described in subparagraph (D) performing services outside the
United States, contributions and other additions for an
annuity contract or retirement income account described in
section 403(b) with respect to such employee, when expressed
as an annual addition to such employee's account, shall not
be treated as exceeding the limitation of paragraph (1) if
such annual addition is not in excess of the greater of
$3,000 or the employee's includible compensation determined
under section 403(b)(3).
``(D) Annual addition.--For purposes of this paragraph, the
term `annual addition' has the meaning given such term by
paragraph (2).
``(E) Church, convention or association of churches.--For
purposes of this paragraph, the terms `church' and
`convention or association of churches' have the same meaning
as when used in section 414(e).''.
(5) Section 457(e)(5) is amended to read as follows:
``(5) Includible compensation.--The term `includible
compensation' has the meaning given to the term
`participant's compensation' by section 415(c)(3).''.
(6) Section 402(g)(7)(B) is amended by striking ``2001.''
and inserting ``2001).''.
(q) Amendments Relating to Section 643 of the Act.--
(1) Section 401(a)(31)(C)(i) is amended by inserting ``is a
qualified trust which is part of a plan which is a defined
contribution plan and'' before ``agrees''.
(2) Section 402(c)(2) is amended by adding at the end the
following flush sentence:
``In the case of a transfer described in subparagraph (A) or
(B), the amount transferred shall be treated as consisting
first of the portion of such distribution that is includible
in gross income (determined without regard to paragraph
(1)).''.
(r) Amendments Relating to Section 648 of the Act.--
(1) Section 417(e) is amended--
(A) in paragraph (1) by striking ``exceed the dollar limit
under section 411(a)(11)(A)'' and inserting ``exceed the
amount that can be distributed without the participant's
consent under section 411(a)(11)'', and
(B) in paragraph (2)(A) by striking ``exceeds the dollar
limit under section 411(a)(11)(A)'' and inserting ``exceeds
the amount that can be distributed without the participant's
consent under section 411(a)(11)''.
(2) Section 205(g) of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 is amended--
(A) in paragraph (1) by striking ``exceed the dollar limit
under section 203(e)(1)'' and inserting ``exceed the amount
that can be distributed without the participant's consent
under section 203(e)'', and
(B) in paragraph (2)(A) by striking ``exceeds the dollar
limit under section 203(e)(1)'' and inserting ``exceeds the
amount that can be distributed without the participant's
consent under section 203(e)''.
(s) Amendment Relating to Section 652 of the Act.--Section
404(a)(1)(D)(iv) is amended by striking ``Plans maintained by
professional service employers'' and inserting ``Special rule
for terminating plans''.
(t) Amendments Relating to Section 657 of the Act.--Section
404(c)(3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974 is amended--
(1) by striking ``the earlier of'' in subparagraph (A) the
second place it appears, and
(2) by striking ``if the transfer'' and inserting ``a
transfer that''.
(u) Amendments Relating to Section 659 of the Act.--
(1) Section 4980F is amended--
(A) in subsection (e)(1) by striking ``written notice'' and
inserting ``the notice described in paragraph (2)'',
(B) by amending subsection (f)(2)(A) to read as follows:
``(A) any defined benefit plan described in section 401(a)
which includes a trust exempt from tax under section 501(a),
or'', and
(C) in subsection (f)(3) by striking ``significantly'' both
places it appears.
(2) Section 204(h)(9) of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 is amended by striking ``significantly''
both places it appears.
(3) Section 659(c)(3)(B) of the Economic Growth and Tax
Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 is amended by striking
``(or'' and inserting ``(and''.
(v) Amendments Relating to Section 661 of the Act.--
(1) Section 412(c)(9)(B) is amended--
(A) in clause (ii) by striking ``125 percent'' and
inserting ``100 percent'', and
(B) by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iv) Limitation.--A change in funding method to use a
prior year valuation, as provided in clause (ii), may not be
made unless as of the valuation date within the prior plan
year, the value of the assets of the plan are not less than
125 percent of the plan's current liability (as defined in
paragraph (7)(B)).''.
(2) Section 302(c)(9)(B) of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 is amended--
(A) in clause (ii) by striking ``125 percent'' and
inserting ``100 percent'', and
(B) by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iv) A change in funding method to use a prior year
valuation, as provided in clause (ii), may not be made unless
as of the valuation date within the prior plan year, the
value of the assets of the plan are not less than 125 percent
of the plan's current liability (as defined in paragraph
(7)(B)).''.
(w) Amendments Relating to Section 662 of the Act.--
(1) Section 404(k) is amended--
(A) in paragraph (1) by striking ``during the taxable
year'',
(B) in paragraph (2)(B) by striking ``(A)(iii)'' and
inserting ``(A)(iv)'',
(C) in paragraph (4)(B) by striking ``(iii)'' and inserting
``(iv)'', and
(D) by redesignating subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) (as
amended by subparagraph (C)) as subparagraph (C) of paragraph
(4) and by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new
subparagraph:
``(B) Reinvestment dividends.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A), an applicable dividend reinvested pursuant to clause
(iii)(II) of paragraph (2)(A) shall be treated as paid in the
taxable year of the corporation in which such dividend is
reinvested in qualifying employer securities or in which the
election
[[Page H488]]
under clause (iii) of paragraph (2)(A) is made, whichever is
later.''.
(2) Section 404(k) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(7) Full vesting.--In accordance with section 411, an
applicable dividend described in clause (iii)(II) of
paragraph (2)(A) shall be subject to the requirements of
section 411(a)(1).''.
(x) Effective Date.--Except as provided in subsection (c),
the amendments made by this section shall take effect as if
included in the provisions of the Economic Growth and Tax
Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 to which they relate.
SEC. 512. AMENDMENTS RELATED TO COMMUNITY RENEWAL TAX RELIEF
ACT OF 2000.
(a) Amendment Related to Section 101 of the Act.--Section
469(i)(3)(E) is amended by striking clauses (ii), (iii), and
(iv) and inserting the following:
``(ii) second to the portion of such loss to which
subparagraph (C) applies,
``(iii) third to the portion of the passive activity credit
to which subparagraph (B) or (D) does not apply,
``(iv) fourth to the portion of such credit to which
subparagraph (B) applies, and''.
(b) Amendment Related to Section 306 of the Act.--Section
151(c)(6)(C) is amended--
(1) by striking ``for earned income credit.--For purposes
of section 32, an'' and inserting ``for principal place of
abode requirements.--An'', and
(2) by striking ``requirement of section 32(c)(3)(A)(ii)''
and inserting ``principal place of abode requirements of
section 2(a)(1)(B), section 2(b)(1)(A), and section
32(c)(3)(A)(ii)''.
(c) Amendment Related to Section 309 of the Act.--
Subparagraph (A) of section 358(h)(1) is amended to read as
follows:
``(A) which is assumed by another person as part of the
exchange, and''.
(d) Amendments Related to Section 401 of the Act.--
(1)(A) Section 1234A is amended by inserting ``or'' after
the comma at the end of paragraph (1), by striking ``or'' at
the end of paragraph (2), and by striking paragraph (3).
(B)(i) Section 1234B is amended in subsection (a)(1) and in
subsection (b) by striking ``sale or exchange'' the first
place it appears in each subsection and inserting ``sale,
exchange, or termination''.
(ii) Section 1234B is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(f) Cross Reference.--
``For special rules relating to dealer securities futures contracts,
see section 1256.''
(2) Section 1091(e) is amended--
(A) in the heading, by striking ``Securities.--'' and
inserting ``Securities and Securities Futures Contracts To
Sell.--'',
(B) by inserting after ``closing of a short sale of'' the
following: ``(or a securities futures contract to sell)'',
(C) in paragraph (2), by inserting after ``short sale of''
the following: ``(or securities futures contracts to sell)'',
and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``For purposes of this subsection, the term `securities
futures contract' has the meaning provided by section
1234B(c).''.
(3) Section 1233(e)(2) is amended by striking ``and'' at
the end of subparagraph (C), by striking the period and
inserting ``; and'' at the end of subparagraph (D), and by
adding at the end the following:
``(E) entering into a securities futures contract (as so
defined) to sell shall be treated as entering into a short
sale, and the sale, exchange, or termination of a securities
futures contract to sell shall be treated as the closing of a
short sale.''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect as if included in the provisions of the
Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000 to which they
relate.
SEC. 513. AMENDMENTS RELATED TO THE TAX RELIEF EXTENSION ACT
OF 1999.
(a) Amendments Related to Section 545 of the Act.--Section
857(b)(7) is amended--
(1) in clause (i) of subparagraph (B), by striking ``the
amount of which'' and inserting ``to the extent the amount of
the rents'', and
(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``if the amount'' and
inserting ``to the extent the amount''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect as if included in section 545 of the Tax
Relief Extension Act of 1999.
SEC. 514. AMENDMENTS RELATED TO THE TAXPAYER RELIEF ACT OF
1997.
(a) Amendments Related to Section 311 of the Act.--Section
311(e) of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-34;
111 Stat. 836) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ``recognized'' and
inserting ``included in gross income'', and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) Disposition of interest in passive activity.--Section
469(g)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall not
apply by reason of an election made under paragraph (1).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect as if included in section 311 of the
Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997.
SEC. 515. AMENDMENT RELATED TO THE BALANCED BUDGET ACT OF
1997.
(a) Amendment Related to Section 4006 of the Act.--Section
26(b)(2) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of
subparagraph (P), by striking the period and inserting ``,
and'' at the end of subparagraph (Q), and by adding at the
end the following new subparagraph:
``(R) section 138(c)(2) (relating to penalty for
distributions from Medicare+Choice MSA not used for qualified
medical expenses if minimum balance not maintained).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall take effect as if included in section 4006 of the
Balanced Budget Act of 1997.
SEC. 516. OTHER TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
(a) Coordination of Advanced Payments of Earned Income
Credit.--
(1) Section 32(g)(2) is amended by striking ``subpart'' and
inserting ``part''.
(2) The amendment made by this subsection shall take effect
as if included in section 474 of the Tax Reform Act of 1984.
(b) Disclosure by Social Security Administration to Federal
Child Support Agencies.--
(1) Section 6103(l)(8) is amended--
(A) in the heading, by striking ``state and local'' and
inserting ``federal, state, and local'', and
(B) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``Federal or'' before
``State or local''.
(2) The amendments made by this subsection shall take
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Treatment of Settlements Under Partnership Audit
Rules.--
(1) The following provisions are each amended by inserting
``or the Attorney General (or his delegate)'' after
``Secretary'' each place it appears:
(A) Paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 6224(c).
(B) Section 6229(f)(2).
(C) Section 6231(b)(1)(C).
(D) Section 6234(g)(4)(A).
(2) The amendments made by this subsection shall apply with
respect to settlement agreements entered into after the date
of the enactment of this Act.
(d) Amendment Related to Procedure and Administration.--
(1) Section 6331(k)(3) (relating to no levy while certain
offers pending or installment agreement pending or in effect)
is amended to read as follows:
``(3) Certain rules to apply.--Rules similar to the rules
of--
``(A) paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection (i), and
``(B) except in the case of paragraph (2)(C), paragraph (5)
of subsection (i),
shall apply for purposes of this subsection.''.
(2) The amendment made by this subsection shall take effect
on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(e) Modified Endowment Contracts.--Paragraph (2) of section
318(a) of the Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000 (114
Stat. 2763A-645) is repealed, and clause (ii) of section
7702A(c)(3)(A) shall read and be applied as if the amendment
made by such paragraph had not been enacted.
SEC. 517. CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.
(1) The subsection (g) of section 25B that relates to
termination is redesignated as subsection (h).
(2) Section 51A(c)(1) is amended by striking ``51(d)(10)''
and inserting ``51(d)(11)''.
(3) Section 172(b)(1)(F)(i) is amended--
(A) by striking ``3 years'' and inserting ``3 taxable
years'', and
(B) by striking ``2 years'' and inserting ``2 taxable
years''.
(4) Section 351(h)(1) is amended by inserting a comma after
``liability''.
(5) Section 741 is amended by striking ``which have
appreciated substantially in value''.
(6) Section 857(b)(7)(B)(i) is amended by striking
``subsection 856(d)'' and inserting ``section 856(d)''.
(7) Section 1394(c)(2) is amended by striking
``subparagraph (A)'' and inserting ``paragraph (1)''.
(8)(A) Section 6227(d) is amended by striking ``subsection
(b)'' and inserting ``subsection (c)''.
(B) Section 6228 is amended--
(i) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``subsection (b) of
section 6227'' and inserting ``subsection (c) of section
6227'',
(ii) in subsection (a)(3)(A), by striking ``subsection (b)
of'', and
(iii) in subsections (b)(1) and (b)(2)(A), by striking
``subsection (c) of section 6227'' and inserting ``subsection
(d) of section 6227''.
(C) Section 6231(b)(2)(B)(i) is amended by striking
``section 6227(c)'' and inserting ``section 6227(d)''.
(9) Section 1221(b)(1)(B)(i) is amended by striking
``1256(b))'' and inserting ``1256(b)))''.
(10) Section 618(b)(2) of the Economic Growth and Tax
Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-16; 115
Stat. 108) is amended--
(A) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``203(d)'' and
inserting ``202(f)'', and
(B) in subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E) by striking ``203''
and inserting ``202(f)''.
(11)(A) Section 525 of the Ticket to Work and Work
Incentives Improvement Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-170; 113
Stat. 1928) is amended by striking ``7200'' and inserting
``7201''.
(B) Section 532(c)(2) of such Act (113 Stat. 1930) is
amended--
(i) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``341(d)(3)'' and
inserting ``341(d)'', and
(ii) in subparagraph (Q), by striking ``954(c)(1)(B)(iii)
and inserting ``954(c)(1)(B)''.
SEC. 518. ADDITIONAL CORRECTIONS.
(a) Amendments Related to Section 202 of the Economic
Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001.--
[[Page H489]]
(1) Subsection (h) of section 23 is amended--
(A) by striking ``subsection (a)(1)(B)'' and inserting
``subsection (a)(3)'', and
(B) by adding at the end the following new flush sentence:
``If any amount as increased under the preceding sentence is
not a multiple of $10, such amount shall be rounded to the
nearest multiple of $10.''
(2) Subsection (f) of section 137 is amended by adding at
the end the following new flush sentence:
``If any amount as increased under the preceding sentence is
not a multiple of $10, such amount shall be rounded to the
nearest multiple of $10.''
(b) Amendments Related to Section 204 of the Economic
Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001.--Section
21(d)(2) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``$200'' and inserting
``$250'', and
(2) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``$400'' and inserting
``$500''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect as if included in the provisions of the
Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 to
which they relate.
TITLE VI--UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE
SEC. 601. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Temporary Extended
Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002''.
SEC. 602. FEDERAL-STATE AGREEMENTS.
(a) In General.--Any State which desires to do so may enter
into and participate in an agreement under this title with
the Secretary of Labor (in this title referred to as the
``Secretary''). Any State which is a party to an agreement
under this title may, upon providing 30 days' written notice
to the Secretary, terminate such agreement.
(b) Provisions of Agreement.--Any agreement under
subsection (a) shall provide that the State agency of the
State will make payments of temporary extended unemployment
compensation to individuals who--
(1) have exhausted all rights to regular compensation under
the State law or under Federal law with respect to a benefit
year (excluding any benefit year that ended before March 15,
2001);
(2) have no rights to regular compensation or extended
compensation with respect to a week under such law or any
other State unemployment compensation law or to compensation
under any other Federal law;
(3) are not receiving compensation with respect to such
week under the unemployment compensation law of Canada; and
(4) filed an initial claim for regular compensation on or
after March 15, 2001.
(c) Exhaustion of Benefits.--For purposes of subsection
(b)(1), an individual shall be deemed to have exhausted such
individual's rights to regular compensation under a State law
when--
(1) no payments of regular compensation can be made under
such law because such individual has received all regular
compensation available to such individual based on employment
or wages during such individual's base period; or
(2) such individual's rights to such compensation have been
terminated by reason of the expiration of the benefit year
with respect to which such rights existed.
(d) Weekly Benefit Amount, Etc.--For purposes of any
agreement under this title--
(1) the amount of temporary extended unemployment
compensation which shall be payable to any individual for any
week of total unemployment shall be equal to the amount of
the regular compensation (including dependents' allowances)
payable to such individual during such individual's benefit
year under the State law for a week of total unemployment;
(2) the terms and conditions of the State law which apply
to claims for regular compensation and to the payment thereof
shall apply to claims for temporary extended unemployment
compensation and the payment thereof, except--
(A) that an individual shall not be eligible for temporary
extended unemployment compensation under this title unless,
in the base period with respect to which the individual
exhausted all rights to regular compensation under the State
law, the individual had 20 weeks of full-time insured
employment or the equivalent in insured wages, as determined
under the provisions of the State law implementing section
202(a)(5) of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment
Compensation Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note); and
(B) where otherwise inconsistent with the provisions of
this title or with the regulations or operating instructions
of the Secretary promulgated to carry out this title; and
(3) the maximum amount of temporary extended unemployment
compensation payable to any individual for whom a temporary
extended unemployment compensation account is established
under section 603 shall not exceed the amount established in
such account for such individual.
(e) Election by States.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of Federal law (and if State law permits), the
Governor of a State that is in an extended benefit period may
provide for the payment of temporary extended unemployment
compensation in lieu of extended compensation to individuals
who otherwise meet the requirements of this section. Such an
election shall not require a State to trigger off an extended
benefit period.
SEC. 603. TEMPORARY EXTENDED UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION
ACCOUNT.
(a) In General.--Any agreement under this title shall
provide that the State will establish, for each eligible
individual who files an application for temporary extended
unemployment compensation, a temporary extended unemployment
compensation account with respect to such individual's
benefit year.
(b) Amount in Account.--
(1) In general.--The amount established in an account under
subsection (a) shall be equal to the lesser of--
(A) 50 percent of the total amount of regular compensation
(including dependents' allowances) payable to the individual
during the individual's benefit year under such law, or
(B) 13 times the individual's average weekly benefit amount
for the benefit year.
(2) Weekly benefit amount.--For purposes of this
subsection, an individual's weekly benefit amount for any
week is the amount of regular compensation (including
dependents' allowances) under the State law payable to such
individual for such week for total unemployment.
(c) Special Rule.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this section, if, at the time that the individual's account
is exhausted, such individual's State is in an extended
benefit period (as determined under paragraph (2)), then,
such account shall be augmented by an amount equal to the
amount originally established in such account (as determined
under subsection (b)(1)).
(2) Extended benefit period.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), a State shall be considered to be in an extended benefit
period if, at the time of exhaustion (as described in
paragraph (1))--
(A) such a period is then in effect for such State under
the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of
1970; or
(B) such a period would then be in effect for such State
under such Act if section 203(d) of such Act were applied as
if it had been amended by striking ``5'' each place it
appears and inserting ``4''.
SEC. 604. PAYMENTS TO STATES HAVING AGREEMENTS FOR THE
PAYMENT OF TEMPORARY EXTENDED UNEMPLOYMENT
COMPENSATION.
(a) General Rule.--There shall be paid to each State that
has entered into an agreement under this title an amount
equal to 100 percent of the temporary extended unemployment
compensation paid to individuals by the State pursuant to
such agreement.
(b) Treatment of Reimbursable Compensation.--No payment
shall be made to any State under this section in respect of
any compensation to the extent the State is entitled to
reimbursement in respect of such compensation under the
provisions of any Federal law other than this title or
chapter 85 of title 5, United States Code. A State shall not
be entitled to any reimbursement under such chapter 85 in
respect of any compensation to the extent the State is
entitled to reimbursement under this title in respect of such
compensation.
(c) Determination of Amount.--Sums payable to any State by
reason of such State having an agreement under this title
shall be payable, either in advance or by way of
reimbursement (as may be determined by the Secretary), in
such amounts as the Secretary estimates the State will be
entitled to receive under this title for each calendar month,
reduced or increased, as the case may be, by any amount by
which the Secretary finds that the Secretary's estimates for
any prior calendar month were greater or less than the
amounts which should have been paid to the State. Such
estimates may be made on the basis of such statistical,
sampling, or other method as may be agreed upon by the
Secretary and the State agency of the State involved.
SEC. 605. FINANCING PROVISIONS.
(a) In General.--Funds in the extended unemployment
compensation account (as established by section 905(a) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1105(a)) of the Unemployment
Trust Fund (as established by section 904(a) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 1104(a)) shall be used for the making of payments to
States having agreements entered into under this title.
(b) Certification.--The Secretary shall from time to time
certify to the Secretary of the Treasury for payment to each
State the sums payable to such State under this title. The
Secretary of the Treasury, prior to audit or settlement by
the General Accounting Office, shall make payments to the
State in accordance with such certification, by transfers
from the extended unemployment compensation account (as so
established) to the account of such State in the Unemployment
Trust Fund (as so established).
(c) Assistance to States.--There are appropriated out of
the employment security administration account (as
established by section 901(a) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1101(a)) of the Unemployment Trust Fund, without
fiscal year limitation, such funds as may be necessary for
purposes of assisting States (as provided in title III of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 501 et seq.)) in meeting the
costs of administration of agreements under this title.
(d) Appropriations for Certain Payments.--There are
appropriated from the general fund of the Treasury, without
fiscal
[[Page H490]]
year limitation, to the extended unemployment compensation
account (as so established) of the Unemployment Trust Fund
(as so established) such sums as the Secretary estimates to
be necessary to make the payments under this section in
respect of--
(1) compensation payable under chapter 85 of title 5,
United States Code; and
(2) compensation payable on the basis of services to which
section 3309(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
applies.
Amounts appropriated pursuant to the preceding sentence shall
not be required to be repaid.
SEC. 606. FRAUD AND OVERPAYMENTS.
(a) In General.--If an individual knowingly has made, or
caused to be made by another, a false statement or
representation of a material fact, or knowingly has failed,
or caused another to fail, to disclose a material fact, and
as a result of such false statement or representation or of
such nondisclosure such individual has received an amount of
temporary extended unemployment compensation under this title
to which he was not entitled, such individual--
(1) shall be ineligible for further temporary extended
unemployment compensation under this title in accordance with
the provisions of the applicable State unemployment
compensation law relating to fraud in connection with a claim
for unemployment compensation; and
(2) shall be subject to prosecution under section 1001 of
title 18, United States Code.
(b) Repayment.--In the case of individuals who have
received amounts of temporary extended unemployment
compensation under this title to which they were not
entitled, the State shall require such individuals to repay
the amounts of such temporary extended unemployment
compensation to the State agency, except that the State
agency may waive such repayment if it determines that--
(1) the payment of such temporary extended unemployment
compensation was without fault on the part of any such
individual; and
(2) such repayment would be contrary to equity and good
conscience.
(c) Recovery by State Agency.--
(1) In general.--The State agency may recover the amount to
be repaid, or any part thereof, by deductions from any
temporary extended unemployment compensation payable to such
individual under this title or from any unemployment
compensation payable to such individual under any Federal
unemployment compensation law administered by the State
agency or under any other Federal law administered by the
State agency which provides for the payment of any assistance
or allowance with respect to any week of unemployment, during
the 3-year period after the date such individuals received
the payment of the temporary extended unemployment
compensation to which they were not entitled, except that no
single deduction may exceed 50 percent of the weekly benefit
amount from which such deduction is made.
(2) Opportunity for hearing.--No repayment shall be
required, and no deduction shall be made, until a
determination has been made, notice thereof and an
opportunity for a fair hearing has been given to the
individual, and the determination has become final.
(d) Review.--Any determination by a State agency under this
section shall be subject to review in the same manner and to
the same extent as determinations under the State
unemployment compensation law, and only in that manner and to
that extent.
SEC. 607. DEFINITIONS.
In this title, the terms ``compensation'', ``regular
compensation'', ``extended compensation'', ``additional
compensation'', ``benefit year'', ``base period'', ``State'',
``State agency'', ``State law'', and ``week'' have the
respective meanings given such terms under section 205 of the
Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970
(26 U.S.C. 3304 note).
SEC. 608. APPLICABILITY.
An agreement entered into under this title shall apply to
weeks of unemployment--
(1) beginning after the date on which such agreement is
entered into; and
(2) ending before January 1, 2003.
SEC. 609. SPECIAL REED ACT TRANSFER IN FISCAL YEAR 2002.
(a) Repeal of Certain Provisions Added by the Balanced
Budget Act of 1997.--
(1) In general.--The following provisions of section 903 of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1103) are repealed:
(A) Paragraph (3) of subsection (a).
(B) The last sentence of subsection (c)(2).
(2) Savings provision.--Any amounts transferred before the
date of enactment of this Act under the provision repealed by
paragraph (1)(A) shall remain subject to section 903 of the
Social Security Act, as last in effect before such date of
enactment.
(b) Special Transfer in Fiscal Year 2002.--Section 903 of
the Social Security Act is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``Special Transfer in Fiscal Year 2002
``(d)(1) The Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer (as
of the date determined under paragraph (5)) from the Federal
unemployment account to the account of each State in the
Unemployment Trust Fund the amount determined with respect to
such State under paragraph (2).
``(2)(A) The amount to be transferred under this subsection
to a State account shall (as determined by the Secretary of
Labor and certified by such Secretary to the Secretary of the
Treasury) be equal to--
``(i) the amount which would have been required to have
been transferred under this section to such account at the
beginning of fiscal year 2002 if--
``(I) section 609(a)(1) of the Temporary Extended
Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002 had been enacted before
the close of fiscal year 2001, and
``(II) section 5402 of Public Law 105-33 (relating to
increase in Federal unemployment account ceiling) had not
been enacted,
minus
``(ii) the amount which was in fact transferred under this
section to such account at the beginning of fiscal year 2002.
``(B) Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraph (A)--
``(i) the aggregate amount transferred to the States under
this subsection may not exceed a total of $8,000,000,000; and
``(ii) all amounts determined under subparagraph (A) shall
be reduced ratably, if and to the extent necessary in order
to comply with the limitation under clause (i).
``(3)(A) Except as provided in paragraph (4), amounts
transferred to a State account pursuant to this subsection
may be used only in the payment of cash benefits--
``(i) to individuals with respect to their unemployment,
and
``(ii) which are allowable under subparagraph (B) or (C).
``(B)(i) At the option of the State, cash benefits under
this paragraph may include amounts which shall be payable
as--
``(I) regular compensation, or
``(II) additional compensation, upon the exhaustion of any
temporary extended unemployment compensation (if such State
has entered into an agreement under the Temporary Extended
Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002), for individuals
eligible for regular compensation under the unemployment
compensation law of such State.
``(ii) Any additional compensation under clause (i) may not
be taken into account for purposes of any determination
relating to the amount of any extended compensation for which
an individual might be eligible.
``(C)(i) At the option of the State, cash benefits under
this paragraph may include amounts which shall be payable to
1 or more categories of individuals not otherwise eligible
for regular compensation under the unemployment compensation
law of such State, including those described in clause (iii).
``(ii) The benefits paid under this subparagraph to any
individual may not, for any period of unemployment, exceed
the maximum amount of regular compensation authorized under
the unemployment compensation law of such State for that same
period, plus any additional compensation (described in
subparagraph (B)(i)) which could have been paid with respect
to that amount.
``(iii) The categories of individuals described in this
clause include the following:
``(I) Individuals who are seeking, or available for, only
part-time (and not full-time) work.
``(II) Individuals who would be eligible for regular
compensation under the unemployment compensation law of such
State under an alternative base period.
``(D) Amounts transferred to a State account under this
subsection may be used in the payment of cash benefits to
individuals only for weeks of unemployment beginning after
the date of enactment of this subsection.
``(4) Amounts transferred to a State account under this
subsection may be used for the administration of its
unemployment compensation law and public employment offices
(including in connection with benefits described in paragraph
(3) and any recipients thereof), subject to the same
conditions as set forth in subsection (c)(2) (excluding
subparagraph (B) thereof, and deeming the reference to
`subsections (a) and (b)' in subparagraph (D) thereof to
include this subsection).
``(5) Transfers under this subsection shall be made within
10 days after the date of enactment of this paragraph.''
(c) Limitations on Transfers.--Section 903(b) of the Social
Security Act shall apply to transfers under section 903(d) of
such Act (as amended by this section). For purposes of the
preceding sentence, such section 903(b) shall be deemed to be
amended as follows:
(1) By substituting ``the transfer date described in
subsection (d)(5)'' for ``October 1 of any fiscal year''.
(2) By substituting ``remain in the Federal unemployment
account'' for ``be transferred to the Federal unemployment
account as of the beginning of such October 1''.
(3) By substituting ``fiscal year 2002 (after the transfer
date described in subsection (d)(5))'' for ``the fiscal year
beginning on such October 1''.
(4) By substituting ``under subsection (d)'' for ``as of
October 1 of such fiscal year''.
(5) By substituting ``(as of the close of fiscal year
2002)'' for ``(as of the close of such fiscal year)''.
(d) Technical Amendments.--(1) Sections 3304(a)(4)(B) and
3306(f)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 are amended
by inserting ``or 903(d)(4)'' before ``of the Social Security
Act''.
(2) Section 303(a)(5) of the Social Security Act is amended
in the second proviso by inserting ``or 903(d)(4)'' after
``903(c)(2)''.
(e) Regulations.--The Secretary of Labor may prescribe any
operating instructions or regulations necessary to carry out
this section and the amendments made by this section.
[[Page H491]]
TITLE VII--DISPLACED WORKER HEALTH INSURANCE CREDIT
SEC. 701. DISPLACED WORKER HEALTH INSURANCE CREDIT.
(a) In General.--Subchapter B of chapter 65 is amended by
inserting after section 6428 the following new section:
``SEC. 6429. DISPLACED WORKER HEALTH INSURANCE CREDIT.
``(a) In General.--In the case of an individual, there
shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by
subtitle A an amount equal to 60 percent of the amount paid
during the taxable year for coverage for the taxpayer, the
taxpayer's spouse, and dependents of the taxpayer under
qualified health insurance during eligible coverage months.
``(b) Only 12 Eligible Coverage Months.--The number of
eligible coverage months taken into account under subsection
(a) for all taxable years shall not exceed 12.
``(c) Eligible Coverage Month.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) In general.--The term `eligible coverage month' means
any month during 2002 or 2003 if, as of the first day of such
month--
``(A) the taxpayer is unemployed,
``(B) the taxpayer is covered by qualified health
insurance,
``(C) the premium for coverage under such insurance for
such month is paid by the taxpayer, and
``(D) the taxpayer does not have other specified coverage.
``(2) Special rules.--
``(A) Treatment of first month of employment.--The taxpayer
shall be treated as meeting the requirement of paragraph
(1)(A) for the first month beginning on or after the date
that the taxpayer ceases to be unemployed by reason of
beginning work for an employer.
``(B) Initial claim must be after march 15, 2001.--The
taxpayer shall not be treated as meeting the requirement of
paragraph (1)(A) with respect to any unemployment if the
initial claim for regular compensation for such unemployment
is filed on or before March 15, 2001.
``(C) Joint returns.--In the case of a joint return, the
requirements of paragraph (1) shall be treated as met if at
least 1 spouse satisfies such requirements.
``(3) Other specified coverage.--For purposes of this
subsection, an individual has other specified coverage for
any month if, as of the first day of such month--
``(A) Subsidized coverage.--
``(i) In general.--Such individual is covered under any
qualified health insurance under which at least 50 percent of
the cost of coverage (determined under section 4980B) is paid
or incurred by an employer (or former employer) of the
taxpayer or the taxpayer's spouse.
``(ii) Treatment of cafeteria plans and flexible spending
accounts.--For purposes of clause (i), the cost of benefits--
``(I) which are chosen under a cafeteria plan (as defined
in section 125(d)), or provided under a flexible spending or
similar arrangement, of such an employer, and
``(II) which are not includible in gross income under
section 106,
shall be treated as borne by such employer.
``(B) Coverage under medicare, medicaid, or schip.--Such
individual--
``(i) is entitled to benefits under part A of title XVIII
of the Social Security Act or is enrolled under part B of
such title, or
``(ii) is enrolled in the program under title XIX or XXI of
such Act.
``(C) Certain other coverage.--Such individual--
``(i) is enrolled in a health benefits plan under chapter
89 of title 5, United States Code, or
``(ii) is entitled to receive benefits under chapter 55 of
title 10, United States Code.
``(4) Determination of unemployment.--For purposes of
paragraph (1), an individual shall be treated as unemployed
during any period--
``(A) for which such individual is receiving unemployment
compensation (as defined in section 85(b)), or
``(B) for which such individual is certified by a State
agency (or by any other entity designated by the Secretary)
as otherwise being entitled to receive unemployment
compensation (as so defined) but for--
``(i) the termination of the period during which such
compensation was payable, or
``(ii) an exhaustion of such individual's rights to such
compensation.
``(d) Qualified Health Insurance.--For purposes of this
section, the term `qualified health insurance' means
insurance which constitutes medical care; except that such
term shall not include any insurance if substantially all of
its coverage is of excepted benefits described in section
9832(c).
``(e) Coordination With Advance Payments of Credit.--
``(1) Recapture of excess advance payments.--If any payment
is made by the Secretary under section 7527 during any
calendar year to a provider of qualified health insurance for
an individual, then the tax imposed by this chapter for the
individual's last taxable year beginning in such calendar
year shall be increased by the aggregate amount of such
payments.
``(2) Reconciliation of payments advanced and credit
allowed.--Any increase in tax under paragraph (1) shall not
be treated as tax imposed by this chapter for purposes of
determining the amount of any credit (other than the credit
allowed by subsection (a)) allowable under part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1.
``(f) Special Rules.--
``(1) Coordination with other deductions.--Amounts taken
into account under subsection (a) shall not be taken into
account in determining any deduction allowed under section
162(l) or 213.
``(2) MSA distributions.--Amounts distributed from an
Archer MSA (as defined in section 220(d)) shall not be taken
into account under subsection (a).
``(3) Denial of credit to dependents.--No credit shall be
allowed under this section to any individual with respect to
whom a deduction under section 151 is allowable to another
taxpayer for a taxable year beginning in the calendar year in
which such individual's taxable year begins.
``(4) Credit treated as refundable credit.--For purposes of
this title, the credit allowed under this section shall be
treated as a credit allowable under subpart C of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1.
``(5) Regulations.--The Secretary may prescribe such
regulations and other guidance as may be necessary or
appropriate to carry out this section and section 7527.''.
(b) Increased Access to Health Insurance for Individuals
Eligible for Tax Credit Through Use of Guaranteed Issue,
Qualified High Risk Pools, and Other Appropriate State
Mechanisms.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, in applying section 2741 of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-41)) and any alternative State mechanism
under section 2744 of such Act (42 U.S.C.300gg-44)), in
determining who is an eligible individual (as defined in
section 2741(b) of such Act) in the case of an individual who
may be covered by insurance for which credit is allowable
under section 6429 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for
an eligible coverage month, if the individual seeks to obtain
health insurance coverage under such section during an
eligible coverage month under such section--
(A) paragraph (1) of such section 2741(b) shall be applied
as if any reference to 18 months is deemed a reference to 12
months, and
(B) paragraphs (4) and (5) of such section 2741(b) shall
not apply.
(2) Promotion of state high risk pools.--Title XXVII of the
Public Health Service Act is amended by inserting after
section 2744 the following new section:
``SEC. 2745. PROMOTION OF QUALIFIED HIGH RISK POOLS.
``(a) Seed Grants to States.--The Secretary shall provide
from the funds appropriated under subsection (c)(1) a grant
of up to $1,000,000 to each State that has not created a
qualified high risk pool as of the date of the enactment of
this section for the State's costs of creation and initial
operation of such a pool.
``(b) Matching Funds for Operation of Pools.--
``(1) In general.--In the case of a State that has
established a qualified high risk pool that restricts
premiums charged under the pool to no more than 150 percent
of the premium for applicable standard risk rates and that
offers a choice of two or more coverage options through the
pool, from the funds appropriated under subsection (c)(2) and
allotted to the State under paragraph (2), the Secretary
shall provide a grant of up to 50 percent of the losses
incurred by the State in connection with the operation of the
pool.
``(2) Allotment.--The amounts appropriated under subsection
(c)(2) for a fiscal year shall be made available to the
States in accordance with a formula that is based upon the
number of uninsured individuals in the States.
``(3) Construction.--Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed as preventing a State from supplementing the funds
made available under this subsection for the support and
operation of qualified high risk pools.
``(c) Funding.--Out of any money in the Treasury of the
United States not otherwise appropriated, there are
appropriated--
``(1) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2002 to carry out
subsection (a); and
``(2) $40,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 and 2003.
Funds appropriated under this subsection for a fiscal year
shall remain available for obligation through the end of the
following fiscal year. Nothing in this section shall be
construed as providing a State with an entitlement to a grant
under this section.
``(d) Qualified High Risk Pool and State Defined.--For
purposes of this section, the term `qualified high risk pool'
has the meaning given such term in section 2744(c)(2) and the
term `State' means any of the 50 States and the District of
Columbia.''.
(3) Construction.--Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed as affecting the ability of a State to use
mechanisms, described in sections 2741(c) and 2744 of the
Public Health Service Act, as an alternative to applying the
guaranteed availability provisions of section 2741(a) of such
Act.
(c) Information Reporting.--
(1) In general.--Subpart B of part III of subchapter A of
chapter 61 (relating to information concerning transactions
with other persons) is amended by inserting after section
6050S the following new section:
``SEC. 6050T. RETURNS RELATING TO DISPLACED WORKER HEALTH
INSURANCE CREDIT.
``(a) Requirement of Reporting.--Every person--
``(1) who, in connection with a trade or business conducted
by such person, receives
[[Page H492]]
payments during any calendar year from any individual for
coverage of such individual or any other individual under
qualified health insurance (as defined in section 6429(d)),
and
``(2) who claims a reimbursement for an advance credit
amount,
shall, at such time as the Secretary may prescribe, make the
return described in subsection (b) with respect to each
individual from whom such payments were received or for whom
such a reimbursement is claimed.
``(b) Form and Manner of Returns.--A return is described in
this subsection if such return--
``(1) is in such form as the Secretary may prescribe, and
``(2) contains--
``(A) the name, address, and TIN of each individual
referred to in subsection (a),
``(B) the aggregate of the advance credit amounts provided
to such individual and for which reimbursement is claimed,
``(C) the number of months for which such advance credit
amounts are so provided, and
``(D) such other information as the Secretary may
prescribe.
``(c) Statements To Be Furnished to Individuals With
Respect to Whom Information Is Required.--Every person
required to make a return under subsection (a) shall furnish
to each individual whose name is required to be set forth in
such return a written statement showing--
``(1) the name and address of the person required to make
such return and the phone number of the information contact
for such person, and
``(2) the information required to be shown on the return
with respect to such individual.
The written statement required under the preceding sentence
shall be furnished on or before January 31 of the year
following the calendar year for which the return under
subsection (a) is required to be made.
``(d) Advance Credit Amount.--For purposes of this section,
the term `advance credit amount' means an amount for which
the person can claim a reimbursement pursuant to a program
established by the Secretary under section 7527.''
(2) Assessable penalties.--
(A) Subparagraph (B) of section 6724(d)(1) (relating to
definitions) is amended by redesignating clauses (xi) through
(xvii) as clauses (xii) through (xviii), respectively, and by
inserting after clause (x) the following new clause:
``(xi) section 6050T (relating to returns relating to
displaced worker health insurance credit),''.
(B) Paragraph (2) of section 6724(d) is amended by striking
``or'' at the end of subparagraph (Z), by striking the period
at the end of subparagraph (AA) and inserting ``, or'', and
by adding after subparagraph (AA) the following new
subparagraph:
``(BB) section 6050T (relating to returns relating to
displaced worker health insurance credit).''
(3) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
B of part III of subchapter A of chapter 61 is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 6050S the
following new item:
``Sec. 6050T. Returns relating to displaced worker health insurance
credit.''
(d) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Paragraph (2) of section 1324(b) of title 31, United
States Code, is amended by inserting before the period ``, or
from section 6429 of such Code''.
(2) The table of sections for subchapter B of chapter 65 is
amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``Sec. 6429. Displaced worker health insurance credit.''
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.
SEC. 702. ADVANCE PAYMENT OF DISPLACED WORKER HEALTH
INSURANCE CREDIT.
(a) In General.--Chapter 77 (relating to miscellaneous
provisions) is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``SEC. 7527. ADVANCE PAYMENT OF DISPLACED WORKER HEALTH
INSURANCE CREDIT.
``(a) General Rule.--The Secretary shall establish a
program for making payments on behalf of eligible individuals
to providers of health insurance for such individuals.
``(b) Eligible Individual.--For purposes of this section,
the term `eligible individual' means any individual for whom
a qualified health insurance credit eligibility certificate
is in effect.
``(c) Qualified Health Insurance Credit Eligibility
Certificate.--For purposes of this section, a qualified
health insurance credit eligibility certificate is a
statement certified by a State agency (or by any other entity
designated by the Secretary) which--
``(1) certifies that the individual was unemployed (within
the meaning of section 6429) as of the first day of any
month, and
``(2) provides such other information as the Secretary may
require for purposes of this section.''
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
77 is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``Sec. 7527. Advance payment of displaced worker health insurance
credit.''
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
TITLE VIII--EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ASSISTANCE AND TEMPORARY HEALTH
CARE COVERAGE ASSISTANCE
SEC. 801. EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ASSISTANCE AND TEMPORARY
HEALTH CARE COVERAGE ASSISTANCE.
(a) In General.--Section 173(a) of the Workforce Investment
Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) to the Governor of any State or outlying area who
applies for assistance under subsection (f) to provide
employment and training assistance and temporary health care
coverage assistance to workers affected by major economic
dislocations, such as plant closures, mass layoffs, or
multiple layoffs, including those dislocations caused by the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.''.
(b) Requirements.--Section 173 of the Workforce Investment
Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(f) Additional Relief for Major Economic Dislocations.--
``(1) Grant recipient eligibility.--
``(A) In general.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
subsection (a)(4), a Governor shall submit an application,
for assistance described in subparagraph (B), to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require.
``(B) Types of assistance.--
``(i) In general.--Assistance described in this
subparagraph is--
``(I) employment and training assistance, including
employment and training activities described in section 134;
and
``(II) temporary health care coverage assistance described
in paragraph (4).
``(ii) Minimum allocation to temporary health care coverage
assistance.--Not less than 30 percent of the cost of
assistance requested in any application submitted under this
subsection shall consist of the cost for temporary health
care coverage assistance described in paragraph (4).
``(iii) Encouragement of certain types of health care
coverage.--In publishing requirements for applications under
this subsection, the Secretary shall encourage the use of
private health coverage alternatives.
``(C) Minimum award requirement for eligible states and
outlying areas.--
``(i) Requirements.--In any case in which the requirements
of this section are met in connection with one or more
applications of the Governor of any State or outlying area
for assistance described in subparagraph (B), the Governor--
``(I) shall be awarded at least 1 grant under subsection
(a)(4) pursuant to such applications, and
``(II) except as provided in clause (ii), shall be awarded
not less than $5,000,000 in total grants awarded under
(a)(4).
``(ii) Exception to minimum grant requirements.--The
Secretary may award to a Governor a total amount less than
the minimum total amount specified in clause (i)(II), as
appropriate, if the Governor--
``(I) requests less than such minimum total amount, or
``(II) fails to demonstrate to the Secretary that there are
a sufficient number of eligible recipients to justify the
awarding of grants in such minimum total amount.
``(2) State administration.--The Governor may designate one
or more local workforce investment boards or other entities
with the capability to respond to the circumstances relating
to the particular closure, layoff, or other dislocation to
administer the grant under subsection (a)(4).
``(3) Participant eligibility.--An individual shall be
eligible to receive assistance described in paragraph (1)(B)
under a grant awarded under subsection (a)(4) if such
individual is a dislocated worker and the Governor has
certified that a major economic dislocation, such as a plant
closure, mass layoff, or multiple layoff, including a
dislocation caused by the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, contributed importantly to the dislocation.
``(4) Temporary health care coverage assistance.--
``(A) In general.--Temporary health care coverage
assistance described in this paragraph consists of health
care coverage premium assistance provided to qualified
individuals under this paragraph with respect to premiums for
coverage for themselves, for their spouses, for their
dependents, or for any combination thereof, other than
premiums for excluded health insurance coverage.
``(B) Qualified individuals.--For purposes of this
paragraph--
``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), a qualified
individual is an individual who--
``(I) is a dislocated worker referred to in paragraph (3)
with respect to whom the Governor has made the certification
regarding the dislocation as required under such paragraph,
and
``(II) is receiving or has received employment and training
assistance as described in paragraph (1)(B)(i)(I).
``(ii) Limitation.--An individual shall not be treated as a
qualified individual if--
``(I) such individual is eligible for coverage under the
program under title XIX of the Social Security Act applicable
in the State or outlying area, or
[[Page H493]]
``(II) such individual is eligible for coverage under the
program under title XXI of such Act applicable in the State
or outlying area,
unless such eligibility is effective solely in connection
with eligibility for health care coverage premium assistance
under a program established by the Governor in connection
with temporary health care coverage assistance received under
this subsection.
``(iii) Construction.--
``(I) Permitting coverage through enrollment in medicaid or
schip.--Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as
preventing a State from using funds made available by reason
of subsection (a)(4) to provide health care coverage through
enrollment in the program under title XIX (relating to
medicaid) or in the program under title XXI (relating to
SCHIP) of the Social Security Act, but only in the case of
individuals who are not otherwise eligible for coverage under
either such program.
``(II) Not affecting eligibility for assistance.--An
individual shall not be treated for purposes of this
subsection as being eligible for coverage under either such
program (and thereby not eligible for assistance under this
subsection) merely on the basis that the State provides
assistance under this subsection through coverage under
either such program.
``(C) Limitation on entitlement.--Nothing in this
subsection shall be construed as establishing any entitlement
of qualified individuals to premium assistance under this
subsection.
``(D) Concurrence and consultation.--In connection with any
temporary health care coverage assistance provided pursuant
to this paragraph--
``(i) if the Secretary determines that health care coverage
premium assistance provided through title XIX or XXI of the
Social Security Act is a substantial component of the
assistance provided, the Secretary shall act in concurrence
with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and
``(ii) in any other case, the Secretary shall consult with
the Secretary of Health and Human Services to the extent that
such assistance affects programs administered by or under the
Secretary of Health and Human Services.
``(E) Use of funds.--Temporary health care coverage
assistance provided pursuant to this subsection shall
supplement and may not supplant any other State or local
funds used to provide health care coverage and may not be
included in determining the amount of non-Federal
contributions required under any program.
``(F) Definitions.--For purposes of this paragraph--
``(i) Excluded health care coverage.--The term `excluded
health care coverage' means coverage under--
``(I) title XVIII of the Social Security Act,
``(II) chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code,
``(III) chapter 17 of title 38, United States Code,
``(IV) chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code (other
than coverage which is comparable to continuation coverage
under section 4980B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), or
``(V) the Indian Health Care Improvement Act.
Such term also includes coverage under a qualified long-term
care insurance contract and excepted benefits described in
section 733(c) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act
of 1974.
``(ii) Premium.--The term `premium' means, in connection
with health care coverage, the premium which would (but for
this section) be charged for the cost of coverage.
``(5) Appropriations.--
``(A) In general.--There is hereby appropriated, from any
amounts in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated,
$3,900,000,000 for the period consisting of fiscal years
2002, 2003, and 2004 for the award of grants under subsection
(a)(4) in accordance with this section.
``(B) Availability.--Amounts appropriated pursuant to
subparagraph (A) for each fiscal year--
``(i) are in addition to amounts made available under
section 132(a)(2)(A) or any other provision of law to carry
out this section; and
``(ii) notwithstanding section 189(g)(1), shall remain
available for obligation by the Secretary from the date of
the enactment of this subsection through each succeeding
fiscal year, except that, notwithstanding section 189(g)(2),
no funds are hereby available for expenditure after June 30,
2004.''.
TITLE IX--TEMPORARY STATE HEALTH CARE ASSISTANCE
SEC. 901. TEMPORARY STATE HEALTH CARE ASSISTANCE.
(a) In General.--Title XXI of the Social Security Act is
amended by adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 2111. TEMPORARY STATE HEALTH CARE ASSISTANCE.
``(a) In General.--For the purpose of providing allotments
to States under this section, there are hereby appropriated,
out of any funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated,
$4,599,667,448. Such funds shall be available for expenditure
by the State through the end of 2002. This section
constitutes budget authority in advance of appropriations
Acts and represents the obligation of the Federal Government
to provide for the payment to States of amounts provided
under this section.
``(b) Allotment.--Funds appropriated under subsection (a)
shall be allotted by the Secretary among the States in
accordance with the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``State Allotment (in dollars)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama 50,746,770
Alaska 31,934,026
Arizona 68,594,677
Arkansas 38,203,601
California 482,591,746
Colorado 37,469,775
Connecticut 60,039,005
Delaware 10,355,807
District of Columbia 18,321,834
Florida 164,619,369
Georgia 118,754,564
Hawaii 12,827,163
Idaho 13,031,700
Illinois 175,505,956
Indiana 66,067,368
Iowa 31,521,201
Kansas 27,288,967
Kentucky 82,759,133
Louisiana 83,907,301
Maine 22,650,838
Maryland 60,347,066
Massachusetts 121,971,140
Michigan 156,479,213
Minnesota 113,966,453
Mississippi 55,335,225
Missouri 74,675,436
Montana 10,224,652
Nebraska 31,582,786
Nevada 14,695,973
New Hampshire 15,482,962
New Jersey 115,880,093
New Mexico 39,204,714
New York 573,999,663
North Carolina 189,333,723
North Dakota 8,915,675
Ohio 166,006,936
Oklahoma 48,914,626
Oregon 71,160,353
Pennsylvania 227,183,255
Rhode Island 45,001,680
South Carolina 94,789,740
South Dakota 19,951,788
Tennessee 102,845,128
Texas 289,526,532
Utah 30,860,915
Vermont 10,291,090
Virginia 67,232,217
Washington 110,377,264
West Virginia 31,120,804
Wisconsin 93,089,086
Wyoming 12,030,459
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``(c) Use of Funds.--
``(1) In general.--Funds appropriated under this section
may be used by a State only to provide health care items and
services (other than types of items and services for which
Federal financial participation is prohibited under this
title or title XIX).
``(2) Limitation.--Funds so appropriated may not be used to
match other Federal expenditures or in any other manner that
results in the expenditure of Federal funds in excess of the
amounts provided under this section.
``(d) Payment to States.--Funds made available under this
section shall be paid to the States in a form and manner and
time specified by the Secretary, based upon the submission of
such information as the Secretary may require. There is no
requirement for the expenditure of any State funds in order
to qualify for receipt of funds under this section. The
previous sections of this title shall not apply with respect
to funds provided under this section.
``(e) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
`State' means the 50 States and the District of Columbia.''.
(b) Repeal.--Effective as of January 1, 2003, section 2111
of the Social Security Act, as inserted by subsection (a), is
repealed.
TITLE X--SOCIAL SECURITY HELD HARMLESS; BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF ACT
SEC. 1001. NO IMPACT ON SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUNDS.
(a) In General.--Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made
by this Act) shall be construed to alter or amend title II of
the Social Security Act (or any regulation promulgated under
that Act).
(b) Transfers.--
(1) Estimate of secretary.--The Secretary of the Treasury
shall annually estimate the impact that the enactment of this
Act has on the income and balances of the trust funds
established under section 201 of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 401).
(2) Transfer of funds.--If, under paragraph (1), the
Secretary of the Treasury estimates that the enactment of
this Act has a negative impact on the income and balances of
the trust funds established under section 201 of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401), the Secretary shall transfer,
not less frequently than quarterly, from the general revenues
of the Federal Government an amount sufficient so as to
ensure that the income and balances of such trust funds are
not reduced as a result of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 1002. EMERGENCY DESIGNATION.
Congress designates as emergency requirements pursuant to
section 252(e) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985 the following amounts:
(1) An amount equal to the amount by which revenues are
reduced by this Act below the recommended levels of Federal
revenues for fiscal year 2002, the total of fiscal years 2002
through 2006, and the total of fiscal years 2002 through
2011, provided in the conference report accompanying H. Con.
Res. 83, the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal
year 2002.
[[Page H494]]
(2) Amounts equal to the amounts of new budget authority
and outlays provided in this Act in excess of the allocations
under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974
to the Committee on Finance of the Senate for fiscal year
2002, the total of fiscal years 2002 through 2006, and the
total of fiscal years 2002 through 2011.
In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the
amendment of the Senate to the title of the bill, insert the
following:
To provide tax incentives for economic recovery and
assistance to displaced workers.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 347, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) and the gentleman from
California (Mr. Matsui) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas).
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
It was not too long ago that we all gathered on the floor of the
House and listened to President Bush on his State of the Union message.
It was a remarkable speech because it was interrupted by a number of
standing applauses for the statements that the President made.
One of those that I listened carefully to was one that elicited a
significant amount of response. It was when he talked about his
economic recovery program. He said, ``I can explain it in one word:
jobs.'' When we talk about economic recovery, we have got to talk about
the job-creating machines in this country called business.
What we have in front of us today, Mr. Speaker, is an economic
security and worker assistance act. Because frankly, during this
recession, with the complications added by September 11, the fact is
that we do not have enough jobs and we have people without jobs.
We are going to hear a discussion on the floor today about the fact
that we should simply allow the Senate to do our thinking for us; that
whatever is the common denominator that can get out of the Senate
should be what it is that we accept over here in the House.
I think one of the things that we have to focus on is the fact that
the President indicated, given his program, there will be a year or two
in which the budget is not in balance; but in following his program, we
will return to surpluses. There is a fairly easy explanation for those
who do not get it. It goes something like this: if people do not have
jobs, they do not pay much in taxes. The government gets its revenue
from taxes, and then we get less in than we anticipated. We went from a
surplus; we are moving to a deficit. If we have a program which creates
jobs, people then are paying taxes, the government's revenue goes up,
and we move from a deficit to a surplus. And what we have in front of
us is a program to create more jobs.
It helps those who are in need. It assists in consumer demand; $13.7
billion, as the President has outlined available for those individuals
at the lower end of the economic spectrum. No one believes that they
will not consume that money provided to them. That alone provides a
modest economic stimulus.
We talked about a very popular provision which is included in this
package encouraging businesses to buy equipment now and not tomorrow.
It is called the 30 percent expensing, and it encourages decisions that
may be made later to be made today, so that the economic effect occurs
now and not later. That is a pretty good definition of a stimulus.
But it does more than that. When workers are unemployed, oftentimes
they lose their health insurance benefits. This package addresses those
who are unemployed by saying, we want to end the political football of
unemployment insurance between the House and the Senate. If this
becomes law, the tug of war is over, because we have provided the
innovative structure which says the President's new trigger for
assistance, not the statutory 5 percent unemployment rate in States,
but the President's suggested 4 percent trigger should be utilized as a
determiner of whether or not a State gets 13 weeks additional
unemployment assistance. Every State would get the first 13 weeks. But
if this becomes law, the trigger would determine whether a State would
get an additional 13 weeks of assistance, based upon its unemployment
rate; and then, after that 13 weeks, if the State still had high
unemployment, it would trigger an additional 13 weeks and so on. We
could resolve the unemployment issue for the rest of calendar year 2002
by moving this legislation.
In addition to that, I hope people have not forgotten the commitment
to assist the City of New York. They took it on the chin for all
Americans. In this bill is the ``liberty provision'' to assist in the
rebuilding of downtown Manhattan. That is a promise that we made. This
bill will be a promise that we deliver.
It seems to me that when someone decides that someone else ought to
do the thinking for us, we have given up on trying to be creative and
responsive. This bill is different than the one that we sent to the
Senate in October; it is different than the one that we sent the Senate
in December. It is different in positive ways. It helps more people,
more meaningfully, and it ought to be passed.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I just have to say that I am not sure if the gentleman
and I are reading from the same bill, because he talks about
stimulating the economy; but as I read these tax provisions for
corporations, that is not what this does. He has a provision in there
that would eliminate the alternative minimum tax, not for individuals,
but for corporations. As the Congressional Budget Office has said, this
helps corporations from their past activities, it does not stimulate
the economy.
There is a provision in there that encourages corporations to keep
their earnings overseas and not invest in the United States. That costs
about $13 billion or $14 billion over the next 10 years. That does
nothing to stimulate the economy. In fact, it works in the opposite
direction.
The tax provisions in this particular bill do very little to
stimulate the economy of the United States. In fact, they are really
corporate handouts as a result of a commitment made to the U.S. Chamber
of Commerce last year when the chamber decided not to put corporate tax
breaks on their individual tax cut bill. So what they are doing is
using as a bootstrap the unemployment benefits, aid to New York in
order to get these corporate tax breaks. In fact, the corporate tax
breaks and the acceleration of the 28 percent rate, which helps
basically the higher-income people, is about two-thirds of the $175
billion in tax cuts over the next 10 years.
The real tragedy is the Senate, the other body, passed their bill to
give an additional 13 weeks' unemployment benefits to the American
unemployed unanimously. Democrats and Republicans alike worked together
to do this.
Think about this for a minute. There are 8 million people unemployed
today; there are a million that have lost their benefits since
September 11, and in the next 6 months there will be another 2 million.
They are losing them at a rate of 77,000 a year. The gentleman from
California, the Chair of the Committee on Ways and Means, knows that
the Senate will not act on this bill. So we are basically telling the
unemployed that because of politics, because they want to help their
corporate friends, we are not going to be able to help the unemployed
in America.
I want to conclude by making one other observation about this, Mr.
Speaker. This money, this money that is being used to pay $175 billion
worth of corporate tax breaks over the next 10 years comes from the
payroll taxes of the average American, the waitress that serves us in
the House dining room, the elevator operator that gets us up to the
second floor so we can vote. These are the people that the money is
coming from. The payroll taxes are paying for corporate tax cuts,
mainly because we are now in a deficit. We had $5.6 trillion worth of
surpluses. We have eaten them all up. It is gone. At the end of this
fiscal year, we are going to have deficit spending.
So this is not a fiscal stimulus bill; this is a bill to help the
corporate tax breaks of America.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Hulshof).
(Mr. HULSHOF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I continue to be puzzled by this cowering
in
[[Page H495]]
the shadow of the other body. Last night we heard that we could not try
to make some genuine changes to campaign finance reform because we
might somehow fall out of favor with the other body. Mr. Speaker, have
we relinquished our constitutional authority over to unanimous consent
requests?
I think what I would like to say, first of all, is to set the record
straight on the AMT, on the alternative minimum tax. This bill, just
like the one in December, does not repeal the alternative minimum tax
that corporations must pay. We do, however, make some crucial reforms
in the AMT to maximize the impact of, for instance, the bonus
depreciation investment incentives.
Let me just talk about a real-life story to the gentleman from
California who says that this stimulus bill would just help
corporations. Recently the St. Louis business community was sent
reeling with news that Ford announced a closure of a plant in
Hazelwood, Missouri. About 3,000 workers' jobs are now in peril, not to
mention the surrounding community, and not to mention the surrounding
businesses that depend upon those workers to stay in business.
A handful of political leaders, including the Democratic leader,
journeyed to Detroit to meet with corporate headquarters to try to
convince the automaker not to shut down this worthwhile plant in St.
Louis. What if? And I do not have the answer to this, Mr. Speaker. It
is a rhetorical question. What if we had passed this economic stimulus
bill last fall? What if we had provided some real relief, this penalty
and this counter-cyclical punishment of corporations that have to face
this alternative minimum tax? What if we had been able to provide that
economic help back last fall or even as far back as December? Would
those workers, those 3,000 auto workers' jobs still be in jeopardy?
Again, I do not have the answer to that; but to me, as we debate
this, inaction continues to be not an option.
Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this bill.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin).
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, this is a very easy issue for people to
understand. If we concur in the Senate amendments, we send a bill to
the President today extending unemployment insurance for 13 weeks for
the people who have exhausted their benefits.
Mr. Speaker, there are currently 8 million people who are unemployed
looking for work in this country. If we pass the motion that is
suggested by the chairman of the committee, we will get nothing done.
Nothing will occur. It is the same old bill that we tried to do once
before, twice before. The only thing certain is that we are going to go
home for the Presidents' Day recess and it will be 2 weeks before we
are really back here doing work again; and during that 2 weeks, there
is going to be another 150,000 people in this country who will have
exhausted their unemployment insurance benefits and cannot find
employment. That is what is going to happen.
It is not about the pride of whether we accept what the Senate wants,
the other body wants, or whether we have the right to add or subtract
to it. That is not what is in question here. The question is whether we
are going to hold the displaced workers, those who have lost their
jobs, hostage to the Republican tax agenda to cut business taxes.
During the last five recessions, we have been able to work on a
bipartisan basis to extend unemployment compensation benefits. We did
that without holding it hostage to other agendas in this body. We
should do that again.
There are more than 1 million jobless workers who have had their
unemployment insurance expire since September 11. The number of workers
who have exhausted their regular UI benefits is expected to be 750,000
higher in the first half of 2002 than it was in the first half of 2001.
The FUTA taxes, money we have set aside, equal $40 billion for this
purpose, so the money is there. Make no mistake about it, we have an
option to do something today; and if we do not, the responsibility
rests solely with the Republican leadership in this body.
{time} 1245
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds.
It is amazing how swiftly someone can place blame. If, in fact, we
did what the gentleman said, there would be no health insurance for
displaced workers, no New York assistance, no low-income help, no small
business help. It is interesting we are to blame when in December we
sent the Senate unemployment and only now it is coming back.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut
(Mrs. Johnson).
Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me time.
First of all, I do not understand why my colleagues think going home
having extended unemployment 13 weeks is help. Why is it not better to
go home and have extended unemployment 13 weeks, put in an automatic
trigger so unemployed people cannot be held hostage by the other body
if the recession lasts? Why is it not better to go home and provide
health benefits for those who are unemployed? The first time in our
entire history that we have ever said to the unemployed that health
security is just as important as income security when you are
unemployed. Why is it that Members think, and I have had Members say to
me, well, the New York aid, we will do that later. Do they not
understand the other body is not capable of doing it later? They would
have done it if they could have done it. Why did they not add it into
the extension? It is very important. What about the extenders? My
colleagues have all voted for extenders many times. Do Members not care
that the welfare-to-work tax credit is going to expire? Do Members not
care that the work-opportunities tax credit that helps people coming
off of welfare, to get employed, to stay employed, prisoners coming out
of prison to get employed and stay employed, are Members not thinking
that consistent predictable tax policy protects jobs, reduces the
number of unemployed? The provisions in this bill, I could go on and
on.
Why, after September 11, do we not want to change the carry-back of
losses when we see losses all across the country in certain sector of
the economy? Do Members not have any sense of fairness and
responsibility? Does not the other body? Why did they send us this? Are
they not thinking about people's lives? Do they not care? Do they not
care about unemployment compensation, about health benefits for the
unemployed, about jobs for the people coming off of welfare?
Get your minds focused. The other body is not capable of action. The
only thing they will ever act on is on the extension of unemployment
benefits, and it is our job to put in there the essential things, help
for New York, certain extenders.
When we look at the tax provision, extension of mental health parity.
After all we have talked about mental health benefits? Listen, needless
to say, I am heated up. I can only say do not hide behind the
alternative minimum tax. We do not even repeal it. What we do to fix it
will help individuals as well as businesses.
I know the politics of Enron and the politics of alternative minimum
tax. I also know every company that pays those taxes pays them when
they are in a downturn and gets them back when they are in an upturn.
We know that there is not one new dollar of Federal revenue either lost
or gained. So do not distort that issue and hide behind it when the
unemployeds' well-being is at stake, when women coming off of welfare
will lose their jobs because that tax credit is gone.
I urge Members to think, put on this unemployment comp provision,
exactly what we need, so that we can do that in conference and Members
can help us in conference. But we cannot let the Senate say compassion
and caring is just 13 weeks long.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Quinn). The Chair would remind all
Members in the Chamber to avoid improper references to the Senate.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from the State of Michigan (Mr. Levin).
(Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
[[Page H496]]
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I think the basic point is if people really
care they would sit down on a bipartisan basis in this House and try to
work out a package. There has been zero effort to do that in this
House. Zero.
I favor a stimulus package, but it should not hold up action on
unemployment compensation. Five months ago the Speaker stood in this
House and promised the House would act on unemployment compensation.
The time to keep that promise is long overdue. And as I said, we have
had no bipartisan discussions meaningfully in this House on a stimulus
package.
We need to work out specific tax provisions. For example, on the
acceleration of tax rates, CBO has said that the proposal in this
package would generate little stimulus relative to its total revenue
loss; that the stimulus is probably small. And as to the AMT, CBO has
said eliminating the AMT as done here does little by itself to change
the near-term incentive for businesses to invest; its bang for its buck
is small. So why not sit down and work out a package on a bipartisan
basis? The time has come to do both. To pass unemployment compensation
relief today, and then to sit down on a bipartisan basis in the
Committee on Ways and Means and work out a stimulus package. That is
the way to go.
The way we are going today is a dead end for the workers of this
country and for the businesses of this Nation.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Once again we have heard those words ``we eliminate alternative
minimum tax.'' They just cannot get over it. It is not true and no
matter how many times they say it, it will not be true. If the
gentleman wants his promise kept, all he has to do is go back and read
the trade adjustment assistance tax. What we did, this House passed
over to the Senate a provision that said that if someone lost their job
based upon September 11, they would be elevated for benefits as though
it was related to trade. That promise was kept. It is a problem that
Members have such short memories and it does not fit your political
agenda. People who lost their jobs because of September 11 have been
taken care of in a House-passed bill and the Senate has not done a dang
thing about it.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Houghton), a very valued member of the committee, the author of the New
York Liberty Bill.
Mr. HOUGHTON. Mr. Speaker, thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
We are going to be talking at cross purposes here as we come from
different bases. We have different philosophies. We have set in
concrete certain impressions that we got.
I will state how I come out on this thing. I think we have three
issues. First of all, the economy is still in trouble. Secondly, people
need unemployment insurance, an extension of that; and, thirdly, we
have a hole right in the City of New York and we have got to fill it.
Now what is not clear is how we go about fixing these things. Members
can say the alternative minimum tax is a boondoggle and it does not
help economic recovery. But I could say it does. But the important
thing is we get investment and people back to work. Now, that is a
difficult situation. When times are good, we do not do anything. When
times are bad, there is the point when the government has to step in.
And frankly, something has to be done. And I do not know whether it
will be resolved here or whether it will be resolved in conference. But
something has to be done by the United States Government to try to put
a little juice and a little impetus back into the economic recovery. If
not, we are just going to be languishing and waiting.
Secondly, as far as up employment insurance, I do not think there is
any question about it. I think we ought to do it. I do not think there
is any argument on it.
As far as the Liberty Zone in New York, the only thing I can comment
on there is time is of the importance there. There are a lot of people
making decisions about where they will reestablish themselves, what
buildings they will go into, and we have 20 million square feet that
was destroyed down there. Maybe some of the head offices of the larger
financial firms will stay there, but what about the support staff? Time
is terribly, terribly important.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from the State of Washington (Mr. McDermott).
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I would say to my friend from New York
(Mr. Houghton) if he were the chairman of this committee we would
probably have a bill here we could pass. But when we have a situation
where the chairman of the committee talks for about 5 minutes about
this bill, tells us it will be on the floor tomorrow, we never have a
hearing on it, we do not know what is in it, how could we possibly know
what is in it? We must have hearings.
Now, this bill for those Members on my side who cannot figure it out,
this does two things. This is a fund-raising stimulus bill. That is all
it is. They do it just before they go home so they can stimulate fund-
raising when they are back in the district. That is why they did it in
December when they did it. But also this is a bill for PR. If we do not
get this out of here in the next half hour, a lot of those press
releases that have already gone out about what we have done for the
unemployed will be a little bit premature.
The fact is that if Members wanted to do something about the 8
million people who are unemployed and the 11,000 per day that are going
to be exhausting their unemployment insurance and the 2,000,000 that
are expected to exhaust their unemployment benefits by the end of the
first 6 months, Members would have accepted the Senate bill and do
something about it. We all know that 62 percent of the people who are
unemployed are not even covered by the unemployment insurance. If they
want to make reform in unemployment insurance, we are glad to sit down
and talk. But do not wrap it in this stuff and tell us that we have to
eat all these fund-raising deals to get it for the unemployed. That is
simply DOA. This bill is dead on arrival. It is DOA when it arrives in
the other body.
Now, do they want to do something for people who are unemployed or
not? It apparently has not occurred to them that if they do something
twice and it has not worked, doing it a third time is not going to
work. That is a sign of mental illness, that they do the same thing
over and over again and expect a different result.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Collins), a member of the committee.
Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
The more I hear, the better I understand that talk is cheap. I want
to remind those who say that the Senate, the other body, is going to
accept this as dead on arrival. I also want to remind Members of this:
the majority Members of the other body support a stimulus package. It
is the supermajority leader who does not and want to have an issue for
the fall rather than a solution today. People who are unemployed are
not so much interested in a UI check.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The gentleman will kindly
suspend.
I know the Chair has made this reminder before; but again, all
Members are reminded not to make characterizations of Members of the
other body and their motives or motivation in enacting legislation.
The gentleman may proceed.
Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I could not understand all you said.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is inappropriate under the rules of the
House during the course of debate for Members to make reference to or
characterize the inaction or action of a Member of the other body. The
Chair took the gentleman's remarks to do such.
Parliamentary Inquiries
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
That ruling is one that is made regardless of whether or not the
statements made are factual; is that correct?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The truth is not a defense. The remark is
out of order.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, so the truth is not the criteria for
determining that you cannot make the statements that the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Collins) made?
[[Page H497]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The rule is a matter of bicameral comity.
The rules of the House prohibit those references.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
Should parliamentary inquires be used by the majority to make
political statements rather than to actually make an inquiry?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Parliamentary inquiry may be directed to the
Chair to determine where in the course of the proceedings we are
currently located and also to explain rulings the Chair might have
made; and that is how the Chair took the gentleman from California's
(Mr. Thomas) observations.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, well, whether the truth or falsity of a
statement, if it is a derogatory remark made by a Member in the other
body----
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will hear from the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Rangel) first.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, is he making a parliamentary inquiry?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would ask for order and comity.
If the gentleman has an inquiry, the Chair's happy to hear it.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, my inquiry would be, are you stating the
inquiry made in a parliamentary fashion by the gentleman from
California (Mr. Thomas) was not a political statement?
{time} 1300
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The Chair tries to take the
inquiry propounded by any Member in the best possible light, first of
all.
The Chair, second of all, understood the gentleman to ask a question,
whether or not a reference to the motivation of a Member in the other
body has any relevance to whether it is a true observation or not.
The Chair, taking that in the best possible light, concluded that it
was an appropriate inquiry.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, taken in its best possible light, I agree
with the Chair.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair thanks the gentleman.
Does the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) still have an inquiry
before we go back to the gentleman from Georgia?
The gentleman from Georgia may resume.
Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may state his inquiry.
Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, is it proper procedure for me to state
that, in my opinion, the statement I made was factual?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will again indicate that it is not
appropriate, and as we have learned from the inquiry by the gentleman
from California (Mr. Thomas), it is not appropriate to characterize or
give characterization to action or nonaction taken in the other body or
to ascribe motives to an individual Member of the other body as to why
they have acted or not acted in a manner, and the Chair felt that the
gentleman's comments tread upon that ground.
Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his inquiry.
Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, in regards to the other body, my statement
was then factual to me and to this body. I thank the Chair.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair does not consider that to be an
inquiry. The gentleman may proceed on his time.
Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, as I was stating, people who are unemployed
are more interested in a job even though they know when they do need
some subsidy, such jobs are created again or opened back up.
Last year before the Committee on the Budget, the Chairman of the
Federal Reserve was asked a question about interest rates: Do you think
you've raised interest rates too quick and too high? His answer was:
No. What we were trying to do was slow down the capital investments of
corporations.
He succeeded because now he states what we need are capital
investments of corporations, of business, and we are not talking about
just large corporations. We are talking about all corporations.
We see that interest rates have been lowered to a record level in
many years, but it is not working. Low interest rates are good for
borrowers if someone wants to borrow or if someone wants that cheap
money. I tell my colleagues who it is not good for. It is not good for
those who have invested in the money market, and I guarantee my
colleagues, those people will remember in November what their interest
bearing is on their CD and their money market accounts.
So I would advise my colleagues to not drag this thing out again.
How does stimulus relate to the market and the economy? I have been
in transportation for over 39 years. Everything at some point moves by
truck. Inventories are lower, they are not being replenished because
they have been moved out, and people are turning those inventories to
cash.
I have seen the ups and downs of the economy. I have also heard a lot
about tax credits for creating a job. In 39 years I never hired a
person because of a tax credit, but I bought a lot of equipment because
of tax deference. There is nothing in this bill that exempts a
corporation from tax. It defers a tax so that it encourages them to
invest, and it does away with the punishment clause that causes a
company to prepay tax even in a year when they have a bad year. That is
the alternative minimum tax, and that is how it works.
This will work. I will give my colleagues an example of a small
business. Had this bill reached the President's desk in December or in
October, there is a small business, I talked to the owner in Georgia,
who was prepared to buy and invest a quarter of a million dollars
before January 1, 2002, in equipment and plans to buy and purchase over
the next 3 years $1 million a year because he has seen the ups and
downs of the economy and how tax relief, tax deference has worked for
the marketplace and has encouraged people in the marketplace to spend
money which creates jobs.
If my colleagues really want to do something for the unemployed, they
will also support this stimulus package. If my colleagues want to send
a message to the other body, they will support this and have a larger
number of yes votes.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Edwards).
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, talk may be cheap, but this bill is not. In
fact, it is expensive, fiscally irresponsible and unfair. This bill is
unfair to our children and grandchildren because it will add billions
of dollars to the already huge $6 trillion national debt that will
burden them for the rest of their lives.
It is unfair to senior citizens because it takes tens of billions of
dollars over the years ahead from the Social Security and Medicare
Trust Funds.
It is unfair to the Army soldiers in my district who, as we speak
here today, are overseas in harm's way, sacrificing for their country,
while special interests walk around the halls of Congress with their
hands out and special deals.
This bill is unfair to unemployed workers because it delays the
extension of unemployed insurance, which we could pass today and send
on to the President and help those families in the days ahead. This
bill is unfair to workers, to small businesses and family farmers
because while they work hard, pay their bills and pay their taxes, huge
profitable corporations are saying they should not have to pay taxes.
So much for shared sacrifice. We should vote no on this bill.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, could I request a determination of the time
remaining, please.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas)
has 14 minutes remaining. The gentleman from California (Mr. Matsui)
has 20 minutes remaining.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Armey), the majority leader of the House of Representatives.
Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr.
Thomas) for yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, it seems every now and then we have to stop and just
remind
[[Page H498]]
ourselves what the debate is about here. It seems to me there is too
much confusion with respect to whether or not this debate is about
cutting taxes, leaving money in the coffers of the Federal Government
as opposed to the hands of the American people who earned it in the
first place, and whether or not it is fair and correct to deny this
poor, beleaguered, suffering government more of our tax revenues.
Mr. Speaker, that is not what this debate is about. This debate is
about whether or not this Government of the United States will exercise
its responsibility to do everything it can to help unemployed American
workers get back to work. It is about jobs. It is about opportunity. It
is about a chance to stay on the job, get a promotion on the job, get a
job in a thriving, growing economy; a thriving, growing economy that
has been serving the American people well, and one that got locked into
a bit of a cock hat first by the misguided, ill-advised case against
the Microsoft company earlier last year that compressed the equity
markets to the point of economic downturn, and then secondly by the
attack on America on September 11.
What are we to do about that? Sit back, call upon the Federal Reserve
to do all they can, and we do nothing? Or are we to join the effort to
try to put America back to work?
Twice already we have tried to put an economic stimulus package
through this body to the other body and to the President that is
designed for the purpose of putting people back to work. Twice now,
despite the fact that a majority of the Members of the other body were
ready to vote to approve that package, it was stopped. That is a shame.
Finally, after having done nothing, the other body sends us a paltry,
paltry, stingy, shortsighted, self-serving, insensitive 13 weeks
unemployment compensation extension and then has the audacity to
applaud themselves for their generosity.
Mr. Speaker, does this great government, with all its resources, all
its resourcefulness, all its keen minds, we have nothing to offer an
unemployed American worker except more weeks of unemployment? If that
is the least we can do, let us at least be humble about it. Let us not
brag about it. Let us not strut and pretend we have done something good
here.
Let us understand, we failed my colleagues and Mr. and Mrs. American
worker; if all we had to offer was more weeks to stay unemployed, we
failed them. We do not deserve applause. We certainly do not deserve
appreciation.
This House of Representatives cannot do only the least we can do for
people out of a job in America. We are committing to doing the best we
can do, and the best we can do is to cut taxes in a smart way to allow
incentives for investment and growth in employment and jobs and
opportunity. Again, for the third time, we tried to do that policy
which was proven to us to be a policy that works time after time after
time.
Very simple question, do my colleagues want to stand up with pride
and say, Mr. and Mrs. America, we tried to put you back to work, or do
my colleagues want to really go home and say, we just decided to take
care of our politics in Washington, and we were content for workers to
stay unemployed for another 13 weeks, and we had nothing else to offer?
Shame on us if that is all we can do. Shame on us if we have nothing
in our hearts for people out of a job in America except stay out of a
job for a little bit longer so that we can continue to have the money
of those people who are fortunate to stay working. Shame on us if we
fail them.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would again remind all Members to
refrain from urging action by the Senate or characterizing Senate
action or inaction.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Kleczka).
Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, the chairman of the committee, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), in his opening remarks said the
reason we need this bill comes with a very easy explanation. In fact,
it is one word called jobs.
I will give my colleagues an easier explanation as to why we need
this bill, but it is two words. It is called campaign contributions.
Last year we already passed an economic stimulus bill. It totaled $1.3
trillion in tax cuts, and many of us argued that that is too much, the
surplus that we thought would be there might not materialize, and lo
and behold it has not. So compliments of the party of fiscal
discipline, this Federal Government is now in a deficit.
After we passed this massive tax break, the bulk of which folks are
not going to get, we passed a $15 billion bailout for the airlines, and
we were told at that time by the Speaker and the minority leader the
next bill or very shortly we are going to take care of the unemployed
workers. That was months ago.
Then the House brought up a bill to bail out the insurance industry.
Again, nothing done for the unemployed worker.
Today, we have an opportunity to finally take care of the unemployed
worker. Pending before the House is a clean, simple Senate-passed bill
that provides a 13-week extension for the unemployed worker, but the
majority leader says we do more because that worker needs a job. That
worker needs an extension because he wants his old job back, whether he
or she has the seniority or he or she has a 401 or retirement program.
We can do today what we have not done for months. We can pass this
bill and have it to the President this afternoon by passing the Senate
bill. Why must we do it today? Because today Congress goes on vacation.
We are going on vacation for a week, and as Members are going to be
scurrying off to Andrews Air Force Base to board those beautiful Air
Force jets that workers paid for, taking them to exotic places, the
workers of this country get nothing, the unemployed workers get
nothing.
Mr. Speaker, today we can send this valentine to the unemployed
workers of America, and we are going to sign it, regards, the people's
House.
{time} 1315
Not the ``Special Interest House,'' not the ``Business Only House,''
this is for the unemployed workers from the ``People's House.'' That is
what we can do today.
But my Republican colleagues are saying, okay, we will give this to
the unemployed workers, but we have to give this valentine to our
corporate business friends. Signed, Love, the Republicans.
Mr. Speaker let us not blackmail the unemployed workers of America.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds.
I know the gentleman has his speaking points that have been passed
out, and he is trying to stay on them; but I really wish he would
realize that this House, back in December, passed trade adjustment
authority, which had a provision for workers who lost their jobs
because of September 11. It is the Senate that has failed to deliver on
providing help for those who, through no fault of their own, lost their
jobs.
It is a fact. I know the gentleman does not like it, but it is true.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Kleczka), for a grand total of 4 minutes.
Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, it is also true that last October we passed
a ``stimulus'' bill, a bill which repealed the alternative minimum tax
for businesses, but made it retroactive to 1986, giving IBM one check
for $1.4 billion, GM a check for $850 million, and Enron $250 million.
And my colleague wonders why the Senate did not pass his bill? The
gentleman poisoned the well with that type of nonsense.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner).
Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to make two points, I think.
In business, when I was in business at home, if we could agree on
some future course of action, we set that aside and went ahead with it;
and those matters that we could not agree on what was best for our
employees and ourselves we would discuss further.
I think the facts are pretty simple here. We all say we agree on
unemployment benefits, so why do we not go ahead and do that? That is
what reasonable people would do, I think, in
[[Page H499]]
this country. Unfortunately, we get in here and get carried away with
the politics of the moment. But reasonable people, I think across the
country, would say we can agree on this, so let us do that today, then
let us come back and talk further about what we cannot agree on.
Now, speaking personally, there are a lot of things in the package,
above and beyond the unemployment provisions, that I think are pretty
good public policy. What I disagree on and what the Blue Dogs have
talked about forever is the fact that we continue to pile on debt after
debt after debt, with no attempt to look at the 10-year budget window
and figure out a way to pay for this stimulus package, so-called
stimulus package. We do not even make an attempt to do so.
This package is going to put another $175 billion of debt on us. We
already know we have another $1 trillion of interest coming in the next
10 years, if the projections hold. We tried to warn last year that we
should not put out a 10-year package, where fully 70 percent of the
expected surplus is not even going to get here for 5 years. That is not
how we should run the business of this country, and it is foolish to
try to say that that is going to be the case.
But beyond all that, people in this country understand borrowing
money, and they understand paying interest; and this is terribly unfair
what we are doing when we make no attempt to pay for it. None
whatsoever. There are some things in there, as I said, that I think are
good public policy, and I would like to work on and try to figure out
how to accomplish them.
We have paid up to now about $140 billion this year in interest
payments. That is as much as this bill costs almost for the next 5
years. That shows what kind of unbelievable, almost un-Godly thing we
are doing to the next generation when we make no attempt to pay for
these matters.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from the State of California (Mr. Becerra).
Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
My colleagues, there is a legitimate difference of opinion on what
constitutes sound economic stimulus for this economy. We all support
emergency help for the unemployed Americans, over a million that have
exhausted their benefits. There is even widespread support for the tax
extenders, such as the work opportunity tax credits. And there is even
majority support in the body for the accelerated depreciation of
company assets. But there is not bipartisan, bicameral support to pass
massive tax cuts that benefit large corporations like Enron and the
well-to-do in America, especially when those tax cuts are paid for by
workers' contributions to Social Security.
These tax cuts raid the Social Security Trust Fund and deepen the
deficit by $72 billion this year alone. So let us pass what we all say
we agree on: help and relief for the unemployed American. And then let
us come back and do the other good, reasonable work on economic
stimulus. But do not hold Americans hostage while we bicker.
We toyed with Americans back in September when we passed this airline
bailout bill of billions of dollars for corporations, and we were told
it would help American workers. It did not. My colleagues toyed last
night, the Republican leadership in this House, with campaign finance
reform; but we were successful in getting it through. Even Enron toyed
with its workers by making them lose all their money in their pension
funds and displacing them and now having them unemployed.
It is time to stop toying with the American worker. It is time for us
to do some work. There are adults who are unemployed; let us act like
adults and get some work done. Unanimously the Senate said let us at
least do unemployment relief for American workers. We can do the same
thing. Let us be big enough to know there are differences of opinion.
Let us come together and do what is right for the American worker and
then come back and do what else is right for the American economy. But
do not hold the American workers hostage.
I hope my colleagues will not vote for this because they think it is
going to help. It is a sham and it will not work. Let us help American
workers today.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I want to commend my colleague from California for putting
together a great package. This is similar to the package we passed back
in December.
The most important thing we can do, obviously, for the economy is to
stimulate, and that is why this package is a good one. It actually has
stimulation. It ought to stimulate the economy. And the notion that
simply extending someone's unemployment benefits will somehow stimulate
the economy is absurd. We have to get away from that.
We see the other side trot out packages, gifts, Valentines that we
are supposedly sending out. I would submit that that is the problem. We
take the money and will only give it back by giving it as a gift, a
gift that we can bestow, our almightiness here; we can bestow a gift on
the American people by giving them back some of their money. It is
their money. We ought to not take so much of it. If we want to
stimulate the economy, we should not.
That is why this bill is a good one, and that is why I would urge
support. It is not unfair to let people keep their own money.
I urge support of the bill.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Doggett).
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, this bill is really the Republican ``Tale
of Two Cities.'' The best of times for some: first-class treatment for
the Kenny-boys of the world. And the worst of times for others: third-
class treatment for the now unemployed Enron mail room attendant.
And it is a ``Tale of Two Cities'' in another way. The year 2001, a
historically bad year for Enron in Houston, was a wonderful year for
Enron here in Washington on tax policy in this House.
Let's review the year: (1) Enron successfully gets favorable
treatment in that collection of subsidies and preferences called an
``energy bill.'' (2) Enron successfully supported efforts to block an
international crackdown on offshore tax havens. (3) Enron's accounting
firm, Arthur Andersen, successfully opposes my bill and all legislation
to crack down on abusive corporate tax shelters. And (4) Enron
successfully led the coalition that deals with the centerpiece of what
we are debating now, the change in the alternative minimum corporate
tax.
Instead of contributing a dime to the cost of the war on terrorism,
Enron wanted $254 million back in a government check. That was the
Republican leadership's idea--the idea of Enron's Republican allies
regarding the true meaning of sacrifice--they would take while others
gave.
Indeed, the Secretary of the Treasury told the Ways and Means
Committee only last week that he could not find a tax break that Enron
asked for last year that the administration did not attempt to give
them.
If the bill before us today is approved, just like Enron, others of
the most profitable, largest corporations in this country, will not
contribute a dime to our national security. The Republicans are not
just taking the Kenny-boy approach, but they said it was a ``New York''
bill. Well, it is. It is the Leona Helmsley approach--``Taxes are for
the little people.'' That is what Republicans have been telling us all
last year: ``Taxes are for the little people.''
And so is shared sacrifice. The little people out there in America,
the unemployed, the people that work hard to build this country, they
can share the sacrifice while the Kenny-boys will take their checks and
go their own way. To add insult to injury, they are paying for all
their tax breaks by redirecting Social Security payroll taxes to
finance more tax breaks for those at the very top so that these rich
corporations do not have to share in the cost of our national security.
How many times do my colleagues have to pass this bill? Just once.
Just once, done fairly, without arrogance, done in a bipartisan way,
instead of passing it at three in the morning like last time in
December, or squeaking through with arm twisting on a two-vote victory
in October.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to
the
[[Page H500]]
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery), a valued member of the
Committee on Ways and Means.
Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this
time.
I am going to try to get through my talk here without screaming,
although it is difficult in the atmosphere that has been created here.
It is an atmosphere all too often of hyperbole and even demagoguery,
and I think it is time that those who might be listening to this debate
are given some facts without hyperbole and certainly without
demagoguery.
This package that we are going to pass today to try to stimulate the
economy, to generate economic growth, to create jobs, to get people
back to work consists of about $150 billion over 10 years. The fact is
that about two-thirds of this package, two-thirds of it, about $100
billion, are either tax cuts or benefits for not big corporations, not
business, but individuals: workers, the unemployed. Two-thirds, $100
billion of the package, goes to individuals. One-third, about $50
billion, goes to corporations and other businesses, partnerships, sole
proprietorships, small businesses and the like.
Those are the facts. Despite all the yelling, the screaming, the
demagoguery and the finger-pointing, those are the facts.
Unemployment insurance. We go further than the Senate did in their
package. We not only provide an additional 13 weeks of unemployment
benefits to the 26 weeks that are already in place under the law for
the unemployed, but we use an idea that came from President Bush in his
budget this year to say we are going to lower the required trigger for
extended benefits to 4 percent of the uninsured rate for any State.
It does not have to be nationwide, like the current law; any State
that exceeds the 4 percent unemployment insured rate automatically gets
extended benefits. That is in our bill. It is not in the Senate bill.
So we are trying to do more for the unemployed and their unemployment
benefits.
{time} 1330
Mr. Speaker, let me point out quickly, nobody in this bill or any
other bill is raiding the Social Security trust fund, which has been
said erroneously by more than one Member today. Yes, we are using
surpluses generated by the payroll tax to pay for other things in
government, but nobody is raiding the trust fund. Every penny that is
supposed to be going into the Social Security trust fund is going, and
will continue to go.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Roemer).
(Mr. ROEMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker, this bill is dripping and glowing red, not
the red of compassion of Valentine's Day, but the red of deficits and
the red ink that is not paid for and will cost taxpayers across the
country.
This will cost taxpayers $180 billion over 5 years, and the Bush
budget has an $80 billion shortfall.
I voted for a tax cut that puts money in workers' pockets last July.
I would vote for a bipartisan package of depreciation allowance and
unemployment benefits for our workers today. But this bill has things
in it such as subpart F. Does that help our workers? No, that is for
banks and insurance companies who operate overseas. If they put it here
domestically, they lose the benefit. How is that a stimulus?
Mr. Speaker, we have passed bipartisan education reform. We have
passed bipartisan campaign finance reform. Let us work together with a
bipartisan stimulus that helps our workers and helps our economy.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick).
(Ms. KILPATRICK asked and was given permission to revise and extend
her remarks.)
Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time.
Mr. Speaker, leadership, that is what this country wants. Leadership.
Millions of Americans have lost their jobs from KMart to Ford Motor
Company, and everything in between across the country. Here we sit as
435 and 535 of the most powerful people in the world and cannot come
together on a package that would stimulate the economy, save families,
give hope to our children, and protect the seniors who built this
country.
Leadership, Mr. Speaker, that is what this country needs. If we can
give $100 billion to the terrorism debacle that we find ourselves in,
over $50 billion for the airline industry, over $35 billion to the
insurance industry, can we not find the dollars that families in
America needs to take care of their children, the people who played by
the rules, raised their children, did everything we said they should
do?
I am appalled by this Congress, as we sit here today, the richest
country in the world, which was in recession before September 11, and
then the tragedy of September 11, and cannot come together as leaders.
Come on, men, 56 women, let us do what is right. Let us come together.
The Senate passed the unemployment benefit insurance extension. Rise up
and build, America is at stake.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleague from
Louisiana, my neighboring State, to look at these numbers. This is from
published Treasury reports. The gentleman said this money comes out of
payroll taxes. That is right. Most of the folks I represent pay more in
Social Security taxes than they do in income taxes. We would raid the
Social Security trust fund to pay for this.
Right now we owe the Social Security trust fund $1.230 trillion
unfunded liability. That is nothing but an IOU. Members profess to be
for the military. We owe the military trust fund $171 billion right now
unfunded liability. That is money that was taken, set aside allegedly
to pay their retirement. It is gone, just like that Social Security
money.
We owe the civil servants, the Border Patrol folks, $534 billion.
How can Members come to this floor and say there is a surplus when we
have increased the debt, mostly through tax breaks and a downturn in
the economy, by $221,158,156,000 in the past 12 months? What is the
benefit of this versus the cost, because I know the cost is that we
never repay those people whose Social Security taxes we have robbed,
whose Civil Service retirement we have robbed, whose military
retirement we have robbed, and whose Medicare we have robbed.
Mr. Speaker, I do not think that it adds up. The gentleman from
California (Mr. Thomas) gave us some bad numbers last year when the
gentleman said we had surpluses as far as the eye can see. I am giving
Members the facts right now.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from Ohio (Mrs. Jones).
(Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and
extend her remarks.)
Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I keep hearing that the third time
is a charm. This was a bad bill the first time; it is a bad bill the
second time; and it is a bad bill the third time. The American people
are not going to be charmed about this bill, even on Valentine's Day.
They do not want candy. They want jobs and benefits.
In Cleveland, Ohio, we just lost 3,000 jobs from LTV Steel because of
overcapacity of steel in our Nation, and we lost it because this
government did not come up with a steel stimulus package that would
allow the steel industry to benefit.
We lost 1,000 jobs with TRW, and another 3,000 jobs with Ford. I came
through the airport the other day. Something I had on buzzed, and I
looked up and I was being wanded by a former LTV worker who said to me,
Congresswoman, we are here working in the airport because we no longer
have jobs at LTV.
I suggest this morning that the problem we have is that this is not a
bill that will help unemployed workers, nor do we have a budget that is
going to help unemployed workers. If we were going to help them, we
would not have reduced Pell grants, reduced dollars to elementary and
secondary education. If we were going to help them, we would not have
reduced dollars for job training programs. If we were going to help the
unemployed workers, we would not
[[Page H501]]
have reduced dollars for affordable urban and rural housing.
Mr. Speaker, I suggest we need to come together and sit down and stop
playing with the unemployed, but help them.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Green).
Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, as it has been said before, this is
the same song in the third verse. I respect my colleagues on the other
side of the aisle, but they are wrong in this third effort. In fact,
there is a country western song called, ``What Part of No Don't You
Understand?'' ``No'' to the AMT tax cuts, ``no'' to the other tax cuts
that will not help the economy.
I am surprised that my Republican colleagues insist on making the
thousands of unemployed Americans continue to suffer. We could pass the
bill that passed the Senate last week, an additional 13 weeks, by
unanimous consent today; but no, Members want to add to this Christmas
tree because they want to send it to the Senate one more time so it can
die like the last two. Members are using this like a political weapon
instead of being concerned about the American people.
Like most of our Nation, I have constituents who are unemployed, in
my own town of Houston, just the Enron employees who have lost their
jobs because of mismanagement and corruption. My constituents need this
extension now. The idea of just playing with it like we are doing here
is outrageous to the people who need this help.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Washington (Ms. Dunn), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
Ms. DUNN. Mr. Speaker, I have an overwhelming sense of deja vu. This
is the third time the House has taken up a bill to help workers and
boost the economic recovery. Some of my colleagues in the opposition
prefer platitudes and promises instead of action. They would rather
talk about helping the unemployed and promoting economic growth rather
than putting together a workable plan. Their motto ought to be ``Just
say no.''
Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, wishing for a stronger economy
will not make it so. Congress needs to act. Our constituents might
justifiably wonder why we are voting on this bill a third time. They
ought to know that 2 months ago the House passed a generous, fair-
minded bill that provided $37 billion in unemployment coverage, health
coverage for the unemployed, tax incentives for businesses, and tax
relief for the middle-income families. But the other body objected.
Why? We just recently heard it from the gentleman from California,
because they said that tax relief would help the rich.
What does that mean? The rich like the schoolteacher who lives in my
district who makes $30,000 a year and cannot afford housing in her own
district and drives an hour to get to work? She is in the 27 percent
bracket; they do not want to lower it. Is she one of the rich they are
referring to?
The other body also objects to our health care provisions. Why? They
did not agree with the way that we cover the unemployed. They would
like to help the folks who work only for big business. They do not want
to help the employees in small businesses who do not have access to
health care coverage when they are laid off.
Mr. Speaker, these arguments are lost on the American public. In my
part of the Nation, we have not yet felt the full impact of the 30,000
Boeing workers who expect to be laid off, and yet unemployment in
Washington State is over 7 percent, number 2 in the Nation and
climbing.
This bill would provide additional unemployment to the 13 weeks we
already provide in this bill because my State of Washington qualifies
under that 4 percent unemployment rate. We are at 7.1 percent. Further
delay is unacceptable.
Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to act now. Let us get this bill passed
and over to the Senate. Let us get the job done so we can get help to
our folks at home.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance my time to the gentleman
from Ohio (Mr. Portman), and ask unanimous consent that he control the
balance of the time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R.
622 for the 187,000 that are losing their jobs, and the Enron employees
in my district that are desperately in trouble because of the Enron
collapse.
I rise in strong opposition to this ``economic stimulus package''
because it is a deviation from the bipartisan precedents set in recent
months by Congress, and represents misguided priorities.
Today's consideration of a motion to concur in the Senate amendments
with an amendment to H.R. 622--Hope for Children Act allows for a raid
on the bipartisan 13 week extension of worker unemployment compensation
passed by the Senate.
The Senate package, which passed by a unanimous vote, provides a 13-
week extension of unemployment benefits for people whose regular
benefits have been exhausted. This represents real and responsible
stimulus for those who need it most. This is crucial because it is
estimated that 2 million working Americans will exhaust their regular
benefits in the first 6 months of this year. In fact, very few of them
are now currently eligible for an extension of those benefits to ensure
they have income to replace their lost wages while they are seeking
either reemployment or new employment.
Instead, this bill substitutes that compromise with a highly partisan
Republican bill that excludes the Minority from this process, raids the
Social Security and Medicare trust fund, and sacrifices American
workers in need.
Substantively, this bill precludes the Minority from offering a
substitute, any amendments, or a motion to recommit, which effectively
eviscerates the fragile bipartisan compromise reached in the Senate.
But the American people must be told the trust about this travesty of
process.
I, along with my Democratic colleagues in Congress, have stood
shoulder-to-shoulder and toe-to-toe with the President in the war
against terrorism. We have been steadfast in our bipartisan support. As
a result we've strengthened our security and protected America from
future attacks. But for the state of our union to truly be sound, we
must stand together today for a real economic stimulus package that
helps all Americans. Sadly, the bill before us puts partisanship and
the special interests above the millions of workers affected by the
recession. As a member of Congress from Houston which has been so
severely hit by recent events, I take particular exception to this.
Today, I urge Congress to take up a real economic stimulus and worker
relief package that will help the 5,000 ex-Enron employees in and
around Houston who have lost their jobs and their hard-earned pensions.
Today, I urge Congress to take up real economic stimulus and worker
relief package that helps the 89,000 American manufacturing workers who
lost their jobs last month; the 54,000 American construction workers
who lost their jobs last month; the 100,000 airlines workers who have
lost their jobs since September 11, 12,000 of which were from
Continental Airlines alone; the 192,000 American service industry
employees who lost their jobs in the fourth quarter; the 211,000
American transportation and public utilities workers who lost their
jobs over the past seven months; and the 1.4 million Americans who lost
their jobs since last March.
Mr. Speaker, America needs a temporary plan that stimulates the
economy by focusing on unemployment and the 2,496,784 initial claimants
reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in December 2001. In Texas
alone, the number of unemployed was 539,947, or 5.1 percent in December
2001. Clearly, these numbers are far higher today. The bill before us
fails to give the relief that is needed. The bill before us is not
temporary. It does not target relief to businesses hurt by the
recession; it enacts tax reductions for the wealthy and corporations,
and does very little to help middle income workers whose extra spending
would serve to stimulate the economy. In fact, the bill before us
repeals the corporate minimum tax which ensures that corporations can
not use tax shelters and loopholes to avoid taxes. Furthermore, it
accelerates a cut in the 28 percent tax bracket even though 75 percent
of American households would receive no benefit from this cut because
they do not have enough income to be in this tax bracket.
Perhaps most disturbingly, all of the costs of the bill are paid out
of Social Security and Medicare surpluses. Clearly, permanent and
expensive tax cuts like those included in this package will increase
the deficit and risk increasing long-term interest rates.
Mr. Speaker, America needs a stand-alone worker relief bill that
helps the 1 million U.S.
[[Page H502]]
employees who have just lost their unemployment, and the 2 million who
will lose their benefits by the end of 2002.
In my State of Texas I called and worked with the Department of Labor
to set up a rapid response team to help displaced workers find the jobs
that they need. But much more needs to be done. Last night I had an
amendment that would have extended unemployment benefits for 1 year.
That would have gone a long way toward helping Americans and
stimulating the economy. Today, I urge an up or down vote on an
economic stimulus package that is responsible and targets unemployed
workers only.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton).
(Mrs. CLAYTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, we have many unemployed persons in my
district. In North Carolina alone we have 28,000 people who have
exhausted their insurance already. We have experienced an increase of
105 percent in unemployment. We need to stop the bickering, stop the
shenanigans between the two Chambers of Congress and do something for
the millions of Americans who need our help.
Mr. Speaker, after 8 years of economic prosperity, and budget
surpluses, the nation's economy is spiraling downward. Consumer
confidence is declining, unemployment is rising, and deficit spending
is returning.
Today, we are considering a bill that would extend for 13 weeks
unemployment benefits for displaced workers. During the past year, more
than 1.5 million jobs were lost. Many unemployed persons have exhausted
their unemployment benefits.
In my State, North Carolina, more than 28,000 people have exhausted
their unemployment benefits, and we have experienced an increase of 105
percent in unemployment. Others were not eligible for unemployment
compensation or health care benefits because they worked for short
periods of time, or in temporary or part-time jobs.
A national economic stimulus package must provide additional relief
for unemployed workers. Helping unemployed workers is the first thing
to do and it is the smart policy to address the economic slowdown. This
certainly is more effective than more huge tax cuts for large
corporations and wealthy individuals. Unfortunately, this $81 billion
bill only provides about $10 billion in benefits for workers and their
families. Most of the relief provided would benefit wealthy individuals
and large corporations. Most economists agree that in a recession, we
should increase consumer confidence and their ability to purchase
necessary goods and services. Unemployed workers lack such confidence
and purchasing capacity.
Simply paying money to state governments for unemployment
compensation programs without requiring some adjustments in program
administration would not be wise. Many states, like the Federal
Government, are financially distressed. They cannot afford to match
federal contributions, to expand coverage periods beyond 26 weeks, or
to increase categories of eligible workers such as part-time workers.
The current crisis calls for these changes plus adjusting the federal/
state match from 50/50 to a larger federal share, perhaps 75/25.
Expanding unemployment compensation benefits offers another advantage--
it provides economic stimulus when it is needed without causing damage
to the long-term economic condition of the country.
Congress has passed bills to help airlines, insurance companies, and
big businesses. It should pass a meaningful economic stimulus bill to
help families of displaced workers. The Republican leadership of the
House should rise above partisan posturing and bickering with the
Senate and simply pass provide unemployment insurance and health
benefits now for those millions of Americans who desperately need them.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).
{time} 1345
Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, today I am reminded of the
disappointment that Charlie Brown feels on Valentine's Day when that
cute little redhead did not give him a valentine. Many of us had great
hopes that we could simply take up relief for unemployed workers, a
bill which passed the Senate unanimously last week; but just like
Charlie Brown, we keep checking the mailbox and unfortunately come away
again filled with disappointment.
The Republican bill today is composed mainly of some old, worn-out
tax items that have been around for a long time. It reflects the tired
philosophy of trickle-down economics, take care of the large and
powerful corporations and eventually the rest will trickle down to us.
But it is wrong to hold this bill hostage to temporary tax relief for
the unemployed who, but for the sake of this debate, will find
themselves on the outside looking in again for a few more weeks.
The disappointment I feel today is not in the same league with the
disappointment that many hard-working Americans are going to feel,
however. By slapping on a $150 billion tax cut in the dead of night,
the leadership has ensured that this bill will not reach the
President's desk this weekend. Two million Americans are approaching or
already have exhausted their unemployment benefits and cannot be
assured that any relief is in sight. That disappointment is one that I
hoped the Congress would not be delivering on this Valentine's Day.
Reject the bill in front of us. Let us go back to work. Pass a
simple, clean extension of benefits for the unemployed and their
families who depend upon them and today who depend upon us.
Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Oklahoma (Mr. Watkins), a valued member of the Committee on Ways and
Means.
(Mr. WATKINS of Oklahoma asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. WATKINS of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill.
Let me say, as my colleague from Louisiana said, two-thirds of it goes
to individuals. Let no mistake be made about that. Another third goes
to business and industry that produces jobs.
Let me say, I am flabbergasted at a lot of the folks who get up and
say it does not help other people, only the big corporations. Let me
tell you who it helps, also. The suspension of net income limitation
helps support those hundreds of thousands of small stripper wells in
Texas, the roughnecks out there, the oil patch workers who are losing
their jobs. I am amazed that many of them did not know that over on
this side.
But let me tell you also who it hurts. My heart goes out to those
people who say they lost a job. I will do everything to build jobs, let
me tell you; but I am here also trying to help those who have never had
a job, many of them Native Americans. Native Americans would be helped
by this bill. They will be able to have possible manufacturing jobs and
many of the others developed with accelerated depreciation on their
lands. We need to be helping those folks, also.
Let me assure you, this bill does more than help the big industries.
I resent the fact that you state that you are doing it for political
purposes, because I do not plan to come back.
Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), a member of the Committee on
Ways and Means.
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day this afternoon, we
are faced with a fundamental question. Implicit in the criticism from
our friends in the minority is the notion that there is only one course
of action here and that is 13 weeks' unemployment and that is it. What
we do here is improve the legislation, not only 13 weeks' unemployment
but an economic trigger for those States that are having challenges.
Moreover, provisions for health benefits. Recall our friend from
Kansas brought a letter down a little while ago from the President
asking not only for unemployment benefits but for health benefits. It
is our role in the Congress of the United States to take legislation
from the other body and improve it and we do so.
And there is something else that is important. This bill also
provides tax relief that fires the engines of economic opportunity. We
passed it once. We have passed it a second time. On this third
occasion, we give the other body the opportunity to join us in an
effective plan to put people back to work and to provide for those who
have lost their jobs.
I ask my colleagues to support the measure.
Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan), a valued member of the Committee on Ways and
Means.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I thank the gentleman for yielding time.
[[Page H503]]
Mr. Speaker, this debate today has been rather unfortunate. We have
heard a lot of emotions, a lot of fear, a lot of envy. What we are
trying to accomplish is simply this: let us take stock in what our
Nation is facing right now. We are in the midst of a war, we have a
homeland security crisis, and we are in recession. We have a lot of
laid-off workers and more layoffs are occurring. And we know as a
historical fact that even if our economy begins to slowly recover, that
unemployment is going to linger on and on and on well after that
recovery takes place.
What we have been trying to do, starting in October, then in December
and now, is to try and get people back to work. The things we are
trying to pass in this bill are the time-tested, proven, bipartisan
solutions to get businesses to stop laying off people, to hire people
back, and to help those people who have lost their jobs.
It is more than just giving someone an unemployment check. It is also
helping those people with their health insurance while they have lost
their jobs, and, more important than just that unemployment check is to
do what we can to give people a paycheck. We have got to get the engine
of economic growth growing again, because we now know because of
recession, we do not have the revenues we wanted to, we do not have the
revenues we need to fix Medicare, to fix Social Security, to fix these
issues. We have got to get Americans back to work, then the surpluses
come back, then the jobs come back. That is the constructive answer we
are trying to accomplish here on, yes, a bipartisan basis.
I urge Members to drop the demagoguery and to pass this bill to help
us work together to get the American people back to work and help those
people who have lost their jobs.
Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, we can handle this very logically and expeditiously. I
think the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton) mentioned that there
are three issues here: Obviously, how we deal with the New York
problem; how we deal with the unemployment benefit; and how we
stimulate the economy. We agree on the first two. We should just pass a
bill right now that would take care of New York's problem. We could do
it and send it over to the other body. They will pass it. We can
actually take care of that issue. That is simple. No one is going to
object to that.
Unemployment benefits. In terms of the discussion that went on today,
no Member in that 1 hour of debate has said that they do not want to
give unemployed benefits to the 8 million unemployed Americans. Why not
just take the other body's bill and just agree to it? We could do that
by unanimous consent, vote it on the suspension calendar.
We do have a difference, because the other side wants to give
corporate tax cuts; and we think that in order to deal with the economy
and stimulate it, we have to create more consumer demand. There is a
big difference there. Obviously, we do not agree. We should not hold
New York and we should not hold the unemployed hostage. We should pass
those and then let us debate. Let us see if we can come up with a
bipartisan proposal on how we stimulate the economy through either tax
cuts for major corporations or how we try to create more consumer
demand.
I hope that we vote ``no'' on this motion.
Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the
distinguished Speaker of the House, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Hastert).
Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, to my colleagues on this side of the
Chamber, and to my colleagues on this side of the Chamber, I first want
to say that yesterday was an incredible day. It was an incredible
debate. Reformers came to this Chamber. They changed some of the rules
on how we do things, how we elect our officials. This House worked its
will. That is the way it should be.
But now we need to look at other needs. We need to look at the needs
of the American people. We are in recession. We are in a war. We are in
a time of terrorist threat within this country, within our own Nation
as well as around the world.
In October, we passed an unemployment compensation extension. In
December, we passed a stimulus package. We knew that people were out of
work. We knew that people were losing jobs.
What we tried to do during this time frame was to do three simple
things. Number one, because every American family who had some
substantive savings, wealth in 401(k)s and the stock market, to get the
confidence back in the stock markets, to get the confidence back in
people putting money in those securities. This bill helps do that.
We also said that we needed to be able to get some consumer
confidence. When you talk about the Fortune 500 companies, they said we
need people with money out there to start buying our products. This
bill does it. It puts money in people's pockets right away.
Finally, there are people out there who lost their jobs. They need
unemployment compensation. They need health care. It is in this bill.
But they also, more than that unemployment compensation check, they
would like to have a job. And so you need to concentrate that capital
where companies are putting that money back into creating jobs,
building buildings, buying machinery, putting money in new ideas. This
bill does it.
I heard the previous speaker say, ``Don't hold these people hostage.
Don't hold New York hostage.'' We are not. We take care of New York in
this bill. We are not holding the unemployed hostage. We take care of
them in this bill just as we have done two times previous. But, ladies
and gentlemen, let us not hold America hostage. Let us get this
legislation done. Let us give people confidence in the markets. Let us
give people confidence that they are going to get a paycheck. Let us
give them the confidence that they can have a job so that they can pay
their house payment and their car payment.
It is time to get this job done. It is time to quit playing political
games. It is time to get a stimulus package for the people of the
United States. Vote for this motion.
Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this
misguided attempt to stimulate our economy.
Today, the House of Representatives leadership is lining unemployed
Americans against a wall for another St. Valentine's Day Massacre.
While pretending to pass an economic stimulus package, they are
holding the unemployed hostage in hopes of passing larger tax breaks
for wealthy individuals and large corporations.
The Senate has passed legislation to extend Unemployment Compensation
for the 1 million people who have exhausted their unemployment benefits
since September 11. Yet, the House leadership has chosen to ignore the
plight of these people, and the more than 2 million workers who will
exhaust their benefits over the next 6 months, and attach a misguided
``economic stimulus'' package to the bill that will do nothing to
stimulate the economy. I call on the House leadership to consider the
clean bill passed by the Senate so we can help the 8 million people in
America who are looking for jobs.
According to sources, 11,000 people are exhausting their Unemployment
Compensation each and every day. With Congressional District Work
Period starting today, more than 120,000 Americans will have lost their
benefits by the time we return to Washington on February 26. We should
stop playing partisan politics with these people's lives.
But, there are other serious problems with this ``stimulus package.''
Any more tax cuts would continue to erode the Social Security and
Medicare Trust Fund by almost $80 billion. It is time to stop
threatening our elderly just to make the 15 percent of wealthiest
Americans even wealthier.
Valentine's Day is a time for us to open our hearts and to give of
ourselves. But this legislation will only serve to break the hearts of
those unemployed Americans who need our help.
Mr. MALONEY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, for the third time in 4
months, the House of Representatives will consider a deeply flawed
economic stimulus package.
In January 2001, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office
projected that the Federal Government would end fiscal year 2002 with a
$106 billion surplus. At that time, I advocated a fiscally responsible
plan of equally dividing the surplus between tax cuts, paying down our
Nation's debt, and investing in important priorities like education and
health care. Unfortunately, in June legislation was passed--over my
strong objections--that cut taxes more than we could afford. I have
long supported tax relief, but it must be in balance with what we can
afford in our budget. We are now facing large, multiyear budget
deficits that threaten our long-term economic security.
[[Page H504]]
Any stimulus bill must be fiscally responsible and provide assistance
to families and small businesses experiencing the effects of the
recession. The bill we are considering today, as did the previous
versions, includes provisions that I strongly support, but these
positive elements cannot make up for its fundamental flaws. Those
positive elements, include providing a supplemental rebate to those who
received only a partial or no rebate as a result of last spring's tax
cut, providing small businesses a bonus depreciation of 30 percent over
3 years, and reducing the recovery period for making improvements to
leased properties. Additionally, I support a permanent rate cut for
low- and moderate-income earners.
In addition, I strongly support extending unemployment benefits to
the approximately 2 million Americans who have lost their jobs as a
result of the recession and the September 11 attacks. In the middle of
March, those individuals and families who have lost their jobs because
of the attacks of September 11 will begin losing their unemployment
benefits. We also need to include provisions that assist families in
continuing their health care coverage. We must pass a bill that
provides substantial relief to those families, and will get to the
President's desk. Unfortunately, this bill does not provide that help.
Moreover, this bill virtually eliminates the Alternative Minimum Tax
(AMT) liability for the Nation's largest and wealthiest corporations.
The AMT is designed to ensure that corporations cannot avoid paying
their fair share using deductions to entirely eliminate all or almost
all of their tax liability. The bill before us today would allow
corporations to claim deductions against their AMT liability that they
currently are not allowed to take. This will provide little, if any,
stimulus to the economy, but will certainly exacerbate the budget
difficulties we now face. Worse yet, the bill pays for this corporate
AMT tax giveaway by taking the funds from the Social Security and
Medicare Trust Funds.
In this time of budget deficits we cannot and must not continue to
raid the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds to pay for tax cuts
for wealthy corporations. Over the past few weeks, many have spoken of
protecting our Nation's economic security. I suggest that passing
legislation that threatens the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds
threatens the very foundation of our economic security.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass a bill that provides
fiscally responsible stimulus to our economy and relief to displaced
workers. Unfortunately, the bill before us today will both further
extend the deficits we are facing and also deplete the Social Security
and Medicare Trust Funds. Long-term economic security depends on long-
term fiscal responsibility. We owe our citizens a bill that provides a
short-term stimulus, substantial assistance to the unemployed, and
ensures long-term growth. The bill before us today fails to meet all
three of these standards.
Mrs. WILSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the state of the
economy and jobs. In June, July, and August when we passed the first
stimulus bill, we were all hoping that if we dipped into recession at
all that we would have a soft landing. September 11 changed all that.
When we saw those planes crash into the towers in New York and the
planes crash in Pennsylvania and here in Washington, DC, we saw and
felt a shudder through the American economy.
It was not only travel and tourism that was hurt, but also consumer
confidence. For 5 consecutive months after September 11, consumer
confidence fell. But we are coming back. Consumer confidence rose for
the second consecutive month in 2002, and we need to encourage this
growth by passing an economic security bill.
In October, the President called for a stimulus package and the House
of Representatives responded. We passed a second one in December. We
are now working on our third. The other body will not even let a vote
be taken on the issue. The economic stimulus bills in the House are not
perfect. There are things about them I did not like as an individual
legislator. There is almost no bill here that everybody can say, ``By
gosh, that's something that I can support a hundred percent. There's
not a work that I would change.'' It is not the nature of this body,
but we moved the bills forward. We moved the process along for a good
reason.
Since September 11, over 1 million Americans have lost their jobs. We
have over 1 million families who are worried about where the next
paycheck will come from. All of those families are worried about their
health insurance. What if they do not get another job before that COBRA
runs out? What happens if the unemployment benefits run out? What
happens if we do not get back to growing jobs in this country? Those
families are hurting and we need to help them. Last year we passed an
economic stimulus bill in the House that provided 13 weeks of extended
benefits to those who have lost their jobs, and today we will again
pass another stimulus bill with that exact same measure.
What do we want to see in an economic stimulus bill? Certainly first
and foremost, we need to create capital to create jobs. Most of the
jobs created in this country are created by small business. That means
we have to include provisions like accelerated depreciation in the
stimulus bill. As a former small business owner I was always amazed
when I did my books at the end of the year, figuring out what my profit
or loss was and how much corporate tax I had to pay. One year I bought
new computers for my entire office, costing me about $20,000 to $30,000
for the new computer system. Under section 179, I was only able to
claim $10,000, even though I paid that business expense., That did not
seem right, or fair and it certainly discouraged me from getting
$35,000 worth of computers at one time. Certainly one of the things we
need to do for small business is to raise those limits so that a small
business looking at buying equipment, going and doing some
construction, or expanding their computer setup, can do so. This will
stimulate our economy and create jobs.
The second thing we are going to need to do is extend health care
benefits and unemployment benefits so that people who have lost their
jobs due to the slowdown in the economy can make it through. All of us
know neighbors who are worried about losing their job sometime this
year and all of us are willing to say, ``Look, we're going to help you
over the hump. We're going to make sure that this awful time for you is
not made worse because you can't feed your family or that you lost your
health insurance.'' So, we must have health care coverage and
unemployment insurance extenders in any economic stimulus bill.
The third thing our economic stimulus bill has to do is restore
consumer confidence. About two-thirds of the American economy comes
from consumer spending. We need to continue to restore confidence in
the public so that we do not have a further collapse in retail sales.
We have to restore faith in consumers and in the markets. If you talk
to people about their retirement plans, most Americans now have 401(k)s
or IRAs or pension plans. We are now investors in the stock market. One
hundred million Americans own stocks, mostly in IRAs and 401(k)s,
pension plans through work of Thrift Savings accounts. All of us have
seen the value of our retirement savings go way down because of the
economic slowdown. We need to reestablish confidence in the stock
market, turn our economy around, and get back to creating jobs.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my deep disappointment
in the bill before us today.
Today, we had the opportunity to follow the lead of the Senate by
passing a 13-week extension for Americans who have been unable to find
work but whose unemployment benefits have run out. I have received
many, many letters from constituents who are concerned about losing
their homes, paying for their health bills, and buying food for their
children. Today, we had the opportunity to help them by passing the
Senate provision and sending it to the President's desk. Instead, the
Republican leadership chose to play politics with the lives of
unemployed persons and their families, once again putting forth a bill
that they know cannot be enacted into law.
In the last quarter of 2001, nearly 860,000 unemployed men and women
exhausted their unemployment benefits. In December alone unemployment
benefits ran out for 300,000 workers. In my State of Illinois, 42,299
workers exhausted their benefits in the last 3 months of last year--an
increase of 88 percent from the previous year. Faced with serious
fiscal pressures, no state has stepped forward to extend assistance as
they have in the past. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are now
struggling to pay their bills as they look for work in the middle of a
recession.
I believe that we need a real economic stimulus plan and that we can
do a great deal more than we're doing to create jobs and prevent
additional layoffs. We should be providing assistance to States,
funding the construction and repair of housing and schools, expanding
transportation options, and investing in clean water projects. We
should be assisting laid-off workers and their families and obtaining
affordable health coverage through COBRA and Medicaid.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle don't agree with those
job stimulus proposals. They would rather give money to the wealthy and
mega-corporations than invest in targeted and proven job creation
initiatives. They would rather provide unemployed men and women with an
insufficient tax voucher than guarantee health coverage through
Medicaid.
We disagree on those questions and it will take time to resolve them.
In the meantime, we should take a simple action today. We should pass a
13-week benefits extension that will provide immediate relief to over 1
million workers.
We could take that step. Sadly for this institution and tragically
for those workers, the House leadership has decided it would rather
make a political point than make a difference in people's lives.
[[Page H505]]
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride and
pleasure that I rise to urge the enactment of H.R. 622, The Economic
Security and Worker Assistance Act of 2002, also known as the Hope for
Children Act.
I cannot overemphasize how proud I am to be an original cosponsor of
the Hope for Children Act. Mr. DeMint deserves our thanks and praise
for his work on this bill.
Mr. Speaker, throughout my 21 years in Congress, I have worked
tirelessly with a broad, bipartisan group of colleagues, to protect
children. Encouraging adoption has been among our primary concerns.
Along those ends, I have introduced my own legislation that designated
National Adoption Week, and I worked to help establish the current
$5,000 tax credit for adopting parents. The $5,000 tax credit, which
was incorporated into the ``Contract with America,'' passed by
Congress, and later signed into law, is helping many families that have
adopted a child.
But there is still so much to be done. There are so many children
that need to be adopted. There are so many infertile couples who
desperately want to raise children. This legislation today is needed.
H.R. 622 seeks to double the adoption tax credit to $10,000 for all
adoptions and double the employer adoption assistance exclusion to
$10,000. The legislation also increases the income cap at which the
credit begins to phase out from $75,000 to $150,000.
The fact of the matter is that adoptions are very costly, ranging
from $8,000 to $30,000 per year. There are many families who would like
to open their home to a child, but are prevented or delayed on doing so
by the high cost of adoption. H.R. 622 helps to ease this financial
burden to ensure that children quickly find a permanent, loving home--
so that no child is left behind to end up in the foster care system
permanently.
The empirical evidence shows conclusively that the tax credit must be
increased. Just take a look at the tax return data. According to the
Committee report accompanying this bill, half of the taxpayers who
received income tax benefits for adoption expenses in 1998 reported
expenses in excess of $5,000, while 25 percent of taxpayers receiving
tax benefits for adoption reported expenses totaling more than $10,000.
It is important to note that the $5,000 tax credit expires this year
and the current $5,000 employer adoption assistance exclusion also
expires--it is vital that we enact this important legislation to help
defray these costs.
The Hope for Children Act is a solid start to ensuring that more
children find a loving home. While some adoptions will cost well over
$10,000--the data suggests that as many as 25 percent of all adoptions
fall into this category--raising the limit will aid more families in
their efforts to adopt a child in need. If the President signs the Hope
for Children Act into law this year, families could claim the $10,000
tax credit beginning with their 2003 tax returns.
One final note. Virtually every well-conducted social research study
that has examined the impact of adoption on a child concludes that
adoption is far more preferable than state custody. The adoption of a
child into a traditional two-parent, man and woman family, has
profoundly positive social consequences for both the child, as well as
for our society. A recent Heritage Foundation analysis of the adoption
research literature shows that adopted children raised in a two-parent
family, measure as well as, if not better than, a biological child on
virtually every social, educational, and health indicator assessed.
The route by which the Hope for Children Act has arrived here in the
House again deserves some discussion. On May 17, 2001, this bill was
agreed to by a vote of 420-0. On February 6, 2002, the Senate passed
the measure with an amendment to add tax relief and economic stimulus
language. Today we are adding some additional tax relief provisions, so
that unemployment insurance benefits will be extended to all displaced
workers regardless of how their job losses occurred.
New Jersey's economy was hit very hard by terrorism. First we lost
approximately 700 New Jerseyans on September 11, including nearly 50
from my own Fourth District. In addition to the unbearable loss of
life, there were tens of thousands of jobs held by people from New
Jersey that disappeared into the great cloud of fire, smoke, and ash of
the collapsing Twin Towers. Entire businesses and departments were
wiped out in an instant.
Before the shock waves of September 11, had even faded, New Jersey
was plunged into another unprecedented crisis, as the first major
biological weapons attack in U.S. history took place on New Jersey
soil. Our mail system ground to a halt. Items frozen in the mail
included everything from an engagement ring to credit card bills.
Thousands of lives were turned upside down. Another wave of jobs were
lost. To this day, the John K. Rafferty Post Office in Hamilton has not
reopened, and hundreds of postal workers who work there are now
scattered all over the state in makeshift accommodations.
Mr. Speaker, New Jersey's residents need a helping hand. We need this
stimulus package. People are hurting. I think the Senate should move
promptly and pass H.R. 622. It is time to put the interests of the
American people ahead of partisan calculations.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the unanimous passage of the Hope for Children
Act.
Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, once again, the Republicans are
attempting to shove forward several tax provisions for the wealthy and
big businesses without adequate consideration for the unemployed and
low-income.
This is the third time in five months that an economic stimulus
package has been to the House floor. Not once out of the three times,
has there been sufficient assistance in the form of health insurance
converge and unemployment benefits for the unemployed and low-income
families. Not once have Republican considered the long-term effect of
the unnecessary tax cuts. Not once have they considered anything else
but their special interests, the wealthy.
We need a bill that will give better backing for COBRA insurance. The
tax credit that this bill provides will do nothing for the families and
individuals who cannot afford to pay upfront for the insurance
packages. While Democrats have been fighting to help the jobless and
low-wage workers, the number of those in need has grown and each
individual has been without federal income support since March, when
this recession officially started.
While we stand in the midst of a recession, we have Members of
Congress who contritely confess their sincere desire to help the
American people, but simultaneously provide help for only approximately
25 percent of the American people, who happen to be very wealthy. The
rest of the nation will suffer because they are not wealthy enough or
because they are not highly compensated executives in the corporate
world.
This bill follows the pattern this Congress established when it
passed the airline bailout bill last October. We provided $15 billion
in financial assistance to financially strapped airlines following the
September 11th attack, but the leadership of this Chamber did nothing
for rank-and-file workers who were laid off by the airlines. Last
November, this Chamber bailed out the insurance industry, which covered
the airline industry we bailed out the month before, but the leadership
did nothing for rank-and-file workers who were laid off by the airlines
or as a result of the economic recession.
This bill today, like the others before, is another tax break bill
for people who do very well in good times and bad, but it does very
little for the people who need the most help--the jobless and low wage
workers. Once again, this bill, like the others before, puts those most
in need as a last priority. That's unacceptable. For that reason, I
will vote ``no''. Mr. Speaker, we can do better than this. It's
unfortunate that the other side of the aisle does not negotiate in good
faith. No one saw this bill before it came to the House floor. It did
not go through the committee process. This is a product of an
autocratic procedure. It is put out for us to take or leave. That's it.
I urge my colleagues to join me in rejecting this bill.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 622, the
Hope For Children Act which will increase the adoption tax credit for
families. I am an original cosponsor of this legislation and I commend
the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Demint for his leadership on
this important issue.
I am particularly pleased that with today's vote we will be adding a
provision to temporarily extend unemployment compensation for an
additional 13 weeks for individuals who have exhausted their 26 weekly
benefits, and will provide needs assistance to New York under the
Liberty Program.
As our nation begins to rebound economically it is important that we
provide American's who have been adversely affected by the events of
September 11th and the subsequent economic downturn with the means to
provide for their families. Representing numerous individuals affected
by the slow down of the airline, travel, and tourism industry in New
York, I know how important this extension will be in assisting these
hard working individuals. This economic package is a major step to
regaining a healthy economy. Each of the components will help us
stimulate different areas of the economy and promote growth and jobs.
Our economy has weathered turbulence in the past during times of war
and times of peace. But a sound, reasoned economic growth package, such
as the one we are working to pass, will put us on the right track back
to prosperity.
Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support this important measure.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, on this Valentine's Day the Republican
leadership is presenting America's largest corporations and wealthiest
individuals with another sweetheart
[[Page H506]]
deal, while people and families in Oregon and across the nation
continue to wait for a meaningful economic stimulus package.
The State of Oregon continues to lead the nation in unemployment, so
it is frustrating to see Republican proposals that continue to focus on
people who need the Federal Government's help the least. Even more
exasperating is the fact that these corporate tax credits and tax cuts
will be paid by Social Security and Medicare surpluses.
A true economic stimulus package would directly put people back to
work and not last longer than necessary. The bill before us today is
not an economic stimulus package, is not temporary, and does not target
relief to businesses hurt by the recession.
The most significant and appropriate response to help the American
people would be accomplished by increasing funding for ready-to-go
public works projects that will reduce unemployment, while benefiting
communities across the country. Every state in the nation has
transportation, water, environmental clean-up, and other infrastructure
projects that could immediately employ people to make our communities
safer and healthier.
This bill is the third attempt by the Republican leadership to use a
weakened economy as an excuse for permanent tax breaks for their
favored few. Until a fair and sensible economic stimulus package is
presented to the House, I must withhold my support.
Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 622, the
Economic Support and Worker Assistance Act.
The Republican Majority's actions on the economic stimulus package
are making me feel like Bill Murray in the movie, Groundhog Day. Just
as Bill Murray had the same bad day over and over again, we keep
getting the same bad bill over and over again. Unfortunately, for the
millions of Americans who are unemployed, this is not a movie, but real
life--and it is turning out to be a tragedy, rather than a comedy.
The Senate passed legislation to extend unemployment benefits by 13
weeks for the more than 1 million people who lost their jobs in recent
months. We should be approving that same legislation so it can be sent
to the President for his signature today. We are about to go into
recess for nearly 2 weeks. If we do not send a bill to the President
today, we will take no action for a minimum of 12 days--and during that
time, more than 120,000 people will lose their benefits.
Passage of a clean bill to extend unemployment benefits would give
unemployed Americans and their families some immediate financial
relief. Such action is supported by wide, bipartisan majorities in
Congress, so there is no excuse for delay. Unfortunately, the House
Republican leadership refuses to do what is right to protect America's
workers. Instead, they insist on continually giving bigger and more
outrageous tax cuts to their corporate friends, while millions of
unemployed Americans are desperately trying to feed their families and
search for new jobs.
I urge my colleagues to vote for a 13-week extension of unemployment
insurance benefits and to vote against tax breaks for big business and
the wealthy. By doing otherwise on Valentine's Day, we will do more
than break the hearts of the American people, we will break their
banks.
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, on February 6 the Senate passed a 13-week
extension of unemployment insurance by unanimous consent. Fifty
Democratic, 49 Republican and one Independent Senator recognized that
while our country is at war and our economy is in a downturn it is time
to lend a hand to individuals who are out of work. After weeks of
attempting to pass a comprehensive stimulus the Senate came together
and acknowledged that political differences should not prevent the
government from helping America's most needy at this critical time.
Unfortunately, the bill before the House today fails to follow the
bipartisan spirit of the Senate and instead subjects people who will
soon be without jobs and without unemployment insurance to a Washington
political game. People out of work around the country deserve better
treatment by Congress. The victims of today's House action are
hardworking Americans out of work through no fault of their own. In my
own City of New York recovery from the terrorist attack has made the
unemployment situation particularly grim. I continually encounter
people who are victims of economic circumstance like the woman who
approached me last Friday on Lexington Ave and urged me as a Member of
the House to follow the Senate's lead. This House should know that our
constituents are watching and they can clearly see that unemployment
insurance is falling victim to a political agenda.
Finally, the Majority bill was crafted in the middle of the night
last night and represents such an amalgamation of provisions that we do
not even know hour much it will cost. The President's budget proposal
recognizes that we are not eating into the Social Security surplus. I
do not disagree with every provision in the bill but it is
irresponsible to vote on a substantial tax package like this without
knowing all of its long-term ramifications.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, yet again, we are involved in a most
curious proceeding. The Republican majority is bringing forth, for a
third time, an economic stimulus bill that cannot be passed in the
Senate and is being brought up only for partisan reasons. Many of my
colleagues in the Republican leadership talk about the obstructionism
in the Senate. I say this exercise is the height of obstructionism. The
House Republican leadership seems intent on doing things ``my way or
the highway.'' And each time they pass the same old bill, they keep
millions of unemployed Americans from getting the help they need. In
fact, by their delay, more than 11,000 workers each day exhaust their
unemployment benefits and therefore would immediately benefit from the
Senate's unemployment extension.
But the Republican leadership will not allow a vote on any other bill
than their own. We can't even vote for the stimulus amendment on
unemployment assistance that passed the Senate by voice vote. That is
neither bipartisan nor responsible. In fact, at no time have my
Republican colleagues reached out to me or other Democrats to work on
an economic stimulus bill. At the one and only meeting we had on the
stimulus health pieces in which the Republican leadership allowed
Members to show up, we were told that they had to ``just say no'' to
anything we had to discuss. That too is neither bipartisan nor
responsible.
So, here I am again, for the third time, telling you why this is a
bad bill. The Republican leadership bill is supposed to provide
immediate stimulus. So why do many of the tax provisions cost billions
after 2002, in years when the economy is expected to be in recovery and
stimulus is no longer needed? And why does this bill provide no
meaningful immediate help for the millions of Americans without work
and without health insurance coverage?
For example, why can't we truly held laid-off workers continue COBRA
coverage? The Republicans promise assistance for workers to continue
coverage under COBRA. But, the 60 percent tax credit is inadequate to
allow families to afford coverage; millions of workers would not even
be eligible because of restrictive definitions; and the Republican
leadership program sets the stage for complete gutting of the employer-
sponsored insurance--something Republicans have long tried to do. This
tax credit is even more meaningless for workers who don't quality for
COBRA, as they tend to be working in lower paying jobs and would find
it even more difficult to afford coverage, particularly in the
indivdual market where in most instances there are no protections on
cost or availability of coverage.
Also, why can't we help laid-off workers who are not eligible for
COBRA coverage? Presented with an option of building on a program,
Medicaid, that already provides guaranteed, affordable health insurance
coverage for nearly 44 million Americans and a program that currently
does not provides health insurance to anyone, Republicans chose the
program that has no experience providing coverage. Worse yet, they
don't even guarantee any of the money would be used for health care.
And, in attempt to counter some of our arguments, they provide funding
to state high-risk pools, presumably to give people a place to spend
their ``meaningless'' tax credits. Unfortunately, they are a day late
and a dollar short: $40 million won't even cover 50% of these pools'
costs for the two years it is available.
Had we had a chance to offer a substitute, the Democrats would have
offered something that truly helps laid-off workers. The Democratic
proposal would reach 5.1 million Americans. The Democratic proposal
would provide additional financial assistance to states to help them
meet the increases in Medicaid enrollment as a result of the economic
downturn. As millions join the ranks of the uninsured, we need to
ensure states preserve, not limit, eligibility for coverage.
The Democratic proposal would shore up health care providers as well.
Providers are being hard hit by the economic downturn. The Democratic
proposal would prevent physicians from taking a 5.4 percent reduction
in their Medicare payments this coming year. It also includes
bipartisan legislation to reduce regulatory obstacles in the Medicare
program for providers. Both of these proposals should make it easier
for providers to weather the economic downturn and continue providing
quality care to seniors.
But the Republican leadership has barred votes on any alternative
proposals today. What are they afraid of? We want to put choices before
the American public--they do not. We want to help displaced workers and
shore up the health system to weather the economic downturn--they do
not. We want to provide targeted, responsible stimulus--they do not.
This Republican process is an outrage, serving only to obstruct help
for unemployed Americans.
[[Page H507]]
Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Speaker, while we debate today's latest House
Republican economic stimulus proposal, I would like to once again speak
up on behalf of my home district of Guam and the U.S. territories, all
of which have been experiencing double digit unemployment rates and
have seen a down-turn in our tourism-dependent economies.
I am grateful for the assistance of Representative John Boehner,
Chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee, for ensuring
that the territories are eligible under the National Emergency Grants
provision of the Republican stimulus bill. However, I was hoping that
the Government of Guam would be provided economic relief for individual
tax rebates and to see increases for Medicaid funding that we have
sought, and that were included in Democratic proposals.
The bill before us today does nothing for the territories, especially
for Guam. In fact, it may hurt. It provides more tax cuts which are
reflected in Guam through a ``mirror tax code.'' This has the effect of
reducing local revenues at a time when Government of Guam leaders are
exploring the possibility of cutting worker salaries by 10 percent. It
ignores our plight because we are not included in the additional 13
weeks of unemployment insurance. We should assist people who truly need
help and local governments who are suffering through the most difficult
times in the nation.
After all is said or done between the various competing proposals,
however, it is clear to me that the territories will not be provided
with the economic relief necessary, and that a targeted insular areas
economic relief package is direly needed. Unlike the rest of the
country, we in the territories have been struggling economically for
the last few years. Prior to the September 11 attacks, Guam's economy,
alone, was already struggling as a result of the Asian economic crisis.
For the last 3 years, Guam's unemployment rate has averaged over 15
percent. This rate is three times the national average.
Over the last several months, I have been in discussion with other
territorial delegates, Administration officials, Congressional leaders
from the Ways and Means and Resources Committees, and local political
and business leaders in the territories, on the need for an insular
areas economic relief package.
Legislative items which should be considered include:
Increasing the waiver of local matching requirements for the
territories;
Ensuring that the territories are included in the National Emergency
Grants Program;
Lifting the cap on Medicaid funding for the territories or increasing
the level of Medicaid funding;
Establishing empowerment zones in the territories;
Extending the supplement grant for population increases and
contingency fund for welfare programs to the territories;
Providing unemployment assistance to the smaller territories from
FEMA's Disaster Unemployment Assistance Program;
Extending supplemental security income benefits to Guam and the
Virgin Islands;
Providing Federal guaranteed bonds for infrastructure projects in the
territories; and
Generating increased GovGuam revenues with military personnel on
temporary duty on Guam.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on ways to provide
economic relief to the U.S. territories.
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I think today's action on the
House floor is exactly the kind of thing that makes people cynical
about Congress and the political process.
As our businesses are struggling to recover from recession,
unemployment insurance is running out for thousands of people who have
lost their jobs. Extending those benefits is something they need and
something that will help the economy because it will enable them to
continue paying their bills.
Those are the facts. There should be no partisan disagreement about
them--which is why the Senate unanimously approved the bill before us,
which would extend those benefits for 13 weeks.
And there should be no disagreement about what we should be doing
today as we prepare to adjourn and leave town for more than a week. We
should be passing that bill--the bill supported by every Senator,
regardless of party--and sending it to the President so he can sign it
into law.
But we aren't doing that. Instead, the Republicans leadership is
insisting on holding that bill hostage--which means holding hostage
everyone who need the extension of unemployment coverage--by sending it
back to the Senate loaded down with a bulging grab bag of other
legislation that the House has already passed before.
No wonder people are cynical about Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I am not saying that none of the things in this
legislative package is any good. As a matter of fact, there are a
number of items that I support. For example, I strongly support the
extension of the clean-energy production credits and the work-
opportunity credit. I also support a number of provisions to give tax
relief to small businesses and to shorten the period for depreciating
leasehold improvements. And I definitely think we need to change the
way the alternative minimum tax is applied to individuals.
But all those provisions were already included in legislation that
the House passed last year. There is no need to hijack this bill--a
bill to provide urgently-needed help to thousands of Americans--to get
them to the Senate, because they are already there.
I understand that the Republican leadership here in the House wants
the Senate to act on a stimulus bill--and I agree that a sound stimulus
bill would be good for the economy and good for the country. But I
cannot agree to their strategy. I cannot agree to holding hard-pressed
Americans hostage to try to coerce our colleagues in the other body.
So, I cannot support this motion.
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this economic
stimulus package. In particular, I'd like to highlight the part of this
bill that addresses the needs of working Americans and their families.
I'd also like to thank Sam Johnson of Texas and Buck McKeon of
California, who helped craft the National Emergency Grant provisions,
which we originally introduced as part of the ``Back-to-Work Act'' to
respond to the needs of displaced workers.
As everyone knows, the September 11 terrorist attacks precipitated a
downturn in our economy, and thousands of workers are now jobless. The
proposal before us will help every worker return to work as quickly as
possible--and in the meantime, that they and their families have access
to quality health insurance as well as employment and job training
resources.
Last year, the Labor Department acted decisively to mobilize the
existing safety net for displaced workers and their families. And
Secretary Elaine Chao testified before my committee on how Congress can
work with the Administration to further strengthen the safety net for
these workers--which is what this worker relief package would do.
As Secretary Chao said, and I quote, ``This Administration is
committed to going even further than current programs allow to help
families, industries and regions that have been hardest-hit by the
terrorist attacks and their aftermath. Workers need help regardless of
what industry they work in--not just a chosen few. The President's plan
gets money to wherever people are hurting.''
The proposal before us is one that can be implemented quickly,
flexibly, and without creating new bureaucracy. It's designed to do
three things: (1) help those who have lost their jobs because of the
economic downturn; (2) put people back to work to help get the economy
moving again; and (3) ensure that displaced workers have access to
health care.
Specifically, this bill would expand the National Emergency Grant
program and authorize and appropriate $3.9 billion to help dislocated
workers. Under the bill, grants may be used by states to help ensure
that dislocated workers: (1) maintain health insurance coverage; (2)
receive some form of income support during the recovery period; and (3)
return to work as quickly as possible with the help of employment
training and job search assistance.
Mr. Speaker, this proposal is a compassionate one--not just because
it provides workers in need with flexibility and resources, but because
it recognizes that a displaced worker's true goal, ultimately, is to
return to work. A government program can help a worker survive. But
until a worker returns to work, no economic recovery is complete.
On behalf of our nation's workers, I urge my colleagues to vote
``yes'' on this economic stimulus package.
Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, today, the House of
Representatives will vote on another stimulus package that comes closer
to the immediate needs of the country. We are all facing a sagging
economy, escalating unemployment levels, and close to my home on Long
Island, our concerns also include reconstruction efforts. Although this
bill does not include everything I would have preferred, it is an
improvement from the previous versions I opposed.
Although I support the provision extending unemployment benefits for
an additional 13 weeks, this bill neglects the immediate unemployed
health insurance needs of displaced workers. This bill provides a
temporary tax credit equal to 60 percent of the cost of health
insurance purchased by unemployed workers. This is a step in the right
direction, but displaced workers need health insurance assistance now;
not when they file their taxes next year.
New York is in dire straights because of the September 11 attacks.
The sudden spike in unemployment levels has placed an enormous strain
on unemployment rolls and other assistance programs. I was pleased the
bill included $3.9 billion in national emergency grants to states for
health care and reemployment assistance for displaced workers, as well
as an
[[Page H508]]
additional $4.6 billion for health care expenses.
In addition, this measure includes a number of temporary tax
provisions for reconstruction incentives to businesses located in the
New York Liberty Zone surrounding the World Trade Center. Among these
provisions includes $8 billion in tax-exempt bonds over the next three
years for reconstruction in the areas of New York City damaged by the
September 11 attacks. Also included are several measures intended to
attract businesses back to New York City.
Nonetheless, I am disturbed over the procedural games this bill must
endure. We had an opportunity to pass a Senate cleared unemployment
extension measure on its merits which would have passed the House and
been sent to the president. Unfortunately, several tax provisions were
added to the bill, essentially making it impossible to pass the Senate.
Since September 11th, more than one million have seen their
unemployment benefits expire. Another two million workers will exhaust
their benefits over the next 6 months. Yet we continue to play partisan
and procedural games holding the unemployed hostage. It's unfortunate
that some of the positive measures of this bill will never see the
president's desk.
America needs an economic stimulus package that prioritizes the needs
of this country during this difficult time. Therefore we must address
the needs of our workers as well as providing our businesses with
stimulating tax cuts that provide the temporary relief they need.
However, this will never be achieved if the same procedural games are
played.
Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, this past Tuesday the State of Wisconsin
did something no other state has done, and something this chamber has
failed to do. Wisconsin did what was right and decided to help
unemployed workers by extending their unemployment insurance benefits
for an additional 8 weeks. They did it without playing political games
or attaching controversial measures intended to score political points
but not help America's workers.
Only a few short days after September 11, Congress quickly rushed to
rescue the airline industry and provided a $15 billion package. This
package provided airline executives with a guarantee that their million
dollar salaries were safe, but included no provisions that helped the
thousands of airline workers who were being laid off at an alarming
pace.
The economic downturn, combined with the terrorist attacks, has
caused many people to lose their jobs. Our unemployment is at its
highest rate in about a decade. Yet, the House passed an economic
stimulus bill that included millions of dollars is special tax breaks
for big corporations, including Enron, but left behind those who needed
financial help the most--Americans who have lost their jobs.
I applaud the State of Wisconsin for providing unemployed workers
financial help for an additional 2 months while they look for a job.
That means the people of Wisconsin will also have another 2 months to
make their car payment, pay their house mortgage, and feed their
families. I believe we must extend this assistance to all out-of-work
Americans. It is our responsibility, our duty, to make sure that all
unemployed or displaced workers have their benefits extended.
Today, this House had an opportunity to pass a bill that would have
extended unemployment benefits to unemployed workers and gotten a
prompt signature from the President. Sadly, tying unemployment benefits
to another so-called economic stimulus bill will cause it to meet the
fate of the previous 2 bills this House passed--it will go nowhere. We
should follow Wisconsin's example and pass legislation that extends
unemployment insurance benefits for at least another 13 weeks in a
stand-alone bill. To do so otherwise is to turn our backs on the
American people.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). All time for debate has
expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 347, the previous question is ordered.
Parliamentary Inquiries
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may state his inquiry.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, what would be the appropriate time for me to
move that we concur with the Senate amendment to extend the
unemployment compensation?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The previous question is ordered on this
motion to final adoption without intervening motion so there is no
opportunity at this time.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I have an additional parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
Mr. RANGEL. Will the minority have an opportunity to offer a
substitute to the majority position?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. There is no such opportunity. The previous
question is ordered to final adoption.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, my further and last parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
Mr. RANGEL. Does the minority have an opportunity to make a motion to
recommit the majority's rule?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The previous question is ordered to final
adoption without intervening motion. The answer is no.
The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from
California (Mr. Thomas).
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. PORTMAN. 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.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 225,
nays 199, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 38]
YEAS--225
Aderholt
Akin
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilirakis
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Boozman
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Coble
Collins
Combest
Cooksey
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Everett
Ferguson
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hart
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kerns
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
McCarthy (NY)
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
Mica
Miller, Gary
Miller, Jeff
Moran (KS)
Myrick
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schaffer
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tauzin
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Upton
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins (OK)
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--199
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barrett
Becerra
Bentsen
Berkley
Berry
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank
Frost
Gephardt
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hastings (FL)
Hill
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
[[Page H509]]
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Kucinich
LaFalce
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren
Lowey
Luther
Lynch
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Mascara
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller, George
Mink
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Phelps
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thurman
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson (CA)
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--11
Berman
Brady (TX)
Miller, Dan
Payne
Riley
Roukema
Stenholm
Stump
Taylor (NC)
Traficant
Weldon (PA)
{time} 1417
So the motion was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________